Hypothetical scenario:
You can bet on a single dye roll (choosing a number between 1-6), but if you win you get paid x12 of your stake (instead of x6).
So the Expected Value is positive (see example below), but you'd still have 83% chance of losing.
1 - will you take that bet?
2 - if so, what % of your available funds would you put at stake (i.e. funds you're willing to gamble and afford to lose)?
Again, this is a single, non-repetitive bet.
-----------------------
Simulation for BTC1 bet:
EV = (83% x -BTC1) + (17% x BTC12) = +BTC1.21
I would definitely take that bet, and I doubt anyone with a bare minimum gambling knowledge wouldn't.
Regardiing the best size I would keep it the same size disregarding how much more I will be paid out, because It Is a single bet event.
All gambling fans will definitely accept all forms of betting even though they know that there is an 83% percentage of losing.
However, in fact all gambling bets do have a greater percentage of losing and only a small chance of winning, even if luck is on your side.
Even though a gambler has gambling knowledge, when they are playing or betting they experience a slight defeat, this knowledge is very rarely used. Because yes, there is only high emotion and greed, so it makes them forget and continue playing without thinking about defeat.
Bottom question I guess is concerned with the legitimacy. Ofcourse there will always be risk;small or big, in gambling. But getting an odd of winning more than 40% I guess is already big so what more with the given computation of OP. Most of the people here would be interested with such offer but if this won't be paying on casino's end, then this will just be a waste of time. If the offer is a bit unrealistic, think or doubt already. A gambling casino won't allow its players to win most of the because it will only yield to bankruptcy unless that casino to offer such thing qould find a way to generate profit inspite of giving such odd to the players.