How would you modify MP $204 Across then regression to $44 inside on a $25 table?
I know you cant put $44 inside on a $25 table and $204 across will not work either. I just will like to know how will you make the numbers work on a $25 table. What will the across dollar amount be. Thank you
MP $204 Across for $25 table ?????
Moderators: 220Inside, DarthNater
Re: MP $204 Across for $25 table ?????
Doubling the $204 to $408 would give you about $200 on two hits and then down to $110 inside would be close.
Of course it doesn't give you the same win on each of the first two hits.
Noah
Of course it doesn't give you the same win on each of the first two hits.
Noah
-
- Posts: 1830
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:15 pm
Re: MP $204 Across for $25 table ?????
That's a great question, SoSerious.
At first blush, the easiest way is just to double the MP-$204's bet-values.
So on a $25 table you could go $408-Across ($50 each on the 4 & 10...$70 each on the 5 & 9...and $84 each on the 6 & 8) for two paying hits of $98 each; and then regress everything down to $110-Inside...whereafter you would apply the Passive/Aggressive press-schedule.
After two paying-hits you have collected $196 ($98 x 2) in Across money; so when you regress everything down to $110-Inside; you have a net in-rack profit of +$86 no matter what the skilled-DI does in that hand from that point forward.
The Passive-Aggressive press-schedule is designed specifically to carefully balance subsequent-to-regression profit-growth with ever-expaning bet-size increases.
Again, you have to be not only sufficiently bankrolled to apply this approach to other skilled-shooters, but you also have to have a fairly high drawdown-tolerance and volatility-tolerance in your DNA.
That is, unless you fully understand the nature of how volatility works, even in an advantaged situation, and can accept a higher degree of hand-to-hand and even session-to-session vol; then this bet isn't for you.
On the other hand, if you are comfortable with all that, and are good at identifying other skilled-shooters, rhythmic rollers, and semi-talented DI's as you move from table to table; then I think you'll find the MP $204 Across two-hit Regression to be quite a profitably viable option.
MP
At first blush, the easiest way is just to double the MP-$204's bet-values.
So on a $25 table you could go $408-Across ($50 each on the 4 & 10...$70 each on the 5 & 9...and $84 each on the 6 & 8) for two paying hits of $98 each; and then regress everything down to $110-Inside...whereafter you would apply the Passive/Aggressive press-schedule.
After two paying-hits you have collected $196 ($98 x 2) in Across money; so when you regress everything down to $110-Inside; you have a net in-rack profit of +$86 no matter what the skilled-DI does in that hand from that point forward.
The Passive-Aggressive press-schedule is designed specifically to carefully balance subsequent-to-regression profit-growth with ever-expaning bet-size increases.
Again, you have to be not only sufficiently bankrolled to apply this approach to other skilled-shooters, but you also have to have a fairly high drawdown-tolerance and volatility-tolerance in your DNA.
That is, unless you fully understand the nature of how volatility works, even in an advantaged situation, and can accept a higher degree of hand-to-hand and even session-to-session vol; then this bet isn't for you.
On the other hand, if you are comfortable with all that, and are good at identifying other skilled-shooters, rhythmic rollers, and semi-talented DI's as you move from table to table; then I think you'll find the MP $204 Across two-hit Regression to be quite a profitably viable option.
MP
Re: MP $204 Across for $25 table ?????
Thanks acpa and Mad Professor,
I was thinking about trying it out, but just on my shooting. Those $25 table are pretty empty.
I was thinking about trying it out, but just on my shooting. Those $25 table are pretty empty.
-
- Posts: 1830
- Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 12:15 pm
Re: MP $204 Across for $25 table ?????
Fear of Volatility Leads to Profit Prevention
I am more convinced than ever, that for many skilled-shooters, the FEAR of hand-to-hand volatility far out-weighs the DESIRE for seizing bonafide bankroll-building opportunities.
That is, in the headlong rush to “lose less”, many skilled-shooters make bet-decisions that are based more on trying to calm any wager-outcome volatility than they are in actually exploiting their validated in-casino advantage.
But here’s the problem with that.
~The more you try to reduce bet-resolution volatility (in an advantaged situation); the less likely you are to get anywhere close to earning what your D-I skills deserve.
~The more we seek to eliminate bet-outcome volatility; the slower our bankroll-growth will be.
~The slower we make the bankroll-growing process; the more likely it is that those shallow-gains will be entirely wiped out by impatience-routeddeeper losses.
~As a result, our volatility-quelling efforts actually work against and conspire in opposition to our money-making goals.
In other words, the more we try to reduce our hand-to-hand bet-volatility; the less likely we are to even reach the most modest of bankroll-growing goals…
…and so, in our efforts to “lose less”, many skilled-shooters unwittingly make volatility-quelling bet-decisions that unintentionally make it much more difficult for themselves to actually win.
MP
I am more convinced than ever, that for many skilled-shooters, the FEAR of hand-to-hand volatility far out-weighs the DESIRE for seizing bonafide bankroll-building opportunities.
That is, in the headlong rush to “lose less”, many skilled-shooters make bet-decisions that are based more on trying to calm any wager-outcome volatility than they are in actually exploiting their validated in-casino advantage.
But here’s the problem with that.
~The more you try to reduce bet-resolution volatility (in an advantaged situation); the less likely you are to get anywhere close to earning what your D-I skills deserve.
~The more we seek to eliminate bet-outcome volatility; the slower our bankroll-growth will be.
~The slower we make the bankroll-growing process; the more likely it is that those shallow-gains will be entirely wiped out by impatience-routeddeeper losses.
~As a result, our volatility-quelling efforts actually work against and conspire in opposition to our money-making goals.
In other words, the more we try to reduce our hand-to-hand bet-volatility; the less likely we are to even reach the most modest of bankroll-growing goals…
…and so, in our efforts to “lose less”, many skilled-shooters unwittingly make volatility-quelling bet-decisions that unintentionally make it much more difficult for themselves to actually win.
MP
Re: MP $204 Across for $25 table ?????
Interesting MP. I can relate. Upon reflection, I think this is perhaps the reason we had a winning day this past Sunday but a loser on Monday. On the first day I played my plan. It was fairly conservative, but still required me to take many offensive risks. We won $560 in five sessions. The following day we lost $350 in 4 sessions. And although the "play" was the same, I can see in retrospect that I was playing much more defensively trying to protect the previous day's win. I was betting smaller and trying to build into a hand rather than pushing early and regressing after a hit or two. I'll try to be mindful of that next time. There's no reward in craps without risk. Like a lot of things it's easier said than done but practice helps. Thanks for the insight.
I wanna see the dust...