Some people are deluded by thoughts of making a living by playing craps. These folks go to a casino a few times, perhaps have good luck, see how exciting the game is and then think: ?Gee, wouldn?t this be a fun way to make a living?? Like people who buy homes in areas where they have vacationed for a few weeks here and there over many years and are severely disappointed when their life-style isn?t as exciting or wonderful as their vacations, the would-be professional craps players become quickly disillusioned with their new career. For two reasons: one - the more time you actually spend in a casino, the less exciting and glamorous casinos get - especially if you are trying to earn your daily bread there but are, instead, consistently losing your dough; and two, craps is a negative expectation game that is very hard to beat in the long run and it isn?t conducive to the stuff livings are made of.
Most mathematicians would say (correctly) that unless someone can control the outcome of the dice roll or find enough shooters over time who can, the math of craps is unassailable. This is absolutely true. Even the best bets at the craps table come with a house edge or vig. Make pass line and come bets, and you will lose 1.4 percent of all the money you put into action in this way. Play its opposite, the don?t pass and the don?t come, and you face almost the same house edge albeit a fraction lower. The taking of odds, while it lessens the overall impact of the house edge by reducing it in the short run by spreading it out over more money, does not change the fact that if your typical bet on the pass line is $5, you will lose seven cents on average every time you make the bet. You can put $10 in odds behind that $5 (double odds), or you can put $500 behind that $5 (100X odds) and you are still going to lose seven cents on that $5 pass line bet.
Certainly 1.4 percent is a small edge to be sure. Certainly 1.4 percent is nothing to tremble at if you are a recreational casino gambler. But 1.4 percent is the sword of Damocles if you are trying to make a living. It is tantamount to saying: ?I am going to invest in a company that will lose me seven cents for every $5 I invest and that is guaranteed!? Only an insane person would make such an investment.
The rule of craps is this: No one can make a living at the game, unless he can control the dice to a great degree.
And here is the exception. The Captain. He has defied the odds of the game for almost three decades. How does he do it when the math clearly shows that it is impossible? He?s done it with a combination of controlled shooting and smart betting on other rollers.
People who don?t know the Captain could say: ?Obviously, the Captain is lying and Scoblete is a gullible fool.? Of course, these people have not seen the Captain?s books, which meticulously record all the sessions he has played over all these years. They have not spoken to casino executives who have confirmed the Captain?s ?luck.? I met with one executive who now works for the Trump organization who showed me the Captain?s spreadsheet. The Captain was substantially ahead for over eight years! ?He?s killing us,? laughed the executive. Skeptics haven?t seen the ?top secret? memos that have passed between some casinos trying to figure out how he does it. I have.
So how does he do it?
Technically, I can outline his systems of play and offer you advice on how to employ them. This I?ve done in relatively inexpensive books and tapes. First, he doesn?t bet on every shooter - because to bet on each and every shooter is to guarantee a loss in the long run. He employs the 5-Count for selecting whom he?ll risk his money on. Then he plays an extremely conservative betting system. Even with that, however, the mathematical dictum ?Thou canst not win!? looms large.
The only explanation that makes sense to me is this: When the Captain stumbled on the 5-Count method of selecting shooters, he stumbled on a way to deselect many players who were playing a ?random dice game? in favor of a few players who were slightly altering the odds of the game by physically controlling the dice. Since these dice controllers are few and far between, the Captain reduced his overall exposure to the ?random? shooters and increased his chances to win by increasing the percentage of ?rhythmic rollers? he was betting on. The Captain own roll is amazingly accurate as is the roll of his long time dice companion, The Arm. Between the two them they havce had magnificent and sustained rolls ? over the long run.
By way of analogy, when scientists couldn?t explain how a bumblebee could fly based on aerodynamics, they had a choice. They could state definitively that ?bumblebees can?t fly!? even though we have all seen them fly, or the scientists could say: ?We know they shouldn?t be able to fly but they do. So let?s figure out how they are doing the seemingly impossible.? That?s the situation I?m in. I know the Captain has done what I?ve seen him do. He shouldn?t be able to do it. But I can?t deny that he?s done it. He?s a bumblebee who can fly despite the fact that he is playing a game that shouldn?t allow him to be aerodynamic. Go figure....
Some of Frank's most popular books can be purchased by clicking one of the image