What size increase in bankroll is needed to add a lay bet on each comeout roll?

[Billionaireben]

If one were comfortable betting $110 inside and regressing after 1 number to inside minus the point for $32-44, on a $11k bankroll; what kind of increase would they need to have the same risk level adding a lay bet on the come out roll only?

For low loss frequency, laying the 4 for $76+1 should yield good results. But, because there is a dice setting where any throw on axis can't be a 5 or 9; laying 5 and 9 for $42+1 each risks less. On a good day, I can stay on axis over 80% of the time (with possible error, since I don't use the hardway.) But, in the 6 times I've used a variation of this (I was betting much higher) it didn't work out. I haven't tried the lay $76+1 for a win of $37, I like that; but it pays far less than total risk. Laying 2 numbers on the come out roll (as long as vig is refundable when taking down bets, I saw one dealer try to not refund it) wins more than the loss risk, but I think I won 1 in 6 times I did it (I did bet way too much, like $150 each.) I think I lost 2 times that I did it, so only a little worse than expectation. Too small a sample. The idea is you can only lose $43, but you could have a string of 4 seven naturals winning a couple hundred right off the bat on a good day. I suspect, one could lay 4 for that bankroll without an increase; since it's still a unit and at a different time. If laying 5 & 9, that has a higher risk; maybe the odds would shift if I did more samples. I tried the throw 100 times, I was often up 3-6 units; I think I finished at 6 units (a lot of my notes are not at hand; no space due to Covid closures crowding my place.)

[DarthNater]

BB,
You could lay all six numbers and toss 7s on the comeout.

If you have a set that avoids 5s and nines, transpose it into an all sevens variant. Then after a few sevens and you finally set a point, just move the lays to place bets as they might already be paid for. Then switch to a high SRR set and bang numbers.

DN8R

[Billionaireben]

Darthnater, the 7/11 set avoids 5/9 and it is an all 7 set. The only downside to the set is it doesn't makes all of the craps numbers. I've thought about laying across, but it's a high loss frequency. I wouldn't lay 4 and 10 because the loss frequency is higher than I'd want. With 5 and 9, it should be profitable; but I haven't done enough testing. but the set is 5/2, 6/1.

I just wonder if anyone has ideas of how to keep the risk the same with the 5/9 lay. If I increased by 20 units, would that be a large enough bankroll. Risk each time is lower than 1 unit (110)

[DarthNater]

BB,
That set is tops, then facing, right? i.e.: 5261 ?

If you want all craps numbers on axis there’s 6622, it’s “cousin”: 1122, plus several more permutations. There’s a 4 and a 10 there, but since you’re laying 5/9 that might have some possibilities for your plan.

You could lay $180 on the 5 or 9, but if you’re really “on axis over 80% of the time on good days”, then I’d suggest place betting your highest recurring numbers and transition your set to a V3, V2, or X6 variant after some Bonetracker validations of a few books of rolls. Also, not sure what your frequency of “good days” is, but with the right set and high axial repeatability, you ought to be able to develop a strategy of betting the $110 on your top three numbers.

Just some thoughts, good luck, DN8R

[heavy]

If you can stay on axis over 80% of the time you don't need to worry about laying any numbers. Just my opinion, but I'm sticking to it until you can prove me wrong. I just don't think the math will support it over the long run. Take the money you'd spend laying numbers and add it as additional place action on your dominant place bet.

[Big O]

with 80% on axis , i would set the 2V put 200 on the 4 and 10, 100 on the H4 and H10 and carry a bag to put all the money in.

[Billionaireben]

I did specify 'on a good day' and specified that I didn't use the hardway set; so I might have been made an error (hard to tell which dice had the number, but I did void of I got tow 6's and only one 6 was on the axis. Most sessions with 10 times with the dice have several rolls in the teens, 1-2 in the 20's+. My main number is getting 1 number 78-80% of the time. As long as I do that, then I'm satisfied; since I regress after 1 number.

I won consistently my last year of frequent play, before that I over bet and sometimes cost myself.

The biggest challenge now is forming a team and getting skilled players around the table, that would be a back up the money truck situation.

[220Inside]

With numbers like that you don't need this team that you keep mentioning. You're not going to find any that will make claims anywhere close to those numbers and be able to back them up.

[Billionaireben]

22Inside, I'd gladly train a team; I've seen 2 others that were above my level (1 I only saw once, he was broke; hadn't figured out betting yet. The other was very old and quit playing for health reasons, but he seemed to have lost his touch; he went from super long rolls to only making 1 number.)

