Regression Avoids Depression Part 5

Using Different Steepness Ratios

In Part Four of this series, we looked at the profitability of using a $110-Inside to $22-Inside regression.  That equates to a 5:1 regression-ratio. Part One of this series explains in detail what regression-ratios are, and how we use them.

Simply stated:

• The steeper the regression-ratio is; the higher, earlier and more often a net-profit will be secured.
• The shallower the regression-ratio is; the less frequent and lower our net-profit will be.

The Risk of Using Too LOW of a Regression Ratio

If we try to go cheap with our betting by not putting out a large enough initial bet (or by flat-betting) when we have the best chance of actually capitalizing on our Precision-Shooting abilities; then it’s little wonder why so many accomplished players run into difficulty in exploiting even their most obvious skills. 

• If our bets are too low or the regressions that we use are too shallow in ratio; then we’ll almost always restrain and unnecessarily retard our advantage-play earnings.
• Most players look at a lower-value/lower-ratio starting-level for their regression as a way of reducing volatility; but in fact, it just makes it harder (or almost impossible) for them to break through to profit on a sustainable basis.
• The lower and closer your Sevens-to-Rolls Ratio (SRR) is to random; the less time (as measured by number of point-cycle rolls) you will have in which to capitalize on your dice-influencing skill.  Therefore you have to bet on the fattest part of your roll-duration expectancy curve.

Let’s take a look at various ISR steepness-ratios to see how they affect our average profit per hand.

As you can see on the chart above; combining a regression that is too shallow (2:1) with a modest SRR, can result in a negative result even though you will often hit your first paying Inside-Number bet and still be able to make the regression.  What puts this SRR-7 shooter into negative territory is the fact that he won’t hit enough paying Inside-Numbers often enough at the regressed $22-Inside mark to make the bet become net-positive.

On the other hand, you can see that if this same SRR-7 shooter simply increases (steepens) the ISR regression-ratio to 3:1, the very same skill-set produces a modest profit.

• As your SRR-rate improves and the steepness of your regression increases; so does your return on investment. 

For example, in the chart below, a SRR-8 dice-influencer produces a profit even when employing a shallow 2:1 regression ratio.  Obviously though, his bet-flexibility and overall income rises dramatically as his regression-ratio increases.

It is important to note that each SRR-level forces a different bet-reduction trigger point.  While the SRR-7 shooter has to immediately regress his large initial bet after just one hit; the SRR-8 dice-influencer can reasonably keep them up at their initial large size for the first three point-cycle rolls before having to steeply regress them.

• As your SRR improves over random, the higher your rate-of-return will be. 

• Obviously, the more well-endowed your session bankroll is and the more comfortable you are in using higher-ratio steeper-regression wagers; the more you will be able to take full advantage of your dice-influencing skills.

 
Take a look at the added flexibility that a SRR-9 dice-influencer enjoys.

Part Six of this series adds a whole new dimension to regression-based profit-making.  I hope you will join me for that.  Until then,

Good Luck & Good Skill at the Tables…and in Life.

Sincerely,

The Mad Professor