Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

In a recent article at Gutshot, the author mentions Gambling Theory in the 4th paragraph as part of his discussion:


“Gambling Theory & Other Topics”, refers to betting on craps in such a way that, when you included dealer error, you were likely to end up a small amount in profit. Er, dealer error? What is meant here, is theft, pure and simple. If you are going to do that, then fine, but what you are doing is stealing.


Before someone thinks I'm attacking Mason and 2+2, the exact opposite: is this type of description accurate ... or is what he's talking about completely out of context?

(Part of this has to also do with my mainly only being versed in poker when it comes to casinos as I have always avoided every other game.)

In the spirit of full disclosure, as most people know, I do also write for Gutshot along with the 2+2 magazine and this particular writer isn't one to make ludicrous claims normally - so I'm wondering how he derived something that seems seedy from something that I'm guessing isn't...

Or is this just a case of me being ignorant as to how craps functions?

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

gambling used to be very dead if they were talking about making money off bad crap dealers.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

I honestly can't find it - I searched various words and phrases on amazon's nifty "search inside the book" function so I wouldnt have to thumb through the entire printed volume, but I couldn't find anything having to do with croupiers or craps dealers (let alone crap craps dealers [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] *rimshot*)

But yeah, it would have been nice if the guy were at all specific about what he was referring to. I suspect it has something to do with "taking the odds" - that is, in the book Mason talks about how at a crap table you can double or sometimes triple your wager with even money on an original bet with a very low house advantage, which effectively halves or thirds that small advantage that the house has. He mentions that if make this wager and you wager large enough to get comped, the comps will more than cover for the fact that you're taking a very tiny bit the worst of it on every bet. Although that would be more of a pit boss error rather than a croupier error, I guess.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

That's where my question comes in... I've read every 2+2 book (at least twice) and my thought was that I probably just ... missed ... some craps strategy while simply reading it to, you know, read it.

I'm flipping through pages now seeing if I can find what this is referencing - but, again, my complete lack of craps knowledge makes this an odd search, hence my post, as I figured others here have like me read the book, but, unlike me, may know craps.

I hate to see a 2+2 book misrepresented and I'm sure this may be an honest error where the author misread / misunderstood what was written in the book in question.

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

Hi Barron:

First off, I think this comes from Gambling for a Living and not Gambling Theory and Other Topics. It was mentioned in the craps chapter where the discussion is that craps is not a beatable game. It had to do with the idea that in craps games where the house offered very high odds such as 100 times odds you could reduce the true house edge to almost nothing. Thus with a few dealer errors you could have a small advantage. It was not advocated as a way to play.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

Yep, I found it - page 168:

"When you take 100 times odds, your disadvantage is so miniscule (about 2/100 of 1 percent, even less if you are a "don't" bettor) as to be almost irrelevant. That doesn't mean that you could start playing craps for a living. But the truth of the matter is if you made only pass, don't pass, come, or don't come bets, and constantly took 100 times odds you actually would have a small advantage in practice. This is true as long as you were willing to take the money when the dealer made a mistake in your favor and to point it out to him when he made a mistake in his favor. If you are astute enough not to make any errors yourself and complicate matters by betting odd amounts you would almost certainly have the best of it when playing craps at one of these 100 times odds places. Still, that edge would be very small and would involve giant swings. So we don't recommend it."

Pure over-reaction on the article writer's part, as I gather most of us suspected. Thanks for clearing that up, Mason.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

Likewise, Mason, thanks.

As soon as I read that article I was like, I don't know anything about craps but that doesn't sound right....

I'll make a point of this in the Gutshot forums as I believe people should be set right before this misrepresentation becomes "fact" in some folks' minds.

My Gutshot Post

Barron Vangor Toth
BarronVangorToth.com

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

Hi Barron:

I just reread the article in question and this time I noticed that the paragraph citing my book and his comments are now removed (and they were there when I read them earlier). So I thank you for your effort.

What's interesting is that I have had these types of shots taken at me for years. The author is writing about a lack of ethics that he sees in many people, particularly those involved in the gambling world. I wonder if that should include someone who is willing to write something very negative about someone else based totally on memory without checking out exactly what was said or written?

It's my theory with many of these unknown authors who take these shots that if they can somehow show that we at Two Plus Two got something wrong, or are unethical in some way, that it will give them instant recognition. What they should be concentrating on is making sure that what they write is good and accurate, sort of like what you are doing for our Two Plus Two Internet Magazine. That's the best way to build a solid reputation as someone who is worth listening to. Of course, it can take a few years (or more) to achieve this. But that's the path I took, and the other Two Plus Two authors took.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

I've counted cards at blackjack before.
I also dealt BJ for a few months...and was friends with some of our craps dealers. I didn't bother learning how to play or deal craps because I didn't intend to be a dealer for very long.

It is my opinon that dealer-errors happen more often than many people think (both FOR and AGAINST the player).

I can't begin to tell you the number of times when i had a multi-card 18 and the dealer had a 19 and they knocked my hand for a push because they were just tired or unfocused or whatever.

Hey, that's not my fault that they got it wrong, is it?
(I seriously don't believe that it is).

Obviously if it goes the other way around I point out to them the error because I want to get paid when I win gosh-darnit.

When I was a dealer this happened with me just about as much as with any other dealer. Accidentally taking a player's money when I shouldn't have and then having to call the floor over to correct it....or realizing when I was dealing the next hand that I paid somebody off when I should not have and then saying "well...nobody said anything so I guess we got away with one there!"
stuff like that.
errors happen.
they want you to deal as fast as possible...and an error or two every once in awhile are the price we pay for such speed.


I imagine that this type of stuff also happens at craps all the freaking time.
Even with everyone there (all the dealers and box-person) watching over the game it just looks to me like there's SO much stuff going on that it would be impossible for there not to be errors.


To imply that you should correct the dealer EVERY freaking time they accidentally give you TOO MUCH money is just silly.


Now...if you want to take it to 'angle-shoot' levels you could do what i did.

I'm a talkative sort by nature anyway (big surprise when one considers my wordy-posts). And I can multi-task. So it's not a big deal for me to talk with the dealer or the table about football or the tasty buffet or where they're from or whatever...ALL THE WHILE keeping an eye on my hand and making sure I am getting paid the correct amount (or more).


A distracted dealer is more likely to make mistakes obviously.
since I have the ability to talk so much to the point of distraction I know that this is +EV for me.


Yup...it's a bit of an angle-shoot. But I'm going to talk some of the time anyway...and my original point of being chatty was to deflect any ideas that the floor may have gotten about me counting the cards to begin with (since so many card-counters have to concentrate really hard in order to count and very few are like me and can do other things while keeping accurate count).

So...while trying to deflect the attention of the floor and convince them that i was talking WAY too much to possibly be counting cards I accidentally discovered this other +EV aspect of how it also induces more dealer-errors.



If I'm not intentionally TRYING to induce an error (such as trying to convince the dealer that I have 21 when I really had 22) then I don't think that alone is an angle-shoot in and of itself.

Whether or not accepting a 'win' when it actually should have been a 'push' or 'loss' is closer to the line of course.

But the idea that your regular, everyday dealer errors can change a 2% -EV game into a 1% -EV game has occured to me before.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

why invest in a game that at best gives you a coin toss chance of winning?

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

well....even EV is better than -EV.
Some people like to play Craps...and if you can play it without the negative expecatation then you are at least not hurting yourself.

the comps that one gets for playing have value also.
Usually the comps that are given out are not much compared to the advantage the casino has over you for the amount of play required.

Obviously if you are somehow playing a coin-toss-ish EV game then this isn't the case.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

I've probably put it at least 200 hours at craps tables. I've rarely noticed errors. And the ones I've noticed have almost never been in my favor. I've played in a number of casinos in Tahoe, Reno and Vegas.

There are 3 people taking bets and a floor manager in the middle of a typical table. Bets are systematically placed on the available felt to indicate the player that originally made the wager. You can't have a place bet (getting just under true odds) and a bet from a come line bet on the same number to eliminate confusion. Numbers (and status of the roll, whether it's a come out roll or what the point is) are called out during the action and there are many eyes watching the table.

The only time I've gotten a mistake in my favor was when I made a pass line bet right after someone hit their point and the dealer thought I'd made the pass line bet for the come out roll.

It takes a little while to learn to follow the action in craps, but once you do, it's extremely simple.

