Is there really such a thing as a "lucky streak?"

[heavy]

Are winning streaks real? If so, how and why does this benefit gamblers?

Recently Irish has argued that there's no such thing as an exploitable streak in gambling. A recent scientific article sent to me by a forum member seems to suggest the opposite. What are your thoughts? Is there such a thing as a "lucky" streak at craps? If so, how can you capitalize on it?

[Golfer]

Thom needs to watch the Richard Dreyfus movie, "Let It Ride".

Streaks happen. Some can wake up and get in on a portion of them to positive results. Extreme variance does show itself. It doesn't happen a lot and it means nothing if you don't wake up and catch the wave. They always crash and burn, bu sure are fun getting to the edge of the cliff. Science? We don't need no stinking science, just winning bets. Hop the Red.

Mr. Reno

[SHOOTITALL]

If streaks do not happen, how did that gal in AC hold the dice for over four hours?

[220Inside]

Isn't a streak just another term for a table trending hot (or cold) and aren't those short term table trends something we try to identify and exploit?

[heavy]

Interesting responses. Now, let's think about the "world record" hand tossed in Atlantic City by Patricia Demauro. This was a 154 roll hand. That's 153 rolls without a "bad" seven. The hand lasted 4 hours and 18 minutes. About 36 roll an hour, for those of you who think craps is a fast game. Unlike Scoblete's unsubstantiated claim of a 147 roll hand by the so-called "Captain," this hand was actually documented by the casino. Now, there can be little doubt that the table dumped during this time. But I suggest that it dumped much LESS than it should have on a hand of that length? I saw the numbers on this once years ago and recall being surprised at how little it was - in the low six figures. Demauro never revealed how much she won, but there have been several comments in the press about the fact that she was a second time player who did not know how to bet her hands.

So why is it that when all of these players were at the table with her - no one player won six figures? In fact, I'd guess that the average player at that table won less than $12K. Thoughts?

[Knick111]

Hi Irish,

NO.you make your own wining streak with your shooting.



Have you ever though about donathing your
brain to science irish, when you die/pass away?

Jaime. 1943

[wild child]

There are those very rare occurrences
Reports of craps hands extending 90,120 tosses and more numbers

Overlooked or understated is the seven ( 7 ) showing on multiple Come Out tosses
in just the right sequence to continue the hand........

Shooter sets the Pass Line Point ,rolls some number of times,repeats said P/L
with the seven (7) or even several C/O sevens , then establish a P/L number and continues
the scenario long beyond some players comfort zone ( aka : latrine leave )

...Mix in a streak or several H O R N number streaks ....Then seemingly the wager action
drifts to H O R N bets and the shooter delivers some Box Numbers....Oh The Humanity

Question :
Hypercritically were you present and in the game and the shooter ,at roll number 133 ,declares a
Latrine Leave of Absence,
and the Box and T G S demand the dice be passed .....

.....In your opinion would the other players
unite and keep the dice passing untouched until the lucky shooter return to finish the hand ?
.
In your opinion , what percentage of the players at that craps table would be making a fuss
to bring the drink server into the mix ??????

just me saying

w c

[heavy]

Okay, let me try this from a different angle. You have three guys standing at the table playing craps. Patricia Demauro gets the dice and embarks on an epic roll. One of these guys is doing the five count and only placing the six and eight. His first bet is $60 each. The next guy is in from the first roll. He plays pass line with double odds ($10 game so there's $30 action) and bets $88 inside - giving him essentially the same action as player 1. Player three starts out with what I call a $120 pyramid - $10 four and ten - $20 five and nine - $30 six and eight. They can go same bet, press, or regress at any point they want. But ONE of these players is likely to get luckier than the other two. Which will it be and why (hint - the player's initial bet probably has little to do with the answer).

Any ideas?

[London Shooter]

The player who gets lucky will be the one who presses the most. Same bet not good. Regress (in relative terms) would be a disaster on this hand in terms of missed profit potential.

Deciding to be "off" at the 150 mark for a few rolls would be a blast though

[Dylanfreake]

Anything can happen at a craps table.

I saw a guy toss three 1-2`s. A guy who had been playing the horn all session , but not on this shooter, tosses in a $60 horn . Next number was not a horn number. The guy is cussing as he leaves the table. I guess he thought he had missed an opportunity or maybe he was just unlucky or maybe he was just stupid. I think he just didn`t anticipate that three streak of 1-2s.

Then there was the tipsy guy , who bops up to the table in a shiny suit with slick-backed black hair and a pretty chick on his arm , dressed for a night out on the town. He tosses a green on the 12. The dealers roll their eyes, while looking at the pretty lady.

"Midnight", the stick calls.

The player says , "Put it all on the 12".

Box says, " That`s over the table limit."

Player, "A hundred ?"

Box , "Okay" , as the player picks up black chips from the felt. The dealers rolling their eyes for the second time.

"Midnight , again ". No more eye-rollin`.

The player just smiles , looking at the pretty lady still attached to his arm. He picks up his chips from the felt with his one free hand and bops away from the table in unison with the pretty lady.

