ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 มี.ค. 2022
- Spoiler alert ... this was 2/3 butt kicking and 1/3 grind ... but I still really love this strategy when we're in rhythm. Tonight, was ultra-choppy and we seemed to just be off by 1 beat (or roll) all night long. Oh well, that's dice!
==================== SHOW NOTES =========================
The Southern Border Strategy
- Bypass the Come out
- 3 Unit Don't Come Bet
- Optionally, hedge by laying the point for 1 roll
- 2 Unit Don't Come Bet
- 3 Unit Come Bet
That's it …
If you get picked off in the DC or end up with not enough units to cover the next bets, make an attempt to keep the ratios and order the same, even if you can't keep the levels correct.
For example, betting in units of 2-1-2 is just as good as betting the prescribed 3-2-3
===================================================
Pro Craps Website: www.procraps.net
Casino Gaming TV: / casinogamingtv
Discord: / discord
===================================================
The opinions in this video are not guaranteed or warranty to produce any particular result. This video is for informational and entertainment purposes only. Any form of gambling carries an inherent risk. Never gamble with money you cannot afford to lose. Anyone who believes they, or someone they know, may have a gambling addiction, please seek help.
National Problem Gambling Helpline 1-800-522-4700 Call Text or Chat NCPGambling.org
#Craps #ProCraps #SouthernBorderStrategy #ComeLadder #WinningAtCraps #CrapsStrategyForBeginners #AdvancedCrapsStrategy #HowToPlayCraps #CrapsStrategy #HowToPlayCraps #WinAtCraps #DiceControl #DiceInfluence #WinningCrapsStrategy #LiveCraps #CrapsStrategy #ComeBets #DontCome #LayBets #PlaceBets #PassLine #DontPass #DarkSide #LayTheBackWall #BestCrapsStrategy - บันเทิง
![[ไฮไลต์] ฟุตบอลชาย ฝรั่งเศส vs อเมริกา รอบแบ่งกลุ่ม | โอลิมปิก 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/oZ9aSS0NEEg/mqdefault.jpg)
Your second loss wasn't a loss. The don't come should have moved to the 10 when you hit the 10 as the point.
That’s the peril of doing everything live like I do. We transparently win and lose. But you also get my dumb dumb mistakes peppered in there.
I appreciate your attention to detail. Means a lot.
Instantly saw the mistake too
yeah it was dont come not dont pass wtf....too yappy
@MrZola1234 exactly! That shook me pretty good, making me think that I've been playing that wrong. Just got back from Vegas with $3k in profit, and I play a DP with immediate DC, then coming. Never lost my establishing DC on a point made. Good callout!
So glad you keep the strats going to the end. Make it have a real feel session.
You should get over to @casinogamingtv ... I do all of these strats and others and run them for a month straight every day live (Daily Paycheck). You really get to see them under all conditions.
Super cold table. 🥶
Very!
John,as you stated a side bankroll for hedges on the DC is smart as sitting in that DC box is brutal! But not every time. Only if the hands and specifically the previous hand are short i.e. PSO!. A first move when playing the DC and the previous hand was a PSO or short roll seven, should/could be a Horn high ace deuce for at least 5.00 throw an extra 1.00 on the yo and hop the reds for two each. In addition if the sevens aren't rolling pretty tight there in no need to be playing the DC. Never take more then two outside DC losses on a shooter! Best of Luck at the Tables!😉
man that shooting was just a roll away every time. Just shows that no matter the strategy you are at the mercy of the dice gods.
Always!
love the idea of the name, politics and gambling, two of my favorite conversational topics
Hahaha. Isn’t that video of Kamala and Trump just perfect?
Decent strategy
HI John, been trying this one, 44 inside -a hit you press 1 unit to 3 units, next hit you power press 6 or 8 to 42 and 5 and 9 got to 36. collect next hit $49/50.. here is my twist . since you are collecting a lil to get to 3 units. when big red comes your next shooter get those lil winnings so you may start aggressive.6/8=18 to 42 to 90 to 210 if hit 210 goes back to 90 and then to the moon add 4 and 10 after the 210 hit. i have gotten to 210 hit couple few times. but thats usually an 15 to 20 roll. have not caught a monster yet. last attempt bought in 400 cashed out 139 8. point 7 kills all systems and dark side there always guys makes all horns 5 points,
I do that sometimes as well. If you get that early 7 before you "get into it" take the small winnings and rework a different direction on the next shooter. That's good thinking.
Hi John, I was looking for a light side strategy. Could you send me that Tom Brady strategy. I was looking for it and could not find. No rush,when you get a chance. Thank you in advance! Dan
I see you found it. That TB#12 is pretty aggressive and offers no protection at all, but it's a money maker in the right hands!
Take DP 3 unit on come out roll and continue cycle would do better following any 7 with DP=3 rinse, repeat. No wasted rolls and you're essentially playing against 7,7 even a PSO would pay 1 unit. Consider hedge come out with Lay 4/10.
Yes, using the DP and the Passline as part of the cycle helps in not wasting the rolls. If I were to use a comeout hedge (ricochet style) it would certainly help those losers I kept facing in the DC during this roll out
Hi John, during the first half of the roll would you have switched strategies if you were at a table for real money? New to the game and curious when you know it is time to switch up or walk away? Thanks for the videos and insight.
Absolutely would have switched off. It's always tough to know what the right "trigger" is for switching. But generally a strategy like this, while it's supposed to be a bit of a grind, it should be showing profit consistently. If it's bouncing around, and i can get a sense of why (like too many 7's or too many box numbers) and I'm just treading water, I'll switch out.
But I switch out in stages. In other words, after the 2 don't comes, I might place 2 numbers instead of doing that come bet. If that starts to take over I'll go to one DC and an extra place bet. So I sort of feel it out and ease into something new vs a full switch.
Now in this one, with all those 4's and 10s ... If I see 4 or more of them before the 7, I'm switching to a 4 and 10 based strategy right away, but probably keeping the Don't Come in play.
I am very new to craps only tried playing once. I’ve been binge watching all kinds of videos. I love how in depth you go with strategies. Question at the 10:50 mark the point was 6. You had 2 dc bets the 4 & 10. You then placed a come bet. The 6 came out. Now I know the come bet moves to the 6. But wouldn’t the dc bets lose because the point came? Never mind. I’m an idiot. You lose the dc’s on the number rolled.
No. The Don’t Come bets are separate. Think them as each being a Don’t Pass. So in this example the DC 4 only loses on the next 4. And the DC 10 only loses on the next 10.
This can put you in a nice position where you win 2 bets on the 7 but cannot lose them both in the same throw.
Still a risk but I like to have 2 DC bets for that reason.
@@ProCraps so why at 5:30 you had the point on the 10 and 3 units in the dc and rolled a 10 why wouldn't the 3 units go behind the 10 although the point was made?
@@davidleaf5377 Yeah, I totally screwed that one up ;)
How does this differ from the Hedgeless Horseman?
Also, there is a video of a wedding DJ mixing that Don't Come Kamala...to a Trump, I wana Come...funny shit!!
The difference is in the order of the bets and the levels.
Here, we're a 3 unit DC which is a risk on the way out. Then the 2 unit DC allows you to win on a 7 on that next roll. The 3rd bet (The 3 unit Come) also wins on a 7. Now, you're in a spot where you have 5 units on the 7 and 2 units on a number so you're always in a good spot when the bad number comes.
The horseman leaves you with a nice Don't and 3 come bets, so after you're all setup, there's still a risk of getting donked.
Ultimately, all of these are variations on a theme, but it's nice to have something like this to switch to if the other one is on a bad rhythm on a given night.
@ProCraps Great explanation!
So The Border Strategy for cold table and the Hedgeless Horseman essentially is darkside with a bigger light side payoff.
I notice you don't use the field as a hedge on the comeout yo...but if you did, what would the unit ratio be? Same for hopping Big Red on a comeout.
What system besides a Squeeze Regression sets you up with risk off quickly, for a hot shooter?
Love the channel bro! I've learned so much, thank you!!!
What do you have against starting with the come out roll?
Nothing. It's just a rhythm thing for me. I like the cycle of bets moving through the regular points cycle.
What? A point of 10 repeats with a DC of three units is not a loss of those three units. Those three units simply go behind the 10. Only a seven or eleven is a loss on a DC bet.
Yeah I think someone else caught that dealing error as well. I think I was still hung up on a point in my head and totally missed that.
Remember that these practice videos are live streamed, so you get me raw - Mistakes and all. No editing. So I expect mistakes even though I try like hell to keep it right.
Appreciate your eye for detail.
@@ProCraps No problem, I enjoy your efforts. What are your thoughts on dice setting? I get hammered with a high number of sevens with a random throw but with a dice set I seem to reduce the sevens a tad which makes a little but important difference. I am using a 5-3, 4-1 knuckleball (no spin) set. A small reduction in the appearance of the seven has been giving me an edge. My strategy is simple but effective, one unit on each box number across and after one hit go to two units on the four inside numbers (you will have to add from your stack for the double up). With a second hit then take all down and wait for the seven out. If a seven hits on either of the first or second bets simply double your starting bet. You will need enough bankroll for four double ups which is why the missing of the seven is important. If I hit the seven four times in a row that is a stop loss. I am considerably ahead in live casino play. I also notice a seeming advantage on the new live roll electronic tables. I have been walking around and charting the last 15 rolls on each table which is displayed. And in Vegas I have charted winning on these electronic tables at a rate of between 5 to ten wins for every loss.
@@RC6790 First off, love the simple strategy and you charting the tables before you jump into it. As far as dice setting, I'm definitely in the camp that sees it as a possibility. I work on it daily myself. To me, the goals there are not to run off 30+ rollers all day long, but consistent 8+ rolls and that helps you bet a bit more safely more often.
@@ProCraps You are right about dice setting, there is no absolute dice control but if we can limit the seven by even one percent or even an half of a percent beyond the probability of random shooting then I think we are on the way to shifting the outcome in our favor. I am seeing a difference in dice setting over random rolls, especially when I am closer to the landing areas such as next to the stickman or on those electronic tables where the middle of the table is even closer to the landing area. The less energy it takes to make the roll the less the bouncing and rebounding of the dice.
@@RC6790 I've got a couple of videos out there where I talk exactly about that. One of them is called "RESPECT THE 7" It's all about the energy control.
Have you watched any of the Cashiers Cage videos? Interesting guy with a throw that I really like.
Your second row with the ten wouldn't have taken your DC but you pulled it down...
Wow ! Brutal....but it happens....following "rhythm"....if I observed this for 30 minutes I would have played Field bets and hard 4-10 and parlayed each at least twice! Maybe hedged the Number established with a 4 times dont on that number....easy to say After the fact! thanks !......
Very true. Strategy like this gives you time and space to make those calls. And I like that winning any 2 out of the 3 bets shows you a profit.
Thank you for responses. Is the Tom Brady on your site? Im like Dan DVD I normally look for light side with ability to switch dark on a table when necessary. Also, are you on Patreon? Would love to help support your great work........Gary
@@gscop1683 The "GOAT" or the TB12 is the strategy you're asking about ... that one really is full light side, no way to get out of it. But the Trojan Horse does have the 4 and 10 as part of the horseman.
I don't have a Patreon. At some point, I may do a course or write a book, though :) I appreciate your support!
Check us out live every day on Casino Gaming TV ... the chat in there is pretty fun.
Another error on the 7 come out.
It was a practice session ... I get more involved in what I'm thinking through than dealing accuracy in these. Thanks for keeping me honest.
i couldn't do it. got to be hard talking rolling, talking and keeping track of stacks.
. keep up the good videos@@ProCraps
Shouldn't the come bets be first, then the DC bets. The repeat would pay not knock you off
If you do the come bet first any it’s set, then you lose the power of the 7 on rolls 2 and 3. I have tried it that way and I like setting one DC first if I can
So why don’t you come out on the come out roll with a don’t pass?
No tactical reason at all. It’s the same as a DC. For some reason I just like to let the game “get started” before I jump into it. It’s a hole in my game for sure
Why do you need 16 chips for a $10 table instead of 8?
You need 8 units. So at a $10 table it’s 2 $5 chips to make a betting unit. So it’s 16 needed
Why do you need 16 units if minimum bet is $10?
At a $10 table a “unit” is $10 or 2 $5 chips. So I account for that with 16 of those $5 chips to be the 8 “units” that I need to work the strategy
A couple mistakes in first ten minutes. One at 5:27, another at 8:40....Not sure how many more after that so hard to say how strategy really played out.
Shoot, the one at 5:27 does change the rhythm. Taking the point off at 8:40 also changes order. I'll be re-filming this one a few more times. One session does not a strategy make.
Thanks for spotting that. I say this a lot, even when I'm going extra slow, I'm trying to bet, pay, and explain and a misfire happens from time to time. Appreciate your eyes on the details there!
5:25 is a fail but 8:40 is correct.
Thanks for the extra sets of eyes!
I’m not always an odds player either but your characterization is just 100% wrong.
The house makes zero on the odds. If you could see the exact stats for a full year in terms of % of the drop attributable to odds bets it would be statistically indistinguishable from zero.
They offer you odds to entice you to make pass and come bets not the other way around. Now, odds are a more volatile way to play than a naked come bet but the fact that they win less than 50% of the time for every number doesn’t make it a bad bet.
There are lots of channels that seem to have a similar mindset: good bets are those that pay out a high percentage of the time. But a bet that wins 90% but pays out 1:15 is a bad bet. A bet that pays out 10% of the time but pays 15:1 is an amazing bet. Odds are the crazy bet that pay out exactly what they should, so they aren’t really good or bad by themselves.
Don't know why Google marked this one as spam from you?
Here's where I stand on the whole odds thing.
First of all, everyone needs to be honest and acknowledge that the the Come (or Pass Line Bet) on it's own is already an excellent bet, even in it's flat form. Once it travels, we know that the flat payment on a box number sucks, but given the advantage during the come out phase, that's the yin-yang of it and overall it's got an incredibly low house edge, even without the odds.
Now the odds, while they do pay perfectly, don't pay off often enough in my opinion to warrant that being the core of my play. In fact, the very fact that they're offered at a pure payout should be a red flag, not a green flag in my opinion. Like I said last night, the casinos do nothing that favors you, only things that entice you to put more money at risk on things they know that they'll collect on.
We all know the math. There's a 33% chance the 4 shows before a 7, and an 11% chance that it shows twice. In the case of a come bet that moves to a 4, you're in that 11% bracket. Sure they advertise "pure odds" because its in their best interest that you make that bet. Nearly 90% of the time, they're taking that money.
It's not nearly as bad on the inside numbers, but it heavily favors the house with a greater than 75% chance that they take your odds bets from you.
I am fully aware that over massive numbers of rolls it all evens out to the < 1% house edge when we do max odds. But we live in short moments. I'm fine with the short term loss of potential profits by playing no or reduced odds. That's a personal choice I make though, which I base in evaluating the math with a focus on short term instead of widening my view. I hope that makes sense.
@@ProCraps Again my point isn’t to go to battle over the odds being the most amazing bet. They are the only fair bet in a casino, but if people don’t want to bet them because it’s more volatile then I’m not going to tell them they are dumb.
But you cannot correctly say that 90% of the time the odds on a 4 lose. It’s just not true. I understand where you’re getting that number but that’s not the right way to look at it. 2/3 of the time they take your money on those odds and 1/3 of they time they give your money back plus 2x. So you break even on that bet in the long run.
Using your logic, we could do something similar and say “the odds of rolling 10 8s before a 7 are (5/6)^10. That’s a really small number. But let’s say that you watch 9 of them come and then decide to make an odds bet. You’re not betting that 10 8s arrive before the 7 now. You’re betting that it happens once.
*when you make the odds bet*, one of the 4s has already rolled by definition. Your odds bet is simply one that says, starting NOW, one 4 comes before a 7. And you lose that bet 2/3 of the time. Not 90%.
I know that this type of talk pigeon-holes me into being “that math guy” but it’s important to at least talk about the math correctly. And using the probability of rolling 2 4s before a 7 to justify or critique a bet that isn’t made until one 4 is rolled is wrong. No opinion there.
That doesn’t mean you have to bet odds. I’m not taking a stand on that at all. But the casino would prefer odds bets be outlawed I can promise you that. They have a zero expectation, and so from the casinos point of view, they are not even a source of income.
Don’t come/don’t pass players love to argue that the main reason the DP/DC is so small on a layout is that the casino doesn’t want you to notice the “good” bets. There may be some truth to that but the same logic applies to odds which aren’t even labeled. If the casino had a bet that they won 90% of the time but only had to pay out 2:1, you can bet they would have a neon arrow pointing to it :)
@@MyopiaMovie 2 points that I want to make with you here (and I agree, this is not an argument, just some point/counter-point)
You said: *when you make the odds bet*, one of the 4s has already rolled by definition. Your odds bet is simply one that says, starting NOW, one 4 comes before a 7. And you lose that bet 2/3 of the time. Not 90%.
I think that's one of those lies, damn lies and statistics things. Yes, at the moment the come bet arrives at the 4, if you consider that to be "roll zero" then yes, there's a 33% chance that a 4 shows before a 7 and the bet pays. But in the arc of probability, you simply cannot discount the appearance of the 4 that got you there. In the scope of the rolls sequence, you've already beaten the 33% to get there. In order to get paid on it, you are living in the 11% likelihood, that's just a fact of the math and we can't ignore it or use a turn of phrase to diminish the reality that is -- getting that bet to pay off means 2 4's have to show before a 7, and that's 11%
Now, your other point is SPOT ON, and it's one that I didn't properly call out, which is to say that your odds are returned to you should that 7 show on a come out roll. So, you're having them at risk on 100% of the rolls. Great point. But you also know me as a guy that works his odds on the come out, so my personal (and this is totally me) math has me fighting those percentages 100% of the time. But I know I'm the rare bird.
I love your last point about the psychological aspect of words being big or small (or non-existent) on the layout. There's again, both truth and fallacy to that for sure. I think there's part of it that's totally mind games on their part, and other parts of it that are actually artistic.
At the end of the day, most people are dumbasses and will over-bet their bankroll, their skill, and their logic. The casino always wins because we beat ourselves.
Frankly, a player that knows the game and has discipline, whether they play no odds, 1x odds, progressive odds, or max odds, but manages their time and money well will always do better than someone that "plays the math" or "plays their gut" with a disregard for common sense and money management. That's probably 95% of the players out there, and its why my "Edgeless Craps" casino will still make me money!
@@ProCraps I worry when having any type of internet discourse, that the other party might be offended or something. So I will preface this
by saying I hope nothing I say comes off with any animosity. There is zero here I promise :)
But you are 100% categorically wrong about the 11%. That is not how math of any kind works. The only relevant odds of ANY casino bet are those that exist at the exact point in time when you make the bet. So, because you don’t place any odds on the 4 until after the come bet has traveled, there is nothing about the past that matters.
This is simple to prove in any number of ways. If you think odds on a 4 pay off only 11% of the time, you should be ecstatic to offer someone 5:1 on them. After all if you win 90%, paying 5:1 is such a rip off to them. I would gladly go to any table anywhere in the world and do nothing but wait for odds on the 4 and make that bet with you instead of the casino. Pay me even 3-1 and you have all the action you want. If you’re right and you win 90%, paying me 3:1 is a gold mine.
Alternatively, if you think that the relevant math is “2 4s before a 7 is 11%” and that it applies the same no matter what other rolls have happened, you can skip the come out phase. Just wait for a single 4 and then lay the 4. You’re getting paid 1:2 on something that, according to you, only happens 10% of the time. That’s stealing!
We could also prove it using WinCraps probably. We could code it up to make no bets until a single 4 is rolled and then place or lay the 4 and do nothing else until that has resolved itself. If you’re right the player laying the 4 will win 90% of the time or close to it.
My point is there are several ways to show these things definitively. I don’t understand why so many craps fans believe that basic statistics are a matter of opinion.
If I was standing at roulette wheel and had a sheet over the history…and you came up and wanted to bet on black. If I stopped you and said, “woah Jon! You can’t do that. It pays even money and look! (Removes the sheet to show 5 straight black numbers) You are getting even money on a bet that only happens about 1%=(.48^6) of the time.
Would you reconsider? Or would you say “look stranger…they are about to spin the wheel and there are about half of the spaces that are black. So I’m basically even money for this spin”?
The fact that your flat bet is involved in the craps example is 100% irrelevant to the win percentage of your odds bet.
You (and others) have scoffed at martingale systems, and rightfully so. The proponents of those systems are, ironically, thinking of the math exactly like you are here. They think “the odds of losing 15 straight field bets is X”. And that’s fine, but when they are making their $4800 bet or whatever it is, their odds are slightly less than 50/50.
It is an uphill battle and most people in the craps community roll their eyes at anyone who understands the math of the game. You aren’t that way but I still feel this strange relationship between you and the math and for whatever reason one of my life’s goals is to try and teach everyone the basics so they understand correctly (I even emailed you about it).
I don’t care if someone follows the “math” in any given way. What I can’t understand is why people refuse to learn the real math. Or why they don’t believe people who actually do understand it.
@@MyopiaMovie No fear of me being offended! I enjoy the debate and frankly people reading this (if they do?) will hopefully learn something. We csn always talk offline as well.
Your statement about the 11% being categorically wrong is, well, categorically wrong :) And what I mean by that I think we sometimes interchange the terms odds and probabilities when talking about this stuff. I know I do, and I think that can be a source of consternation for some folks.
As you know, at any moment in time, the next roll of the dice, just like a spin in Roulette is a totally unique event. So, yes, the 33% odds of the 4 beating the 7 holds true for that moment in time. But the probabilities state that for that to happen twice is 11%, that's math that we also cannot dispute.
So there's the decision that we as bettors have to make. Bet the odds or bet the probability ... and do so in a game where previous events have zero impact on future events.
Maybe I'm over-simplifying this, but the "math guys" tend to rely solely on those odds and the math evening out over time because of the independent nature of each roll, while the "probability guys" tend to use that same math as the basis to justify a decision that's based on the "movement" towards that end.
In the end, we know that the chart of dice rolls is going to look like it should. It's not a question for people like me THAT this will happen, it's a matter of the order in which things happen to get it there ... hence looking at a come bet that got to the 4 and saying "I know that the probability of the 4 showing again before the 7 is 11% so I'm going to avoid the odds" vs the statistical wizard saying "I know that there's a 33% chance that a 4 will show before a 7 on any given roll, so I'm putting up the odds"
Love your example of jumping onto the Lay 4 after seeing a 4. That's a fallacy play for sure, but it does give room and reason for everyone to think. There are strategists out there that base their entire game play on this exact notion. I'm not in that camp, although I can see where the logic springs from.
There's a bit of feel vs facts there for sure, but they're both rooted in the same formula, and our decision making based on how we read it.