I made $100 a day consistently the last year I played often, losing 1 session; I quit after 2 losing rolls in a row that time. I was betting $44 inside then, I've been saving. If I had a team, I'd start at $1200 a day in gains; move up as my bankroll grew. If I had a near empty table, I could go it alone; also, it's boring to travel alone. I can't fund a team, but if I get involved with a hot girl who can do this well; I'd partially back her until able to as long as she found other teammates.

[Lkwd]

If I had a team, I'd start at $1200 a day in gains; move up as my bankroll grew. If I had a near empty table, I could go it alone; also, it's boring to travel alone. I can't fund a team, but if I get involved with a hot girl who can do this well; I'd partially back her until able to as long as she found other teammates.

This is beginning to sound like one of those Hallmark Channel Movies that my wife loves to watch.


Lkwd

[Moe Bettor]

Agree that you don't need a team. What you need to do is sell your capability to investors. Play with their money. You get 80%, they get %20 and they pay all yr. expenses. Plus, you hire other shooters who can prove themselves. You make them pay to play while you, the expert, observe and help. They have to complete three trials in a row. Lose any one and they have to reset with another payment. They finish all three levels, you take them in. They get %50, you get %30, investors still get %20. You make money every which way no matter whether you win or lose.

[skasower]

BillionaireBen,
You would be living the dream brother! This reminds me of that wonderful fantasy video from the History Channel all about this guy who could toss any number he intended to toss...The Dominator. Man, I love that video, although I have no evidence that such an invincible dice influencer could be that accurate toss after toss after toss. However, that is livin' tha dream.....



I am excited about you all woman team BillionaireBen. I think THAT is a money maker just to watch them converge at the craps table and toss no matter what the outcome. (Another History Channel video perhaps?)

Tongue in Cheek here,
skasower

[Billionaireben]

Thnick, years ago I tried going to my former employer (used to run a hedge fund, now promotes penny stocks to brokers) and discussed investing in card counting. His former partner might have gone for it, since he was a gambler and $25k was his typical gamble; but he was in "the country club" for a fax blast he sent to individuals on a penny stock (not while working at this place.) The guy I knew liked me, but had no interest in the project. One time I was holding my winnings for them to call last roll (experts should know how to play that) and just playing for fun, had a monster roll. This one guy betting a lot from the start made a fortune off me, after the ship closed; he complimented my shooting ability. I asked how he made his money and he said his family owns 10,000 trailers in Alabama. I asked if he ever considered investing in a dice control team, he said his mom (head of the family business) didn't like that he gambled; but would never allow him to be involved in something like that.

If someone invests in gambling, it's usually a 50/50 split after expenses being returned to the investor. Look at top pro poker players, if you're not a top pro; they might expect to buy part of your action (ie if they bought 100%, you'd get nothing.) Besides, I won't need investors by the time I save enough; basically I'm there but I have to sell collectibles that I bought with the purpose of reselling them. Once I sell those off, I'll day trade during the day and play craps 4 times a week. The only negative is that weight training to the point that I feel it in my hands or muscles is bad for my controlled throw, I want to get back in the gym; but the most I could do without risking my throw is my rowing machine.

Tables are always crowded, a team getting there before the crowds means 6 times per turn instead of 1. I might go to the casino to meet other dice controllers. But, that yields a casual fragmented group at best. If I had students, I'd get a GoPro Hero Black 7 and strobe light to study the results of each throw and see who's beating the game; and what percentage of the time that correlates with winning (ie the times when dice are completely random but win money vs times when dice fly in a controlled manner and win money.)

The numbers I expect from team play are big, the only sample I have is one time on a table of dice controllers; the rest is based on 6x my results (because 6x more people having skill should equate to that many more successful rolls.) I also look to aggressive strategies like laying 4 or 5+9 on the come out, but since I haven't gotten them to work in the limited number of attempts; I'm trying to find out how many more units in the bankroll would be needed to keep the risk the same. There are other tactics that only work if correlated with session winnings, I might bet 1/3 of session winnings inside w/regression at the beginning of each roll until a pt7 happens. This was never tested in my winning year, but should be a safe way to increase gains.

Your suggestion 'They have to complete three trials in a row. Lose any one and they have to reset with another payment. They finish all three levels, you take them in' sounds like stock trading companies claim, I never trust those sites; half of them are in Russia (not that I have anything against Russians, but it would be hard to get a refund if they're a scam.)

[220Inside]

I'll take my chances with the penny stocks

[heavy]

If someone invests in gambling, it's usually a 50/50 split after expenses being returned to the investor.

