now wagering requirements

[Ping]

Frankly,I can never understand why Baccarat and Roulette are low risk bet opportunities as long as you bet on one side only. In the land casinos that I frequent,it is very often that a gambler loses his entire fortune on baccarat.

Baccarat, Roulette and Craps are considered under "games with low-risk bet OPPORTUNITIES" because if one bet on BOTH SIDES, they have an artificially high value of bet, but is actually risking very small amount only, esp. in Baccarat.

At least, that's how I think it is...




Ping

[KasinoKing]

Frankly,I can never understand why Baccarat and Roulette are low risk bet opportunities as long as you bet on one side only. In the land casinos that I frequent,it is very often that a gambler loses his entire fortune on baccarat.

I'm the same. I know nothing about Baccarat, but I do know it's IMPOSSIBLE to place a no-risk wager on Roulette.
This game has probably the simplest maths of any casino game to work out, and it has one of the highest house edges at 2.7% - and that's if it's only got ONE zero!
I am totally mystified why online casinos disallow it in WR.
If I owned an online site, I'd be happy to allow WR on Roulette ONLY!
(And I'd be singing all the way to the bank! )

[Macgyver]

I am totally mystified why online casinos disallow it in WR.

When I did a google search, I came up with an article from Winner Online. Here's an excerpt:

Many people will argue that the reason no-risk wagers are disqualified from bonus wagering requirements is because it gives players a way of artificially increasing their overall wagering volume, which makes it easier for players to meet the required threshold. Or it helps players reduce their risk of ruin by smoothing out the volatility of their wagering sessions. These are valid arguments, but in the end no-risk wagers will give back more money to the house than other, smarter wagers at the same table will. I'd like to see a casino run a limited-time promotion that encourages people to place no-risk wagers, or at least doesn't discourage them. It may attract some good, dumb money.

Some reasons as to why they're excluded, but at the end, pretty much agrees with KK.

[Vesuvio]

I'm the same. I know nothing about Baccarat, but I do know it's IMPOSSIBLE to place a no-risk wager on Roulette.
This game has probably the simplest maths of any casino game to work out, and it has one of the highest house edges at 2.7% - and that's if it's only got ONE zero!
I am totally mystified why online casinos disallow it in WR.
If I owned an online site, I'd be happy to allow WR on Roulette ONLY!
(And I'd be singing all the way to the bank! )

I think it's just that with Roulette you can bet on e.g. red, black & 0 (some variation of 18,18,1). So if the wr's fairly low it'd be possible to get an absolutely guaranteed profit very quickly (quite an incentive for those pesky bonus hunters ). You should on average get more playing BJ, but it also takes longer and you risk losing your deposit.

[KasinoKing]

I think it's just that with Roulette you can bet on e.g. red, black & 0 (some variation of 18,18,1). So if the wr's fairly low it'd be possible to get an absolutely guaranteed profit very quickly (quite an incentive for those pesky bonus hunters ). You should on average get more playing BJ, but it also takes longer and you risk losing your deposit.

The Roulette method you describe would be a VERY bad plan, even for a bonus hunter! To be worth anything the WR would have to be tiny. This plan also ensures that you lose something EVERY spin, ending up with a tiny profit (if any) - at least with other games you have a chance of a good run leading to a nice profit!
According to 'The Wizard', even Stud Poker has lower house edge of 2.555% if played a certain way - yet this is allowed nearly everywhere!
I probably would not play Roulette even if it WAS allowed because my fingers have been badly burnt by it before - but I still don't understand why casinos ban it!

[GrandMaster]

The Roulette method you describe would be a VERY bad plan, even for a bonus hunter! To be worth anything the WR would have to be tiny. This plan also ensures that you lose something EVERY spin, ending up with a tiny profit (if any) - at least with other games you have a chance of a good run leading to a nice profit!
According to 'The Wizard', even Stud Poker has lower house edge of 2.555% if played a certain way - yet this is allowed nearly everywhere!
I probably would not play Roulette even if it WAS allowed because my fingers have been badly burnt by it before - but I still don't understand why casinos ban it!

The point is that as long as the WR is less than 37xB, you can make a guaranteed profit by covering all numbers in roulette if allowed. Some people may prefer a smaller guaranteed profit to a potentially larger, but uncertain profit that could be achieved by playing, say, blackjack.

[aye-nay]

The point is that as long as the WR is less than 37xB, you can make a guaranteed profit by covering all numbers in roulette if allowed. Some people may prefer a smaller guaranteed profit to a potentially larger, but uncertain profit that could be achieved by playing, say, blackjack.

btw, I tried to cover all numbers at the wheel of fortune (or at least a lot of numbers, I don't quite remember). but that wasn't worth it

[KasinoKing]

The point is that as long as the WR is less than 37xB, you can make a guaranteed profit by covering all numbers in roulette if allowed. Some people may prefer a smaller guaranteed profit to a potentially larger, but uncertain profit that could be achieved by playing, say, blackjack.

Yes, you're probably right - a guaranteed tiny profit - I'm to tired to try to work it out right now!

Myself - I'd rather do something more risky and try to make a good profit - this is supposed to be gambling you know!!!

[Ping]

Myself - I'd rather do something more risky and try to make a good profit - this is supposed to be gambling you know!!!

Well said!



Ping

[KasinoKing]

Thanks!
PS. Where's my 200 bucks?