Quote:
Originally Posted by The IRS
I mean I don't want to give away the house but you make way more on these by betting big because you don't have to wager anymore the times you bust out...just saying.
I feel like an idiot for not thinking of this. It seems so obvious. It's a nice way of minimizing the effect of the house edge when completing rollover, because you don't have to complete the rollover every time. The EV of the bonus becomes close to the full value of the bonus, I think?
Say you deposit $1000 with a 100% match bonus. If you just complete the rollover normally your EV is 1000-C, where C is the cost of rollover. Instead if you bet fairly large at a low house edge bet like the pass line until you either lose the $2000 or double it, your EV is .5*-1000+.5*(3000-C). Your EV is 1000-.5*C. You've halved the cost of rollover to your EV. You can can do this as long as you like. It works because you get to bet money that is not yours yet and quit if you lose it. There would be an optimal stopping point somewhere. The most significant factor with this would be one's bankroll, I expect. It might not be desirable to risk $8000 to gain .125*C in EV.
Another benefit is that you save a lot of time. If you use a strategy that busts you in a few minutes 90% of the time or something and you only have to complete the rollover 10% of the time, there is a huge savings in time compared to completing the rollover 100% of the time for a huge gain in hourly.
It seems like the biggest downside is that you would need to withdraw your winnings and re-deposit to continue doing this, and the sites don't like that and will probably put restrictions on you.