Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Internet Gambling > Internet Bonuses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-24-2005, 02:17 PM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

[ QUOTE ]
You're wrong.

When you bust before meeting WR, you reduce the HA because you wagered less.

Less HA = +EV

[/ QUOTE ]

You didn't read my post. I understand this. But the chance of you busting out is always there, whether or not you actually do bust out. Meaning to properly calculate EV, you should do it before you actually bust out or not. Doing it once you bust out is just results oriented.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-24-2005, 02:18 PM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You're wrong.

When you bust before meeting WR, you reduce the HA because you wagered less.

Less HA = +EV

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

You also should reread my post. I'm not disputing that the chance of busting out increases your EV, just the way your analyzing it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-24-2005, 02:20 PM
cassette cassette is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 30
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

You can't accuratley determine EV until you are finished playing. Your initial assesment is just an approximation.

EV is directly related to the number of hands you play.

< hands = > EV.

Or at least this is how I understand it.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-24-2005, 02:33 PM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

[ QUOTE ]
You can't accuratley determine EV until you are finished playing. Your initial assesment is just an approximation.

EV is directly related to the number of hands you play.

< hands = > EV.

Or at least this is how I understand it.

[/ QUOTE ]

EV is expected value, not value. I'm not disagreeing that increasing your bet size will increase your variance, increase your CHANCE of busting out, and therefore increase your expected value. It will, and this therefore means that betting higher will have a slight +EV effect. However, actually busting does nothing to your expected value, that has already been calculated. All it is is you experiencing one possible outcome to playing with higher variance. The difference between what I'm saying and what you're saying is subtle, but true; and therefore means that there is no reason to celebrate when busting out.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-24-2005, 02:36 PM
Sniper Sniper is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 704
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

[ QUOTE ]
You can't accuratley determine EV until you are finished playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh boy, do you have to hit the books...

EV = Expected Value

expected
adj 1: considered likely or probable to happen or arrive
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-24-2005, 03:37 PM
cassette cassette is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 30
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't accuratley determine EV until you are finished playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh boy, do you have to hit the books...

EV = Expected Value

expected
adj 1: considered likely or probable to happen or arrive

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm maybe going out on a bit of a limb here, but I would like to argue that in the long run EV is actually so close to EXPECTED VALUE that for all intents and purposes, it is VALUE.

Let's try to summarize a serious bonus hunter's career:

Over a few years something like this might be reasonable:
500 casinos with an average bonus of 100/100/3000

So: EV = 500*100 - (1 500 000 *.0040) = $44 000

This assumes that you never bust a bonus. When you do bust a bonus you are effectively reducing the WR, which reduces the HA.

Let's say you bust half of your bonuses half way through the WR:

So: EV = [250*100 – (750 000 * .0040) ] + [250*100 – ( 375 000 * .0040)] = 22 000 + 23 050 = $45 050

Regardless of bet size, if you do not bust bonuses you will have less money at the end of the day because you are paying more “rake” in the form of HA. Is this flawed thinking?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-24-2005, 03:49 PM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You can't accuratley determine EV until you are finished playing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh boy, do you have to hit the books...

EV = Expected Value

expected
adj 1: considered likely or probable to happen or arrive

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm maybe going out on a bit of a limb here, but I would like to argue that in the long run EV is actually so close to EXPECTED VALUE that for all intents and purposes, it is VALUE.

Let's try to summarize a serious bonus hunter's career:

Over a few years something like this might be reasonable:
500 casinos with an average bonus of 100/100/3000

So: EV = 500*100 - (1 500 000 *.0040) = $44 000

This assumes that you never bust a bonus. When you do bust a bonus you are effectively reducing the WR, which reduces the HA.

Let's say you bust half of your bonuses half way through the WR:

So: EV = [250*100 – (750 000 * .0040) ] + [250*100 – ( 375 000 * .0040)] = 22 000 + 23 050 = $45 050

Regardless of bet size, if you do not bust bonuses you will have less money at the end of the day because you are paying more “rake” in the form of HA. Is this flawed thinking?

[/ QUOTE ]

You've just made my point for me. You did an EV equation based upon the (correct) analysis that you will bust out more often if you increase your bet size, thus increasing your EV. Notice, you did this formula without actually busting out. Actually busting out has no effect on the Expected value, only the fact that you are more LIKELY to bust out has an effect on expected value.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-24-2005, 04:01 PM
cassette cassette is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 30
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

No matter how likely you are to bust out, if you never do your profits will be the first figure. If you bust out half the time your profits will be the second.

This is starting to sound pretty convoluted. But I think that increasing bet size increases your likelyhood of busting out, which in turn increases EV when you do bust out. Increased bet size is the catalyst but not the independent variable responsible.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-24-2005, 04:58 PM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

[ QUOTE ]
which in turn increases EV when you do bust out

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right about everything except for that statement above. I really can't argue the same point anymore except to say, as I already have, that it is Expected Value. It refers to a value based on an uncertain outcome. Once you bust out, you already know the outcome, there no longer is any expected value, there is just value. Look at it this way, I assume that you are familiar with the gambler's fallacy that past results can determine future outcomes. That is essentially what you are trying to do here. Once you bust out, the event has already happenned, it doesn't increase your Expected Value for future casino whoring because past results do not affect future outcomes, and it can't change the expected value for what you have already done, because I can't stress this enough, results are irrelevant in EV calculations.
Your argument would be analagous to arguing that hitting your flush on the river increased the EV of the hand, on the flop and turn, because you don't look at the hand till it completes. This is simply not how expected value works. You are being results oriented.

Edit: I'm definitely not the best person to explain this, and this probably isn't the best forum where other people who might be able to explain it better than me frequent. I'll cross-post it to the probability forum when I get a chance, they can certainly explain it better.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-24-2005, 05:10 PM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: non-sticky casino bonus question

Ok, I x-posted this to the probability forum HERE we'll let them sort it out.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.