1.01x = 98% win chance?

[hermanhs09]

As far as I know on most gambling sites if you choose a 98% win chance then you'll get a payout of somewhere around 1.01x. I know that primedice rounds it off to 1.01x, but I think the number is actually around 1.0102x.

How is this following the 1% house edge rule? I don't get the maths behind it.

[1714587095]

1714587095

[1714587095]

1714587095

[1714587095]

1714587095

[1714587095]

1714587095

[Chemistry1988]

As far as I know on most gambling sites if you choose a 98% win chance then you'll get a payout of somewhere around 1.01x. I know that primedice rounds it off to 1.01x, but I think the number is actually around 1.0102x.

How is this following the 1% house edge rule? I don't get the maths behind it.

When you enter "98" in the win chance field, the payout field shows "1.010x". And if you then enter "0.001" in the bet amount field, you will see that "0.0000102" is shown in the profit on win. You could make a bet to verify that yourself.
In short, 1.010x is shown but you will actually get 1.0102x when you wins your bet.

[JasonXG]

As far as I know on most gambling sites if you choose a 98% win chance then you'll get a payout of somewhere around 1.01x. I know that primedice rounds it off to 1.01x, but I think the number is actually around 1.0102x.

How is this following the 1% house edge rule? I don't get the maths behind it.

Rather roll 50/50 if you work out the odds vs rewards its the best outcome. Doing say 98% win actually gives u much lower return. Its the house edge. Careful for it.

[RHavar]

How is this following the 1% house edge rule? I don't get the maths behind it.

House edge of 1% means that on average you will lose 1% of what you wager. So your expected loss by betting 1 BTC on this bet, is -0.01 BTC (same as any other multiplier). The only real difference here is you're effectively paying 0.01 BTC (amortized) for a (large) shot at winning 1.0102x BTC (or what ever). That's why cowbay (he was the first?) to call it the suckers bet. It seems good, but it's a *fantastic* deal for the casino and a terrible deal for players.


If you're interested in maths, check out the FAQ of bustabit it documents it a fair bit and we don't use a traditional "house edge"  precisely to make it more fair for players who are doing these types of bets.  (For instance, if you bet on bustabit @ 1.01x, you'll be paying a mere 0.009900990099% house edge, precisely because the house has so little risk) .

[JasonXG]

How is this following the 1% house edge rule? I don't get the maths behind it.

House edge of 1% means that on average you will lose 1% of what you wager. So your expected loss by betting 1 BTC on this bet, is -0.01 BTC (same as any other multiplier). The only real difference here is you're effectively paying 0.01 BTC (amortized) for a (large) shot at winning 1.0102x BTC (or what ever). That's why cowbay (he was the first?) to call it the suckers bet. It seems good, but it's a *fantastic* deal for the casino and a terrible deal for players.


If you're interested in maths, check out the FAQ of bustabit it documents it a fair bit and we don't use a traditional "house edge"  precisely to make it more fair for players who are doing these types of bets.  (For instance, if you bet on bustabit @ 1.01x, you'll be paying a mere 0.009900990099% house edge, precisely because the house has so little risk) .

 Yes but you must remember that , that's 1% of everyone you can't do it from person to person. A few lucky people will win the money the casino rakes up when people lose, which is a lot. So basically 99% of the money is constantly flowing back and forth while the 1% is the profits.