"Now that`s how you play craps.", says one of the dealers.

"He had no need to color up.", said another.

Now the way I look at it , either that guy knew that while he was at the table , two 12`s were going to be tossed in a row or he was a streak player and knew that another 12 was going to be tossed after the first one.

However, when he left after the second hit , I suppose he was not a streak player by not having made a third "midnight " wager. I again suppose that he was just in the right place at the right time and was just having fun , since he and the pretty lady showed little emotion as both of his wagers won.

The bopper was Mr. Lucky in more ways than one.

[heavy]

Okay, here's a link to a couple of articles that cite the same scientific research:

http://expandedconsciousness.com/2017/0 ... prise-you/

http://www.popsci.com/article/science/a ... e-says-yes

Somebody read those the tell us your interpretation of what it says. To me it essentially says that some players intuitively reduce the size of their bets - protecting their profit - and that by and large the person who does that gets luckier.

[Moe Bettor]

Coming at this from yet another angle. All that Irish says is true if the craps dice sums are produced by a random number generator. All you have is variance. But action at a live craps table involves live people. Even an random shooter may set the dice and toss them rhythmically and produce
a string of inside numbers. Is this still all random and within variance? Well..you're not going to really know unless thousands of rolls are thrown, but
for me..if the shooter has those qualities I will certainly involve myself on repeat numbers and play the don'ts when I see a juggler or a slammer. What
would be interesting is to find out whether charting or the sense of what is happening at the table has a beneficial result over a long time. The more that I have played and kept focus regarding how shooters do their thing, the better it has been for me. But that is hearsay. We need a project. Maybe.

[Golfer]

Hey DF, was a 3rd midnight thrown on the next roll?

[heavy]

I would simply say that in a random game, over the long run you're better off locking up a win early. Keep some action on the table if you wish - but play with your surplus winnings after you've locked up a win. There may be that streak of three or four consecutive sixes that Irish mentioned before, but there's no guarantee that the next toss won't be the ugly number. Low vig bets, variance, and a little bit of money management win the day.

No doubt Irish will disagree with the money management part - even though I've seen him make many money management moves through the years.

[Dylanfreake]

No a third midnight was not tossed, but I do not remember what number was tossed . That happened a year or two before Oct of 2002. I started going to casinos in Aug . 2000. The casino that the guy bet midnights was ST Tunica.

The other "horn" event took place last month at GS Tunica. The guy bought in for $163 and started making a $4 horn bet and an occasional $5 field bet. He did this on three or four shooters and then laid off the shooter that shot the consecutive 1-2s. Pissed off ,he makes the $60 horn which lost and left the table seeming to be fuming.

He was a bet late on , "see the horn , bet the horn". Had he been a real streak player, I guess he would have made the wager after the first 1-2 was rolled.

My thoughts are if you are going after streaks , get in on them early. The only problem is that they may end on your first wager. Plus, who knows when the streak has started or when is the current streak going to end. I suppose that is why I play the way I do which is constant so that I never have to second guess my way of play.

Now that does not mean that I win all the time either or that streak players never win. I have seen some craps players ride a streak almost to the promised land and make thousands of dollars . I am not one of them . I try to pick my wins off at a $5 or $10 pace, always looking to the long run.

[Moe Bettor]

That is the way I play. Get in early, regress and play with a profit already locked up. You press and pull and press and if you are lucky enough to
be in on a streak you'll make a lot of money. IMO if you try to play for the long run, you will lose. The HA always catches up.

[Dark Side]

It depends on what you claim money management will do for you. The good aspects of "money management" are largely volatility management techniques. They'll help you lose less. Perfectly good with that. They will not however help you win more, which is a lie that John Patrick has been telling for decades. A lot of things folks put under the "money management" banner are nonsense.

You are quick to jump all over the money management style of play, stating it won't help you win more however, you never give an example of how it doesn't help a person win more.

Instead of your normal I don't agree so it's non sense response, why not give an example of why it's non sense?

DS

[six shooter]

Lou is on another Lucky Streak for 2017 48 wins and 1 loss.

[London Shooter]

"They'll help you lose less"

That's all you need to know about money management techniques. Great for negative expectation games. In other words, keep less of your money on the table for less of the time and you'll lose less.

[Dark Side]

Darkside. It's just math. It's not a question of whether I "agree" or "disagree." It just, is. 2+2 = 4 or it doesn't. Volatility management simply cuts the tails off of the profit/loss bell curve. You lose less, but you're wins are not optimized, in other words, you win less. Not complicated. 2 + 2 = 4. And I'm totally fine with a lot of money management/volatility management techniques. I'm just saying they're not what people claim them to be. Every player must evaluate how much they're willing to forego profit-wise in order to lose less when things aren't going well. This is not just a session to session question but one of frequency of play and overall bankroll.

Thank you for the reply.

I'm more of a it's not how much you win, it's how much you don't loose player. I'll take small profits before I'll dive head first into the big hit mentality and loose large sums of money.

Money management is paramount to me.

It's the way I've played for 30 plus years and works fine for me.

DS