Does increasing your bet size increase your EV when bonus clearing?

[stephan]

By EV I mean expected value and not $/hour! I need to settle this once and for all. I have this posted at 3 forums and it's split almost evenly the number of people who think both ways.

I'm having a debate with several people over this. Here is the scenario.

Casino x is giving you a $100 bonus for depositing $100 at their site. You have to wager $2000 to clear the $100 bonus and cash out.

Group 1 says that the EV of the bonus is the same no matter how much you bet. If you bet $20 100x then you should expect $2000x.995= (house edge of .5%) $10. Subtract that $10 from the $100 bonus and you net $90. If you bet $1 2000x then it's the same exact result.

Group 2 says Anytime wagering requirements do not carry over, betting
higher increases variance, which increases EV. This reason is very
simple. Over the long run you are wagering a lot less at a negative
expectation game.

Who is right?


EDIT:
This is what the math (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=0&Number=6825722&page=0&vc=#P ost6825722) forum thinks about it

This is what they think about it over at Rx (http://forum.therx.com/showthread.php?t=394797&page=3) (the discussion starts on page 3)

[kyleb]

pzhon is correct when he says that EV increases with bet size. I've said it here many times, but everyone refuses to believe me. In that case, I suggest anyone who thinks that larger bet sizes do not increase EV to take pzhon and I up on a bet to be confirmed by an independent auditor like the Wizard of Odds.

I'll take action up to $100,000 with a minimum bet of $25,000. I can't speak for pzhon, but I'm sure he's willing to wager a relatively large sum as well.

[stephan]

[ QUOTE ]
pzhon is correct when he says that EV increases with bet size. I've said it here many times, but everyone refuses to believe me. In that case, I suggest anyone who thinks that larger bet sizes do not increase EV to take pzhon and I up on a bet to be confirmed by an independent auditor like the Wizard of Odds.

I'll take action up to $100,000 with a minimum bet of $25,000. I can't speak for pzhon, but I'm sure he's willing to wager a relatively large sum as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's the case, how much dif does it make and how much more variance are we talking?

[kyleb]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
pzhon is correct when he says that EV increases with bet size. I've said it here many times, but everyone refuses to believe me. In that case, I suggest anyone who thinks that larger bet sizes do not increase EV to take pzhon and I up on a bet to be confirmed by an independent auditor like the Wizard of Odds.

I'll take action up to $100,000 with a minimum bet of $25,000. I can't speak for pzhon, but I'm sure he's willing to wager a relatively large sum as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

If that's the case, how much dif does it make and how much more variance are we talking?

[/ QUOTE ]

The difference is likely minimal over a small sample, but significant over many trials. The variance will go absolutely sky-high through the roof.

[funkymunky]

[ QUOTE ]
pzhon is correct when he says that EV increases with bet size. I've said it here many times, but everyone refuses to believe me. In that case, I suggest anyone who thinks that larger bet sizes do not increase EV to take pzhon and I up on a bet to be confirmed by an independent auditor like the Wizard of Odds.

I'll take action up to $100,000 with a minimum bet of $25,000. I can't speak for pzhon, but I'm sure he's willing to wager a relatively large sum as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

How do people not see this as true? If they're more concerned about risk of ruin, then fine. But if you are going to gamble , then GAMBOOL!!

[Blowup Doll]

I can't believe there are people who still argue about this.

[stephan]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't believe there are people who still argue about this.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm still a noob to casinos /images/graemlins/smile.gif. Btw, you think it's yes or no?

[1huskerfan]

Your EV per dollar waged will remain constant. Your overll EV goes up.

[Freakin]

[ QUOTE ]
Your EV per dollar waged will remain constant. Your overll EV goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

well put.

might as well amend it to say

EV per dollar wagered remains constant
Average amount wagered decreases from busting out
Overall EV goes up

[ubercuber]

Given that Ed Miller settled this matter on this forum, you might be hard pressed to find anyone here who thinks otherwise. I too am falling in line, EV goes up.

