300% bonus on Golden Palace, I'd be dumb not to do it right?

[icemanjmw]

Golden Palace has a promotion now they will give you a $300 bonus if you deposit $100. First, I have not been able to find details about how much you have to wager to withdraw that bonus (probably 10 times the amount) so does anyone know that?
And also, playing a mix of Let It Ride and Blackjack (with basic strategy) I should be able to profit with this right?

[bottomset]

its a sticky bonus, so you go for big wins or busto

you only get the $300 to gamble with, but get to keep the profits from it

so black chip betting at BJ is the way to go

[Photoc]

Go search the internet bonus forums on what sticky type 1, typw 2, and cashable bonuses are. Golden Palace is one of the more talked about casino sites.

[KSOT]

Prepare to lose $100 faster than you ever thought possible.

[splashpot]

Basically you bet it all on one hand of blackjack. $400 on one hand. If you win, you'll have $800, but you have to give back the $300 bonus. So that's $500, or $400 profit. If you lose, you lose $100. So you have a 50-50 chance to win $400 or lose $100.

PS- back when I did this bonus, it was only $200 I think.

[Vivalution]

Don't bet all $400 on one hand. The casino has a better edge if you don't leave yourself with the ability to split and double down. Bets from $50 to $100 are probably best.

[stigmata]

yeah bet 50-100 each hand, also look at bonuswhores.com forum for a ton of dicussion about sticky bonus strategy. I think it's actually best to wait to do these until you have a fairly decent bankroll, and then just hit up a load of sticky bonuses in one go and earn A LOT of +EV in very little time. If your bankroll is still low (e.g. low thousands) you probably don't want this kind of mad variance yet.

[splashpot]

[ QUOTE ]
Don't bet all $400 on one hand. The casino has a better edge if you don't leave yourself with the ability to split and double down. Bets from $50 to $100 are probably best.

[/ QUOTE ]
Good point. And now that I think about it, I did bet something like $50 per bet. There was a thread in the BW forum giving some formula for how much to bet using your BR in the equation to maximize EV and minimize ROR.

[J_B]

Would the house have less of an edge if you were to bet the Don't Pass Line at craps vs. one hand of BJ? (if craps counts)

[KSOT]

I don't think craps counts.

By the way, this topic lead me to sign up for two new stickies. Lost my $100 deposit on each very fast.

[CalvinTy]

disclaimer: I haven't bonus whored at casinos since the 20th century... (well, I'm thinking 1999 & 2000 at those boss sites) so I am not sure what changed lately in terms of WR requirements & "automatic betting" feature with basic strategy I'm seeing being mentioned (?).

But reading a few weeks of this, me (and a friend who have nagged me) prolly would start this someday with lots of information from here... even then, I have one burning question that nobody seem to mention as a possible method..

Say you have "some kind of BR (at least $1K, perhaps $2K)" before starting casino whoring, if someone starts at Golden Palace as an example with their $100 deposit and 300% bonus (basically $100 deposit & $300 sticky bonus) with 4WR (D+B = at least $1,600 worth of bets based on other thread here?), what is wrong with depositing first with only $100, but then immediately make 2nd deposit of, say, $1,100, instead of $100.... THEN *start* making $50-$100 bets with your new $1,500 balance (your $100 deposit & $1,100 2nd deposit) with GP giving you the $300 extra only to wager with??

Doing the required $1,600 worth of bets (or whatever amount), this basically would be only 30-40 "BJ hands" at $50 bet per hand?). This *seems* like a good balanced way to quickly go through the WR? After all, you can only whore GP 'once' so depositing "only" $100 cant be good if you happen to make $25 bets but bust out due to variance & losing your 1 golden opportunity for the bonus?

Am I missing something tangible here? Sorry if I'm making it sound complicated... bear with me here..

P.S. I edited the post when I realized I meant 2 deposits, not 1 big initial deposit...

* CalvinTy

[WLVRYN]

Calvin-

There isnt really a bonus when its sticky. They take away the $300 when you cash out, so if you put in $1,500 of your own money, you end up risking a lot more of your own money than if you just deposited $100. Either way, the only way you make any money on a sticky bonus is if you run hot and end up making money solely from playing (since you cant cash the bonus). In that scenario, I would much rather only put up a $100 stake compared to a $1,500 stake.

[CalvinTy]

[ QUOTE ]
Calvin-

There isnt really a bonus when its sticky. They take away the $300 when you cash out, so if you put in $1,500 of your own money, you end up risking a lot more of your own money than if you just deposited $100. Either way, the only way you make any money on a sticky bonus is if you run hot and end up making money solely from playing (since you cant cash the bonus). In that scenario, I would much rather only put up a $100 stake compared to a $1,500 stake.

[/ QUOTE ]
I appreciate the reply. Thanks to 2p2 in recent months, I learned what a sticky meant so I did understand that they would take out the $300 at cashout. I'm just saying that... oh wait a minute, I get it now-- duh me, I was thinking that there was a bonus separate from the sticky one!! *sheepish look* Never mind... as you said, WLVRYN, it's all just my money at stake with a sticky. /images/graemlins/blush.gif

Okay, let me divert my question for a non-sticky bonus then, *shaking my head*. Now, if a site says "deposit to get 100% up to $100 bonus (obv $100 deposit)" with a # multiplier of D+B wagering requirements, I wonder if people practice the idea of deposit just the minimum necessary and then make 2nd deposit just to increase their bankroll before making bets so they can comfortably put higher bets for better EV and less ROR? I don't see people mentioning it, so just am wondering...

* CalvinTy

[WLVRYN]

The generally accepted strategy for cashable bonuses is to play many hands at low wagers in order to better approximate the true HA of less than 1%. Part of the idea behind playing cashable bonuses is that you want to make money by having the theoretical loss (HA% * amount bet) be less than the bonus amount. Given that online casino gambling is -EV without the bonuses, in the long run, you'd be giving money away not to maximize the bonus amount. Sure sometimes you'll run hot and win money, but more often than not you'll lose. The higher you bet, the more you are giving away to the HA, and the less bonus money you are taking in. Also, you get to the WR faster, which could be a good or bad thing dependin on how you are running. If flat betting a few bucks a hand doesnt get your juices flowing and you are willing to risk your own bankroll, then a $100 cashable bonus probably doesnt mean that much anyway.

[CalvinTy]

WLVRYN: You nailed it on the head, I understand now. (Btw, less bets at higher amounts actually means that the HA effect is "lower", though?)

I had searched/saved some key & hot discussion about flat betting & optimum betting for maximum EV and balancing ROR, etc. While you probably have seen those posts before, but interesting debates going on... especially Ed Miller's posts in 2004 on this subject:

last month (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=4801255&page=0&fpart=all &vc=1)

last fall (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=3762510&page=0&fpart=all &vc=1)

the big discussion w/ Ed Miller's feedback (in Archives) (http://archiveserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=722359&page=0&fpart=all& vc=1)

Those WERE interesting reading!

P.S. In short, flat betting $1 or $2 is actually NOT optimal but it all boils down to each individual's level of risk, I guess.

* CalvinTy

[AASooted]

[ QUOTE ]
The higher you bet, the more you are giving away to the HA, and the less bonus money you are taking in. Also, you get to the WR faster, which could be a good or bad thing dependin on how you are running.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe increasing the bet size increases the HA. Increasing your bet size will definitely increase your variance, though. I have a decent size bankroll, so I've been taking the increased variance in return for increasing my hourly earn. For example, if I have a $100 bonus and $100 of my own money I'll bet at $10 per hand. If I get quite a bit ahead (no set number -- depends on how I'm feeling that day), I'll drop that to $5 to decrease my variance the rest of the way. If I dip below $100, I'll start making larger bets in hopes of hitting a hot streak (never betting more than half so I can double or split). I know I bust more than I would flat betting small amounts, but I don't spend all day at one casino.

I'm pretty sure I'm not giving away any HA long term since there are many bonuses out there, and the increased hourly rate is worth it to me. In fact, I'm pretty sure your EV goes up when you bet larger. It's counterintuitive, but I think it has to do with the fact that your negative variance is limited to the money you have in your account but your positive variance is unlimited.

[WLVRYN]

Calvin, thanks those are pretty interesting links (and I guess why I'll never be the world's best gambler). I usually dont grind out $1 hands, for the most part I'm a $5 per hand guy on cashables. Maybe I should be betting more on those since my casino roll has grown a bit from when I first did PlanetLuck and Starluck. It may be tough though because even though the math works, deep down inside I'm still a risk averse, low limit whore.