Pages:
Author

Topic: Small negative house edge - page 4. (Read 6066 times)

legendary
Activity: 3514
Merit: 1280
English ⬄ Russian Translation Services
March 25, 2015, 04:22:22 AM
#70
the site will go bust in no time at all. You're talking a whole digit here. I've played a lot on dice sites and that house edge has usually played a big roll in anytime that I've busted.

Let's take a 1% house edge and a -1% house edge.

1% House Edge on 2x Multiplier:
Under: 49.5
Over: 50.5

-1% House Edge on 2x Multiplier:
Under 50.5
Over: 49.5

That's a whole 2 digit difference, a MASSIVE game changer for the players and casino owner.

Of course, the max profit could easily solve this, but even still it would be easy to spam 10000 bets on 2x and statistically you would be better off compared to the positive house edge.

It wouldn't work.

You seem to not have read the whole thread. We are talking about a small negative house edge. And small here means small as compared to a house edge we see at dice sites in the "wild" (in absolute terms of course). I have mentioned a few times already that I mean an edge in the range of 0.05-0.1% negative. Should I actually have written tiny instead of small?

And how are you going to easily spam 10000 bets if there is no auto-betting but time limits are set?
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 502
Circa 2010
March 25, 2015, 03:48:07 AM
#69
Wrong again in what, betting 1% of your bankroll is being safe, what is wrong about that

Wrong in stating the ideal bet would be 1% of one's bankroll.

Well betting 1 btc wont be a good strategy since you can encounter loses and lose all your bankroll unless you have a really big bankroll like 100 btc, the ideal would be to bet
1% of your bankroll to be safe and not die when a lose streak happens.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
March 25, 2015, 03:06:56 AM
#68
Unless the carsino is rich and win most of the time.. negative house edge seem impossible. If there is one which offer this.. I doubt anyone would join in.
yes i think same and its the matter of whose bankroll is bigger is able to take others generally.
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1001
Personal Text Space Not For Sale
March 25, 2015, 02:49:14 AM
#67
Unless the carsino is rich and win most of the time.. negative house edge seem impossible. If there is one which offer this.. I doubt anyone would join in.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
March 25, 2015, 02:49:01 AM
#66
People mostly loose because of their high winning greed, negative house edge is a new idea even then i think people will loose.
hero member
Activity: 1064
Merit: 505
March 25, 2015, 02:48:49 AM
#65
Well betting 1 btc wont be a good strategy since you can encounter loses and lose all your bankroll unless you have a really big bankroll like 100 btc, the ideal would be to bet
1% of your bankroll to be safe and not die when a lose streak happens.

Wrong again.

The best amount to bet as a % of your bankroll would be based on the Kelly Criterion - which is in turn based on how large your edge is.

Man, with the amount of misinformation and foolishness around I should start a dice site - I see why Stunna keeps upgrading his service - he's raking it in.

Wrong again in what, betting 1% of your bankroll is being safe, what is wrong about that
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 502
Circa 2010
March 25, 2015, 02:47:10 AM
#64
Well betting 1 btc wont be a good strategy since you can encounter loses and lose all your bankroll unless you have a really big bankroll like 100 btc, the ideal would be to bet
1% of your bankroll to be safe and not die when a lose streak happens.

Wrong again.

The best amount to bet as a % of your bankroll would be based on the Kelly Criterion - which is in turn based on how large your edge is.

Man, with the amount of misinformation and foolishness around I should start a dice site - I see why Stunna keeps upgrading his service - he's raking it in.
hero member
Activity: 1064
Merit: 505
March 25, 2015, 02:44:38 AM
#63
I'm not sure if my theory is right but I believe you should eventually profit. If you bet at 50% you will have 49-100 to win. If you roll 100 times on average you should win more than 50%. Therefore if you bet 1BTC at 50% on 100 times, you should win 51 times and lose 49 times. Therefore it's a profit.

Well betting 1 btc wont be a good strategy since you can encounter loses and lose all your bankroll unless you have a really big bankroll like 100 btc, the ideal would be to bet
1% of your bankroll to be safe and not die when a lose streak happens.
hero member
Activity: 826
Merit: 1000
March 25, 2015, 02:38:35 AM
#62
I'm not sure if my theory is right but I believe you should eventually profit. If you bet at 50% you will have 49-100 to win. If you roll 100 times on average you should win more than 50%. Therefore if you bet 1BTC at 50% on 100 times, you should win 51 times and lose 49 times. Therefore it's a profit.
hero member
Activity: 742
Merit: 502
Circa 2010
March 25, 2015, 02:33:47 AM
#61
According to what I learned, the users will lose in the end, assuming bankroll of player < house and there is a max bet limit.

The player will go on playing till he lose everything.             

I'm going to respond to this specific post - but anyone claiming that the users will lose in the long term with them having an "edge" against the house (assuming they are fair) doesn't understand basic probability.

First off, what is the long run?

When people refer to the long run - they might think 1 million events is long, maybe even 1 billion. Not so, long run means literally the largest number you could ever possibly think of (and yet still bigger than that) - better to think of it as infinity. Now the Law of Large Numbers - which has been proven both mathematically, logically and through modelling - means that as you approach an infinite number of events their outcomes will converge to statistical expectation.

Now, as a player in reality cannot play to infinite games - they will face a degree of variance. Variance is what causes random streaks of wins and losses - not random voodoo skill. This variance should decline as they play more and more games - eventually with enough games (enough being effectively infinity) they should come out ahead if they have a positive EV.

Hence, theoretically across a large number of events - an operator who offers +EV for their userbase can expect to lose money over time - although they could be extremely lucky and make a profit due to variance. But this variance WILL DECREASE, meaning with enough events the users can expect to profit.

This is the basis of why no casino/gambling site will ever offer +EV to users permanently (possibly short term to entice customers or they're rigged).
hero member
Activity: 1064
Merit: 505
March 25, 2015, 01:29:42 AM
#60
It is accepted by most here that a positive house edge will ultimately wipe out your deposit (rather sooner than later). But we could try to look at this issue from another angle. That is, whether the house is predetermined to lose in the long run if it had a negative house edge? As I see it, a positive house edge doesn't guarantee per se that a casino won't suffer heavy losses, but why should it necessarily suffer them if it had a small negative edge (to attract new users)? In other words, how long will it take till we see a casino claiming just that?

I've never seen a mention of the negative house edge here, so I decided to create a new topic on this issue (and added a poll)

According to what I learned, the users will lose in the end, assuming bankroll of player < house and there is a max bet limit.

The player will go on playing till he lose everything.             

What if the player are just flat betting, say 1% of his bitcoin, over and over again? He will win 50.5% of the x2 bets and lose 49.5% only.
While he may have bad luck to have more loses than wins in the short term, it is not easy for him to lose everything with flat betting.

Yes thats exactly what i said its pretty much impossible to lose it on flat betting if you adjust your bankroll and after a few thousand bets the odds must equal to 49.5 and 50.5
hero member
Activity: 574
Merit: 500
March 25, 2015, 12:43:37 AM
#59
the site will go bust in no time at all. You're talking a whole digit here. I've played a lot on dice sites and that house edge has usually played a big roll in anytime that I've busted.

Let's take a 1% house edge and a -1% house edge.

1% House Edge on 2x Multiplier:
Under: 49.5
Over: 50.5

-1% House Edge on 2x Multiplier:
Under 50.5
Over: 49.5

That's a whole 2 digit difference, a MASSIVE game changer for the players and casino owner.

Of course, the max profit could easily solve this, but even still it would be easy to spam 10000 bets on 2x and statistically you would be better off compared to the positive house edge.

It wouldn't work.
sr. member
Activity: 379
Merit: 251
March 25, 2015, 12:35:19 AM
#58
I think that with a negative house edge you can still win money from the people that go all or nothing crazy like me Tongue
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 1000
March 24, 2015, 11:57:27 PM
#57
There are some kinds of video poker have over 100% return, so you may try them.

But the figures are theoretical, when you play real money, you are very hardly to get Str8 flush or royal flush, so the actual return are lower than the theoretical returns(over 100%)

check out:  http://wizardofodds.com/pdf/video-poker-cheat-sheet.pdf

Double Bonus
Royal flush 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800
Straight flush 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
4 aces 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160 160
4 2s-4s 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80 80
4 5s-Ks 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
Full house 10 9 10 9 9 9 8 9 7
Flush 7 7 7 6 7 6 6 5 5
Straight 5 5 4 5 4 4 5 4 4
3 of a kind 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Two pair 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Jacks or better 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Total 100.17%  99.11% 98.81% 97.81% 97.74% 96.38% 96.23% 95.27% 93.11%

Deuces Wild
 
Natural royal flush 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800
Four deuces 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Wild royal flush 25 25 25 25 20 25 20 20 25 20 25
Five of a kind 15 15 16 15 12 15 12 12 16 10 15
Straight flush 9 11 10 10 9 9 10 9 13 8 10
Four of a kind 5 4 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 4 4
Full house 3 4 4 4 3 4 4 4 3 4 3
Flush 2 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 2 3 2
Straight 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Three of a kind 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Total 100.76% 99.96% 99.73% 99.42% 98.94% 98.91% 97.58% 97.06% 96.77% 95.96% 94.82%

Joker Poker (kings or better)
 
Natural royal flush 800 800 940 800 940 800 800
Five of a kind 200 200 200 200 200 200 200
Wild royal flush 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Straight flush 50 50 50 50 50 50 40
Four of a kind 20 18 17 17 15 15 20
Full house 7 7 7 7 7 7 5
Flush 5 5 5 5 5 5 4
Straight 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Three of a kind 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Two pair 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Kings or better 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Total 100.65%  98.94% 98.44% 98.09% 96.74% 96.38% 95.46%
legendary
Activity: 2422
Merit: 1451
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
March 24, 2015, 11:37:11 PM
#56
Didn't read anything past the first page, but this is simply not going to work.

If such a casino was made, a person/people with huge bankrolls will easily just come, bid say 10btc per game until they take out all of the money the casino has. The casino wouldn't even last a day.

Besides, as a gambler, you can't really "feel" the difference between winning 49.5% of the time or winning 50.5% of the time. Most people would probably just pass it off as a scam.

So it obviously won't work.

Look at the example of moneypot. You can overcome the house edge of 0.5% if you play smartly.  But the website is still in profit as we speak and it's been running for quite some time.

Nope. I just went to their website and read it. If you're a single player, you can't overcome the house edge. Only if you're playing with other people, but then only you can overcome it for yourself. The rest of the players will not be able to. Thus it's not really a "negative house edge". It's still positive.

Well it's not like you can leave a bot running there and beat the house on the long run.

But there's always people betting there at all times. There are times that the stakes aren't that high due to low activity and putting on a competitive bet to get good bonuses is perfectly possible. It's also not just a single person per turn that beats the 0.5% edge. By adapting bets smartly each round, you can receive a bonus that put out the house's 0.5% edge.
sr. member
Activity: 322
Merit: 250
March 24, 2015, 11:27:21 PM
#55
Didn't read anything past the first page, but this is simply not going to work.

If such a casino was made, a person/people with huge bankrolls will easily just come, bid say 10btc per game until they take out all of the money the casino has. The casino wouldn't even last a day.

Besides, as a gambler, you can't really "feel" the difference between winning 49.5% of the time or winning 50.5% of the time. Most people would probably just pass it off as a scam.

So it obviously won't work.

Look at the example of moneypot. You can overcome the house edge of 0.5% if you play smartly.  But the website is still in profit as we speak and it's been running for quite some time.

Nope. I just went to their website and read it. If you're a single player, you can't overcome the house edge. Only if you're playing with other people, but then only you can overcome it for yourself. The rest of the players will not be able to. Thus it's not really a "negative house edge". It's still positive.
legendary
Activity: 2422
Merit: 1451
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
March 24, 2015, 08:13:04 PM
#54
Look at the example of moneypot. You can overcome the house edge of 0.5% if you play smartly.  But the website is still in profit as we speak and it's been running for quite some time.
legendary
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1001
March 24, 2015, 08:12:25 PM
#53
Negative house edge is very risky for a casino, at least if it's done for all players. It means an unlimited giveaway, even if the time and bet size are limited, because too many people (and multi-accounters, and bots!) can go there and do too many bets, and as a result losses of a casino may be unpredictable. For casino it's much better to give fixed bonuses or limit the number of participants of a promotion, then it won't be so risky for a casino.

Depending how high they give player advantage than yes it could be risky. Having a promotional period for it would be a good idea though imo. A good way to attract new customers to your casino. Especially something like dice sites which already saturate the Bitcoin gambling market.
legendary
Activity: 3192
Merit: 1279
Primedice.com, Stake.com
March 24, 2015, 07:56:56 PM
#52
It is almost impossible to make money with a negative house edge over any significant period of time. It's basically just a free giveaway. I don't think a 0.1-0.4% edge is sustainable either unless you have a very low max bet and no or very low operational costs.
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
March 24, 2015, 07:38:01 PM
#51
What you don't understand is:

Gambling is for fun, not making money.

Get that in your head.
Pages:
Jump to: