[Optional]

During the discussion of Cory's dispute with Heritage over his JoB payout Justin posted this;

I thought maybe Monkey or someone else would catch this.

According to Cory's posts, he
1. received 8% bonus on deposit;
2. received every 8th deposit free, and
3. received 8% rebate on losses every month.

If JOB is played with perfect strategy, this game is +EV playing 6k hands per month (which was observed here). If you play a lot more hands than this, it becomes -EV.

Additional info is that the player deposited 200-300 dollars at a time.

What does 2) mean? Does it mean the payer gets a credit for the average of his last 7 deposits after making the 7th or 8th deposit maybe?

But my main question is why is the max EV attained at 6000 hands per month? And how do I work this out?

I'm struggling to get my head around why this promo is more +EV at 6000 hands per month than with 10000 hands when rebates are on a percentage basis.

(I did catch it btw Justin. I asked over there how they could offer a 99.5% game with 8% rebate on losses. As I 'assumed' that made it +EV with perfect strategy)

[tto827]

Wish someone had answered you, I am quite interested to see what the math says. As of now I feel Cory is a sleaze of some kind just from what I've read and that he found a way to abuse the system, not by pure mathematical analysis (ie cheating not outsmarting) but if the math says a positive return in expected if played correctly, then I'd be more likely to join Cory's side, as that's the hosts fault for having the potential for +EV.

[Optional]

Me too tto. I did get a PM trying to help, but it didn't help with the math. I'd also like to know how to calculate the maximum downswing to expect.

I think you can probably bank on what J7 says about it being +EV as correct. And with him playing 6000 hands per month it's kind of obvious he was just working that angle. Not that I personally think it matters in the Cory case. The book can ban him for being too good at taking advantage of the game just the same as if they think he had some sort of exploit. And it's about breaking the ban, not how he played this time. (although I agree it seems kind of sucky to ban someone for that, rather than adjust your bonuses down)

[DevilCheese]

I did not read the entire thread on the matter but here's a rough example of how I imagine he did it

he was playing $25 per hand ($5x5), a royal pays $20k, so let's look at an example

in a given month let's say he has two stopping points in which he quits and waits for the new month to begin
1. losing 28 deposits of $300 in a month OR 2. hitting a royal OR 3. neither, stops after 6k hands

Scenario 1. if he loses his 28 deposits (24*300 = -$7200) of his own money:

1. he's getting 4 deposits for free ($1200)

2. 8% bonus on the other 24 ($576)

3. 8% rebate on losses ($672)

Scenario 2. if he hits a royal: (+17000) (let's say he's down an average of $3000 when he hits it)
Scenario 3. He neither hits a royal nor loses all 28 deposits and stops playing after 6k hands

Running a simulation on 6k hands a month on average, we get 9.7% chance of ruin at $9000 and 13.6% chance of hitting a royal, the other 76.8% results in an average loss of about $3k (let's say 2 free deposits, and 8% back = $2160 of his money), so his monthly EV was about

.097(672-7200)+.768(-2160)+.136(17000)= -630-1650+2300 = EV of about +$20 a month

I don't really see a significant advantage here. Of course this is simplified, I doubt he stopped only after a royal, more likely a $ value stopping point, also on months he didn't hit a royal I assume he played more than 6k hands on average. So I know the numbers are off a bit, but let's consider his coin in is 6000*25=$150000 a month. Even if the EV was $500 a month, that's still only a 0.3% advantage, which can be easily be found in vegas.

[Justin7]

You're oversimplifying.

Assume you make 7 deposits totalling $1000. You get your 8th free, so your play amount is 1000 * 8/7. You get an 8% bonus on each, so it is 1000 * 1.08 * 8/7. You get an 8% rebate on your losses, which is the entire amount (including losses on your rebated losses). Your actual play amount is then 1000 * 1.08 * 8/8 / (1-0.08).

I'm attaching a spreadsheet I used to estimate the EV on it.

[PharaohUB]

You shouldn't apply the 8% bonus to the free 8th deposit.

[cyberbabble]

The goal is to find if this is +EV with the bonuses. Let's do oversimplify. We dummy out the RNG and set the software to step through each possible hand one time to find out the results after one full cycle.
Lets say the cycle is 40000 hands to make it a little easier. Machine is 99.5% payback. play 1 per hand.

Completely wrong, full cycle is not 40000.

[mrpooh]

justin has it right

[lecubs28]

37 dollars a month in ev? am i reading that right?

[wtt0315]

you must of never played their jacks or better. the odds of a royal there are about half that of a normal casino.
I lost 2000 dollars there once playing perfect strategy playing 1 dollar jacks or better 5 dollar hands and didnt even hit a 4 of a kind. Tighest software i have seen online. I hit 3 20 k royal flushes at betjam and 1- 8000 dollar won at betislands and even 2 here at sbr, but heritage is by far the worse

[Optional]

37 dollars a month in ev? am i reading that right?

As long as it is +EV at all I assume the idea is to play until variance swings your way and you get more than 1 royal in a short period. With the assumption you are unlikely to be felted in the mean time if your roll is the right size.

Then withdraw your win and start the cycle again.



@Justin7... would having multiple accounts each playing the optimal 6000 hands per month change the odds of success/failure?

[DevilCheese]

Ok, I know my numbers were a bit off but if we are not going to oversimplify then you can't assume he just plays 6000 hands each month and stops, it's an arbitrary number. That's why I considered a "stopping point." The reason is because of the 8% casino rebate. Let's consider he plays 5000 hands and at that point he is down $20,000. A royal would make him break even for the month, but he has a $1600 rebate coming to him if he stops playing. That means a royal would "actually" pay only $18400, making the JoB game have a payout of 99.39% and that's with adjusted strategy which I doubt he did, so it's actually probably a little less. The more he loses in a month the less it makes sense for him to keep playing.

On the other hand, if he does hit a royal, he should stop playing immediately and wait for the new month because if he loses his winnings he's not going to get a casino rebate to fall back on. That's another reason you can't just look at 6000 hands. On the months he does hit a royal, he's playing less than 6000 hands and on the months he does not he's likely playing more than 6000 hands.

[Optional]

From the original post DevilCheese: "playing 6k hands per month (which was observed here)."

Good point about the rebates for that month cutting off once a royal is hit. But if the aim is to hit 2 RFs close together to make a real profit for the time I think you are still going to want to play the optimal number of hands per period.

[wtt0315]

These were the days
royal.jpg
royal2.jpg

[yisman]

last year Heritage offered 20% back on monthly casino losses and 10% on monthly winnings

[DevilCheese]

From the original post DevilCheese: "playing 6k hands per month (which was observed here)."

Good point about the rebates for that month cutting off once a royal is hit. But if the aim is to hit 2 RFs close together to make a real profit for the time I think you are still going to want to play the optimal number of hands per period.

I don't see any +EV in trying to hit 2 RFs close together. I know he hit 2 RFs 3 days apart but has it been said what the actual dates were?

[Optional]

I don't see any +EV in trying to hit 2 RFs close together. I know he hit 2 RFs 3 days apart but has it been said what the actual dates were?

Yeah the dates where mentioned somewhere. Both toward the end of the month I think it was.