| |
FAQs
About The Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method
We
first discussed the Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method in my
Dodging Bullets As A
Darksider article. To my surprise, it generated an immense amount of
interest on a number of Message Board Discussion Groups as well as keeping my e-mailbox
full for weeks upon weeks at a time. That of
course led to the unanticipated postponement in releasing other Darkside Methods in the
series, and instead required the follow-up,
Dodging Bullets As A Darksider Part II
article. Now, months later, I STILL continue
to receive a ton of e-mail, plus numerous I.M.s and MB-enquiries regarding this
hybrid gaming-approach.
To
that end, I have a taken a few of the most Frequently Asked Questions and
assembled them here. In most cases, I have
melded several similar inquiries together, and edited the question to reflect the most
general problem, request or query.
A
Cautionary Word
It
is CRITICAL for you to realize that the Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method is NOT made to be
used against EVERY shooter or EVERY table-situation.
It WILL NOT work in EVERY situation or against EVERY shooter. It is designed to work on choppy or
cool-trending tables ONLY.
If
you choose to ignore this advice, YOU MAY LOSE, and your losses could be large and
devastating.
Please
properly qualify the table conditions and confirm that you are indeed betting against
actual random-rollers, and NOT against Precision-Shooters, clever speed-setting
dicesetters or too-casual-to-be-noticed rhythmic-rollers. This method is tailored to win against
random-rollers at choppy or cool tables ONLY.
Any other application can be extremely risky, and I urge you to use it with
utmost caution and the most prudent and extreme of care if you choose to venture outside
of those parameters.
Used
properly, it can be a consistent winner. Used
improperly, it can be a stone-cold guaranteed LOSER.
If
you decide to extend the short-leash (5 steps) into a L-O-N-G Leash (8 or 10
or 12 or more progressions), please DO NOT delude yourself into thinking you are still
playing the MPs Dodging Bullet Short-Leash
you are not
your clothes are
drenched in gasoline and you are playing with FIRE and NOT using a level of common-sense
that God even gave to dogs.
So,
being adequately counseled with that cautionary warning, lets jump right into the
most Frequently Asked Questions.
Hedging
the Come-Out
"When
I start getting to the upper reaches (the third, fourth and fifth betting-stages) of your
C-T/S-L Method, I start to worry about getting knocked off on the Come-Out roll (to a 7 or
11). I know you arent a big fan of
hedge-bets in general, but what do you think of using a bet on the Yo (11)
when your wagers start to reach the higher bet range?"
Actually
a hedge-bet to guard against a higher-level (bigger dollar) wager is not an entirely bad
idea when you are using this approach.
At
the low-money levels, those Come-Out hedge-bet Yos are a steady bleed on your
bankroll, however, once you get to the $35 and higher level; then you can certainly
consider adding a Come-Out hedge-bet Yo into the mix.
As
long as you keep in mind the fact that your profit margin with the C-T/S-L Method is quite
thin (it works out to just a bit over $13 per shooter you apply this against), so a $2
Yo-bet (at the $35 level), or $5 (at the $75 level) will have a way of steadily eroding
your profit-margin. In fact, that
$13/shooter average shrinks to around $9/shooter when you always use a Yo-Hedge on the
Come-Out
and who said a buck here or there on the Prop-bets wouldnt make a
difference in your take-home coinage?
On
the other hand, when my own wagering gets to the $75 and $155 bet-levels (on an initial $5
base-bet starting point), I will often use that somewhat costly $5 and $12
insurance hedge against the Yo. Yes,
it takes longer to accumulate more profit and to stage a comeback after a session-loss,
but it also makes the trip a little calmer.
Now
that Ive been able to profitably move up to the $25 base-bet level (strictly fueled
by previous C-T/S-L revenues), I start the Yo-hedge once I reach the third progression. To my mind, it is part of the cost of doing
business at that somewhat rarified ($175, $375, and $775) altitude. Even though it tends to grind down my average
profit/shooter, it does bring me a lot more peace of mind along the way.
Why
the Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method Works
"MP,
what is the math behind this method, and how does it all fit together to make
it so strong? Why dont more
random-rollers make four or five or six PL-Points in a row more often? Why doesnt this method fail more often?"
The
"numbers" behind the Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method were derived
from the math of the game.
Ø On
average, a random-roller will throw a Come-Out winner (7 or 11) once every 4.5 Come-Out
rolls. That means, ON AVERAGE, 22.2% of the Come-Out rolls will either be a 7 or 11.
Ø Of
course, this is partially offset with the occurrence of C-O 2's and 3's, which will show
up 8.3% of the time on the Come-Out (1 out of every 12 C-O rolls). We don't factor in the
Bar-12 because it does not affect the C-T/S-L Method.
Yes,
sometimes a random-roller will throw a string of C-O winners (losers for us) during his
Come-Out roll even on a properly qualified choppy or cool-trending table.
It
CAN happen and it DOES happen. Just because something isn't PROBABLE, does
not mean it is IMPOSSIBLE.
That
is precisely where the Short-Leash part of this betting approach comes into play.
We don't pursue the chase endlessly until we run out of money. Rather, we pursue it to a
point where the strength of the math indicates we will rarely go. At that point (six
PL-winners), you are witnessing a very hot hand, and you have to stem your losses and wait
for the table to turn cool or choppy again BEFORE you reapply the C-T/S-L. Of course, if the table turns that warm or that
hot; then there is an obvious betting opportunity in wagering WITH the shooter.
