| Play smart...learn how to play casino craps the right way! |
 |  |  |  |  |  |
| Craps Pros and Their Winning Systems by William J. Enslen, Jr. |
Be smart, play smart, and learn how to play craps the right way!
In my other article, Winning Systems, I address the fact that
there's no such thing as a long-term craps "winning system" for
the player. It's a mathematical fact that a player cannot gain an
advantage over the house using any combination of bets or bet
amounts. Period. Yet I see book after book and article after
article explaining a wide variety of systems that so-called "craps
pros" use to consistently beat the house. It irritates me knowing
that the gambling world recognizes some of these authors as
craps "experts." It irritates me when I read something from a
well-respected so-called craps expert who, in reality, spreads
false hope instead of fact. It irritates me knowing the Industry
acknowledges and flaunts these people as skilled and
knowledgeable players. It all boils down to money. False hope
and dreams of hitting it big sell books and magazines. The
reality that the game is designed for the player to lose doesn't
sell squat. In other words, in the gaming world, B.S. sells and
reality doesn't. One can only conclude that some of these
authors either aren't the experts that Industry acknowledges
them to be, or they're selling manure for an easy buck.
Search the Internet for craps articles and you'll find tons of
them. Some factual, some full of bull. Some by unknown
authors, some by well-known Industry leaders who have
multi-book titles to their credit and routinely write for magazines
and newsletters. Some authors do, indeed, explain game facts
honestly and correctly. However, too often, some so-called
experts apparently feel no shame in spreading false hope.
For example, I just finished reading a series of articles by a
well-known author with several book titles in print and a long list
of other writing credits. He talks about using wacky systems to
make a profit for almost every bet on the table, even those with
high house advantages. The fact is that none of those systems
can guarantee the player long-term wins. As explained in my
article, Variance, distribution variance is the only thing that
allows a player to win in the short-term. Let's examine one of
these so-called winning systems that so-called pros use to
make money: Place betting the 6 and 8.
The author's scheme is to Place bet both the 6 and 8, then wait
until one of them hits and turn them both off (i.e., make them
not working) because a 7 is more likely to appear before
another 6 or 8. If five rolls go by without hitting a 6 or 8 and
without hitting a 7, then turn both bets off because the 7 is due
to hit. After a 7 appears, then Place bet the 6 and 8 again.
The author ends his article by offering false hope that this
system will be profitable for the player only if the player has
discipline to stick to the method without making any other bets.
Your first clue that the author clearly isn't the expert that his
credentials imply is the reliance on the "Gambler's Fallacy" (see
my article, The Gambler's Fallacy). This system considers a 7
is "due" to hit if it doesn't show in five rolls or if a 6 or 8 shows
first. We know this is absurd because the odds of any number
appearing on the next roll are the same whether the number
hasn't appeared after five rolls or after a million rolls. Since the
odds never change, it doesn't matter how many times you turn
off your Place bets. You can leave them on constantly, or turn
them off and back on every other roll. It doesn't matter, the
odds never change. Let's look at the math associated with
Place betting the 6 and 8.
Over many rolls, results tend to resemble a perfect distribution.
Assuming a perfect distribution over 36 rolls, we expect a 7 to
appear six times, a 6 to appear five times, and an 8 to appear
five times. Because the odds for any number appearing on the
next roll never change, the odds of your Place bets winning and
losing are the same whether you leave them on constantly or
whether you randomly turn them off and on.
Assume you bet $6 on the 6 and $6 on the 8 for a total of $12.
Assuming a perfect distribution, the 6 will appear five times in 36
rolls and you win $35 (5 x $7 = $35). The 8 will appear five
times in those 36 rolls and you win $35 (5 x $7 = $35.
Therefore, in a 36-roll perfect distribution, you win $70 by Place
betting the 6 and 8 for $6 each. (Note: for a $6 Place bet on
the 6 or 8, the Place odds are 7:6, which means you win $7 for
your $6 bet.)
However, on six of those 36 rolls, a 7 will appear and you lose
$72 ($6 on the 6 and $6 on the 8 = $12; then $12 x 6 = $72).
The negative expectation with this system (i.e., Place betting the
6 and 8 for $6 each) is that you lose an average of $2 for every
36 rolls (i.e., you win $70, but you lose $72).
This is actually a good system, in terms of the player, because
of the low house advantages of the Place 6 and 8 bets.
However, it's clear that this system cannot guarantee long-term
success. It's statistically impossible. In other words, despite the
author's claim that this system will prove to be very profitable for
you, the statistical fact is that is won't over the long-term.
So, the question you should ask yourself now is: If this system
relies on the false notion of the Gambler's Fallacy, and if this
system is statistically proven to result in a player loss over the
long-term, why is this so-called craps expert feeding me such
bull manure by saying it will prove to be very profitable for me?
I think I know the answer to that question, and I think you do,
too. Could the answer have anything to do with selling books
and articles?
Remember, be smart. Play smart. Don't fall for bogus claims of
winning systems or wacky dice-setting schemes. Learn how to
play craps the right way.
Now you know!
back to Articles
In my other article, Winning Systems, I address the fact that
there's no such thing as a long-term craps "winning system" for
the player. It's a mathematical fact that a player cannot gain an
advantage over the house using any combination of bets or bet
amounts. Period. Yet I see book after book and article after
article explaining a wide variety of systems that so-called "craps
pros" use to consistently beat the house. It irritates me knowing
that the gambling world recognizes some of these authors as
craps "experts." It irritates me when I read something from a
well-respected so-called craps expert who, in reality, spreads
false hope instead of fact. It irritates me knowing the Industry
acknowledges and flaunts these people as skilled and
knowledgeable players. It all boils down to money. False hope
and dreams of hitting it big sell books and magazines. The
reality that the game is designed for the player to lose doesn't
sell squat. In other words, in the gaming world, B.S. sells and
reality doesn't. One can only conclude that some of these
authors either aren't the experts that Industry acknowledges
them to be, or they're selling manure for an easy buck.
Search the Internet for craps articles and you'll find tons of
them. Some factual, some full of bull. Some by unknown
authors, some by well-known Industry leaders who have
multi-book titles to their credit and routinely write for magazines
and newsletters. Some authors do, indeed, explain game facts
honestly and correctly. However, too often, some so-called
experts apparently feel no shame in spreading false hope.
For example, I just finished reading a series of articles by a
well-known author with several book titles in print and a long list
of other writing credits. He talks about using wacky systems to
make a profit for almost every bet on the table, even those with
high house advantages. The fact is that none of those systems
can guarantee the player long-term wins. As explained in my
article, Variance, distribution variance is the only thing that
allows a player to win in the short-term. Let's examine one of
these so-called winning systems that so-called pros use to
make money: Place betting the 6 and 8.
The author's scheme is to Place bet both the 6 and 8, then wait
until one of them hits and turn them both off (i.e., make them
not working) because a 7 is more likely to appear before
another 6 or 8. If five rolls go by without hitting a 6 or 8 and
without hitting a 7, then turn both bets off because the 7 is due
to hit. After a 7 appears, then Place bet the 6 and 8 again.
The author ends his article by offering false hope that this
system will be profitable for the player only if the player has
discipline to stick to the method without making any other bets.
Your first clue that the author clearly isn't the expert that his
credentials imply is the reliance on the "Gambler's Fallacy" (see
my article, The Gambler's Fallacy). This system considers a 7
is "due" to hit if it doesn't show in five rolls or if a 6 or 8 shows
first. We know this is absurd because the odds of any number
appearing on the next roll are the same whether the number
hasn't appeared after five rolls or after a million rolls. Since the
odds never change, it doesn't matter how many times you turn
off your Place bets. You can leave them on constantly, or turn
them off and back on every other roll. It doesn't matter, the
odds never change. Let's look at the math associated with
Place betting the 6 and 8.
Over many rolls, results tend to resemble a perfect distribution.
Assuming a perfect distribution over 36 rolls, we expect a 7 to
appear six times, a 6 to appear five times, and an 8 to appear
five times. Because the odds for any number appearing on the
next roll never change, the odds of your Place bets winning and
losing are the same whether you leave them on constantly or
whether you randomly turn them off and on.
Assume you bet $6 on the 6 and $6 on the 8 for a total of $12.
Assuming a perfect distribution, the 6 will appear five times in 36
rolls and you win $35 (5 x $7 = $35). The 8 will appear five
times in those 36 rolls and you win $35 (5 x $7 = $35.
Therefore, in a 36-roll perfect distribution, you win $70 by Place
betting the 6 and 8 for $6 each. (Note: for a $6 Place bet on
the 6 or 8, the Place odds are 7:6, which means you win $7 for
your $6 bet.)
However, on six of those 36 rolls, a 7 will appear and you lose
$72 ($6 on the 6 and $6 on the 8 = $12; then $12 x 6 = $72).
The negative expectation with this system (i.e., Place betting the
6 and 8 for $6 each) is that you lose an average of $2 for every
36 rolls (i.e., you win $70, but you lose $72).
This is actually a good system, in terms of the player, because
of the low house advantages of the Place 6 and 8 bets.
However, it's clear that this system cannot guarantee long-term
success. It's statistically impossible. In other words, despite the
author's claim that this system will prove to be very profitable for
you, the statistical fact is that is won't over the long-term.
So, the question you should ask yourself now is: If this system
relies on the false notion of the Gambler's Fallacy, and if this
system is statistically proven to result in a player loss over the
long-term, why is this so-called craps expert feeding me such
bull manure by saying it will prove to be very profitable for me?
I think I know the answer to that question, and I think you do,
too. Could the answer have anything to do with selling books
and articles?
Remember, be smart. Play smart. Don't fall for bogus claims of
winning systems or wacky dice-setting schemes. Learn how to
play craps the right way.
Now you know!
back to Articles
|
| Remember, learn how to play casino craps the right way! My book teaches you to play in reality, not Fantasyland. |
(for search-engine crawlers)
(for humans)
|
| Read the Disclaimer for the advertisement above. |
| Read the Disclaimer for the advertisement above. |
| Read the Disclaimer for the advertisement above. |
| Read the Disclaimer for the advertisement above. |
| Read the Disclaimer for the advertisement above. |
