Blackjack EV Post
 

looking for the post where someone mathematically proved that betting larger on the monthly bonuses was +EV rather than betting the min. Was like a year or so ago. Search is kicking my ass because 'EV' is in every other post. Have a rather large, for me, side bet running.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

I mean the standard littlewoods type bonus where deposit 100 get 100 thing.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

If I recall correctly, it is only slightly more +EV to bet large, and this was because your loss is limited to going bust, while there is no limit on your profit.

The main benefit to betting large is the increased $/hr, but this is at the cost of a higher risk of ruin. The higher risk of ruin is what increases the EV, but I'm pretty sure this increase was small enough that it wouldn't be the deciding factor for most people...it would be outweighed by whether they had the bankroll to tolerate the higher risk in return for the increased $/hr.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

The higher risk of ruin means you'll go bust more often.

Going bust more often means in the long term you'll wager less dollars, obviously once you go broke you don't need to finish the wagering.

Wagering less $ means less EV lost to the house edge.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
The higher risk of ruin means you'll go bust more often.

Going bust more often means in the long term you'll wager less dollars, obviously once you go broke you don't need to finish the wagering.

Wagering less $ means less EV lost to the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge. How big are people's units in terms of the money they have on the site? I am taking a break from poker and have done a few BJ bonusses, did one from a $400 "roll" at $5 per bet, doing a $200 one at $3 per bet... Sound sensible? I'm not interested in < $40/hour win rates.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

sciolist,

that is very nitty.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
sciolist,

that is very nitty.

[/ QUOTE ]
The webpage is telling me to do it in $1 increments! OK, I shall stop feeling bad about doing it 5x higher

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

[/ QUOTE ]
If the playthrough is $10k, the house edge is the same whether I play one $10k hands or 10k $1 hands. It's just the variance that is different, surely?

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
The higher risk of ruin means you'll go bust more often.

Going bust more often means in the long term you'll wager less dollars, obviously once you go broke you don't need to finish the wagering.

Wagering less $ means less EV lost to the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

[/ QUOTE ]
If the playthrough is $10k, the house edge is the same whether I play one $10k hands or 10k $1 hands. It's just the variance that is different, surely?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

[/ QUOTE ]
If the playthrough is $10k, the house edge is the same whether I play one $10k hands or 10k $1 hands. It's just the variance that is different, surely?

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically, yes.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

I did quite a few last fall. I played in either $1 and $2 increments following the charts on the Wizard of Odds. I made a profit on about 90% of the bonuses offered that were dollar for dollar and cashable with playthroughs 10x or lesser.

I kept the records in a notebook and can name the casinos.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

[/ QUOTE ]
If the playthrough is $10k, the house edge is the same whether I play one $10k hands or 10k $1 hands. It's just the variance that is different, surely?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, but you're not going to have a 10k balance with a playthrough of 10k.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

[/ QUOTE ]
If the playthrough is $10k, the house edge is the same whether I play one $10k hands or 10k $1 hands. It's just the variance that is different, surely?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. If your balance is say $400, $200+$200 bonus and you do $50 bets it only takes 8 bad bets to go broke. Worst case scenario and you'll only have the opportunity to wager $400 and you're bust.

In the long term you'll be getting the same amount of bonus as someone who bets $1 but because of all the times you bust quickly you'll do far less total wagering.

Example, if I wager $100,000 less dollars than you over my 'career' and the house edge is 1%, well there's an extra $1000 EV my way.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

Let's take two extremes.

100% $100 bonus. 30x playthrough. 0.5 HA (a bit high for blackjack, but that doesn't matter for this example)

Scenario 1:

Bet low (say $1 per hand).

100-3000*0.005 = 85

Scenario 2:

Try to double up then grind it out low.

(-100 + 300-3000*0.005) / 2 = 92

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

On bonuswhores before they shut down the casinos forum, this was known as "Galt's Epiphany" (named after a poster who coined this strategy).

By playing a cashable bonus more aggressively (larger bets), you can yield a higher EV. The difference can be miniscule or huge, depending on the bonus structure.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The wagering requirements are generally in $ though, so you aren't giving up anything in terms of the house edge.

[/ QUOTE ]

What?

[/ QUOTE ]
If the playthrough is $10k, the house edge is the same whether I play one $10k hands or 10k $1 hands. It's just the variance that is different, surely?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. If your balance is say $400, $200+$200 bonus and you do $50 bets it only takes 8 bad bets to go broke. Worst case scenario and you'll only have the opportunity to wager $400 and you're bust.

In the long term you'll be getting the same amount of bonus as someone who bets $1 but because of all the times you bust quickly you'll do far less total wagering.

Example, if I wager $100,000 less dollars than you over my 'career' and the house edge is 1%, well there's an extra $1000 EV my way.

[/ QUOTE ]

Read his post.

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

Well, it doesn't work exactly like blackjack, but i wrote a program to generate random numbers between 0 and 1. anything over .5025 was a 'win'. Everything else was a loss. Here are the results for 10,000,000 bonuses. $200 BR and a $2500 WR.

bet size-----avr return
1/n-----187.5
1-------187.51
5-------187.82
10-----188.63
20-----189.98
25-----190.40
50-----192.06
100---193.84
200---195.01

Re: Blackjack EV Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
Well, it doesn't work exactly like blackjack, but i wrote a program to generate random numbers between 0 and 1. anything over .5025 was a 'win'. Everything else was a loss. Here are the results for 10,000,000 bonuses. $200 BR and a $2500 WR.

bet size-----avr return
1/n-----187.5
1-------187.51
5-------187.82
10-----188.63
20-----189.98
25-----190.40
50-----192.06
100---193.84
200---195.01

[/ QUOTE ]

This is right, higher risk of ruin means higher average return.