Another Offer . .
2) Baccarat, min bet = $10, max bet = $1000
3) 40% loss rebate If (ONLY IF) lose entire $50k.
What is the best strategy ? My programmer told me that it is a BIG TRAP.(I am not sure ?) Anyone would like to do the maths ?
Sounds like an advantageQuote: ssho881) Buy in $50k
2) Baccarat, min bet = $10, max bet = $1000
3) 40% loss rebate If (ONLY IF) lose entire $50k.
What is the best strategy ? My programmer told me that it is a BIG TRAP.(I am not sure ?) Anyone would like to do the maths ?
If this is a land based casino and you're betting 1k per hand I assume they will send good mail mail? Can you incorporate it with anything else like a front money bonus?
My programmer said NOT beatable.
Quote: GWAEImo Your strategy would depend on your goal. Do you want to win 50k, or you ok with just winning 1k.
You can't get +ve EV even your goal is 1k !? Am I missing something ?
My nickel analysis agrees. No profit is possible here.Quote: ssho88My programmer told me that it is a BIG TRAP.(I am not sure ?)
Quote: teliotMy nickel analysis agrees. No profit is possible here.
Finally you are here again. Thanks for your time.
Yeah, well, you've always got good problems to analyze. Now, you can answer a question for me. Do you know BJT?Quote: ssho88Finally you are here again. Thanks for your time.
Quote: teliotYeah, well, you've always got good problems to analyze. Now, you can answer a question for me. Do you know BJT?
If I not mistaken he is an AP from CHINA but our team have no relation with him.
Yes.Quote: ssho88If I not mistaken he is an AP from CHINA but our team have no relation with him.
By the way, you can get an edge if the buy-in is $45,000 rather than $50,000 (betting Banker, with a stopping point of winning $1000).
You can use the First Loss Rebate Theorem spread sheet to analyze this. Plug in a bankroll of 50 units and a loss rebate of 40%.
I think your intuition is the same as mine here, so no need to even do the work.Quote: HunterhillEliot could this offer work if he had teamates bet opposite to hedge?
Quote: teliotYes.
By the way, you can get an edge if the buy-in is $45,000 rather than $50,000 (betting Banker, with a stopping point of winning $1000).
You can use the First Loss Rebate Theorem spread sheet to analyze this. Plug in a bankroll of 50 units and a loss rebate of 40%.
No. The buy in is $50k. This game will be beatable if the max bet increase to $1250 or more.
Looks like we have to re-negotiate for higher max bet :=). Visit to casinos in developing countries, there will be lots of surprises !
Quote: teliotI think your intuition is the same as mine here, so no need to even do the work.
Yeah, looks like this offer work if allow to bet opposite to hedge. Just betting until one of the teammate lose his all 50k ? The 40% rebate should be able to cover the house edge.
So the next question is how many hands on average will it take to lose 50k?Quote: ssho88Yeah, looks like this offer work if allow to bet opposite to hedge. Just betting until one of the teammate lose his all 50k ? The 40% rebate should be able to cover the house edge.
Quote: HunterhillSo the next question is how many hands on average will it take to lose 50k?
win exit 1k, loss exit 50k, it's take about 131 rounds to lose 50k. So very good profit !
Edit : It may not so simple, I think we have to carry out simulation for both bettors at the same time, when one of the bettor lose 50k, claim for 40% rebate + the winning amount of opposite bettor. The question here is it may take very long(thousand of hands) to lose 50k. Any comments ?
"Do you know BJT?" Why the question, teliot?Quote: ssho88If I not mistaken he is an AP from CHINA but our team have no relation with him.
BJT was from Taiwan, not CHINA and he is considered a big BS by many. Yes, he gets on some variety shows on Taiwanese TVs. Because no casinos in Taiwan or CHINA (does not count Macau), TV viewers fantasize "professional gamblers" or we call "AP". Big deal??
Quote: teliotMy nickel analysis agrees. No profit is possible here.
Agreed.
The ratio of the probability of losing (a player bet in baccarat) to winning = about 458597/446247.
According to the Gamblers' Ruin formula, the probability of being $1000 ahead before losing the whole $50,000 is:
((458597/446247)50 - 1) / ((458597/446247)51 - 1) = about 27/28.
27/28 of the time, you end up $1000 ahead
1/28 of the time, you end up $30,000 (after the rebate) behind.
Quote: ThatDonGuyAgreed.
The ratio of the probability of losing (a player bet in baccarat) to winning = about 458597/446247.
According to the Gamblers' Ruin formula, the probability of being $1000 ahead before losing the whole $50,000 is:
((458597/446247)50 - 1) / ((458597/446247)51 - 1) = about 27/28.
27/28 of the time, you end up $1000 ahead
1/28 of the time, you end up $30,000 (after the rebate) behind.
Wandering into an area where I shouldn't here, but:
If Don is right you play 28 times, win 27 times for 27K, lose one time for 30K, net equals minus 3K?
But there is hedging possible from others on the team to make this a good AP deal?
Please forget I thought about this out loud, much less started typing. My bad.
