|
Regression Avoids
Depression
Reconciling
Win-Rate With Roll-Survival Rate If
we look at strictly flat-betting a wager like $22-Inside, we know that it takes
several hits to pay for itself before finally emerging with a profit:
For
a straight, non-pressed, non-regressed $22-Inside wager, it takes four winning hits before
it pays for itself and delivers a profit. Unfortunately,
when using that method, a random-roller always stays on the negative side of the equation
because the Inside-Numbers-to-Sevens Ratio is 3:1, and it takes more than three
hits just to earn your money back. Likewise,
it is important to note that our roll-duration and bet-survival rate is almost opposite to
each other.
Ø The
longer (the more rolls) it takes for a flat-bet like $22-Inside to pay for itself; the
more likely it is to fall short of producing a net-profit.
Ø By
the same token, the higher our Sevens-to-Rolls Ratio is, the longer our bets
can stay out on the layout to produce a net-profit.
Ø The
lower and closer our SRR is to random; then the more condensed our time to harvest
a net-profit will be. Simply
stated, a higher SRR gives us more rolls to work with, while a lower SRR reduces our
useable number of point-cycle rolls. The
primary way to ascertain the appropriate regression-point in our hand is determined by our
Sevens-to-Roll ratio, simply because our SRR is the chief determinant of how long, on
average, our point-cycle will last. This
Wont Take Long
Did It
Again,
when measured on a per-roll basis, our ability to avoid the 7 remains constant.
Ø For a random-roller, it remains at 16.67% on each and every toss. However, his chances of having one, two, three, four or more rolls without a 7 decreases simply because of the cumulative nature of the 7-occurrence rate.
Ø
For
the SRR-7 shooter, the sevens-appearance-rate is 14.29%.
As a result, his chances of having one, two, three, four or more rolls
without a 7, increases slightly due to the faintly less cumulative nature of
his 7-occurrence rate.
Ø
Likewise
for the skilled SRR-8 shooter, his per-roll sevens-appearance-rate is 12.5%. Therefore, his chances of having one, two, three,
four or more rolls without a 7 increases significantly when compared to a
SRR-6 random-roller, due to his lower cumulative 7s occurrence-rate.
Ø
More
over, the SRR-9 Precision-Shooter enjoys an 11.11% sevens-appearance-rate on a per-roll
basis. As a result, his chances of having
one, two, three, four or more rolls without a 7, increases dramatically when
compared to random expectation because of his much lower cumulative 7s
occurrence-rate. When
a dice-influencer looks at his skills, he obviously has to include his ability to avoid
the 7 into that calculation matrix.
Ø
A
players ability to avoid the 7 determines how long, on average, his point-cycle roll
will usually last.
Ø Again, we are talking averages here, so that range includes everything from all of his point-then-7-Out hands to his rarer mega and mini-mammoth ones too.
Ø
Our
SRR determines how frequently the 7 is likely to show up, and by logical extension, it
determines how many rolls on average we will have to profitably exploit any of our betting
methods. Knowing
this is extremely important when it comes to considering global-type multi-number bets
that require numerous hits before becoming net-profitable.
Inside-Number wagers fall into this global category. As we will see in a moment, that is why the
use of steep regressions are so important to the net-profitability of skilled
dice-influencers.
As
I pointed out previously, your SRR and the frequency of Inside-Numbers that you produce
within that range, will be somewhat different than the even-distribution examples that
Ive used here; however, these charts will give you a general idea of where some of
your biggest profit-making opportunities can be found.
Ø
If
we know how long our hand generally stays in positive-expectation territory for the
Inside-Number bets we are making; then we can easily determine the ideal time to regress
them from their initially high starting-value.
Ø
Once
we know where that positive-to-negative transition point is, we can regress our large
initial wager down to a lower level and concurrently lock-in a net-profit while still
providing us with active bets on the layout in the event that our hand-duration does
exceed and survive that transition point, as it often will.
A
Practical Comparison
Lets
look at how this works when we compare flat-betting $110-Inside versus the use of an initial
$110-Inside wager that is steeply regressed to $22-Inside at the appropriate
Inside-Numbers-to-Sevens ratio trigger-point.
I
deleted any further references to SRR-6 random betting in the following charts simply
because it always remains in negative-expectation territory. The
following ISR chart utilizes the optimum SRR-based trigger-point at which the
Large-bet-to-Small-bet regression should take place.
Heres
a comparison between flat-betting versus the use of an Initial Steep Regression:
I
hope youll join me for Part Five of this series. Until then, Good
Luck & Good Skill at the Tables
and in Life. Sincerely, The
Mad Professor
|
|