The number of dice-influencers who *THROW* with an edge over the house is quite large, but the number of dice-influencers who actually *BET* with an edge over the house is still quite disappointingly** low**.

I can guarantee that the next couple of chapters in this series will show you how to extract ** more profit** from the

*same level of***you are playing with right now.**

*skill***There’s No Need to Fly Blind**

To judge the effectiveness and efficiency of any betting-method we first have to appraise it at its most basic element.

For global-bets like Across, Inside, Even, Outside, Iron-Cross, 6 & 8, 5 & 9, and 4 & 10 wagers; we have to first consider exactly what it takes to make each of these bets profitable in their flat-bet form.

Additionally, we have to ascertain how many winning-hits it takes to reach profitability when compared to how many hits our current dice-influencing skill-level will likely produce during an average hand.

In other words, we have to consider how many winning-hits our combined multi-number bets require for them to reach net-profitability, and we also have to consider whether or not our current D-I skills can manufacture enough hits to make this kind of wager sustainable over a sizeable scope of sessions.

If we don’t know that, then we are flying almost completely blind…and when it comes to venturing your money; that’s not a very smart thing to do.

Since we looked at all those bets in their most rudimentary flat-bet form in *Part Seventeen*, let’s see how we can leverage that information into a more useable (and profitable) mode for regression-bettors.

**Your TRUE Multi-Number Edge**

If you regress your wagers at the prescribed ** optimal time** during your point-cycle (as I’ve set out and defined in the previous chapters of this series); then your edge over the house will pretty much mirror the stats that you see in the following chart. However, if you follow a different path or betting regimen, then obviously your

*mileage*, your

*advantage over the house*(if any), and of course your

*profit,*is going to vary widely.

Let’s jump right in…

Player-Edge using Optimized Regression | |||

Bet-Type | SSR-7 | SSR-8 | SSR-9 |

Inside | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 1 | 3 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 2.00% | 6.23% | 12.36% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 2.00% | 2.08% | 3.09% |

Across | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 2 | 3 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 1.78% | 5.84% | 11.97% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 0.89% | 1.95% | 2.99% |

Outside | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 1 | 2 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 1.40% | 5.10% | 10.70% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 1.40% | 2.55% | 2.68% |

Even | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 1 | 3 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 1.82% | 5.86% | 12.09% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 1.82% | 1.95% | 3.02% |

Iron Cross | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 2 | 3 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 1.68% | 5.59% | 11.64% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 0.84% | 1.86% | 2.91% |

6 and 8 | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 2 | 3 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 2.42% | 7.42% | 14.00% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 1.21% | 2.47% | 3.50% |

5 and 9 | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 1 | 3 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 1.70% | 5.60% | 11.70% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 1.70% | 1.87% | 2.93% |

4 and 10 | |||

Optimal Hits before Regressing | 1 | 2 | 4 |

Cum. Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression | 1.10% | 4.60% | 9.60% |

Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR | 1.10% | 2.30% | 2.40% |

**What It Means**

*Optimal Hits Before Regressing *is the number of winning hits this particular bet should remain at its initial large pre-regression level before optimally reducing it to a lower bet-amount. For example, a SRR-7 shooter would ideally leave his Inside-Number wager at its large pre-regression starting value for one hit only; while the SRR-8 shooter can afford to leave it at its initial starting value for three paying hits before regressing to a lower amount of exposure.

*Cumulative Edge-per-Hand prior to Regression* is the aggregate advantage the player has over the house prior to regressing his global-wager at the optimal time. This figure gives you an idea of how powerful regression-betting can be when properly combined with dice-influencing. By merging your skill-driven expected-roll-duration with a betting-method that utilizes and exploits the fattest part of your point-cycle expectancy-curve; you derive benefit from the most frequently occurring opportunities, while concurrently reducing bankroll volatility and risk.