Quote: ThatDonGuyAgreed.
The ratio of the probability of losing (a player bet in baccarat) to winning = about 458597/446247.
According to the Gamblers' Ruin formula, the probability of being $1000 ahead before losing the whole $50,000 is:
((458597/446247)50 - 1) / ((458597/446247)51 - 1) = about 27/28.
27/28 of the time, you end up $1000 ahead
1/28 of the time, you end up $30,000 (after the rebate) behind.
What if only bet on BANKER with 5% commission ?
Quote: TwoFeathersATL
Wandering into an area where I shouldn't here, but:
If Don is right you play 28 times, win 27 times for 27K, lose one time for 30K, net equals minus 3K?
But there is hedging possible from others on the team to make this a good AP deal?
No.
Remember, hedging requires betting on the banker, which only pays 19-20.
If the initial results were Bank, Player, Player, the player is +1000, but the banker has two losses (-2000) and one win (+950), so the combined result of the two is -50.
The more bets there are, the more the hedging player's results climb into the negative.
After doing a simulation, the EV with hedging is -817.
Quote: ssho88Quote: ThatDonGuyAgreed.
The ratio of the probability of losing (a player bet in baccarat) to winning = about 458597/446247.
According to the Gamblers' Ruin formula, the probability of being $1000 ahead before losing the whole $50,000 is:
((458597/446247)50 - 1) / ((458597/446247)51 - 1) = about 27/28.
27/28 of the time, you end up $1000 ahead
1/28 of the time, you end up $30,000 (after the rebate) behind.
What if only bet on BANKER with 5% commission ?
This is not quite as easy to figure out, as your "win condition" is not going to be based on "N more wins than losses" for some N. As I said in my previous post, each combination of one $1000 banker win and one $1000 banker loss has a value of $-50.
I did a simulation, and got a win 23/24 of the time and a loss 1/24 of the time. This is an EV of about -292.
Quote: ThatDonGuyQuote: ssho88Quote: ThatDonGuyAgreed.
The ratio of the probability of losing (a player bet in baccarat) to winning = about 458597/446247.
According to the Gamblers' Ruin formula, the probability of being $1000 ahead before losing the whole $50,000 is:
((458597/446247)50 - 1) / ((458597/446247)51 - 1) = about 27/28.
27/28 of the time, you end up $1000 ahead
1/28 of the time, you end up $30,000 (after the rebate) behind.
What if only bet on BANKER with 5% commission ?
This is not quite as easy to figure out, as your "win condition" is not going to be based on "N more wins than losses" for some N. As I said in my previous post, each combination of one $1000 banker win and one $1000 banker loss has a value of $-50.
I did a simulation, and got a win 23/24 of the time and a loss 1/24 of the time. This is an EV of about -292.
Yep, went right over my head. I will not ask a similar question again, promise, cross my heart and all that.
Quote: ThatDonGuyNo.
Remember, hedging requires betting on the banker, which only pays 19-20.
If the initial results were Bank, Player, Player, the player is +1000, but the banker has two losses (-2000) and one win (+950), so the combined result of the two is -50.
The more bets there are, the more the hedging player's results climb into the negative.
After doing a simulation, the EV with hedging is -817.
Bet 1 unit on both BANKER and PLAYER, quit when one bettor lose all his 50 units, claim for 40% rebate + profit(or loss) from other bettor.
Simulation results, average rounds before reach the quit point = 1394, ev = -11.7 units. Any comments ?
Quote: ssho88Bet 1 unit on both BANKER and PLAYER, quit when one bettor lose all his 50 units, claim for 40% rebate + profit(or loss) from other bettor.
Simulation results, average rounds before reach the quit point = 1394, ev = -11.7 units. Any comments ?
Two questions: is a "unit" $1000 (which is about what I get when I do it, but it's a little closer to -12), and does your "average rounds" include tied hands?
Quote: ThatDonGuyTwo questions: is a "unit" $1000 (which is about what I get when I do it, but it's a little closer to -12), and does your "average rounds" include tied hands?
Include tied hands and a "unit" = $1000. What is your "average rounds" and ev ?
1) With hedging + 40% rebate, you have to increase the bet size > $2065.
2) With only the Loss Rebate Strategy(40% rebate without hedging, bet on BANKER only), you have to bet at least $1175
So we are trying very hard to negotiate for higher max bet size, I think this is the most acceptable to casino :=).
Any comments, teliot ?
No, I'm going to pass on this one.Quote: ssho88Any comments, teliot ?
Quote: teliotNo, I'm going to pass on this one.
When there are no +ve edge, you are always pass on, otherwise you will quickly post it on you website, am I correct ?
Edit : What if I am telling you now that we managed to get max bet of $4000, ev=2units($8000), average rounds = 146.
Quote: ssho88Include tied hands and a "unit" = $1000. What is your "average rounds" and ev ?
1393 hands, and EV of -11.95 units
Note that this assumes that if whoever is betting with the bank is below $1000, he will still bet $1000.
