Negative house edge wont work for the following reason:
More people will bet when the edge is negative, than when it's positive, thus either the casino will go bankrupt quickly, or the edge will quickly shift back to positive edge (because the profits made by the house diminish, thus it switches back to positive edge)
Topic: Small negative house edge (Read 6066 times)
Honestly at this point i dont know how people still play dice, its just not fun and you lose, poker blackjack and pretty much any other games are way more fun than dice and you can even win some money on poker on pvp.
By the way on 0% House Edge the casino would win money tho.
By the way on 0% House Edge the casino would win money tho.
yea, at 0% flat betting doesn't work and any other betting strategy would lose in the long run because variance has a larger impact than some percentages of the house edge i think.
Honestly at this point i dont know how people still play dice, its just not fun and you lose, poker blackjack and pretty much any other games are way more fun than dice and you can even win some money on poker on pvp.
By the way on 0% House Edge the casino would win money tho.
By the way on 0% House Edge the casino would win money tho.
^ Just a negative house edge wouldn't work, but if you change the house edge I think it can work. The casino would have to change it depending on the profit it made so far.
For example if profit was below some value, the house edge would be positive to help the house win more. When profit was above some value, the house edge would go lower to reduce the profit lol. Hopefully that brings in more players. xD
For example if profit was below some value, the house edge would be positive to help the house win more. When profit was above some value, the house edge would go lower to reduce the profit lol. Hopefully that brings in more players. xD
Sigh, Deisik, if you still can't understand after I and many others took the time to explain such a simple concept, I really don't know what to say. Seriously, read the central concept of our posts. Your trivial modifications don't do anything.
It's like then you ask "well, what if I change the name of the casino? Your arguments were against the previous casino I suggested". That's completely irrelevant and insignificant. You're nitpicking at places that simply DON'T MATTER.
+EV for players doesn't bring in real gamblers. It brings in investors. It will also lose money for the casino.
Whatever changes you make, that's a fact that won't change. If you completely change the system, then it no longer has anything to do with the central concept of this thread; giving the players an edge in order to attract more players and profit for the casino.
If for example, the casino has a side business selling shoes. The casino ends up making a bit of money, because the shoe business can cover the loss from the casino games, that doesn't make +EV a good idea suddenly. Similarly, when the odds change, that might make the casino money, which can cover some of the losses giving the players an edge made. But that's irrelevant.
It's like then you ask "well, what if I change the name of the casino? Your arguments were against the previous casino I suggested". That's completely irrelevant and insignificant. You're nitpicking at places that simply DON'T MATTER.
+EV for players doesn't bring in real gamblers. It brings in investors. It will also lose money for the casino.
Whatever changes you make, that's a fact that won't change. If you completely change the system, then it no longer has anything to do with the central concept of this thread; giving the players an edge in order to attract more players and profit for the casino.
If for example, the casino has a side business selling shoes. The casino ends up making a bit of money, because the shoe business can cover the loss from the casino games, that doesn't make +EV a good idea suddenly. Similarly, when the odds change, that might make the casino money, which can cover some of the losses giving the players an edge made. But that's irrelevant.
I think negative house edge could be attractive to a lot of gamblers. A bit risky for the house... but could still be a profitable proposition based on player emotion/greed.
Say someone left a autobet on at 0.00001 all day or something, they would come out with money and house would lose.This is an example of just one player.
Imagine what happens when do that a hundred people..
If the house edge is negative just bet static bets, lets say 0.001 bets all the time
With a chance of 51% of win you would eventually reach that chance and for example in 1 million bets
you would win 510.000 and lose 490.000 bets
wich means that you won 20.000 bets more than loses 20.000 x 0.001 = 20 bitcoins
With a chance of 51% of win you would eventually reach that chance and for example in 1 million bets
you would win 510.000 and lose 490.000 bets
wich means that you won 20.000 bets more than loses 20.000 x 0.001 = 20 bitcoins
There is no argument that would encourage a casino to use a nagative house edge after this post.
So I think everything has already been said after the seceond post in this thread...
Well after that post OP tried to break that strategy saying that the casino would not have an automatic betting system and the bets would be slow wich doesnt do anything but slow the process, whats mind blowing is how people voted that the casino would still win because people would be greedy, like it doesnt even matter as long as someone intelligent does that since he would be profiting forever.
Yeah, I finally made it... Read your post and seem to have understood it!
Since that post I significantly revised a casino strategy for the negative house edge, and, what is important, in respect to "the bets being slow which doesn't do anything but slow the process". In fact, now I suggest a changeable house edge (which would surely lure in new users), depending on either the betting speed or house profit (the latter was not my idea, with all due credit)...
