Cosmo counts odds bet at Craps

road trip, very interesting info, thanks for taking the effort.

let me see if this is correct:

If you bet $100 on the line with full odds, (three bets made including come bets) they will rate you as a $1500 per hour player which is worth $105/hr comps.
If you bet $100 on the line with NO odds, they will rate you as a $100 per hour player which is worth $7/hr comps.
So we are comparing the comps of $1500 vs $100 or 15-to-1.

Some math:

If $100 per bet is worth $7 per hour, what should 15X that be worth? 15 X $7 = $105.

It seems to me that you get NO greater comps (dollar for dollar) for betting the max odds. So odds count the same as flat bets.

They say they are rating your odds, but it appears from your info that betting the odds gets you no more in comps (dollar for dollar value) then betting just the flat bet? (that is good, not bad.)

What is really needed is if the "odds bet" and passline or flat bets count as "soft" bets in which case the same money on place bets might count towards greater comps?

edited to add question about allocating money differently on the table and comparison of comps per type of bet.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

While I do think the Don't Pass bet is slightly better than the Pass bet, your logic is once again wrong. For example, the expected value of the pass bet takes into account the possibility of hitting a 7 or 11 on the come out roll. While number 2. is correct, you also have more ways to win on the come out roll. Regarding comment 3., you aren't even close to being correct. Let's say the point is a four, the odds bet pays 2 to 1 for a pass and 1 to 2 for a don't pass. I don't know how I can explain it to you simply enough to point out those are equivalent mathematically regardless of whether or not you understand or believe it. The come out roll numbers are irrelevant.

Your last comment is partially true regarding a negative expectation game. However, if you are betting extra money on the odds then it DOESN'T mean you will lose more. If you increase your pass or don't pass bet then it would increase the expected amount lost. However, if you bet $5 on pass and $10 on the odds, the expected value is EXACTLY the same as betting $5 on the pass line. You should take one of my statictics courses. You might actually learn what expected value really means other than a phrase that you randomly throw around from time to time. I guess that you will believe what you want to believe. For example, you may not believe me when I tell you that the solution for x in the equation 2x - 3 = 7 is 5 but that doesn't mean it's not true.

For fun, I looked at the Cosmo's hotel calendar. Rates (thru June, 2011) range from a few lows of $140 up to $500 for their inexpensive rooms. (Never mind that I could stay downtown for a week and have money left over from those Cosmo rates for one night!)

Anyways......

Yes, your math would make it appear that odds bets are worth the same as line bets and get you no more. At 3x,4x,5x odds, and playing line, come, come until 3 bets are working, the average bet would be $1500.00 for rating purposes. Depending on the points established, and supervisor, etc, that could be higher or lower. "We" could have as much as $1800.00, or as little as $1200.00 in play.

BUT, it seems to me that there may be real value there, for those who have the bankroll and can afford the risk, deviation, or volatility by playing full odds and consider comp value as profit.

"Long term", those odds are providing an extra, free $7.00 per $100 wagered per hour, in comps, with zero house advantage on those odds. So that extra $400, $800, or $1200 in odds is earning $28, $56, or $84.00 in comps for what should be a break even portion of the wager. That should make the odds a much better wager than other casinos where odds are not included in ratings, IF the line bet comp value is comparable to other places.

Offhand, without proper analysis, I'm tempted to suggest this could possibly make the game a positive expectation, (if comp value is included in calculations), although that goes against everything I think I know and think I believe.

I said "tempted". I know it just ain't true.

D*mn, I should have asked about cash back for comps accrued and/or loss rebates. I also wonder how many "hands" per hour a crap table "plays" on average.

I strongly believe in understanding the system, especially since, as an advantage player and casino "ho", I'm always interested in possibly exploiting it. If that is possible.

I do not consider comps as profit. And I could play at numerous casino's for much less to get comps. Since I don't spend much time in my room except to sleep, where I stay is not as important as being frugal.