I have a big project for a client (who is actually paying) to do right now, sorry.Quote: ssho88When there are no +ve edge, you are always pass on, otherwise you will quickly post it on you website, am I correct ?
Quote: ThatDonGuy1393 hands, and EV of -11.95 units
Note that this assumes that if whoever is betting with the bank is below $1000, he will still bet $1000.
I assume that too. There must be errors in my codes.
Quote: teliotI have a big project for a client (who is actually paying) to do right now, sorry.
Sorry. Could you tell us about your big project ?
Quote: ThatDonGuy1393 hands, and EV of -11.95 units
Note that this assumes that if whoever is betting with the bank is below $1000, he will still bet $1000.
Since you still bet $1000 when bank is below $1000, then you will lose more than 50k. Therefore, your actual net loss after rebate is more than 30k.
I assumed the actual loss(after rebate) is exactly 30k. I think that is the reason why we have different results. Could you please check it ?
Keeping in mind that I work under strict NDA's, it is a project for the industry that involves extensive VBA programming.Quote: ssho88Sorry. Could you tell us about your big project ?
Quote: ssho88I assumed the actual loss(after rebate) is exactly 30k. I think that is the reason why we have different results. Could you please check it ?
If the bank bettor is limited to betting whatever is left of his bankroll if it is less than 1 unit, I get EV -11.76 and 1385 hands.
If the bank bettor always bets 1 unit, and the rebate includes anything above 50 units that this player bet (which I am not sure is true; you made it sound like the rebate was 40% of the original 50K buy-in), I get EV -11.74 and 1393 hands.
If the bank bettor bets 1000 when he can, 10 if he has less than 10 (but any bet that is not a multiple of 20 rounds the win down - for example, betting 10 would normally win 9.5, but this rounds down to 9), or everything he has left if it is between the two, but the rebate is limited to 40% of the original 50,000 buy-in, then I get EV -11.76 and 1385 hands.
Note that this is not a problem for the player bettor as all bets and payouts will be 1000.
Also note that this is based on a simulation, so your numbers may be slightly different from mine.
One reason for the difference might be, we have different "rules" dealing with what the banker bettor bets if he is below one unit. What do you do, and if he bets more than what is left from his initial bankroll and loses, will the 40% rebate cover those losses as well?
Quote: ThatDonGuyIf the bank bettor is limited to betting whatever is left of his bankroll if it is less than 1 unit, I get EV -11.76 and 1385 hands.
If the bank bettor always bets 1 unit, and the rebate includes anything above 50 units that this player bet (which I am not sure is true; you made it sound like the rebate was 40% of the original 50K buy-in), I get EV -11.74 and 1393 hands.
If the bank bettor bets 1000 when he can, 10 if he has less than 10 (but any bet that is not a multiple of 20 rounds the win down - for example, betting 10 would normally win 9.5, but this rounds down to 9), or everything he has left if it is between the two, but the rebate is limited to 40% of the original 50,000 buy-in, then I get EV -11.76 and 1385 hands.
Note that this is not a problem for the player bettor as all bets and payouts will be 1000.
Also note that this is based on a simulation, so your numbers may be slightly different from mine.
One reason for the difference might be, we have different "rules" dealing with what the banker bettor bets if he is below one unit. What do you do, and if he bets more than what is left from his initial bankroll and loses, will the 40% rebate cover those losses as well?
When the bank is less than $1000, the bettor will bet everything he has left. Our results(EV -11.76 and 1385 hands) match.
40% rebate only cover the initial buy in $50k
Quote: ssho88Edit : What if I am telling you now that we managed to get max bet of $4000, ev=2units($8000), average rounds = 146.
When I sim this I get an EV for banker of just over 1 unit. What is your stopwin to get the 2 unit EV?
Quote: someoneWhen I sim this I get an EV for banker of just over 1 unit. What is your stopwin to get the 2 unit EV?
Two players bet at same table, each player with BR=$50k, player 1 always bet $4k(unless his BR<$4k) on BANKER and player 2 bet $4k(unless his BR<$4k) on PLAYER, both players will stop betting if one of the player lose his all $50k, total EV( EV of player 1 + EV of player 2) = $7420(1.85 unit), Average rounds = 137.5
Edit : If his BR<$4k, he will only bet what he left.
Whilst playing this way is great for lowering variance, wouldn't it be too obvious to the casino? Betting $4K per hand on Banker with a stop win of $35K gives an EV of $4070 and average rounds of 135.2. If you have a big enough bank you could have 2 people betting this for an EV of $8140 and looking more natural to the casino.
Quote: someoneOK, oppositional betting I get basically the same EV of $7420, with average rounds of 137.9.
Whilst playing this way is great for lowering variance, wouldn't it be too obvious to the casino? Betting $4K per hand on Banker with a stop win of $35K gives an EV of $4070 and average rounds of 135.2. If you have a big enough bank you could have 2 people betting this for an EV of $8140 and looking more natural to the casino.
If you are talking about single player, the optimum strategy should be bet size=4k, bet on BANKER, loss exit -$50000, win exit +$36240, ev=4110, average round = 144.5