[KSOT]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your EV per dollar waged will remain constant. Your overll EV goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

well put.

might as well amend it to say

EV per dollar wagered remains constant
Average amount wagered decreases from busting out
Overall EV goes up

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of just saying it , you should all explain it this way. because it never made sense to me until I realized you were factoring the second part into the equation.

So can I assume that on a site like Intercasino where the WR carries over to the next month, that the EV is always the same no matter how much you bet?

[136913691369]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Your EV per dollar waged will remain constant. Your overll EV goes up.

[/ QUOTE ]

well put.

might as well amend it to say

EV per dollar wagered remains constant
Average amount wagered decreases from busting out
Overall EV goes up

[/ QUOTE ]

Instead of just saying it , you should all explain it this way. because it never made sense to me until I realized you were factoring the second part into the equation.

So can I assume that on a site like Intercasino where the WR carries over to the next month, that the EV is always the same no matter how much you bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct.

Betting bigger to increase EV really comes into play when doing high WR, high HA bonuses i.e. a 200 + 200 20x WR with 3CP being the lowest HA game allowed. Wagering small amounts will eat into your EV tremendously, while if you bet big and are able to do several of these bonuses you should manage to salvage alot of the EV.

[bighomage]

[ QUOTE ]
Given that Ed Miller settled this matter on this forum

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you link to this?

[grinin]

[ QUOTE ]
on a site like Intercasino where the WR carries over to the next month

[/ QUOTE ]
It does not, if you bust your deposit and the bonus

[Freakin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Given that Ed Miller settled this matter on this forum

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you link to this?

[/ QUOTE ]

here (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Board=inet&Number=726465&Search page=2&Main=722359&Words=Ed+Miller&topic=&Search=t rue#Post726465)

Keywords people can use to find this post later: ed miller increasing bet size increase EV bust out variance wager requirement

[thomasperfecto]

I'm still confused?!?!
On the forum linked above someone says..
"absolutely wrong. Busting out is your friend. Less wagering = less lost due to house edge."
This seems to echo the view of poeple on this forum.
It doesn't make sense to me though, how can you lose less by going bust? Surely going buts is the most you can expect to lose when playing for a casino bonus.
I understand the theory that you spend less time trying to clear the bonus but seeing as bonuses are finite, meaning there really aren't that many available. It would surely make more sense to try and make the most from each bonus rather than risk going bust on each one.
I could understand the argument if there where an infinite number of juicy bonuses but there aren't so I don't thin this argument holds much weight in the real world.

[Freakin]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm still confused?!?!
On the forum linked above someone says..
"absolutely wrong. Busting out is your friend. Less wagering = less lost due to house edge."
This seems to echo the view of poeple on this forum.
It doesn't make sense to me though, how can you lose less by going bust? Surely going buts is the most you can expect to lose when playing for a casino bonus.
I understand the theory that you spend less time trying to clear the bonus but seeing as bonuses are finite, meaning there really aren't that many available. It would surely make more sense to try and make the most from each bonus rather than risk going bust on each one.
I could understand the argument if there where an infinite number of juicy bonuses but there aren't so I don't thin this argument holds much weight in the real world.

[/ QUOTE ]

the amount of opportunities has nothing to do with the expected value.

Do you play poker? Ever heard of Sklansky bucks?

You can make the correct poker decisions all day, but still lose money because of variance.

It is somewhat similar to increasing your bet size in casino whoring.


Lets say you deposit 100,000 dollars into a casino. You play $100 hands of blackjack with perfect strategy. You will have upswings and downswings. The more you bet, the higher your upswings and downswings. What if you could have upswings as high as the variance could take you, but your downswings would stop at 99,800 and you could never lose more than $200. Would that be an advantage?

Same thing here. You can have huge upswings, but you can only have downswings as big as your deposit. When you lose, you only lose your deposit; when you win, you can win big.

[Packard]

Amazing how some people would argue with this. It is so obvious that bigger betting is higher +EV.