Hello guys,
I have an offer of 20% cashback on roulette 500X - you know that strange thing with multipliers. It is advertised as returning more RTP than regular European roulette, but it really does not matter for a moment. The offer is - 20% cashback on NET Loses Up to 1000 EUR for a particular week (defined period).
So I have been thinking - making just one bet per week with 500EUR on black/red. According to the probability theory I have a 18/37 chance of winning 1000 (500 wager + 500 profit) and 19/37 chance of losing 500. It seems that I have a positive EV:
0.4865 * 500 - (0.5135 * 400) = 242.25 - 205.4 = +36.85 EUR or 7.37% ROI
400, because if I lose - 500 I get 100 back (20%). Lets asume that this 100 refund is straight cash (does not matter because I can easily bet it on roulette with minimal cut).
Do I get it right. I know it seems counterintuitive, but that is the math part. Yes there is psychology. Yes I can do it - i mena place just one bet.
Is there any "optimal" strategy exploiting cashback on Roulette/blackjack/ table games. What If I play the game 6 more periods / 6 more times?
Thank you for the help
Roulette Cashback 20%
-
Sandica9
- Has experience
- Karma: 7
Post
Re: Roulette Cashback 20%
The best strategy here is to bet only 1 number. So in the long run you will get 36 out of 37 times the 1000 cashback and 1 out of 37 times 180k for a 16.75% profit. Of course it's too risky not only because of the variance alone but because of the possibility of a non-payment from the casino.
- Tonton
- Gaining experience
- Karma: 6
Post
In order to win this particular roulette game/promotion (and any other game) I have to survive to the end. In order to finish first, you have to first finish. Yes, on paper it is awesome - huge +EV. But deep in my stomach I have this feeling - yikes - no way I bet 100 EUR on a single number. I am pretty sure I will lose so much money first, before EV materialize. I will go broke FIRST. And here is the problem - I can't continue if I am broke.
It is not about the Arithmetic Averages, it is the Ensambles averages (Geometric Return).
The development of bank over time playing this particular game will be just one (of the many possible). I may go broke, or I may survive and win, nobody knows. I know for sure that I won't bet 100 EUR on a single number, even though I may have a bank of 20 000 EUR as a backing. 80-10 rolls without a win and everyone's head gets messed up. What about 200 times? No way, too risky (at least for me)
The original idea comes form Daniel Bernoulli, who also found an answer to the St. Petersburg paradox.
So how it looks when applied to the roulette table? Initial bank - 10 000 EUR, Cashback - 10% (ten per cent) Initial Wager - vary, depends, I don't know why, and how to calculate it I just find the OPTIMAL for each payout (Single, Black/red, 6 numbers, Dozen/column) manually adjusting it on Excel. If anyone knows how to find/calculate it - please do share.
The goal is to maximize Geometric Mean, not the Arithmetic Mean (how we calculate EV of bets). Which means the CAGR of the bank/investment, because that is important! To finish the game (which is Infinite) with as much money as possible at the end. Sometimes - these two are at conflict - maximizing Arithmetic means - sacrificing CAGR (even going broke).
1. Single number (35:1). Optimal wager: 0.0022 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0076%
2. Black/Red; Odd/Even (1:1) - Optimal wager: 0.027 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0329%
3. Column/Dozen (2:1) - Optimal wager: 0.023 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0453%
4. Six Numbers (5:1) - Optimal wager: 0.013 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0352%
It seems that there is a clear winner (for this particular variables) in order which type/payout when deciding. It is playing the game with 2:1 payout. I was stunned initially, all these ideas/calculations are so counter intuitive. I had to check them 2 days to be sure what I am writing here.
I want to be clear - I don't suggest - play the game/roulette, no. All I am saying is that there is an optimal solution to most of the financial decisions we make. We always have to balance Risk and Rewards. Shall I hedge my bet? Investments? It depends on so many factors one of which is our personal situation (wealth/well being/risk tolerance etc). There is no ONE SIZE FITS ALL here - for me is a huge no 100 EUR on a single number, but there are people who could pull that off.
Re: Roulette Cashback 20%
I had the time these days, and started again with the idea and its development. There are some funny stuff, for sure. I think this idea is extremely important for all of us, gamblers, investors etc. It is called ergodicity. I have just checked, no mention in the forum about it. Ole Peters is writing on it, Nassim Taleb is also a popularizer. Ed Thorpe for sure, even not naming it. Kelly - most famous proponent in our sphere. After re-reading Mark Spitznagel - Safe Haven book for N-th time, I finally managed to find the answers to the puzzle. I can't speak with math language or formulas, I am not good at it. Feel free to correct me.
In order to win this particular roulette game/promotion (and any other game) I have to survive to the end. In order to finish first, you have to first finish. Yes, on paper it is awesome - huge +EV. But deep in my stomach I have this feeling - yikes - no way I bet 100 EUR on a single number. I am pretty sure I will lose so much money first, before EV materialize. I will go broke FIRST. And here is the problem - I can't continue if I am broke.
It is not about the Arithmetic Averages, it is the Ensambles averages (Geometric Return).
The development of bank over time playing this particular game will be just one (of the many possible). I may go broke, or I may survive and win, nobody knows. I know for sure that I won't bet 100 EUR on a single number, even though I may have a bank of 20 000 EUR as a backing. 80-10 rolls without a win and everyone's head gets messed up. What about 200 times? No way, too risky (at least for me)
The original idea comes form Daniel Bernoulli, who also found an answer to the St. Petersburg paradox.
So how it looks when applied to the roulette table? Initial bank - 10 000 EUR, Cashback - 10% (ten per cent) Initial Wager - vary, depends, I don't know why, and how to calculate it I just find the OPTIMAL for each payout (Single, Black/red, 6 numbers, Dozen/column) manually adjusting it on Excel. If anyone knows how to find/calculate it - please do share.
The goal is to maximize Geometric Mean, not the Arithmetic Mean (how we calculate EV of bets). Which means the CAGR of the bank/investment, because that is important! To finish the game (which is Infinite) with as much money as possible at the end. Sometimes - these two are at conflict - maximizing Arithmetic means - sacrificing CAGR (even going broke).
1. Single number (35:1). Optimal wager: 0.0022 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0076%
2. Black/Red; Odd/Even (1:1) - Optimal wager: 0.027 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0329%
3. Column/Dozen (2:1) - Optimal wager: 0.023 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0453%
4. Six Numbers (5:1) - Optimal wager: 0.013 of the Initial Bank; Max Geomean = CAGR - 0.0352%
It seems that there is a clear winner (for this particular variables) in order which type/payout when deciding. It is playing the game with 2:1 payout. I was stunned initially, all these ideas/calculations are so counter intuitive. I had to check them 2 days to be sure what I am writing here.
I want to be clear - I don't suggest - play the game/roulette, no. All I am saying is that there is an optimal solution to most of the financial decisions we make. We always have to balance Risk and Rewards. Shall I hedge my bet? Investments? It depends on so many factors one of which is our personal situation (wealth/well being/risk tolerance etc). There is no ONE SIZE FITS ALL here - for me is a huge no 100 EUR on a single number, but there are people who could pull that off.
- Ste
- Gaining experience
- Karma: 0
Post
Re: Roulette Cashback 20%
before reading the latest post i alreadyhad doubts about the 1 number strategy.
some years ago i have read on a roulette forum that some guy tested this strategy on a huge number of real roulette spins and, even if mathematically it's the best option cause it (proportionally) pays less house edge, practically it can't work cause of the variance: a single number can be missed for even 400-500 spins, killing every strategy.
some years ago i have read on a roulette forum that some guy tested this strategy on a huge number of real roulette spins and, even if mathematically it's the best option cause it (proportionally) pays less house edge, practically it can't work cause of the variance: a single number can be missed for even 400-500 spins, killing every strategy.
-
