Rollover requirements

**TLD** · 05-25-06, 05:32 PM

Risk amount is the most common method.

Lower of risk/win amount is the second most common method.

Always best to ask about this and other specifications that can differ from book to book (e.g., may one withdraw winnings prior to meeting the rollover? is there a minimum time limit in addition to the rollover? etc.) when taking a bonus, unless it’s a book you’ll be playing at a lot and so you know you’re going to blow through the rollover many times over regardless of how they calculate it.

**presley177** · 05-25-06, 05:32 PM

Originally posted by dcheng

I was reading ActionBets rollover policy wehre if you risk 10 to win 20 your amount towards rollover is 10 and if you risk 15 to win 10 your rollover amount is 10.

I always thought that if you risk 15 to win 10 the rollover amount is 15. Is that true for most books or have I been calculating this wrong?

as far as I know most of the books use the lower amount. or everyone would be playing huge favorites

BK · 05-25-06, 05:40 PM

All but one of the books i've been at have used the lower amount rather than the risk

**Terris** · 05-25-06, 05:45 PM

well using the risk amount is the common method, to my experience...examples would be cris, greek, bowmans, canbet, wsex...the big books.

Some books like Jamaica have a rule that a -200 ML is the max that counts towards the roll.
Using the lower of both is used by some smaller books, to make the bonus look better. Cause a 5x roll with the lower amount is more like a 6x roll.

**TLD** · 05-25-06, 05:45 PM

“as far as I know most of the books use the lower amount. or everyone would be playing huge favorites”

I’ve never bought that reasoning, though I know books often cite that when they switch rollover rules to the “lower of risk/win” method.

If betting big favorites was profitable in the long run (which it almost certainly isn’t), then bettors should do that regardless of rollover considerations. Whereas if betting big favorites gives the book the edge, then books should welcome players making such bets to meet their rollover. Sure, most will win a small amount while meeting their rollover. But the ones who blow their whole balance on the infrequent occasions those big favorites lose will more than make up for it.

The “lower of risk/win” method is good for the books because it artificially boosts the rollover requirements, as would a rule that says bets placed on Tuesdays only get half-credit toward rollover. I don’t think the favorite/underdog thing is relevant.

I’m not saying it’s a ruse by the books. Probably most of them do believe players are “pulling a fast one” if they bet big favorites to get to the rollover. I’m just not convinced they’re right.

BK · 05-25-06, 05:53 PM

The way I see it is if the line is -210 on Team X and you call up and ask for $100 on Team X, they'll give you $210 to get back $100. Not $100 to get back $48. Unless you specify.

And if the line is +210 on team Y and you ask for $100 on Team Y, you'll get $100 to get $210.

In both cases, the "True Amount" of the wager is $100. So that's what you have in action. So that's what counts towards the rollover.

**Terris** · 05-25-06, 06:01 PM

i understand why the lower amount is used Aden, and its np for me.
But terms like the "true amount" are hot air

The only truth is that the player puts on the table what he risks, so there ^^

BK · 05-25-06, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by Terris

i understand why the lower amount is used Aden, and its np for me.
But terms like the "true amount" are hot air

The only truth is that the player puts on the table what he risks, so there ^^

i guess i have been on the other side of things for a while... that might bias me a bit. but i still stick to my opinion.

**pags11** · 05-26-06, 12:15 PM

bodog's the only book out there that counts the larger number towards your rollover that also includes large money line favs...most of the books are using the policy that action bets has...at first I thought it was a little bush, but if you play straight games having a $100 count instead of $110 really isn't that big of a deal...

**tacomax** · 05-26-06, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by pags11

bodog's the only book out there that counts the larger number towards your rollover that also includes large money line favs.

No it isn't.

**Ganchrow** · 05-26-06, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by presley177

as far as I know most of the books use the lower amount. or everyone would be playing huge favorites

This doesn't follow from the underlying math. Betting at a shop with theoretical hold of 4.55% Whether you bet through $100,000 worth of roll with 1,000 $100 bets at +100, or with 250 $400 risk bets at -400, your expectation would be exactly the same.

In other words, if you're at a shop that uses the risk amount to determine progress towards completing a roll then (as long your bet size is small relative to the size of the deposit+bonus) it doesn't matter whether you bet favorites or dogs.

**Ganchrow** · 05-26-06, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by BK

The way I see it is if the line is -210 on Team X and you call up and ask for $100 on Team X, they'll give you $210 to get back $100. Not $100 to get back $48. Unless you specify.

And if the line is +210 on team Y and you ask for $100 on Team Y, you'll get $100 to get $210.

In both cases, the "True Amount" of the wager is $100. So that's what you have in action. So that's what counts towards the rollover.

This is no more than an issue of semantics and is completely unrelated to the underlying economics of the wager.

Using your example of Team X above, if you were to ask for $100 on Team X at 1.48 (the approximate decimal equivalent of -210) you would indeed be risking $100 to win $48.

**tacomax** · 05-26-06, 03:05 PM

You're totally wrong with your maths there, ganchrow.

