It's not. You might earn points on that basis (I assume that what you quoted is true and accurate) but the rewards for those points is based upon other factors. Hence, you'll see here on 2p2 various high volume and/or winning players reporting "rakeback" of 3% or so, while net depositors are receiving rewards of an entirely different magnitude.

Yes, but that variance is likely different than a system basing reward sizes and frequency on player losses rather than rake or fees generated or expected to be generated. .

Incentives for game play is nothing new. That is the essence of rakeback.

A deposit bonus operates a bit more indirectly than rakeback. The trigger is the deposit. The play-through or staged release rules for a deposit bonus set a parameter for future activity expected/incented.

To the extent that a site issues Reward Points for game play, then those Points earn various rewards, which do vary by player ... which is where an ability to target comes in.

Traditionally, players were valued on a number of things, revenue generation being one and overall net cost of their play to the liquidity of the game being another. There would be no "winners/withdrawal tax" just an adjustment in marketing and retention spend versus a break-even grinder who generates the same revenue, but seldom deposits or cashes out.

Traditionally, marketing spends incentivized players to make their next deposit, and were tied to the deposit and subsequent game play. The adjustment to a predictive model where players are incentivized first, based upon past play,then they deposit is something of a change

A freeroll for players who lost, whatever amount they lost, is a far cry from "most major sites" basing rewards on player losses. A retention freeroll makes sense. Basing rewards on game revenue generated makes sense.

A good predictive model for tailoring sizing current rweards to predictive future behavior makes a lot of sense. I do not doubt that predictive models can be a better way to target marketing spends than across the board spending on rewards, I just would be surprised it would be tied to losses more than revenue expectations.

Spending to drive deposits is different among prospective and existing players and both are different than spending to drive play among current players.

Is there a direct connection between the amount an individual player loses and site revenue from that player's activity ? Does a reward today better incent further play/deposits than does a reward for making that next deposit ?

(A lot of questions yes, not too many statements of fact. I can benefit from the knowledge of posters itt and maybe confirm some things at the London affiliate show next month.)