*Edge-per-Roll prior to Optimized ISR *is the average weighted-advantage you have over the house on a per-roll basis prior to reducing your wager at the ideal trigger-point. This figure is used to indicate how much of your total gaming bankroll you can afford to expose to any of these global-wagers.

**How To Use It**

With the ** Player-Edge Using Optimized Regression** chart, it is pretty easy to figure out how much of your total gaming bankroll you can afford to expose to a given global-wager with your current skill-level.

Let me give you an example:

- Let’s say your SRR is 1:7 and you like making Inside-wagers (Place-bets that cover the 5, 6, 8, and 9).
- If you regress your bets at the
*optimal*point for this skill-level (as explained in detail in previous chapters of this series); then your pre-regression edge-per-roll is 2%. - However, your edge over the house only stands up for a very short period of time (as measured by expected point-cycle roll-duration); so you would leave your Inside-Number bet at its large pre-regression amount for just
*one*Inside-number hit before reducing it. - It also means that you could dedicate
*UP TO*2% of your total gaming bankroll to wagering on the pre-regression portion of this bet. Obviously you are free to bet less than that optimal amount; and although by doing so, your risk would be lower, so too would your overall profit-growth. - In this example, if let’s say you wanted to start with $110-Inside before regressing it down to $22-Inside after one paying hit; then you would
*divide*$110 by 0.02 to calculate how much of a TOTAL gaming bankroll you should have before using this steep of a regression (under your current SRR-7 skill-level). In this case we are talking about requiring a $5500 total bankroll to properly fund this wager. - If let’s say you decided that a more conservative 2:1 steepness ratio was called for (starting with perhaps $44-Inside before regressing after one paying hit to $22-Inside); then you take your 2% edge-per roll and
*divide*$44 by 0.02 to discover that you would only need a TOTAL gaming bankroll of $2200 to comfortably afford this wager.

**A Brief but Critical Word About TOTAL Bankroll**

In Chapter Seven of my new ** Crapshooting Bible** I’ve laid out the details of how best to gear and restrict your advantaged wagers to your strongest-edge bets and how much of your bankroll you can reasonably dedicate to any of them on both an individual and collective basis; so I’ll simply remind you here, that your total gaming bankroll is

*not*the money that you bring to the casino as your session buy-in, nor is it the amount of money that you have dedicated for an upcoming trip. Rather, your total gaming bankroll is the amount of money, which if you lost it, would cause you to completely abandon advantage-play dice-influencing.

**Another “ How To Use It” Example**

Let’s say you have an SRR of 1:8, and you are thinking about using an Initial Steep Regression on the

Outside-wager (4, 5, 9, and 10), but you want to see how much of an edge you would likely have over it. As well, you’d like to determine how much of your total gaming bankroll you could reasonably dedicate to this particular wager.

To do that, you simply take a look at the ** Player-Edge Using Optimized Regression** chart and see that an SRR-8 player would likely have a 2.55% edge-per-roll on the Outside-bet.

To determine how much of a bankroll you would ideally need, you first have to determine the initial pre-regression value of the wager you plan to start with. If you wanted to use a 5:1 steepness ratio for your wager (starting with $100-Outside before optimally regressing it to $20-Outside after *three* paying hits); then you’d take your 2.55% edge-per-roll and divide $100 by 0.0255 to discover that you’d ideally need a total gaming bankroll of $3922 to properly fund this bet.

If you wanted to use a more moderate 3:1 steepness ratio like $60-Outside ($15 each on the 4, 5, 9, and 10); then you would divide $60 by 0.0255 to determine that starting with $2353 as your minimum total bankroll would be ideal for this size of wager and your SRR-8 level of dice-influencing skill. gaming.

Though we’ve just begun this exploration, I can promise you that Part Nineteen of this series will open your eyes to a whole new world of possibilities when we examine how quickly you can double your bankroll when you religiously stick to just making optimized advantage-play regression wagers like the ones we are discussing here.

I hope you’ll join me for that.

Until then,

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

*Sincerely,** *

*The Mad Professor *

Copyright © 2006