casino whoring question from a n00b

[skierdude1000]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to gamble, listen to the other guys. Flat betting $1 a hand is the most sure way to make money doing this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your EV for any particular bonus is exactly the same no matter what you bet (assuming you leave yourself money to double and split every hand).

Your long term EV goes up the higher you bet, but so does your varience. Its up to you how you want to look at it.

Ken

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never done casino whoring, but your bet size shouldn't have any effect on your EV. Unless you are talking about EV/Time.

[/ QUOTE ]

We're talking Variance here. With higher bets, he's more likely to bust. He wants to build a bankroll here.

[Freakin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to gamble, listen to the other guys. Flat betting $1 a hand is the most sure way to make money doing this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your EV for any particular bonus is exactly the same no matter what you bet (assuming you leave yourself money to double and split every hand).

Your long term EV goes up the higher you bet, but so does your varience. Its up to you how you want to look at it.

Ken

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never done casino whoring, but your bet size shouldn't have any effect on your EV. Unless you are talking about EV/Time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your EV increases as your variance increases. Your average total WR decreases.

[skierdude1000]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to gamble, listen to the other guys. Flat betting $1 a hand is the most sure way to make money doing this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your EV for any particular bonus is exactly the same no matter what you bet (assuming you leave yourself money to double and split every hand).

Your long term EV goes up the higher you bet, but so does your varience. Its up to you how you want to look at it.

Ken

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never done casino whoring, but your bet size shouldn't have any effect on your EV. Unless you are talking about EV/Time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your EV increases as your variance increases. Your average total WR decreases.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what happens when he busts on his first site because he thought his EV was higher? He's screwed with no bankroll. In the short-term, variance is more important than EV for someone who has a small bankroll and is just starting casino whoring.

[Freakin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you want to gamble, listen to the other guys. Flat betting $1 a hand is the most sure way to make money doing this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your EV for any particular bonus is exactly the same no matter what you bet (assuming you leave yourself money to double and split every hand).

Your long term EV goes up the higher you bet, but so does your varience. Its up to you how you want to look at it.

Ken

[/ QUOTE ]

I've never done casino whoring, but your bet size shouldn't have any effect on your EV. Unless you are talking about EV/Time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your EV increases as your variance increases. Your average total WR decreases.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what happens when he busts on his first site because he thought his EV was higher? He's screwed with no bankroll. In the short-term, variance is more important than EV for someone who has a small bankroll and is just starting casino whoring.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was not debating that a casino n00b should stick to very small bet sizes... I was correcting an incorrect assumption about betsize and EV

[db9db9db9]

http://suckout.blogspot.com/2004/12/...o-bonuses.html

[ShakeZula06]

Since this thread became pretty popularI guess I'll post some of my points.

I disagree with the constant $1 bet thing. When he's saying betting big=bad, it's because he believes that I wont drop down to $1 if variance hits me upside the head. For instance, if Im up I'll be betting roughy 1/8 of how much I'm up. If I lose half my profits, Ill cut my wager in half. If I'm losing I won't ber over 2% of my total br on that site ($100 means $2 bet) and If for some reason I'm under $50 I'm of course betting $1).

This only increase my RoR a very very slim portion (probably less then 1/10th of a percent) however it juices up my hourly by multitudes. In other words any time I'm not betting $1 I'm taking a shot, and worse comes to worse I'm stuck in a mind numbingly boring $1/hand.

Blckjacks boring enough betting $5/hand, I'm not going to make 5x as many wagers for 5x smaller amount.

We are not computers we dont have to bet one amount the whole damn time, it would be incredibly mind numbinly horrible. I wouldnt wish it on my worse enemys.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

I must be missing something about how this works. Any game is played at x% HA. How does bet size change this?

[136913691369]

[ QUOTE ]
I must be missing something about how this works. Any game is played at x% HA. How does bet size change this?

[/ QUOTE ]

use the search feature. There have been countless threads about it. In short, betting bigger allows you to bust out more decreasing the amount of -EV wagers that you have to place.

[db9db9db9]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I must be missing something about how this works. Any game is played at x% HA. How does bet size change this?

[/ QUOTE ]

use the search feature. There have been countless threads about it. In short, betting bigger allows you to bust out more decreasing the amount of -EV wagers that you have to place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, we all seem to know this is true. Although no one actually seems able to prove that this is true.

But there's something in the 2+2 archives that proves that this is true. Although nobody actually seems able to produce this smoking gun.

But we all know it's true.

[db9db9db9]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I must be missing something about how this works. Any game is played at x% HA. How does bet size change this?

[/ QUOTE ]

use the search feature. There have been countless threads about it. In short, betting bigger allows you to bust out more decreasing the amount of -EV wagers that you have to place.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, we all seem to know this is true. Although no one actually seems able to prove that this is true.

But there's something in the 2+2 archives that proves that this is true. Although nobody actually seems able to produce this smoking gun.

But we all know it's true.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh, and news flash: 2+2's search function is almost useless.