**pags11** · 05-28-06, 01:39 AM

OK, let me clarify...bodog's the only book I know that won't rip you off, that I have personal experience playing with, that counts whatever you bet period towards your rollover requirement...

**LGBoots** · 05-28-06, 05:57 AM

SportingBet + Clones count the amount you bet towards W/R.
As do WTTS & I think Bowmans

**magnavox** · 05-28-06, 06:02 AM

Originally posted by LGBoots

SportingBet + Clones count the amount you bet towards W/R.
As do WTTS & I think Bowmans

Don't know about WTTS, however WWTS changed their policy without informing the players half a year or so ago.

**Ganchrow** · 05-28-06, 06:30 AM

Originally posted by tacomax

You're totally wrong with your maths there, ganchrow.

Ever the comedian ...

**LGBoots** · 05-28-06, 08:05 AM

Originally posted by magnavox

Don't know about WTTS, however WWTS changed their policy without informing the players half a year or so ago.

Woops meant WWTS

As far as I know amount wagered still counts,this from their current bonus T&c's.

15% bonus only valid when depositing via Neteller, all other methods will receive 10% bonus.
Limit: one signup bonus and free bet per account (note: the WagerOnSports.com customer is entitled to ONE sportsbook account)
Maximum bonus amount: $500
Minimum deposit required to earn bonus: $100
Customers who have not made a minimum deposit of $100 or more will not be entitled to the free $20 futures bet.
Bonus funds, plus deposit amount must be rolled over at least five (5) times before bonus monies can be withdrawn
Withdrawal of any amount made within 30 days of initial deposit will result in bonus monies being forfeited

Im currently playing there at the moment & sitting on some decent winnings. I won't be too pleased if they try & hold me to something not stated in their T&c's if I reach the end of my roll with a wedge of cash

**natrass** · 05-28-06, 11:17 AM

VIP count wagered amount also I think.

**TLD** · 05-30-06, 01:31 AM

Originally posted by pags11

OK, let me clarify...bodog's the only book I know that won't rip you off, that I have personal experience playing with, that counts whatever you bet period towards your rollover requirement...

Definitely not my experience, but then I rarely inquire about bonus rules any more. I typically don't get bonuses for my reloads, and when I do it's a book I know I put a lot of action in with, so I know I'll well exceed the rollover regardless of which interpretation they use.

But certainly when I did regularly ask in the past, it was quite rare to come across a book that used anything other than the "risk" amount in calculating rollover.

Have things really changed that much? Terris lists many big name books that you surely have experience with (and aren't "rip off" books); are you saying he's mistaken about how they calculate rollover?

**pags11** · 05-30-06, 04:54 PM

TLD,

I do have experience with betjamaica, but to clarify or correct (however you want to look at it) what Terris said regarding betjam's policy regarding ML's...yes, -200 is the maximum wager you can make with them that will count towards your rollover, but they still count the smaller ammount towards your rollover (you can call them on that, but I am certain of it)...the rest of the books mentioned I don't have experience with...VIP I do have experience with, but they count the smaller ammount as well I believe...

**magnavox** · 05-30-06, 05:06 PM

pags, your beliefs are, as usual, wrong.

**Terris** · 05-31-06, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by magnavox

pags, your beliefs are, as usual, wrong.

:0000045:

**pags11** · 05-31-06, 04:55 PM

magnavox,

it must be hard being such a dipshit...so you have documentation to prove otherwise?...I may be wrong regarding VIP, but I don't play with them because they don't give bonuses for players from Nevada...but as far as betjam goes, I am almost 100% certain they count the lower ammount...if I am wrong, please provide some proof that I am...

**TLD** · 05-31-06, 07:00 PM

I’m just sharing my impressions based on my experiences over the years with sportsbooks, and obviously so are Pags and others in this thread. Not sure why it has to be treated as some personal thing, but I guess that’s the usual life in Forumland.

I just got off the phone with Bet Jamaica and went over the rollover rules in detail. (Phone clerks are wrong about 45% of the time about stuff like this. But Bet Jamaica tends to have good customer service, and I spoke with someone who answered with confidence and certainly seemed to know what she’s talking about, so it’s at least reasonably likely this is correct.)

The risk amount is what counts toward the rollover. On moneylines of greater than –200, this is adjusted down as if it were –200. So, for example:

Risk $100 to win $170: You get credit for $100 toward rollover.
Risk $155 to win $100: You get credit for $155 toward rollover.
Risk $750 to win $250: You get credit for $500 toward rollover.

Most of the other books mentioned in this thread I cannot speak to for certain due to the chances they have changed their rules fairly recently. But I just know that in the past when I did ask many, many books these questions about rollover calculations, virtually all of them used the risk amount.

**tacomax** · 05-31-06, 07:01 PM

Canbet and TheGreek off the top of my head.

Many, many others as well.

**pags11** · 06-01-06, 04:28 PM

TLD,

Thanks for the clarification...

magnavox stands corrected again...