|
|
|
|
#1
11-27-2005, 03:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Bet your whole deposit on a single bet. Let's ignore the 3/2 payout for BJ and assume that I win 49% of the time (this MORE than accounts for the loss due to not being able to double or split)... [/ QUOTE ] Actually it doesn't, that is the problem with your calculation. [/ QUOTE ] Just went to verify my numbers. I mis-remembered things slightly -- the 2% number is what no-double/no-split costs you (actually 1.91%), not the total house edge. So the total house edge ends up being 2.35%. But even with this HA, the rebate is a +EV situation for a single bet. 48.825% of the time you double up; 51.175% of the time, you end up with 10% of your bet. The EV is +$2.76. So despite all your protest to the contrary, a 10% rebate is a +EV offer. Acme 
|
|
#2
11-27-2005, 04:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
So despite all your protest to the contrary, a 10% rebate is a +EV offer. [/ QUOTE ] And despite all your calculations the only thing I can agree with is that getting 10% of your losses back makes it less -EV but never +EV. After all if you end up losing money on your session you still lost. How can losing ever be +EV without a jackpot? Jimbo
|
|
#3
11-27-2005, 04:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So despite all your protest to the contrary, a 10% rebate is a +EV offer. [/ QUOTE ] And despite all your calculations the only thing I can agree with is that getting 10% of your losses back makes it less -EV but never +EV. After all if you end up losing money on your session you still lost. How can losing ever be +EV without a jackpot? Jimbo [/ QUOTE ] OMG...you must be kidding me. Nobody can have >3000 posts here and be this ignorant...so I am going to assume you are just a worthless troll and ignore you going forward... Acme
|
|
#4
11-27-2005, 06:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So despite all your protest to the contrary, a 10% rebate is a +EV offer. [/ QUOTE ] And despite all your calculations the only thing I can agree with is that getting 10% of your losses back makes it less -EV but never +EV. After all if you end up losing money on your session you still lost. How can losing ever be +EV without a jackpot? Jimbo [/ QUOTE ] OMG...you must be kidding me. Nobody can have >3000 posts here and be this ignorant...so I am going to assume you are just a worthless troll and ignore you going forward... Acme [/ QUOTE ] Very nice, you cannot refute my logical argument so you resort to name calling. I expected better but alas I am often disappointed. Godd luck getting rich on your new +EV blackjack system. May I have an autographed copy of your book after it goes to print? Jimbo
|
|
#5
11-27-2005, 08:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] So despite all your protest to the contrary, a 10% rebate is a +EV offer. [/ QUOTE ] And despite all your calculations the only thing I can agree with is that getting 10% of your losses back makes it less -EV but never +EV. After all if you end up losing money on your session you still lost. How can losing ever be +EV without a jackpot? Jimbo [/ QUOTE ] OMG...you must be kidding me. Nobody can have >3000 posts here and be this ignorant...so I am going to assume you are just a worthless troll and ignore you going forward... Acme [/ QUOTE ] Very nice, you cannot refute my logical argument so you resort to name calling. I expected better but alas I am often disappointed. Godd luck getting rich on your new +EV blackjack system. May I have an autographed copy of your book after it goes to print? Jimbo [/ QUOTE ] When you present a logical argument, I will refute it. Until then, I will continue to assume you are a troll. All you have said is that losing cannot be +EV. I have presented the way it is +EV, but all you say (over and over ad nauseum) is that if you lose, you only get back 10% of your bet, so it cannot be +EV. If you will not accept the math, you are either ignorant or a troll...and thus, I will not waste another second on you... Acme
|
|
#6
11-27-2005, 08:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
If you will not accept the math.... [/ QUOTE ] How you cannot understand that your math is flawed is beyond me. What is so hard to understand about the refund? You are becoming quite stubborn and displaying it and your ignorance for all to see. Jimbo
|
|
#7
11-27-2005, 09:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
Yawn...
|
|
#8
11-27-2005, 05:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So despite all your protest to the contrary, a 10% rebate is a +EV offer. [/ QUOTE ] And despite all your calculations the only thing I can agree with is that getting 10% of your losses back makes it less -EV but never +EV. After all if you end up losing money on your session you still lost. How can losing ever be +EV without a jackpot? Jimbo [/ QUOTE ] So I offer to flip a coin with you, and if you lose you pay me $95, and if you win, I'll pay you $100. If you lose, you lost $95. Does that mean it wasn't a +EV situation?
|
|
#9
11-27-2005, 06:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
This problem is a tricky one. "Bet it all at once and it's +ev" was the first thing that occurred to me too. Ok, say you bet $100 and lose. If you really think the proposition is +ev, nothing has changed. You still have exactly the same proposition. Why not make another bet if that proposition was +ev. The fact that you have already done it once cannot matter to whether doing it now makes sense. So, while I can't quite wrap my brain around it, I'm in the -ev camp on this one.
Let's imagine that the rebate on losses is 90%. This suddenly seems like a fantastic deal. Is it? I can easily imagine people bankrupting themselves trying martingales on this. Anyway, I'm curious to see the definitive math on this. One other consideration here is that Total Bet has a monthy casino bonus: I forget what the wagering req is, but if nothing else, this deal should increase the ev of clearing that bonus.
|
|
#10
11-27-2005, 06:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 10% refund question
[ QUOTE ]
This problem is a tricky one. "Bet it all at once and it's +ev" was the first thing that occurred to me too. Ok, say you bet $100 and lose. If you really think the proposition is +ev, nothing has changed. You still have exactly the same proposition. Why not make another bet if that proposition was +ev. The fact that you have already done it once cannot matter to whether doing it now makes sense. So, while I can't quite wrap my brain around it, I'm in the -ev camp on this one. [/ QUOTE ] The reason you can't keep making bets is because the refund if for the net result of all of your play. You don't get to play one hand, get a 10% refund, then play another. You don't get the refund on a per-hand basis, but only at the end of the qualifying period of time. Back to your example, say you lost a hand, and decide to do it again, and now win a hand, you LOSE that 10% rebate that you were lined up to receive after the first hand, since you are not at a net loss now.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
