C r a p s????

[krb1000]

We'd like to learn craps...sailing on the Reflection TA in April...will the casino offer lessons? TIA

[Mountain Time]

Yes, they usually do. We are on the same cruise and play craps often on ships. No "high" rollers though. Perhaps we will meet in the casino!

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

[NantahalaCruiser]

We'd like to learn craps...sailing on the Reflection TA in April...will the casino offer lessons? TIA

 

Hopefully they will. If they do not mention it, be sure to ask them about the additional bet (usually called "odds"), with no house advantage, that you can make after the initial roll. This extra bet, which pays the exact mathematical odds without a house advantage, allows you to decrease the average house advantage which is around 1.4% without the additional bet - much better than the Roulette house advantage of around 5.5%.

[DHADEN]

There are SEVERAL good books on how to play craps. Do yourself a favor and get one or two, read them before you cruise, and learn what bets have what odds/probabilities. Learn which are good bets and "Sucker Bets' so you will go in knowing what to avoid.

Then, when you get the lessons on board, you will LOVE IT!!!

[vvnh16a]

Be aware that Celebrity's minimum for most if not all table games is now $10.

[MixerDave]

Be aware that Celebrity's minimum for most if not all table games is now $10.

 

Glad to hear this - I play Blackjack, and my last cruise on RCCL the minimum was $5. As a fairly knowledgeable player it was frustrating to see some of the play by novices that would cost me money. After a few hands I decided to not play. I moved to the craps table where novice play could not hurt me.

[Fish Lover]

Glad to hear this - I play Blackjack, and my last cruise on RCCL the minimum was $5. As a fairly knowledgeable player it was frustrating to see some of the play by novices that would cost me money. After a few hands I decided to not play. I moved to the craps table where novice play could not hurt me.

 

Nothing is more annoying than someone who gets angry at the other players because they choose to make unusual choices when playing blackjack. I mean really. How dare someone say that you "aren't playing right" or "hurting" them because they get an unexpected card. This is a real pet peeve of mine. And incidentally, I play unconventionally and I win frequently. I also don't play with money I can't afford to lose. It's not a job, it's entertainment. If you take it that seriously that you would get annoyed at another player at the table for their choices, you shouldn't be playing.

[r5516]

craps is the best bet in any casino, play the pass line and take full odds behind the line. the house edge is reduced (you still lose) to about .8 %

[NantahalaCruiser]

craps is the best bet in any casino, play the pass line and take full odds behind the line. the house edge is reduced (you still lose) to about .8 %

 

Yeah, taking full odds after the first roll reduces the average house advantage because the house advantage for the odds bets are zero. The degree of reduction depends on the allowed level of odds; e.g. 2x, 3x, etc. Of course, if the minimum bet is $10, then adding 3x brings your total bet after the first roll up to $40! Depending on your gambling budget, even a short losing streak can eat up your budget so fast that you could miss out an a subsequent winning streak :mad:

 

Also, betting the Don't Pass Line is slightly better than betting the Pass Line since the house advantage is slightly lower.

[NantahalaCruiser]

Nothing is more annoying than someone who gets angry at the other players because they choose to make unusual choices when playing blackjack. I mean really. How dare someone say that you "aren't playing right" or "hurting" them because they get an unexpected card. This is a real pet peeve of mine. And incidentally, I play unconventionally and I win frequently. I also don't play with money I can't afford to lose. It's not a job, it's entertainment. If you take it that seriously that you would get annoyed at another player at the table for their choices, you shouldn't be playing.

 

Totally agree. Gambling is based on random occurrences. It's only the superstitious that think another player's actions actually impact their long-term average result. And I have never seen such a player complain when another player's non-standard play gives them a winning hand instead of a bust!

[ghstudio]

Table minimums on Celebrity vary by cruise. We have been on Celebrity cruises in the past few months where there were $5 tables (including craps) and still there were few gambling. If no one is playing, the house (Celebrity) is making nothing. If they have $5 minimums and some folks are playing, the house is now making something. We've also been on cruises where all the tables were $25 the first night....and to no ones surprise...were $5 minimum the next night.

 

You can bet that if the minimums are $10 and few are playing, the minimums will quickly drop.

[pantoot]

As a fairly knowledgeable player it was frustrating to see some of the play by novices that would cost me money. After a few hands I decided to not play. I moved to the craps table where novice play could not hurt me.

 

It doesn't hurt you at the blackjack table either. Although I do superstitiously believe that having a grumpy table creates more losing hands, much like a happy craps table feels like it wins more. (although its hard to be a crank when you are winning I suppose)

 

From thewizardofodds.com (https://wizardofodds.com/ask-the-wizard/blackjack/multiple-hands/, about halfway down):

 

Q: Every time I go to the Blackjack games there is a grumpy simple individual, who wants to stone some poor soul for "messing up the shoe.” Is there any truth to this?

A: In ten years of running this site I steadfastly denied the myth that bad players cause other players to lose in blackjack. However, you are the lucky 1000th person to ask, so I took the trouble to prove it by random simulation. The rules I put in are the standard liberal Vegas Strip rules as follows.

6 decks

Dealer stands on soft 17

Double on any first two cards allowed

Double after split allowed

Late surrender allowed

Player may re-split to four hands, including aces

Cut card used

First, I had both players follow correct total-dependent basic strategy. Over almost 1.6 billion rounds, the loss of the first player to act was 0.289%, and the second player to act of 0.288%.

Second, I had the first player follow the same correct strategy, and the second player follow the same correct strategy except:

Always hit 12 to 16

Always double 9 to 11

Split any pair

Never surrender

Never soft double

In a simulation of 1.05 billion hands the loss of the first player was 0.282%, and the second player was 11.260%. So the house edge of the basic strategy playing first player was almost the same, regardless of whether the second player played correctly or wildly incorrectly. I hope this puts and end the third baseman myth, but I doubt it. As I have said many times, the more ridiculous a belief is, the more tenaciously it tends to be held.

[NantahalaCruiser]

As Pantoot's posting shows in the simulation results, a BJ player's odds of winning or losing are absolutely unaffected by whatever strategy another players uses (whether in front of them or behind them) since all of the cards dealt to both the player and the dealer are random draws.

 

It's interesting to see the false belief / perception of an earlier poster that at BJ another's play affects their odds while he has no problem at the Craps table with whether or not the player in front of him decides to roll or pass the dice - he just does not realize it is in fact the same exact situation!