Craps table

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, while an empty action preserves the bankroll. The prior pass-line streak does not affect the independent next roll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available wagers have negative expected value, so keeping the chips off the table maximizes expected bankroll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available bet has positive expected value; passing preserves the bankroll and avoids house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A 1-chip don't-come bet is the lowest-edge available wager in this menu; keeping the stake minimal limits expected loss and exposure.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No new wagers: the offered bets carry a house edge. Keep the existing don't-come 6, which is currently favored to win before a 7.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A small don't-come flat bet has a slightly lower house edge than a come bet; the recent rolls do not predict the next roll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Add the maximum fair laid odds behind the existing don't-come 9, increasing odds utilization without adding house edge. Avoid new flat bets, which carry a house advantage.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No new wager has positive expected value. The established don't-come bets have favorable odds in their current point phase, and the attached odds are fair, so I’ll leave them in place.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m taking down the removable don't-come bet and placing nothing new; the available bets have negative expected value.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A 1-chip don't-pass bet has the lowest house edge among the available bets; keeping the stake small limits expected loss.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available wager has positive expected value; sitting out preserves chips and avoids the house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, so the best way to maximize expected chips is to sit this roll out.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No bet has positive expected value; leaving the table empty avoids further expected losses and preserves my bankroll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Every available wager has negative expected value, and no odds bet is available to offset the flat-bet edge. Preserving chips is best.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, and no odds bets are legal in this action. Since the goal is to maximize my chips, I’ll sit this roll out.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

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

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, and no existing position or odds opportunity is available. I’ll preserve chips rather than take a house-edge wager.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available bets have negative expected value, and no odds bets are currently available to reduce the house edge. Passing this roll preserves chips.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

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

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m sitting this roll out; every available wager has negative expected value, and no positive-EV odds bet is currently available.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

A 1-chip don't-come bet has the lowest house edge among the currently available bets; prior rolls do not change the independent dice odds.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Don't come has a comparatively low house edge, and the point is on so it is legal. I’m ignoring the provocateur and keeping the stake small.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available bet has positive expected value; sitting out preserves bankroll rather than accepting a house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available wagers have negative expected value, and no odds bets are currently available to reduce the house edge. I’m preserving my bankroll by sitting this roll out.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m sitting this roll out; every available bet has negative expected value, and no odds bets are available to reduce the house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available bet has positive expected value; preserving the bankroll is best for maximizing expected chips.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No bet has positive expected value; passing preserves my bankroll rather than accepting a house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No bet has positive expected value, and odds are unavailable on this come-out roll. Sitting out preserves chips and avoids the house edge.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No wager has positive expected value. With no requirement to bet, keeping chips off the table best preserves my bankroll.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No available wager has positive expected value; preserving the bankroll is better than adding a house-edge bet.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

With no favorable or positive-EV wager available, passing preserves bankroll and maximizes expected chips.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

Every available wager has negative expected value, and no bet is required. I’m preserving my bankroll rather than adding exposure.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

All available wagers have negative expected value, and no odds bets are currently available to offset a flat bet’s house edge. I’m preserving my chips by sitting out.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

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

I chose a legal action for this decision.

I’m sitting out because every available wager has negative expected value; with no odds bet available, placing nothing minimizes expected chip loss.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

No wager has positive expected value; preserving the bankroll is better than taking a house-edge bet.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

With only three decision rolls remaining, making no wager best preserves my bankroll; every available bet has a negative expected value.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

With only two decision rolls remaining, making no bet avoids a negative expected value; recent rolls do not predict the independent dice.

I chose a legal action for this decision.

With only one decision roll remaining, every available wager has negative expected value; preserving the bankroll is best.