Odd Craps Situation that Benefits Player - Does it Matter Enough

[Monteroy]

In one of the games I play I noticed the following unusual situation.

Points made via come bets were not in play on any future come out roll (they became live again after a new point was established) while points covered via don't come were active all the time (though of course the player could always remove these anyways). Odds were the same but since they are 0 EV that does not matter.

In Vegas I know the odds do not play in this situation by default but obviously the come bet has to because the player is at a disadvantage so I was very surprised when my point established via a come bet on the 9 did not lose on a subsequent come out roll of a 7. This was not a one time error (ie: dealer confused point via come bet for a place bet), it is the rule of this game.

Is this significant enough to change the odds to the players benefit?

Strange question I realize, but I was sort of surprised by the situation.

Thanks in advance

[Poshua]

This doesn't change the odds either way. For any given roll when a point is on, there will be four winning rolls (nines) and six losing ones (sevens). Any other outcome means the bet will continue to the next roll. As such, the odds that your come bet will win remain at 40%.

The only impact this has is to increase the average number of rolls it will take to resolve your come bet, because ~29% of craps rolls are come-out rolls and your bet is off during those. To think of it another way, ignoring all bets except your come bet, it's just as though those come-out rolls weren't happening at all and the table were moving more slowly. Increased time, but no change to the odds.

[Monteroy]

Well, look at it this way. If your point established via a come bet is not working on a come out roll but the same point established via a don't come roll is working that can create a situation where if you placed a bet of $1 on each you have many rolls where only the don't come with an established point is live (where player has the edge) while the come bet is not.

I guess my question is that if the player rolls where a disadvantage as part of the game is removed for a roll and that can be off set by an exact opposite bet where the equivalent advantage remains, would that not create a potential +EV situation?

Simple scenario. Every roll bet $1 on pass and don't pass or come/don't come. Forget about any odd bets for now

When it is time for a come out roll all of your don't come bets will be live at 1:1 odds for that number vs a 7 while all of your come bets will be off until after a point is made.

Repeat a million times and factor in the expected loss from the double 6 rolls and what are we left with?

[Poshua]

No, you're still -EV. This looks +EV because you're looking only at the part of the play after a point is established on your Come/Don't Come bets. If you replace each Come/Don't Come bet upon resolution, you'll make significantly more bets on Don't Come than Come, because the Don't bets will resolve faster. Once a point is established, Don't wins more often than it loses, so it might seem like you're +EV.

Unfortunately, the flip side of this is that Don't Come bets lose more often than they win on the come out. If you're making more bets on Don't Come than Come, you're going to lose on the come-out significantly more often you win; this will offset your greater wins once a point is established.

More broadly, think of it this way: both the Come and the Don't Come bets are, themselves, -EV. The bets you make don't interact with each other; betting Come doesn't make your Don't Come bet any more or less likely to pay off. So, how can combining two -EV bets make you +EV?

[Poshua]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess my question is that if the player rolls where a disadvantage as part of the game is removed for a roll and that can be off set by an exact opposite bet where the equivalent advantage remains, would that not create a potential +EV situation?

[/ QUOTE ]

Also, to respond to this specifically, the period after the point is established where your Come bet is at a disadvantage is not "removed"; it's just delayed. The odds of your Come bet ultimately paying off are unchanged by the delay.

You can respond to the delay by betting Don't Come more often than Come (in which case you will lose on the come-out significantly more often than you win, offsetting the greater wins after establishing a point) or you can respond by betting each one equally frequently, in which case you will (1) at any given time, tend to have more on the table on Come than Don't Come, since Don't Come will resolve faster and (2) face the normal house edges on Come and Don't Come, in equal proportions.

[Monteroy]

OK, I see where you are coming from, and I admit I had not really thought the whole thing out as I had never seen this variation of the game before, which I grant is an interesting one. I wasn't believing the game became +EV because of the greater number of wins vs losses (people who put money on all the place bets are a favorite to win something each roll, but that is hardly +EV :P)

The second "point" you made eventually clicked, and yes given that the come bet still stays around and eventually has to be resolved all it does is create a temporary +EV situation for a roll that is countered by the extra -EV (including the house edge) for the come bet that eventually has to resolve at a later time.

Is this a normal variation for craps? My only assumption is it creates a situation where a 7 on a come out roll is no longer bad, which I can see as mentally appealing to many players.

Note, I am a bit annoyed that I missed this, and I suppose I was just surprised at the time (a 7 was rolled which created a false win feel since my come roll did not lose as I thought it should - though obviously that is results based/situational thinking and statistically meaningless)

Thanks again.

[Poshua]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this a normal variation for craps? My only assumption is it creates a situation where a 7 on a come out roll is no longer bad, which I can see as mentally appealing to many players...

Thanks again.

[/ QUOTE ]

No problem. I've never seen this variation. What casino was it at?

It seems particularly odd to have different treatment for come/don't come bets; that adds complication and seems, to me, like a recipe for the dealers to end up mishandling the don't come bets.

[Monteroy]

It is a feature of the Cryptologic online casinos so it is all automated, and I agree that if it was a live feature it would add to the potential of dealer error.

I do wonder though if a live casino had this as a feature and tried to market it whether it would be popular, since it would allow all of the table (assuming most/all bet with the shooter) to root for the same numbers all of the time. This would not be the first time a casino used a 0 or negative EV situation as a feature for players [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Ironically I discovered this while demonstrating to a friend that the information on a TV show about craps which he watched (John Patrick or something) telling him to ignore come/pass and go for place bets was wrong. Shockingly we were unable to create all of the no lose scenarios that happened on that show, go figure!

Thanks again.