I know of several individuals and groups with multi-million dollar bankrolls who fund blackjack teams around the country and the split is nowhere NEAR 50/50. The investors make the bulk of the money because they take on the bulk of the risk. The players are paid peanuts compared to the income they generate. Then again, they risk nothing but their time and the possibility of getting barred for life.

[Billionaireben]

Heavy, I stand corrected; I was basing my statement on top poker players investors, noting that the bottom they basically want all of the return for the percentage the cover. I was just explaining why I had no interest in seeking investors, I wish I had investors 17 years ago when I started an adult video company.

[heavy]

Well, there you go. My older brother, a retired law enforcement officer, once told me that all of the easy money in this country was made in the sex trade and the drug trade. Now we know how you got your start. You probably fared better without investors. Same goes for players who have backers "investing" in them. They're better off playing with their own bankrolls. There's a big desert surrounding Vegas filled with unmarked graves of guys who tried playing with other people's money and failed.

I've turned down many offers to play with OPM through the years and would not do it to this day. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone else. Likewise, I would not recommend investing in a pro dice team for reasons, I believe, you and I may have discussed by e-mail. There are too many great shooters out there who simply have too many character flaws to have to deal with in a pro team situation. Do I have trust issues? You bet your ass. In fact, about the only think I put a lot of faith in is the Pareto Principle. You probably know it as the 80/20 rule. Seems like it applies to pretty much everything in life. That includes much of what I read from posters on line. Unless I know the poster personally and have stepped up to the tables and played with them - I assume that about 80% of what they have to say is bullshit. It is what it is, you know?

[Billionaireben]

Nope, I would have made money at it with enough capital to make a video a week and cover production while waiting to get paid by distributors; I was always spinning my wheels trying to make it in that field. I produced 6 videos that made money, but only enough to cover the one movie I was in which never saw the light of day (there might be a trailer floating around, but a girls legs are hiding my face well enough that I couldn't be identified.) No, I just got better at saving than I was back then. But, your brother isn't wrong; the adult field is better now than the last 12 years as streaming is finally profitable to low budget. The only name I worked with was Becky LeSabre, who did a g/g scene. The only person I'd invest in would be if I was seeing someone, I'd allocate half of what I made betting on them towards their bankroll until it was 100 units of 110 inside; If I invested in anyone else it would be triple the bank and you get a bank. But, I don't want to deal with that. The hard truth is that money handed to you is no where near as valued as money saved/earned/invested. If someone is willing to risk money they earned and saved, they'll perform better as long as their not under bankrolled; than if I handed them money (if I could.) The nickname is a very old joke, from the first Bill Gates interview I saw in 1994; also a friends mom used to call me 'the Ben' in reference to 'the Donald.' If I became a billionaire, it would either by using polygamy to build a law firm or starting an online university (which now is more attractive than ever, if they change regulations.)

Any thoughts on how many units to add to req bankroll to keep the risk the same if adding a lay bet on 5 and 9 on the come out roll? That was the reason I posted originally, got side tracked.

[DarthNater]

BB,
Reverse engineering your $110 across with its supporting bankroll of $11k implies your confidence factor is 100x. To net $110 on the lay you’ll need approx $180 lay. So $180 x 100 = $18,000 more. However, if you’re willing to take a reduced factor, say 40x, with your high on axis probability then I’d stick with the current bankroll. I suggest you road test on a private table first before taking it to the casinos

DN8R

[Billionaireben]

DarthNater, good post. It's tough to quantify the advantage for the purpose of Kelly criterion. I based the initial bankroll on an edge greater than 1%, each time I raise the initial bet; I'll add 10% more units to the bankroll. Example: To increase my bet to $132, I have to have 110 units for $14520. I might have 1000 units at $660 inside in the future, with a large bet; I'd want to increase confidence. The side benefit of those large wagers is that I could cut it in half if I lose and do it a few times to keep losses to 2 units in a bad session.

With complete randomness, one should get an inside number (18 ways) 75% of the rolls and a 7out (6 ways) 25% of the rolls. With dice control, I think it's about 80% of the rolls. Going from 1 in 4 losing to 1 in 5 is pretty good, I don't know what the advantage would be if all rolls after were random. After that, I may collect the first 3, but press until I've made 15 rolls and then take down to a minimal bet.

Originally, I did it the way you mentioned; large bet (not even close to this bankroll let alone that one) and I didn't do well, too small a sample to be sure. I like the 5+9 lay in theory (both avoidable if on axis, loses less than it would have won if it falls off axis, can win multiple times but can only lose once since I'd call it back after the come out roll.)

Definitely right on testing it on a private table, I'll have to build one; I usually use my couch. All my personal statistics were from actual casino play though.