Craps table

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No bet has nonnegative expected value under these rules; passing preserves my bankroll and avoids the house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m sitting out this roll; every available wager has negative expected value, and no odds bets are currently legal.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m placing no bet. Every available wager has negative expected value, so abstaining minimizes expected loss.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m not placing a bet: every available wager has negative expected value, so keeping my chips preserves the best expected session result.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m not required to wager, and every currently legal bet has negative expected value. Passing preserves my bankroll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m abstaining: the available bets have negative expected value, and no wager is required.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available bet has positive expected value; abstaining preserves chips rather than accepting a house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets carry a house edge, and no odds bets are available in this action. With no positive-expectation wager to make, I’ll preserve my bankroll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Every available bet has negative expected value, so preserving my bankroll is preferable to adding action.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available wager has positive expected value, so sitting out preserves chips and avoids expected losses.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available bet has positive expected value, so passing preserves my chips and avoids expected losses.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

The don't pass has the lowest house edge among the available bets, and the come-out phase allows it. Betting 100 maximizes expected chip value under the per-bet limit; prior rolls do not change the odds.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Lay the maximum legal odds behind the existing don't-pass on 9; odds have no house edge, improving odds utilization without adding expected loss.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No new wager offers better expected value than keeping the existing don't-pass position on 9; its odds have no house edge. I’ll avoid adding negative-expectation bets.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A don't-come wager has a low house edge compared with the place and proposition bets. I’m keeping my existing don't-pass position and using the remaining exposure for this flat bet; the recent rolls don’t change the dice probabilities.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A 1-chip don't-pass bet has a slightly lower house edge than pass line and keeps exposure minimal. Prior rolls do not affect the next roll's odds.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Keep the existing don't-pass bet: with point 8 established, its remaining outcome is favorable, and removing it would give up that positive conditional expectation. Make no new bets, since the available bets have negative expected value.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available wagers have negative expected value, and the dice are independent of the recent rolls. With no positive-EV bet available, preserving my chips is the best way to maximize my expected bankroll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, so preserving bankroll is optimal.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

With no positive-EV bets available, sitting out preserves the bankroll and avoids expected losses.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No wager has positive expected value; with no odds bets available, passing preserves the bankroll and maximizes expected chips.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available wager has positive expected value, so preserving the bankroll minimizes expected loss.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, and no odds bets are available. Sitting out preserves the bankroll and maximizes expected chips.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Every available wager has negative expected value, so placing no bet best preserves chips and minimizes expected loss.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Every available wager has negative expected value, and no odds bets are available to reduce the house edge. Passing preserves my chips rather than taking a negative-EV bet.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m sitting out: every available wager has negative expected value, and the recent rolls do not change the fair-dice odds.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A small don't-come wager has a relatively low house edge among the available bets; keeping the stake minimal limits expected loss and exposure.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m taking down the existing negative-EV don’t-come wager and placing no new bets to preserve chips.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available wager has positive expected value; skipping avoids taking on a house edge. The recent rolls do not change the independent dice probabilities.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, so preserving the bankroll is better than wagering.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A $1 don't-come bet is a legal point-phase wager with a lower house edge than the available alternatives; avoid adding higher-edge bets.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Add the maximum legal laid odds behind the existing don't-come 4; true odds have no house edge, and these odds work on the come-out.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available wager has positive expected value, so preserving chips is optimal.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, and no odds bet is available. With no positive-edge wager to make, I’m preserving my bankroll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m sitting this roll out: every available bet has negative expected value, and recent rolls do not change the dice odds.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m sitting out: the available bets have negative expected value, and no odds bets are legal here.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available bet has positive expected value; leaving the table empty avoids expected losses.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

With only three decision rolls left, every available wager has negative expected value and there are no odds bets available to reduce the house edge. I’m preserving my bankroll by sitting this roll out.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, so with bankroll preservation as the objective I’m choosing not to wager.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

With only one decision roll remaining, every available wager has negative expected value. I’m sitting out to preserve my chips.