I just don't see anything frugal about the Cosmopolitan. :::shrug:::

thanks for the detailed response, Alex. Let me respond to your points please:

You wrote:

#1 "While I do think the Don't Pass bet is slightly better than the Pass bet, your logic is once again wrong. For example, the expected value of the pass bet takes into account the possibility of hitting a 7 or 11 on the come out roll."

Answer: in fact, there is a very slightly lower house edge for the DP and DC bets. I will quote the wizard of odds: "Today, most gambling writers, including me, count ties, and thus would go with 1.36% as the house edge." Knowing this, I dont think my logic is "wrong."

#2 "While number 2. is correct, you also have more ways to win on the come out roll." Again please refer to the Wizard's own website showing the slightly lower house edge on the Dont bets.

#3 "Regarding comment 3., you aren't even close to being correct. Let's say the point is a four, the odds bet pays 2 to 1 for a pass and 1 to 2 for a don't pass. I don't know how I can explain it to you simply enough to point out those are equivalent mathematically regardless of whether or not you understand or believe it. The come out roll numbers are irrelevant."

Answer: I dont disagree with what you said about the payoffs. You are correct. But what are you trying to say? It has nothing to do with my point. My point was that the Dont pass is more likely to win after the point is established, and therefore the odds bet for the dont pass is also more likely to win. I wrote: "the 'dont odds' or 'wrong way odds' are more likely to win." All I am saying is that the odds bet on the dont side are more likely to win. It has nothing to do with "payoffs," it has to do with "chance of winning your bet." Does that confuse you?

#4 You wrote: "Your last comment is partially true regarding a negative expectation game." My answer: Yes, a negative expectation game is a negative expectation game. You cant change that. A negative expectation game means that over the long run you will lose.

And you wrote: "However, if you are betting extra money on the odds then it DOESN'T mean you will lose more. If you increase your pass or don't pass bet then it would increase the expected amount lost. However, if you bet $5 on pass and $10 on the odds, the expected value is EXACTLY the same as betting $5 on the pass line. You should take one of my statictics courses. You might actually learn what expected value really means other than a phrase that you randomly throw around from time to time. I guess that you will believe what you want to believe. For example, you may not believe me when I tell you that the solution for x in the equation 2x - 3 = 7 is 5 but that doesn't mean it's not true."

My answer: Again, I dont disagree with you. You are correct and Ive said this all along. There is no house advantage on the odds and there is no player advantage on the odds. BUT you missed my point again. So here it is, again: "the more you play, the more you bet, the more you lose. and betting maximum odds or any odds will not change that." So let me give you an explanation of what I mean. A player who makes one bet of $5 with 100x odds ($500) is expected to lose 1.4% on the passline for his bet which is 1.4% X $5 = 7 cents. But if he makes that same bet 1,000 times he is expected to lose $5,000 X 1.4% = $70. That is what I meant by "the more you play, the more you bet, the more you lose. and betting maximum odds or any odds will not change that." I hope that clears up my statement.

thanks roadtrip. I dont think any casino on the strip has "cash back" anymore. is there?

how many hands in craps per hour? surprisingly, these are the craps statistics that I am familiar with:

1. the average shooter throws the dice five times. this is a very important statistic for those of you who are "come bettors," and here's why: the first roll is the come out roll. the second roll is a number, the third roll is a number. if you are a "come bettor" you now have your three numbers at work. the fourth roll is a number, and perhaps you got lucky and got a repeater and got a payoff. if not, your three come bets are working. the fifth roll statistically is a 7-out. at best, rolls 2, three and 4 were all repeaters. at worst, there were no repeaters and all your money is gone. that is statistic number one.

2. statistic number two is that the average throw of the dice and payoffs takes an average of 25-seconds. this accounts for rolls when there are a lot of bets to be paid, and rolls when there are few bets to be paid. at a "fast table" with few bets or simple bets to pay, there can be four or five rolls per minute. that's why craps is such a fast game. however, we've all been at tables where it can take a minute or longer to pay off bets.

overall, most players and dealers lose track of time at craps tables. let me give you an example. I like to time each shooter when I play. its a habit of mine. I do it just in case someone has a monster roll and then I can give an accurate time check. Well, one day a shooter had a great hand. My original $135 across ended up to be almost a thosuand dollars in my rail, plus about $400 on the layout. Everyone gave him a round of applause. So I asked the dealer on my side of the table and the stickman their estimate of the length of the hand. I also asked the three players on my side of the table. Their estimates ranged from 20 minutes to 35 minutes. In fact, his hand lasted only EIGHT MINUTES. And this is why I always say, "Lord, give me just one twenty minute hand, please."

edited to add:

I just checked the Wizards site. He uses a figure of 150 rolls per hour which is darn close to my average of one roll every 25 seconds. He also says the average hand should be 8.5 rolls per shooter based on the math of the game. Im going by industry stats of 5 rolls per player made by observations which certainly are not "long term" math probabilities.

Here's where I think everyone, except Money, is confused. Betting more at a negative expectation means that long term you will loose more. You may be able to lower the hose edge, but it is still an edge, meaning long term you will loose. Loosing means less money in your pocket regardless of the house edge.

Take my example above with 1000 hands that amazingly mirror the house edge exactly.

a) $5 line bet x 1000 hands = $5000 wagered x 1.41 edge = $70.50 loss
b 2x) $5 line bet + $10 odds = $15 x 1000 hands = $15000 wagered x .606 edge = $90.90 loss
b 100x) $5 line bet + $500 odds = $505 x 1000 hands = $505,000 wagered x .021 edge = $106.05 loss

Betting more at a negative expectation game means that long term you loose more.

Uh Oh... I definitely do not agree with what you've written.

Let us hypothesize perfect distribution of possible outcomes for the arbitrary 1000 hands. Those 1000 hands will have results that exactly meet expected results:

"$5 line bet x 1000 hands = $5000 wagered x 1.41 edge = $70.50 loss" would be correct if the pass line is played.

"2x) $5 line bet + $10 odds = $15 x 1000 hands = $15000 wagered x .606 edge = $90.90 loss
100x) $5 line bet + $500 odds = $505 x 1000 hands = $505,000 wagered x .021 edge = $106.05 loss"

would be incorrect.

The ODDS portion of those bets are "true" odds, and with our hypothetical perfect results and meeting exact expectation, will cancel each other out. (ie: When a point 4 is made, We will win once 2x, and lose twice 1x for every 3 results on that specific hand = net 0 +/- on the odds portion). Our net gain, or loss on the odds portion of the wager cancel each other long term, resulting only in the losses incurred from the line bet house advantage. Hence the term "FREE ODDS". There is no house advantage. None. zero. zip.

Therefor, our actual theoretical loss for those 1000 hands would be the same $70.50. 1.41%. That house advantage may appear diluted when the full odds are implemented, but if you examine perfect results on the points vs true odds, you will KNOW they cancel each other eventually in the long run. :::shrug:::


Edited for spelling.

thank you Kaypea. It's nice to know someone understands reality.

For my math guy friends, please consider this:

For the passline with any odds, the house has an advantage. According to your friend the Wizard of Odds, with 100X odds, the house has an edge of 0.021%.

Tell me, at what point does a negative edge for the player (i.e. a house edge) become a positive game for the player?

I would like to know when a negative becomes a positive? (Hint: it doesn't.)

A lower house edge if continued to be played only means more money going to the house.

Thanks again, Kaypea.

Then explain the 1.41 edge for the pass line only vs the .606 edge for the pass line with 2x odds. If the 1.41 is always applied to the line portion of the bet, where does the .606 come in?

I have no idea. I just wanted to say I like your screen name, kp.