If the house edge is negative just bet static bets, lets say 0.001 bets all the time
With a chance of 51% of win you would eventually reach that chance and for example in 1 million bets
you would win 510.000 and lose 490.000 bets
wich means that you won 20.000 bets more than loses 20.000 x 0.001 = 20 bitcoins
With a chance of 51% of win you would eventually reach that chance and for example in 1 million bets
you would win 510.000 and lose 490.000 bets
wich means that you won 20.000 bets more than loses 20.000 x 0.001 = 20 bitcoins
There is no argument that would encourage a casino to use a nagative house edge after this post.
So I think everything has already been said after the seceond post in this thread...
Well after that post OP tried to break that strategy saying that the casino would not have an automatic betting system and the bets would be slow wich doesnt do anything but slow the process, whats mind blowing is how people voted that the casino would still win because people would be greedy, like it doesnt even matter as long as someone intelligent does that since he would be profiting forever.
If the house edge is negative just bet static bets, lets say 0.001 bets all the time
With a chance of 51% of win you would eventually reach that chance and for example in 1 million bets
you would win 510.000 and lose 490.000 bets
wich means that you won 20.000 bets more than loses 20.000 x 0.001 = 20 bitcoins
With a chance of 51% of win you would eventually reach that chance and for example in 1 million bets
you would win 510.000 and lose 490.000 bets
wich means that you won 20.000 bets more than loses 20.000 x 0.001 = 20 bitcoins
There is no argument that would encourage a casino to use a nagative house edge after this post.
So I think everything has already been said after the seceond post in this thread...
I think negative house edge could be attractive to a lot of gamblers. A bit risky for the house... but could still be a profitable proposition based on player emotion/greed.
Say someone left a autobet on at 0.00001 all day or something, they would come out with money and house would lose.
I think negative house edge could be attractive to a lot of gamblers. A bit risky for the house... but could still be a profitable proposition based on player emotion/greed.
Wouldnt negative house edge still be a winning format anyways?
Since there are short falls for the player to eventually keep betting longer term.
Since there are short falls for the player to eventually keep betting longer term.
Yes I completely agree. The house edge could even be -5% for the casino and the casino will probably end up winning due to people being greedy, emotional, and fearful.
lol, negative house edge has no sense for me
The house edge from all casino games comes from making sure the payout and the odds of winning don't match. In roulette, if you bet on red you have less than 50% of winning (1 or 2 green numbers) but they pay you 1-1, which would be fair if you had a 50% chance of winning.
Same thing with dice sites, you pick the chances of winning, and they pay you less than what would be the "fair" or break even amount if you win.
Same thing with dice sites, you pick the chances of winning, and they pay you less than what would be the "fair" or break even amount if you win.
how would the casino supply constant payouts though, if it was a negative house edge?
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
It is very simple, the site just set your probability to win to make your EV always be (1- House edge %)*bet size.
For example if you are playing a x2 bet in a 0.5% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.75. (1-0.5% = 49.75%*2)
But if you are playing in a 1% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.5. (1-1% = 49.5%*2)
WTF, somehow I expected a good deal of black magic going underneath there! So it won't be difficult at all to calculate the house edge as a function of time that has passed since the last bet. Regarding bots playing from different IP addresses and things like that, this is exactly what many faucets are fighting with on a day-by-day basis...
So, if you want your IP address banned and money taken, you're welcome!
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
It is very simple, the site just set your probability to win to make your EV always be (1- House edge %)*bet size.
For example if you are playing a x2 bet in a 0.5% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.75. (1-0.5% = 49.75%*2)
But if you are playing in a 1% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.5. (1-1% = 49.5%*2)
WTF, somehow I expected a good deal of black magic going underneath there! Therefore it won't be difficult at all to calculate the house edge as a function of time that has passed since the last bet. Regarding bots playing from different IP addresses and things like that, this is exactly what many faucets are fighting with on a day-by-day basis...
So, if you want your IP address banned and money taken, you're welcome!
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
It is very simple, the site just set your probability to win to make your EV always be (1- House edge %)*bet size.
For example if you are playing a x2 bet in a 0.5% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.75. (1-0.5% = 49.75%*2)
But if you are playing in a 1% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.5. (1-1% = 49.5%*2)
Code:
double player_bankroll;
double bet;
int x = RNG(1,100);
if (x > 51) {
player_bankroll = player_bankroll + bet;
} else {
player_bankroll = player_bankroll - bet;
}
And I haven't touched this stuff in 2+ years (I wasn't very good to begin with) so if it's way off, don't blame me. RNG stands for random number generator, in this case from 1 to 100.
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
I don't know how the house edge is actually implemented at dice sites (anyone care to explain?)
-snip
It is very simple, the site just set your probability to win to make your EV always be (1- House edge %)*bet size.
For example if you are playing a x2 bet in a 0.5% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.75. (1-0.5% = 49.75%*2)
But if you are playing in a 1% edge site, you will win the bet if the roll is under 49.5. (1-1% = 49.5%*2)
Jump to: