

well, i would grind it out at bj, but if you can arb it out somewhere that would be fine also. But to do this you would be depositing 100 to get 100 so 200. SO you would have to bet 200 at another book to arb it out. SO you would need at least a 1500 bankroll or higher to do this in case the betruss side wins a couple of the arbs.

I will probably do this in the casino, just because I have not for so long. But I think I will be betting it all on the first hand, so that its quicker for me. If you do that with all 100% cashable bonuses the EV is the same (slightly higher actually) it just saves time, you will make twice as much at half as many.
Have a plan and stick to it

well, he is US so taking the sticky approach on just one casino is not +ev as much, to do the sticky approach, you really should have 10 or more casinos you can do. Otherwise, you are taking a big risk. More than usual.

Senior Member
yea, you have to accept the risk of variance and go the black jack route. unless you are alright tailing and capping and having the majority if not all of your bankroll in the bonus book... in this case i would not be alright with that.

Yes sorry I didnt mean to be blase about it, its risky and there is nothing to stop you losing 5,6,7 in a row which is bye bye quite big $s. The theory though is.....
IF you get a $100 100% bonus, and can grind it out at $2 a hand in 4 hours, and maybe average withdrawing $180 for $80 profit, you can do that everytime. BUT it takes hours for $80.
IF you assume you will win half of the first bets you place, if everytime you do it you put the full $200 on one hand, when you lose its $100 but when you win you are a balance of $400 which is +$300. You then finish the wagering at $2 (slightly less wagering as you just did $200!) and end on $380, so thats +$280.
Over the two casinos you have $100 and +$280 so +$180 overall which is +$90 a casino and you only wagered for 4 hours not 8 as the one casino was over in one hand.
Hope that makes sense!
Have a plan and stick to it

Senior Member
Originally Posted by Andy
Yes sorry I didnt mean to be blase about it, its risky and there is nothing to stop you losing 5,6,7 in a row which is bye bye quite big . The theory though is.....
IF you get a $100 100% bonus, and can grind it out at $2 a hand in 4 hours, and maybe average withdrawing $180 for $80 profit, you can do that everytime. BUT it takes hours for $80.
IF you assume you will win half of the first bets you place, if everytime you do it you put the full $200 on one hand, when you lose its $100 but when you win you are a balance of $400 which is +$300. You then finish the wagering at $2 (slightly less wagering as you just did $200!) and end on $380, so thats +$280.
Over the two casinos you have $100 and +$280 so +$180 overall which is +$90 a casino and you only wagered for 4 hours not 8 as the one casino was over in one hand.
Hope that makes sense!
makes perfect sense... just not enough options for us americans any more to absorb the variance.

Senior Member
Originally Posted by Andy
IF you assume you will win half of the first bets you place,
If playing BJ for one hand you will not win half of the first bets placed. Playing perfect Basic Strategy the player will only win around 45% of the hands. The difference is made up by correctly taking the double downs and splits plus getting 3 to 2 on BJs. If it is allowed you would be much better off playing baccarat. Either player hand (49.3%) or bank hand (50.7% minus the fee). I would play the bank hand to maximize the number of first hand wins.

Senior Member
Good stuff Ron but do they allow baccarat for wagering requirements? I guess it wouldn't matter since u doubled up your bankroll but it wouldn't hurt either to knock out a good chunk of the wagering requirements if it went your way on the first hand!

Senior Member
Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads
 You may not post replies
 You may not post attachments
 You may not edit your posts

Forum Rules