That
brings us around to the math of the actual Pass-Line Point.
On
an individual basis, a random-rollers PL-Point has the following chance of being repeated
before a 7-Out.
Ø For
the 4 or the 10, there is a 33.3% chance he'll make it, and a 66.6% chance that he won't.
Ø For
the 5 or 9, there is a 40% chance that it will be repeated before a 7-Out, and a 60%
chance that it won't.
Ø For
the 6 and 8, there is a 45.4% chance of being repeated, and a 54.6% chance that it won't.
It
means that, on average, a random-roller has a blended 39.56% chance of making ONE PL-Point
in a row. For ease of use and understanding, I rounded that number off to 40% in my
original Dodging Bullets as a Darksider articles.
Ø Now
the 40% figure reflects the chances of a random-roller repeating ONE PL-Point. Then he
encounters a diminishing chance of making TWO PL-Points in a row. That number is 16% of
the time (1 out of 6.25 random-shooters will successfully roll two PL-Point winners before
7'ing-Out).
Ø A
random-roller who has made two PL-Points in a row has a 6.4% probability of making three
in a row (about 1-out-of-every 15.6 shooters). That equates to about one shooter out of
every rotation of the table.
Ø Thereafter,
a R-R has a 2.5% chance of completing four-in-a-row (1-in-40 shooters), while only 1% will
roll five PL-winners in a row. Yes, that is
only 1 out of 100 shooters who will make it this far. Out of them, only 0.4% of them (1
out of 250) will successfully complete their sixth PL-Point.
Ø In
the first Dodging Bullets article, I used even more conservative
numbers to reflect and illustrate the strength of this approach. As you can see the
numbers are quite strong.
Ø Although
it definitely DOES NOT mean that a random-roller on a cold or choppy table CAN'T throw six
PL-winners in a row, it simply means that it won't happen that often. Remember we are
holding off until AFTER he has made one-in-a-row PL-Points.
Ø When
you combine the 1-in-200 (actually 1-in-250) shooters who will make six PL-Point winners
in a row, and factor in the power of the Sheriff and his Deputy (the Come-Out 7 and 11
losers balanced against the C-O 2's and 3's winners), you will end up seeing about 1 out
of every 80 random-rollers (on a choppy or cool-trending table) throw a combination of
enough PL-Points and C-O winners to take you to your max-bet with this betting-approach.
Ø You'll
get to that stage ON AVERAGE, once every 80 shooters on a choppy table, but it DOES NOT
mean that you CAN'T see it happen several times in a row even when you re-apply it
on a properly re-qualified choppy/cool table.
On the other hand, you will also experience extended periods when there
arent any random-rollers who manage to put together more than a couple PL-winners in
a row.
On
average, this method generates about $13 for each random-roller choppy-table situation
that you employ the C-T/S-L at. It takes about 22 wins to offset a final-stage loss, so
the rest of the 1-in-80 wins (approximately 58 net-wins) are kept as profit...and THAT my
friends, is the math behind my Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method.
I
Love It
I Hate It
I Cant Stand It
"MP,
I love your Choppy-Table Short-Leash because it works, but I hate it because I cant
use it often enough to give me the kind of action that I want when Im at the tables. Its just too damn frustrating to stand there
at a choppy table and wait for a shooter to make his first PL-winner before I can make a
bet. I need more action, so I usually make
some other bets that end up eating the steady but frustrating profit that the C-T/S-L
makes for me. I cant stand it anymore,
so I guess Ill thank you for introducing me to it, but pass on using it anymore
because its just too annoying to use."
Although
that is more of a commentary than a question, I can tell you that I also share your
frustrations, but I also dont really like many of the alternatives. I mean, I can avoid betting during those choppy
periods, which I do quite often; or I can use some of my alternative choppy-table methods
that arent nearly as good. That leads
to another brand of frustration called: LOSING. As
you know, the more action that you add to your betting, the more
risk that you have to endure. Therefore,
you have to make the personal decision as to whether you can put up with the annoyance of
fairly steady but frustrating wins; or if you are prepared to endure the higher action and
higher risk of other methods. At any table,
regardless of the trend, it is important that you never let frustration overrule good
judgment.
Can You Extend the Short-Leash to a Medium-Leash?
"I
have applied your Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method to ALL shooters, from their first throw,
while using WinCraps. When the table started
to heat up I simply stop betting, reseed the RNG, and start over again.
By using a 7-step Medium-Leash, I got up to over $5,000 ahead even though I got nailed
(maxed-out at the seventh betting-level) on the way there, and then got nailed again and
was taken back down to still having a $3,000 net-profit.
When I shortened the leash to a 6-step progression on the Don't-Pass, it once again pushed
my net-profit to over $7,000 again. My
question is, can you use your method right from the outset, instead of waiting for the
random-roller to complete his first PL-Point, and is the Grand Martingale a valid way to
make money off of the darkside? "
Yes, you CAN make more money by using my Choppy-Table/Short-Leash
Method against random-rollers on choppy tables right from the outset. However, it does add
to the volatility (the up-and-down risks and rewards) of this betting-method, and most
players tend to get gun-shy when they reach the most critical upper-limits of the
bet-requirements.
For that reason, I recommend a very conservative starting point (beginning the betting
sequence AFTER the random-roller completes his first PL-Point). While the average player
won't make as much money, he also won't get to the final stage of his betting limit as
often either. Psychologically, that makes a huge difference to many limited-bankroll
players. In fact, I strongly urge
limited-bankroll players NOT to use this method at all.
So,
on one hand, a player using the wait-until-the-RR-makes-his-first-PL-Point
method will make less profit (on average), he'll also suffer many fewer
heart-palpitations, and a lot less crash-and-burn bankroll explosions than someone who
extends the leash. It's a trade-off between using a conservative, low-risk,
medium-stability approach VERSUS a riskier, more volatile and higher-risk tactic.
I'll
readily admit that I often start my own C-T/S-L betting at an earlier stage when the table
is quite cool and getting even COLDER. In situations like that, the profit-potential of
this approach REALLY shines through, but again, you have to wield it carefully, and keep
very close tabs as to what the table is offering up in the way of changing trends.
Again,
the methods that I recommend to readers of Irishsetters excellent website
(dicesetter.com), tend to be in the conservative and low-risk category, because I not only
want to GET MORE players INTO the win-zone (with the least amount of risk); I also want to
KEEP them there more often (with the least number of heart-attacks).
There
are many others who belong to the ALWAYS-Parlay, Always Stack Em, Never
Rack Em School of Gambling who tout the positive aspects of a fear-no-evil,
always jump in head-first gambling approach.
However, I personally dislike the risk-for-the-sake-of-a-thrill
part of the old-style Wild West gambler mentality, and therefore focus my money and
attention solely on consistent WINNING instead of getting wrapped up by the thrill of the
chase.
Heres
the problem with starting the C-T/S-L earlier and at less-than-choppy tables:
Ø The
wider the range of tables (Hot, Warm, etc.) that you apply a Grand Martingale betting
scheme to, and,
Ø The
sooner you begin the leash (by not waiting for a player to successfully make
their first PL-Point), and,
Ø The
farther you extend your chain of bets (by using a higher 6th and 7th
progression to your wagers); then,
Ø The
greater your chances of a catastrophic loss at some point along the way.
Most
players have a hard time psychologically handling large losses, and their bankroll has an
equally difficult time absorbing them. It
also means that you have a bigger and deeper hole to dig yourself out of. Faced with a daunting task like that, most players
make dumb and desperate moves which usually puts them into even deeper trouble to a point
where it becomes impracticable for them to launch a recovery from.
Bankroll
Requirements
"You
mentioned in the Dodging Bullets series, that you strongly recommend a bankroll of at
least $5000 for anyone contemplating using this method.
Since the total session bankroll required for a full string of bets
(using a $5 base-bet) is only $285, why do you require such a large bankroll?"
The
Choppy-Table, Short-Leash Method is not for the faint of heart, the weak of stomach, or
the light of bankroll.
Here's
the thing:
You
WILL DEFINITELY hit your $285 session loss-limit about once every four hours
of play on choppy or cool tables (and much, MUCH more often if you dont properly
qualify the table), so you have to be prepared to handle it, both mentally and
financially.
It
is part of the game, and that is precisely WHY you CANNOT use this method against EVERY
player by disregarding table-trends, shooter-skill or prevailing conditions.
Rather,
the C-T/S-L Method can ONLY be safely used when the table is DEFINITELY choppy or cool.
Even then, some random-shooters will come along and max you out on your $285 Loss-Limit,
so the term safe is comparatively relative in this casino-gaming
context.
Losing
DOES happen, and it WILL continue to happen at (seemingly) the most inopportune
times. You have to accept the loss as part of
the whole wagering process, and your bankroll has to be large enough to absorb it without
leaving any structural damage to your wallet or to your ego or to your confidence. For that, most people need a cash-reserve that is
many times the size of any single-session loss, and that is why a dedicated $5000 C-T/S-L
fund is strongly recommended.
Staging
a Comeback
"Can
you explain how your method is able to make a comeback after suffering a $285 session
loss-limit?"
The
true strength and validity of this method shines through in its ability to overcome those
occasional losses with its steady and consistent winnings on choppy and cool-trending
tables.
Here's
why:
You
WILL occasionally run into a lucky random-roller who will toss out a string of six
Pass-Line winners (or a combination of Come-Out and PL-winners) even after he has made his
first PL-Point. IT WILL HAPPEN, and once again, that is the reason why you have to have an
adequate bankroll where the $285 loss will not make a significant dent in your wallet,
your confidence, your mind-set or your ego. It
is also the reason that we put a short leash on our bets. That way, you cut your losses short in the event
that a lucky shooter does puts together the hand of the day.
As
you know, youll get stopped-out at your Loss-Limit about once every 80 or so
random-shooters. While the chance of a random-roller completing six PL-Point winners in a
row is about 250-1; you have to factor in the C-O 7's and 11's, and so on a
fully-populated CHOPPY TABLE youll encounter that situation, about once every eighty
shooters (about once every four hours of 100-roll/hour play).
It
only takes on average about 22 winning bets to offset that one-in-80 situation. So you end
up with a net-gain of ~58 winning bets. Those
numbers are based on a $13-per-shooter profit (22 winning bets X the average revenue of
$13/shooter = $285 allowable loss-limit) when the Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method is
applied against a properly qualified table.
If
you use hedge-bet Yos on the Come-Out; then your profit per shooter drops to around
$9, so it takes substantially longer to stage a comeback.
In this case, it takes about 32 winning bets if you use a hedge-bet on the
Yo versus 22 winning bets if you DONT use a hedge-bet.
The
Validity of WinCraps
"As
you suggested, I used WinCraps to check out the validity of your C-T/S-L Method. It seems to work out really well with this
computer simulator, especially if I manually track when the table gets choppy
or cool. So, how
closely does WinCraps simulate real-life random-roller dice results?"
Just
as in a real-world casino situation, you will see some hot and cold streaks interspersed
with LOTS and LOTS of choppiness. If you are ever concerned about the true randomness of
WinCraps, you can manually re-seed the RNG (random number generator) on the
"configure" page under the "Game" dropdown menu tab. For added randomness the latest
freeware version includes a Mersenne
Twister RNG, which generates dice results at the rate of 28.4 million random outcomes per
second, all within the scope of only 36 possible conclusions. To my experience, this goes a long way to matching
the streaks and trends that youll experience at the real-world tables.
Whenever
I am considering a new betting-method or planning alterations to my current approach, I
will often run it through WinCraps. In fact,
Ive manually logged several hundred thousand practice throws into the memory, so
Ill sometimes run high-speed simulations to try out various betting techniques to
determine the best one based on my own throwing skill.
It
was through experimentation like that that I developed my Come-Out action Game-within-a-Game
betting strategy, wherein I use my C-O rolls as a totally separate and distinct profit
department which is unattached and completely disconnected from my Point-cycle betting. So I strongly recommend WinCraps as an integral
part of your Practice Session or bet-validation process
and, NO, I am NOT connected
with, associated to, or compensated in anyway whatsoever by that software developer
I
merely like the product.
Profit
Potential
"What
is the profit potential for your method, and how do you arrive at those figures? Are they applicable in every casino that you play
at?"
The
quick answer is; it really depends on several factors.
The long answer follows:
Rolls-Per-Hour
Generally you should be seeing about 100 rolls/hour, but this can vary widely depending on
how many people are playing, what kind of bets are being made, the skill of the crew, and
the skill (wagering wise) of the players.
If
several players are giving press/parlay/regress/and hop instructions to the dealer at the
same time, or doing so out of order in the payout sequence, then the game will be much
slower (sometimes as low as 20-30 rolls per hour during prime-time in some jurisdictions).
Conversely, if there are only a handful of players and the dice are moving very rapidly;
then you may get up to two or three times MORE rolls (180 to 300+ per hour) than at an
average table.
Generally,
you can rely on that 90 to 100 rolls/hour figure as a safe average in LV (and the rest of
NV), MS, LA, ONT, NY, CT and A/C.
Base
Bet
All
of the calculations in both of my Dodging Bullets as a Darksider articles
were based on the assumption of a $5 game.
On
that basis, my Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method generates ON AVERAGE just
over $13.00 for each shooter that the table-trend indicates is a good betting situation.
I
made a gradual transition from $5 base-bets to $10, then to the $15 starting-point, all
built on the RELATIVELY predictable results of this approach.
I
can tell you quite candidly that since completing those articles back in 2003, I have been
playing quite a bit more at higher-denomination $25 tables BECAUSE of the excellent
results that this approach has been generating, as well as the commensurately higher
number of shooting opportunities for me because there are usually fewer players at the
pricier tables. Keep in my mind that I developed this approach so I could stay at my
favorite dialed-in tables and still make a little money on the choppy
tables as I waited for the dice to cycle back around to me.
When
I had sufficient profits built up at those lower levels, I moved up to my current $25
base-bet. I keep all of my C-T/S-L revenue totally separate from my main
Precision-Shooting income. That way I can accurately monitor whether it remains as a valid
choppy-table method, or whether I am just on a (now) 24-month lucky winning streak.
So to fully answer your question, I can only give you my own real-world results.
On
an hourly basis, as calculated during my 18-month/2300-hours of actual play trial-period,
at the $5 level; this method generated just under $40 per hour.
While
it doesn't come close to rivaling what my Precision-Shooting can earn; to my mind, it does
represent a valid method that can be employed ON A CHOPPY TABLE while waiting for the dice
to cycle back around to you.
Raising
Your Base-Bet
"You
mentioned that you recommend that a player should start out with a $5 base-bet for this
method. Okay, can you use the
Choppy-Table/Short-Leash as a stand-alone betting method, and what do you do when
youve built up enough profit to be comfortable?
When is the right time to move on up to the next betting-level?"
If
there were more $1, $2, and $3 tables spread across North America instead of being
concentrated in Nevada, I would recommend that ALL players start the C-T/S-L at those
lower levels. If cheap tables are indeed
available where you play; then I would definitely suggest that you start out at the lowest
possible base-bet. From there, you can let
the profit drive any base-bet increases when you become comfortable and adequately
financed for the next level.
Yes,
you can use the Choppy-Table, Short-Leash Method as an independent,
stand-alone approach (for betting on cool-trending or choppy tables only). I would
strongly caution you NOT to step up your base bet to the next level until AFTER you have
experienced two things:
Ø Consistent
and sustainable wins at the $5 base-bet level, over AT LEAST a month or two of steady
play.
Ø Experienced
and validated (for yourself) the approximate 80-to-1 occurrence of hitting your $285
session Loss-Limit at least SEVERAL TIMES over. That
is also an excellent method of determining if you are properly pre-qualifying a choppy or
cool table before you venture your money.
Ø Experienced
the comeback ability of this betting approach.
That is, it is very important to endure the losses, and then experience the
ability for it to self-heal (overcome) and win back those deficits, and to see
for yourself that it can and will legitimately register a net-win over a reasonable period
of time.
Ø BOTH
of these things have to be experienced FIRST HAND MANY TIMES OVER, BEFORE
you even CONSIDER ratcheting up your base-bet to the $10, $15, and then $25 level.
I'll
tell you why.
It
is CRITICAL that you build up your bankroll with WINNINGS (and not from your own kick),
and build up the confidence in your ability to properly gauge the trend and temperature of
the table. After that you can utilize those
profits to fuel higher base-bets. To my mind, I would recommend that you at least DOUBLE
your total dedicated C-T/S-L bankroll with this method (from $5,000 at the $5 level to
$10,000 for the $10 level) before you even consider ratcheting it up.
Likewise,
it is also CRITICAL that you experience the pain of hitting your $285 session Loss-Limit
MANY TIMES OVER before you put any thought into edging your base-bet up. By enduring those
losses, and seeing them offset and overcome with many more frequent wins, it will give you
the required CONFIDENCE and the equally needed revenue-fueled BANKROLL to move on up to
the next snack-bracket.
Origin
of the C-T/S-L Method
"Ive
been using your method now for the past three months (29 casino day-trips and over 100
individual sessions). The numbers worked out
almost exactly as you predicted. Ive
endured two all-out session losses, but my winnings have recouped those losses by a
three-to-one margin. Now that is impressive
although I still cant quite believe it. How
in the world did you ever come up with such a brilliant idea?"
First
of all, every one of the concepts contained in my Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method is NOT new, and they are not
mine. In fact, some of them date back well
over 300 years. That was long before buffet
lines, Players Cards and 6:5 Blackjack; but some time after REAL pirate ships, REAL
castles, and the REAL Roman Empire.
A
basic Martingale is a double-up until you win concept that
looks good on paper, but is doomed to failure in the modern-day casino. The Grand Martingale uses a double-plus-one
concept that gives you one unit of profit for every loss, and not just the recouping of
the original one unit profit that a simple Martingale would give you. Again, in a modern-day casino, the Grand
Martingale usually guarantees eventual backroll-failure.
Up
until now, Grand Martingale-style bets were traditionally applied against games of chance
on a wholesale basis. That is,
the trend never mattered, the type/side of bet (PL or DP in craps, Red or Black, and Odd
or Even in roulette, Banker or Player in Baccarat, etc.) never mattered, and as a result,
the long-term prospect was that there was never any long-term profit potential versus the
house-edge and the volatility of the game.
Simply
stated, when you use a GM-approach, most times you will win, but occasionally you will
face a complete bankroll meltdown.
Applied
on that wholesale (by disregarding the trend), bet-until-it-wins basis;
a Grand Martingale will usually work for a while, but the bettor will often either run out
of money before hitting a win, or he would be stopped-out by the table-limit
maximum-bet. On its own, the GM can be a
devastating loser.
I
looked at the game and at the Grand Martingale from an entirely new approach.
I
was not looking for a way to get rich off of any particular betting-method, and I
certainly was not interested in blowing all of my hard-earned profit on an all-or-nothing
chase-a-loss-until-you-go-broke basis.
Instead, I was just looking for a way that would allow me to stay at certain
dialed-in tables where my Precision-Shooting was particularly effective, and
where it would permit me to wait until the dice cycled back around to my shooting
position.
I
found that choppy conditions were the most frustrating because few methods worked well, if
at all, under those conditions. Instead of
staying on the sidelines, I wanted a method that would let me have some action on the
table even during the choppiest of times, and still give me a reasonable prospect of
profit.
Obviously,
there are several other quite valid betting approaches that I used then, and still use
now; but I found that none of them were able to really capitalize on the random choppiness
that I was encountering about 60% of the time. With
that in mind, I set out to come up with something that would give me a sensible likelihood
of reward. I knew that as a table heated up
or cooled down I already had several excellent betting-methods that were proven
money-makers, so if I could just weather those long and nasty choppy spells, Id be
all set. That way, my Precision-Shooting
could pay the way, yet I wouldnt have to pay too much rent while
waiting patiently for the dice to return to my hand.
What
is unique about the C-T/S-L Method is that it combines a Grand Martingale together with
the power-of-the-7 math for the Dont Pass game, along with the
comparatively reasonable risk/return prospects of a random-roller not being able to throw
six PL-winners in a row.
When
you properly apply this method against the frustrating choppiness and the pervasive never-quite-cool-enough-to-be-cold
trends, which always seem to kill the bankroll of players REGARDLESS of whether they are
betting with the dice or against them; youll
find this method to be quite effective.
Math-Boy
versus Real Player
"Ive
read all of your articles, and Ive paid special attention to your Dodging Bullets
series. I am a confirmed Darksider myself,
and always have been. You use a lot of gaming
math to back up your argument, but doesnt that irritate a lot of regular players who
dont want to read about the math and would rather hear about gambling
stories and trip reports? Below the surface,
are you really one of those despised Math Boys?"
I
don't think of myself as a "math guy", nor as an "anti-math" guy
either. Instead, I look at craps in general, and Precision-Shooting in particular, as a
business.
As
such, the decisions of how, when and where I make my investments (bets) is determined by
the best (highest) likelihood of a steady return on my investment. To get to that point (a
profit ON my investment), I first have to get the return OF my original
investment. I make very few high-risk bets unless I have engineered most of the risk out
of the situation through my own (or others) Precision-Shooting.
When I'm betting on or against random-rollers, I take an even more linear (yet more
organic) approach to the game, wherein I look at the current trend and try to closely
match it with a corresponding betting method. On
hot tables I have a couple of great methods that bring in the cash. Likewise, for cold-tables, I use other betting
approaches that ring the bell very effectively, and so it is with choppy tables, where I
use yet another totally different approach to generate a profit.
Ill
be the first on to admit that my Choppy-Table, Short-Leash Method is not a perfect
approach, yet it provides a steady R.O.I. (with defined and limited risk), and when it
comes right down to it...isn't that what we are all striving for?
Steady
and reliable wins may be boring, but theyre much better than the steady and
reliable thrill of losing.
Therefore,
all of my craps decisions are based on the chances of achieving and maintaining consistent
profitability, without exposing my venture capital (my session bankroll) to undue risk.
While math surely has to figure into the decisions that a professional craps player has to
make, you also have to be vigilant not to get bogged down by the math or blinded by it.
Hedge-Betting
Risks and Rewards
"MP,
I think that hedge-betting to insure against a Come-Out 7 or 11 is a good bet. In fact, I now make No-4 and/or No-10 bets on the
C-O, to cover my DP-bet. Lets
say that I have $75 on the Dont-Pass; Ill wager $150 on the No-4 (plus
commission), along with at least $5 on the Yo-11. This
way I cant get hurt unless a 4 or 10 rolls. What
do you think?"
With
my Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method...the idea was to give you a good and VERY
CONSISTENT shot at the brass ring of steady profit, WITHOUT undue risk or bankroll
erosion.
By
making all of those hedge-bets that you mentioned, your profit actually erodes pretty
quickly, because your net-wins are always diluted and diminished by the losses that you
endure on the other bets that are made in an attempt to cover your base DP-bet.
For
example, I made an average profit of $13.05 against each shooter that I bet against while
using this method over an 18-month trial period (using a $5 base-bet). If I had hedged my
DP wagers as you suggest with No-4/No-10 Lays PLUS a Yo-hedge, I would think that I'd
possibly only be at the break-even point, but more likely, Id probably have
registered a net-loss for my efforts.
When
a new PL-Point is established (after the random-roller has successfully made his first
Point ON A CHOPPY TABLE), we simply wait until a decision is made. On a win, we collect
our winnings, and on a loss, we move up to the next step in the progression.
With
this method, we don't make any Come-bets or Place-bets, we don't make any Lay-4 or 10 bets
or Hardway-bets, we don't do ANYTHING but wait for the inevitable 7-Out. Yes, one shooter
out of ~250 will actually make six PL-Points in a row, and we will lose our $285
loss-limit for that session. It does happen, but obviously, it doesn't happen often enough
to offset our winnings. Again, I STRONGLY recommend that you PROVE IT TO YOURSELF with
WinCraps or with any other simulator or roll-record.
That way, you can compare it against the multi-hedging strategies that you
are contemplating, and I think you will find that on choppy tables; the risk increases
substantially, while your profit declines precipitously.
For
a completely different view on hedge-betting, I would kindly invite you to have a look at
my Bill
& Ted's Excellent System
article and at my A Fresh Look at Old Systems
piece. In addition, you may
want to have a peek at some alternative GRIND methods in my
What Are You Doing
When You Retire?
article.
Handling
Come-Out Wins
"When
do I make my first DP-bets, and what is the plan when a Come-Out 2 or 3 is rolled? What happens if a new player throws a Come-Out
winner 7 or 11 before he makes his first PL-Point?"
When
the table is choppy, and a random-rolling shooter throws a series of Come-Out winners before
setting and then repeating his first PL-Point, we don't have ANY bets on the table,
so there is nothing to worry about.
If
the table is still choppy after he successfully repeats his first PL-Point, that is the
trigger for us to wager a DP bet against him on his very next Come-Out roll. At that time,
Ø If
the shooter throws a craps number on the C-O and our DP-bet wins; then we stop wagering
the C-T/S-L against him. We do that no matter where we are in our betting sequence, and
then we wait for the next shooter.
Ø If
the table conditions are STILL choppy or trending cool, and the next shooter repeats his
first PL-Point; then we start the C-T/S-L process again.
Ø If
the shooter makes a couple of PL-Point winners and a couple of C-O naturals (losers for
us); we simply move up to the next step in the C-T/S-L progression.
Handling
Come-Out Losses
"How
often do Come-Out Winner-7's and 11s occur (losers for us), and how does it affect
the odds of a player throwing six PL-Points in a row?"
When
you factor in the C-O loser-Yo (11), you have to balance it against the equal strength (of
occurrence) of the DP Come-Out winner-3's. That makes the 3 vs. 11, a wash.
You
then have to diminish the "frequency of loss" for the Come-Out Loser-7's with
the 1-in-36 occurrence of the Come-Out winner-2's. This effectively negates (erases or at
least counter-balances) one of the 6-out-of-36 appearances of the 7 (on the Come-Out). On
the Come-Out roll, a random-roller has an "effective advantage" of 5-out-of-36
rolls (13.88%) edge against (over) our DP-bet. Once
the new Point is established, the odds turn in our favor.
In
practical terms, when you factor in the Come-Out loser 7's and 11's (the Sheriff and his
Deputy), and partially offset their effect with the Come-Out winner 2's and 3's; you end
up with the following:
You will max-out (hit your $285 loss-limit on a $5 table) about once every 80 shooters
that you bet against. So far it's been 83.4 shooters between session Loss-Limits for me. Of course your mileage may vary, depending upon
many factors including how you define what a choppy or cool-trending table is.
The
Break-Even Point
"On
average, how many wins does it take to offset the losses that Ill run into with the
C-T/S-L Method?"
The
break-even for this method is approximately 22 shooters. That means that you need to bet against and win on
about 22 players between each session loss-limit where a shooter successfully makes all
six PL-winners in a row and/or he throws enough Come-Out winners to blow you out of the
water.
This
is not a be-all-to-end-all betting-method. Rather, it is ideally suited for choppy table
situations (which you'll encounter at least 60% of the time), and where you are awaiting
the return of the dice to your shooting-position.
My
own experience with this approach over the past couple of years is that the numbers
are solid and the profit is steady. But again, I would urge anyone
considering the use of this method to satisfy themselves FULLY as to the efficacy
of this method before venturing dollar-one of their own money.
Obviously,
if you add hedge-bets or any other supplementary wagers to the C-T/S-L, then you may find
that it takes many more DP victories to overcome and win back the deficit incurred when
you reach the self-imposed $285 loss-limit.
Modifying
the C-T/S-L for Higher Table-Minimums
"MP,
I only play in Atlantic City where $5 tables are rare, especially on the weekend. What I need to know is whether you can give me a
modified progression for the C-T/S-L that starts at a $10 base-bet, but STILL stays within
the $285 session-limit, if possible."
Yes
it is possible, and there is a modified progression that is useable for $10 tables, but
before I give you that, let me give you the normal progression that you would normally
apply regardless of the table-minimum.
You
simply use the following unit progression, and multiply it by the base-bet. The normal Grand Martingale progression is 1, 3,
7, 15, 31, 63, etc. So at a $5 table,
youd multiply each of the units to determine your actual betting series
($5, $15, $35, $75, and $155), and at a $10 table the bets would normally be
$10, $30, $70, $150 and finally, $305. Clearly,
under those circumstances you need to have twice the bankroll at the $10 table as you
would at the $5 table.
However,
there is a cheaper alternative, which looks like this:
$10, $15, $30, $75 and $150. While
this progression is not as aggressive as the standard double plus one-unit
progression that characterizes the Grand Martingale and guarantees one unit of profit for
EACH loss along the way; it does deliver steady profit and only requires approximately the
same bankroll. In fact, it requires a lower
(by $5) total session-bankroll of $280.
The
average profit-per-shooter for this modified $10 C-T/S-L is about 50% lower than you will
earn at a $5 table using the conventional progression, and about 75% lower than you would
gain at a $10 table while using the normal double plus one-unit
progression. On the other hand, it allows you
to play at a $10 min-bet table with a $280 Loss-Limit, and not require a larger bankroll.
Again,
I would recommend a total dedicated bankroll of at least $5000 before considering this
type or level of play.
Profitability
of Higher-Bets with Hedge-Betting
"MP,
I know you did a lot of experimenting and fine-tuning with this method. What is the profitably at a $10 table if I use a
Yo-bet hedge to guard against a Come-Out 11 on your DP-wagers right from the start."
As
I mentioned above, a Yo insurance/hedge-bet on the Come-Out, really dilutes your profit.
It
does provide a somewhat valid, but expensive insurance policy when your bets start to get
into the upper reaches of the sequence, especially on a $10+ base-bet progression.
In
any event, when you use an offsetting Yo-bet hedge on every one
of your C-T/S-L wagers at the $10 base-bet level, the profitability works out to about
$4.30 per random-roller.
Now
to put that into perspective, youll make about THREE TIMES as much profit at
the $5 level if you DONT use a hedge-bet to protect your investment as
you will at the $10 level if you DO. The
kicker is that you end up betting TWICE the amount of money to earn HALF the
amount of profit.
Betting
Without Waiting for the 1st PL-Winner
"Can
you make more money by using the Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method against random-rollers on
choppy tables by betting against them right from the outset, before they make their first
PL-Point?"
You
can POTENTIALLY make more money by using my Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method against
random-rollers on choppy tables right from the outset, but you can also POTENTIALLY lose
more money as well.
By
starting your betting-process earlier, you substantially add to the volatility (the up and
down risks and rewards) of this betting-method. Most
players tend to get gun-shy when they reach the most critical upper-limits of the
bet-requirements. If they suffer a
session-loss at this point, they often become disenchanted with the method, instead of
taking a long, hard look at themselves and their motivations.
For
that reason, I have used a very conservative starting point (AFTER the random-roller
completes his first PL-Point on a CHOPPY table). While the average player won't make as
much money, he won't get to the final stage of the betting limit as often either.
Psychologically, that makes a huge difference to many limited-bankroll players.
In
other words, he'll make less profit (on average), but he'll suffer many fewer
heart-palpitations along the way. It's a trade-off between conservative, low-risk,
lower-profit wins, VERSUS riskier, more volatile, but potentially higher-profit wins.
I'll
readily admit that I often start the C-T/S-L at an earlier stage when the table is quite
cool and getting even COLDER. In situations like that, the profit-potential of this
approach REALLY shines through.
Again, most methods that I recommend tend to be in the conservative-risk category, because
I want to not only get MORE players into the win-zone (with the least amount of risk); I
want to KEEP them there more often (with the least number of heart-attacks).
Theres
one more thing you have to keep in mind if you start betting on a choppy-table
random-roller from the outset, instead of waiting until he makes and repeats his first
PL-Point, and that is that you will hit the fifth and final stage of the progression much
sooner and much more frequently.
That means that you can expect to LOSE much more frequently. For me, thats not a very good trade-off.
On
the other hand, you can add one more stage to your betting sequence, but
that also raises the next required bet (the new sixth stage) to $315. It also means that your minimum session-stake is
now $600, which commensurately raises your total bankroll requirements to about $10,000. For a $5 bettor, this might seem somewhat extreme,
but it is necessary for sustainable success at these wagering levels.
Defining
a Choppy Table
"Im
clear on what a hot table or a cold table is, and Im pretty sure I know what a warm
trend or cool trend looks like, but how do you define what a choppy table is?"
Well,
when both sides are losing, and even the liars are complaining...the table is choppy.
That's
the simple explanation.
The
wider view is that if both PL and DP-bettors are getting killed (losing), and everyone
(including DP/DC, Place, Come and Prop-bet players) are complaining about not being able
to "get anything going"; then it's safe to say you are probably at a
choppy table.
Ø If
you've stood at the table and seen sequences where roller after roller will throw a couple
of Come-Out winners, only to 7-Out two or three tosses after establishing his PL-Point,
and then...
Ø A
few guys will toss the dice, and it starts to look like things MIGHT be turning around,
but just as nearly everyone is convinced that the table is finally trending
"warm"; the dice suddenly remember EXACTLY where the "7" is, and a
rash of players will find them almost immediately after making one or two PL-Point
winners, or,
Ø If
the frustration level for ALL players is high, and the CHOP is steadily eroding the
bankrolls of DP and PL players alike, because there is no dominant trend...
Ø Then
the table is choppy.
There
are a hundred situations that I could use to describe what a choppy table looks like, but
at the end of the day, we are talking about various situations where neither side is able
to find or exploit any sustainable streaks.
You
will usually see that "no-discernable-trend" situation about 60% of the time. In
a back-and-forth game like that, my Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method works GREAT.
Bankroll
Requirements
"What
are the bankroll requirements for a $5 base-bet player?
I say that a total minimum bankroll of $3000 would be needed to feel
comfortable.
Also,
it is my understanding that the Come-Out 7s and 11s are ignored until a
shooter makes a PL-Point winner; at which time, you then begin betting against the
random-roller on the Dont Pass. It is
only at that time that the Come-Out naturals enter the fray. Is that correct?"
You
are correct on every count.
Ø A
proper bankroll for someone considering playing the Choppy-Table/Short-Leash Method at a
$5 table, would be about $5000. While a player could try it with a slightly
smaller bankroll of $3000 or so; they have to be much more psychologically
prepared for the inevitable losses. I DO NOT recommend that anyone use this method with a
bankroll that is any lower than the $3k mark.
Ø Once
you decide that the table is indeed CHOPPY or trending-COOL, and the random-roller has
made his first PL-Point; THEN you start betting against him. Come-Out 7's and 11's are
treated just like any other loss in the series, and you increase your bet to the next
level after each loss.
Ø For
greater clarity; when we say, "makes his first PL-Point",
we mean that he first ESTABLISHES a Point-number, and then successfully REPEATS his
PL-Point number. At that juncture, if the table is STILL CHOPPY, we can start our C-T/S-L
sequence against him.
Ø By
limiting the amount of money (the "short leash") and the number of progressions
that we'll allow ourselves to wager, we still enjoy a significant opportunity for steady
wins, yet we severely limit the downside losses.
Ø Again,
this betting-approach is NOT for the weak of heart or the queasy of stomach. YOU WILL
SOMETIMES LOSE, even on a properly qualified choppy table. That is why it is critically
important to have a sufficient bankroll, and to THOROUGHLY understand that once in a while
you WILL make the fifth-stage $155 bet and lose it (thus ending your betting-series until
you re-qualify another choppy table).
Is
There a Comparable Method to the C-T/S-L?
"MP,
that C-T/S-L of yours has changed my game entirely. I
used to bet on random-rollers with the Three-Point Molly, the Power Press and Iron Cross
until the cows came home and still continually lost.
When I read your Dodging Bullets series, I was totally skeptical, but I
tried it out on WinCraps and it actually worked. I
then went to my local haunt and made some imaginary air bets as the dice
rolled. The dang thing still worked there. I finally took the plunge with real money on real
bets and it worked as well in the casino as it did on the computer simulator. Im making about $45 per hour with it, which
is triple what my job pays, but I have no intention of quitting. What I want to know is if you have more methods
like this that you are going to share with us in the near future?"
YES,
there are more methods that work just as effectively when you apply them in the right
situation at the right time, and YES, I will be sharing them with you in the near future.
Well
folks, that pretty much wraps up the first part of the most frequently asked questions
regarding my Choppy-Table Short-Leash Method. It
also means that there is indeed a FAQs - Part Two coming
your way in due course.
In
the meantime, I again would urge you to carefully gauge the table trend before you apply
the C-T/S-L Method, and to keep a strict rein on your definition of what constitutes a
choppy to cool-trending table. Dont
let GREED mislead you into thinking that ALL the tables are choppy ALL of
the time, and therefore mistakenly qualify for this bettingmethod ALL the
time. That is NOT the case, so please
vigilantly guard against thinking that it is so.
Until
next time,
Good
Luck & Good Skill at the tables
and in Life.
Sincerely,
The
Mad Professor
Back
to The Mad Professor Speaks Main Page!
|