While in blackjack there seems to be a stronger emphasis on the action, in craps, there seems to be a focus to get all the bets straight after every toss. At a table with a strong shooter, there can be so many chips on the table that the dealers get annoyed with every toss because the dice hit some bet. When there is this much action, the time between tosses can be significantly longer than with limited wagers.

While theoretically it's possible with 100X odds (which no one gives, you're way lucky to find 5X odds) and dealer errors to make craps profitable, based on my own experience, I consider it highly unlikely. I actually have that much faith in the competence of most craps dealers unless you actively attempt to disrupt how they run the game. Maybe Mason is counting on math or counting errors with such big odds?

Just one man's opinion.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

Your experience is interesting.
As i said, I don't know anything about Craps really so I'll take your word for it as you obviously know the game.


The casino I worked at was a break-in place where they put you through the dealing class and then hire you for cheap (everyone wants to put their 6-18 months there so they can get a gig at a higher-paying casino).


After you take the class for BJ and carnival games (Carib-Stud, Let-it-Ride, etc) then you can take an optional class to learn craps.

So a lot of the craps dealers are brand-freaking-new...and on top of that, the casino features $0.25 craps.

So they're stuck trying to calculate 9-to-1 or 11-to-1 on a $0.75 bet or $1.25 on the fly (and would complain about how tough it all was in the break-room).

I suspect there were more mistakes at our place then at most casinos!! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

But, from what I can see, with that many people watching the game I would not be surprised that the team-effort would reduce the error potential significantly compared with blackjack.


FWIW - I don't think Mason was thinking in terms of distracting the dealers to the point of error. I think he really WAS referring to just playing the game honestly...and if they make an error in your favor then 'sucks to be them'.


I wonder if making odd-amount bets might increase this likelihood in Craps (a $13 bet where most players would normally be betting $10).
This is something that can be kind of effective in blackjack.
Because figuring 3:2 on a blackjack when you've bet $37 can confuse some dealers.

they will also make mistakes when they are 'coloring-up' your chips on a win...like if I bet $40 (1 green and 3 red) and win...they owe me $80 so they take 2 of the red of the top (and tap it) and leave me with 3 green and 1 red.

but many dealers will FREQUENTLY screw this up.

and if it's a blackjack on a $162 bet (or a double-for-less or whatever) they can get pretty damn confused pretty fast.

Hell, when I was dealing these types of pay-outs would even screw with my head a little bit sometimes.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

Your experience is interesting too. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I've only played at 5 or 10 minimum bet craps. All the dealers I've come across had the payouts memorized for the minimum bet (and the minimum for hard way and yo-11 bets for 1 dollar).

I haven't seen many dealers screw up the coloring up (that wasn't caught), but I would defer to your experience on that one as you've clocked more hours and probably watched the color ups more carefully than I did. I have watched color ups and they all seemed to go properly. Most of the dealers I've seen also could tell the number of chips by height, but still double-checked them.

I agree with you about what Mason was saying. I would still consider selectively correcting the dealers to be unethical, but it's unethical to about the lowest degree I can imagine. It seems to me that Mason is speaking in theoretical terms anyway and certainly not advocating that sort of behavior.

I think I might have to watch some more craps to decide whether I agree with Mason given what you've said.

And your casino does sound a little more likely to have mistakes than other ones. :P

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

[ QUOTE ]
While theoretically it's possible with 100X odds (which no one gives, you're way lucky to find 5X odds)

[/ QUOTE ]

When GFL was written, there had been a craps war going on in Las Vegas and at least three casinos (at that time) were offering 100 times odds.

Best wishes,
Mason

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

I've played craps infrequently, and I've seen two kinds of errors more than I expected: (1) dealers take your place bets and forget to place them (not good); and (2) dealers forget to remove losing come bets when there's a 7 on the come out roll (very good). I've seen mistake (2) enough to believe that making come bets is probably close to 0 EV.

Re: Question from Gambling Theory & Other Topics
 

Oh, I believe it. While I wasn't clear about it in my post, I did strongly consider the possibility that the 100X odds wasn't simply theoretical even though I know it's uncommon now. While you do talk theory, you usually seem practical enough to keep it in the realm of the possible.

Sounds like fun times.