Topic: Would you play 10% for 3 round or 30% for 1 round? - page 2. (Read 530 times)
It is totally different 10% chance you will lose more than you will win but 10% chance would be 9.9 multiplier amd 30% would be 3.3 multiplier. For 10% you can gamble 10 times and if you win one time you can get your moneyback for 3.3 you will have 3 chances to get your profit back. I wouls choose 10% as i get more chacnes and when i had gamble with 1% in 100 chances i always won once
If you have $30
10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
If the 10% rewards its less risk and 30% is high risk i think much better to choose 10% rewards since its gives you with less risk..10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
And i don't want to bet in 30% if the risk is high.. just like other gamblers who are betting slowly and they are not betting in high risk..
If you have a good strategy with 30% it will be the same result. so better to bet in 10% because the rewards is high and less risk..
I would rather play 10% for 3 rounds than 30% for one round round. I personally use this method when i gamble on sports because it's the safest and it's really working for me.
i would rather choose 30% reward = $10 because this is good options and 10% doesn't good looks good for me although all chance still depend on my luck but at least 30% will makes me last long in the game
I prefer to try my luck thrice rather than trying only with one shoot although the prize is higher if you go all in for one spin. I prefer to have 3 spins as I have about 66% more chances to win rather than to spin only once at max bet. Courage is for the bold they say but bolds never have won in slot machines until now (I mean a really big prize like a mega jackpot) while people who divide their bankroll have won even big prizes like jackpots.
If you have $30
10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
10% chance to win 2.66X or 30% chance to win 1.33X?10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
It's like stealing money IMO
How about option 3) Non of them?
If you have $30
10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
I would definitely choose to bet on 30%.10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
Although the chance to win the same but you must remember you have a chance 3 times because you have a capital of $ 30, indeed there is no guarantee to win but at least you do not lose money for one chance only.
I'm going to assume that you did not get the numbers wrong here. Assuming your reward is profit. If so, then:
1. The reward for 10% does not match the risk. For a $10 wager at 10% chance, you should get roughly $80 profit (minus wager), depending on house edge.
2. The reward for 30% chance on a $30 wager should get you roughly $60 profit (minus wager).
So, Option 1 pays out $50/$80 = 0.625,
Option 2 pays out $10/$60=0.166.
To sum it up, both options you have give you really bad deals. Extremely high house edge? But the option with the least disadvantage is Option 1.
Nice calculation and i would really go into the option 1 since the disadvantage is really least than on the second one. House edge would really be bust this things out thats why no matter which way you would go results wont really be guaranteed. Option 1 is high risk since the chance was low but once you hit it,it will surely pay up minus with the HE. 1. The reward for 10% does not match the risk. For a $10 wager at 10% chance, you should get roughly $80 profit (minus wager), depending on house edge.
2. The reward for 30% chance on a $30 wager should get you roughly $60 profit (minus wager).
So, Option 1 pays out $50/$80 = 0.625,
Option 2 pays out $10/$60=0.166.
To sum it up, both options you have give you really bad deals. Extremely high house edge? But the option with the least disadvantage is Option 1.
I don't get it why is the reward so low if you have $30 split then it in to 3 rounds then you'll have $10 per bet the reward should be at $100 or am i missing something there. Both sounds like a bad deal but if I had the choice it would be the 10% because risking to win 33% of your money by going all in is not a good idea.
Yeah i just made up the numbers xd
If you were to bet, would you play low risk low reward or high risk high reward? Perhaps if we have 100%, what would be your optimal % for it?
I prefer high risk high reward because thus you risk smaller amount. If you are lucky you win and it's a real pleasure to get high reward. And when you lose, you don't lose much. In other words, if you bet 1k satoshis with 0.1% win chance you get almost 0.01 BTC in case of winning and in case of losing you lose just 1k sats.
If you have $30
10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
A better choice is to bet 30% for only one round. But in this situation, your percentages and your profits is not match, 10% on 30$ should have the profit of more than 250$, with 30% to win, the profit should be more than 50$. It's waste of time trying to bet with this shit 10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
) 
I'm going to assume that you did not get the numbers wrong here. Assuming your reward is profit. If so, then:
1. The reward for 10% does not match the risk. For a $10 wager at 10% chance, you should get roughly $80 profit (minus wager), depending on house edge.
2. The reward for 30% chance on a $30 wager should get you roughly $60 profit (minus wager).
So, Option 1 pays out $50/$80 = 0.625,
Option 2 pays out $10/$60=0.166.
To sum it up, both options you have give you really bad deals. Extremely high house edge? But the option with the least disadvantage is Option 1.
1. The reward for 10% does not match the risk. For a $10 wager at 10% chance, you should get roughly $80 profit (minus wager), depending on house edge.
2. The reward for 30% chance on a $30 wager should get you roughly $60 profit (minus wager).
So, Option 1 pays out $50/$80 = 0.625,
Option 2 pays out $10/$60=0.166.
To sum it up, both options you have give you really bad deals. Extremely high house edge? But the option with the least disadvantage is Option 1.
I don't get it why is the reward so low if you have $30 split then it in to 3 rounds then you'll have $10 per bet the reward should be at $100 or am i missing something there. Both sounds like a bad deal but if I had the choice it would be the 10% because risking to win 33% of your money by going all in is not a good idea.
Yeah i just made up the numbers xd
If you were to bet, would you play low risk low reward or high risk high reward? Perhaps if we have 100%, what would be your optimal % for it?
I don't get it why is the reward so low if you have $30 split then it in to 3 rounds then you'll have $10 per bet the reward should be at $100 or am i missing something there. Both sounds like a bad deal but if I had the choice it would be the 10% because risking to win 33% of your money by going all in is not a good idea.
If you have $30
10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
10% reward = $50
30% reward = $10
1) Which would you do?
2) Is the chance of 10% x 3 and 30% same? If it is different, which one would be a better choice?
Jump to: