I don't think anyone should post an offer is +EV unless they can back it up with some mathematics.

[etherz]

I don't think anyone should post an offer is +EV unless they can back it up with some mathematics.

Sorry the point I was trying to make is that if the OP does not know how betsize affects EV, how do we know that they know how to calculate the EV correctly? People may just assume what KK is saying is true, and pile into a -EV offer. I know that is not the case here, and people should be doing their own research anyway, but it could have been the case.

I always try to back up my arguments with an explanation/theory/reasoning where possible. I would never state an offer is +EV and then not explain why I thought that.

I would not state an offer is +EV in the title, especially if I had a financial interest in people signing up and depositing, KK would not have included his affiliate link if it was not +EV for him to do so.

The problem is, what happens when I post a thread about a casino with a 100xB post wager slots bonus and claim it is +EV?

[Andy]

I always try to back up my arguments with an explanation/theory/reasoning where possible. I would never state an offer is +EV and then not explain why I thought that.

No me neither. It is a good attitude and approach to have. You do not HAVE to though. Its up to you, sometimes people post an offer genuinely not knowing if it is +EV or not and are asking for advice on it. Thats just the way it is, you do not HAVE to post anything other than the offer itself if you dont want to.

The problem is, what happens when I post a thread about a casino with a 100xB post wager slots bonus and claim it is +EV?

If somebody choses to claim it is +EV, they can then explain why, we can then discuss it. It may be, it may not be, but we will find out with the explanation after. Basically if you want to make claims or not is up to you, IF you chose to, then prove it.

[KasinoKing]

Sorry the point I was trying to make is that if the OP does not know how betsize affects EV, how do we know that they know how to calculate the EV correctly? People may just assume what KK is saying is true, and pile into a -EV offer. I know that is not the case here, and people should be doing their own research anyway, but it could have been the case.

I always try to back up my arguments with an explanation/theory/reasoning where possible. I would never state an offer is +EV and then not explain why I thought that.

I honestly genuinely do not know how bet sizes on slots effects the EV, since the maximum bet you can place is only a tiny % of your total bankroll (about 0.3% in this particular case).
I'm still waiting for someone to explain this to me - can you?

Like you assumed I should know that, I assumed that players would know that a bonus with only x10 WR was +EV.
I did explain the maths (how I see it) in a post further down the thread:

It makes no difference whether you high-roll or low-roll; the maths is still the same, only the time taken is different;

The bonus was 150% with a WR of (D+B)x10.
So if you took the max, it would have been Deposit 500, get a 750 bonus = 1250.
WR of (D+B)x10 = 12,500
If you played the WR on a 96% RTP slot (which most Rival slots are) your expected loss would be 12,500 x 4% = 500
1250 - 500 = 750 = a 250 profit.

Mathematically the bonus was +EV to a value of 50% of your deposit.

Again, I believe that maths to be correct - if not, can someone explain why not to me?

KK would not have included his affiliate link if it was not +EV for him to do so.

I understand why you may think that - but I can assure you the exact opposite is true. I have only ever posted offers on this site (with or without affy links) which I think are +EV or at least, very generous offers. Players had a very good chance of profiting from this offer - just like the last similar offer I posted about Euro Casino where TGT members took the casino for €1,000s! (And I earned €0).
I usually put affy links in (when allowed); I'm an affiliate, that what we do.
Look at the Beating Bonuses site; all/most of the offers he lists are +EV for the player - but all the casino links have affy tags. That's the only way he can get paid for all the hard work he puts in.

KK

[etherz]

Again, I believe that maths to be correct - if not, can someone explain why not to me?

I disagree, I think it does change the EV, for various reasons along the lines of if you play bigger stakes you will bust out more often, over a lot of bonuses, meaning you only have to complete wagering on a fewer total bonus £s. This could go on and is actually better placed in the strategies section. But overall, in my opinion, and it is just that, it is not the same and stake size/strategy does make a difference.

One way of looking at it, is to play max spins, hoping for a big win, when you get a big win at max spins, the wr will be tiny in comparison to the win. You would then continue to wager at small stakes to minimise the variance. Whilst you are making these big spins, if you wager more than your deposit, and start making spins with the bonus money, you are taking advantage of the value in the bonus, effectively getting free spins.

I would be interested to hear other people's opinions here, although we are moving into the realms of Strategy Discussion...

[Landprofits]

.
I would be interested to hear other people's opinions here, although we are moving into the realms of Strategy Discussion...

My suggestion would be to start a thread in Casino Strategies perhaps? If this debate continues, any discussions relating to the strategy can be referred to that thread.

[bella]

Have moved this here to continue discussion....

[Gibber]

Got to say agree with KK, the maths was sound and the the offer was definitely +EV before the terms changed. Correct me if I'm wrong but the only thing increasing bet size does is increase your variance.

[Andy]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the only thing increasing bet size does is increase your variance.

Yes but that will reduce your total wagering. Say in £1000 of wagering at £1 a time you win £950, but that comes in a £500 win, a £100 win, some £50 wins, a £25 win, and loads under that. You have maybe deposited £100 and got a £100 bonus, you need to hit the £500 win in the first £200 of wagering, or you will bust out,you have twice the chance of doing that than if you had £100 in there though so it is value there. BUT how much value will depend on the wagering because every £1000 you wager you lose £50. Basically it is pretty likely you will still bust out after maybe 5x or 6x the wagering, some of the smaller wins will keep you in it, but you would slowly die still.

You do the above over 10 £100 for £100 bonuses all just slowly die away. Some might hit the £500 (or any bigger wins) consistantly/early enough not to die, but generally they will all slowly decline as the wagering eats it away.

Do the above but over the 10 offers play each £10 a spin. This time a much much larger % will bust out before the first £1000 is wagered, but those that do hit wont win £500 they win £5000! You have a balance of £5000 and on that 100/100 bonus the wagering will not be relatively high. On the 9 others you bust out, but you were always going to, this way just means you dont wager much getting there. Over the 10 offers, and £1000 of bonuses you are only really having to do the wagering on one. At that point with £5000 go and play cosmic cat or something similar low stakes to grind it out and keep the balance.

Thats the sort of idea/theory, I completely made those numbers up as an example, you could get exact payout distributions, total payouts, that sort of thing if you want to but there is not a huge amount of point, that is the theory, as you bust out more often your long run wagering is less, but bonus £s recieved the same, so as a ratio its lower, so more profit!

Beatingbonuses.com might be a good place to go. The owner (aka23 I think it is?) is incredibly good at maths/statistics and is quite helpfull too and would be able to explain it much better than I can.

It is for this reason Casinos limit how much can be placed on most games and even slots sometimes. They want small bets so you have to sit there recycling your balance and each time the house edge takes you down. If you can bet big, and condence the wagering, you will have enough to end in profit.

[Fella]

Regarding the +EV of an offer surely this is the case:


1) The +EV of any given slots offer of this type is identical whether you use small or large bets

BUT

2) From a holistic point of view, it is more +EV to place larger bets because you can do more offers.


In other words I think KK is correct & PER OFFER of this type the EV remains the same regardless of stake size.

However Andy's approach of a larger stake size would result in a greater return - but not because each offer has a greater +EV - but because it allows you to do more offers of this type & since each offer is +EV that increases your overall +EV.


(If that's not correct then I've badly misunderstood something somewhere....)

[Gibber]

Yes Andy I fully comprehend that but an offer of £100 bonus with £1000 WR is +ev if you do choose to grind at the start. In fact isn't that what most of us are playing to for the laddies offers if you discount the shite scratchcard/slot machine style offers fo the WR which return nowt anyway. 10xB is probably the max I'd ever play by just grinding anything over that I tend to bet big/attempt a double up if allowed. Based on a 96% HE then KK's figures are correct. Betting big can of course increase your EV for a single slot, however you will proportionately bust out more often which I think we are in agreement over.