100% deposit bonus: one for one, worked all the way down

1

Why one for one is the case every other percentage is read against

A matched offer has four quantities in it and a headline that prints one. The four are the percentage, which decides how much credit a payment brings; the multiple, which decides how much staking the credit brings; the published return of whatever tile the staking crosses, which decides what the staking costs; and the rate at which that tile counts towards the requirement, which has no figure anywhere and is dealt with in entry seven.

At one hundred per cent the first of those four stops interfering. The credit equals the payment, so every sum on the page can be read either as a fraction of the credit or as a fraction of what the reader put in, and the two readings are the same number. That is the only percentage where they are, which is why this card is the one to work slowly and the others are the ones to read against it.

The machine is fixed before anything else moves. Big Bass Raceday Repeat publishes 96.51 per cent claim 74, matched by the game’s own regular-play figure, and sells turns from 0.10 upwards claim 25. Every turn on this card is bought at that foot of the range, supposed rather than advertised and named again wherever it is spent.

The offer is a common shape in this corner of the market rather than anybody’s in particular: fifty pounds paid in, fifty pounds matched beside it, twenty times the credit to be staked. A reader holding different figures can follow every step below with their own, and entry four gives the one multiplication that makes that portable.

2

Two piles of fifty pounds, and only one of them has a condition

The first thing a matched offer does is put two sums of money in the same account and invite a reader to think of them as one. They are not one, and keeping them apart is the first step of the arithmetic rather than a nicety. The reader’s payment is the reader’s money and arrives with no condition of its own. The matched credit is the counter’s money until the requirement is discharged.

So the expectation on this card is worked on the credit alone, which is the convention the network’s arithmetic appendix sets down for a match: a reader’s own payment is no part of the sum the formula acts on, and the two are shown separately. Fifty pounds of credit is what the twenty times is written against, and £1,000.00 is what that comes to.

The payment is not untouched, though, and the honest treatment is to price it in its own right. Every pass of £50.00 across this reel is expected to cost 3.49 points of it, which is £1.75. A reader who stakes their own fifty pounds once before the credit is touched has spent £1.75 in expectation; a reader who stakes it ten times over has spent £17.50 of it, and the match has had nothing to do with either figure.

Priced in the machine’s own units the payment buys 500 turns at the 10p supposed here, and the matched credit another 500, so the account opens on a thousand turns of this reel. The requirement then asks for ten times that count, which is the clearest statement of what twenty times the credit means on an offer where the two piles are equal.

What the terms do with that second pile is the one place this card has to stop short. Whether a requirement may be written against the payment as well as the credit is not settled by anything published: the regulated ceiling speaks of bonus funds alone, and nothing published addresses a requirement written over a payment as well the wagering consultation response. So this card states the chain of published wording and goes no further, and a reader meeting a requirement written over both piles is meeting something the arithmetic here has not priced.

3

The credit worked through, with every step printed

Twenty times a fifty pound credit puts £1,000.00 over the reel. A tile printing 96.51 per cent leaves 3.49 points of everything behind, so £1,000.00 costs £34.90 and £15.10 of the credit is expected to stand at the finish. The cost is more than twice what survives, on the mildest multiple and the second-highest published return in the family.

The house line, with g for the rate a requirement credits the named slot at:

E = B × (1 − W × (1 − RTP) ∕ g)

RTP first on this card, since the whole site is built on it: 96.51 per cent, off the studio’s page for the named tile. B is the matched £50.00 and not the hundred pounds sitting in the account, for the reason entry two gives. W is twenty. And g is one while the terms credit the named title in full, which entry seven stops taking for granted.

£1,000.00 of staking, which at the 10p a turn supposed throughout is 10,000 turns and six hours fifty-six minutes of play

Those ten thousand turns are the part of a matched offer nobody prices. A licensed cycle may not be reopened inside 2.5 seconds RTS 14D, which keeps the hour to 1,440 turns, so the obligation runs to just under seven hours at the briskest pace a licensed build may be run at, and every turn is a separate deliberate act because nothing may run a sequence of them for the reader.

Three readings of one figure, to carry forward. The credit keeps 30.2 pence in every matched pound. The staking costs 69.8 pence in every matched pound. And the whole obligation, in the machine’s own units, is ten thousand turns at the cheapest turn this tile sells.

4

What ten times costs, which is the figure to carry away

The useful way to hold a requirement in the head is as a price per ten times. Ten times the credit buys £500.00 of staking here, and 3.49 points of that is £17.45, which prices every ten times of requirement on a fifty pound credit. That single figure settles any multiple a reader meets on this tile without further arithmetic.

The rows fall in a straight line because both ends of the multiplication are fixed once the tile is chosen. Each ten times adds £500.00 of staking and takes £17.45, and the last row is simply the point at which the additions have consumed the whole credit. That point is 28.7 times on this tile, and it is the machine’s figure rather than the offer’s: it is one divided by the 3.49 points the reel holds back, and no clause anybody writes can move it.

The unit price travels with the credit as well as with the tile, because both ends of the multiplication are proportions. Ten times a £25.00 credit costs £8.73 on this reel and ten times a £100.00 credit costs £34.90, so a reader holding different figures from these multiplies rather than starts again. What stays fixed under all of it is the pair of quantities the arithmetic rests on: the multiple the offer states and the points the reel keeps.

The drawing is the same arithmetic as the table with the proportions made visible, and the thing worth seeing in it is that the two halves of the requirement weigh the same. A reader who thinks of a heavy multiple as harsh and a light one as generous is reading a straight line as though it curved. The second ten times costs exactly what the first ten times cost, and so would the third, until the credit runs out at 28.7 times.

5

The first ten times and the second, and which one a licence allows

Ten times is not an arbitrary place to cut a requirement in half. That ten is the ceiling a licence puts on a play-through, in force since 19 January 2026 SR Code 5.1.1, so the first half of the requirement on this card is the whole of what a licensed cashier is permitted to ask and the second half is the part that exists only out here.

Priced on the figures already worked, that is £17.45. A licensed version of the same offer, pound for pound on fifty pounds at the ceiling, would leave £32.55 of the credit standing instead of £15.10. The licence is therefore worth £17.45 on this card, which is more than the credit’s own expected survival, and the whole of the difference is one line in a code of practice.

Read as a proportion rather than as a sum, the ceiling is worth 34.9 pence in every matched pound on this tile. A licensed version of the offer keeps 65.1 pence in the pound where the version weighed here keeps 30.2, and the whole of that difference is the second ten times. On the mildest multiple this section weighs, one line of a code of practice decides better than a third of the sum the match advertised.

Two things follow that are worth stating precisely. The first is that the ceiling counts in multiples of the bonus funds and not in percentages, so a larger headline does not buy a heavier obligation for each pound of credit: it buys more credit, and the obligation grows in step. The ratio of staking to credit is the multiple, and it is the multiple alone. The pages on this site about two hundred, three hundred and four hundred per cent work out what happens when the headline moves, and all of them rest on the figure in entry four.

The second is that the regulated ten is a cap on the multiple and on nothing else. It says nothing about what a credit may become, nothing about the smallest sum a counter will send, nothing about the rate at which a game is credited against the requirement, and nothing about how long the window is. A reader who treats a licensed offer as a solved problem has taken a ceiling on one term for a settlement of all of them.

6

The same match on a tile lower down the family’s figures

Every figure above belongs to one published return, so the last thing to vary is the name the staking is done on. Big Bass Keeping it Reel prints 96.07 per cent claim 74, which is 0.44 points below the tile in the head of this card. The payment, the match and the multiple all hold still.

At the lower figure the reel keeps 3.93 points, so the identical £1,000.00 costs £39.30 and what stands at the end is £10.70. The name on the tile is worth £4.40 here, which is more than a quarter of what the credit was expected to leave, and it is chosen in a lobby rather than in any term.

Put that beside the unit price from entry four and the comparison becomes exact. Ten times of requirement costs £17.45 on the first tile and £19.65 on the second, so moving down 0.44 points of published return costs about an eighth of what each ten times costs. A reader choosing between a twenty-times offer on the higher tile and an eighteen-times offer on the lower is making a trade the headline cannot express, and the arithmetic above is the only place it can be settled.

One more published figure separates these two tiles and it runs the other way from the return. A round of the title in the head is capped at 5,000 times the stake, and a round of the lower-returning one at 10,000 times claim 74. So the tile that gives back less over a long run of turns is the tile that can do more in a single round, and a reader choosing between them on the published return alone has not been told about the second axis. Neither ceiling is printed on any page the studio publishes: both are read out of what a session sends the game.

The middle column moves as well, and it is the column nobody is shown. Break-even falls from 28.7 times to 25.4 between these two tiles, so a requirement of twenty-six times would leave something on one of them and nothing on the other, with both offers advertising the same words and the reader choosing the difference by picking a name off a lobby tile.

7

The term with no figure in it, and what it does to all of this

One letter in the house line has been held at one throughout and it is the only one no sheet behind this site can supply. How much of a pound staked on a named slot a requirement agrees to count is settled by whoever drafted the terms, by neither the machine nor the rule book, and no sheet on this site holds a figure for one. This card has taken it at a whole pound in the pound because that is the ordinary case and because an assumption stated is better than a figure invented.

Move it and the page changes shape. At a third of a pound in the pound, the £1,000.00 of staking becomes £3,000.00, the expected cost rises to £104.70, and the close goes from £15.10 to −£54.70. The percentage in the headline has not moved, the multiple has not moved, the published return has not moved, and the offer has gone from keeping three tenths of the credit to costing more than the payment that bought it.

That is the largest single movement any term produces on this card, and it comes from the one term with no number attached to it in any source this site may cite. The Commission’s own record of the matter prints a respondent’s example of a thirty per cent contribution rate rather than a figure of its own, and takes no position on weighting at all the wagering consultation response. So a reader cannot look the figure up, and a page that supposed a low one would be making the offer look worse than anything published supports.

Which is why a baseline card has to name it rather than quietly assume it. Everything above is worked at a whole pound in the pound. If the terms in front of a reader say otherwise, every figure on this page divides by whatever rate they state, and the one in entry four divides with the rest: at half a pound in the pound, each ten times of requirement costs £34.90 rather than £17.45.

8

What a licence moves, and the four figures to take away

The closing exercise is to set the duties of a British licence against the sums above and print what each one is worth. On a matched offer three of them move money and one of them moves the clock.

The fourth is worth a sentence of its own, being the one duty that bites only where a payment has been made. A no-payment credit gives it nothing to attach to. A matched offer puts the reader’s own fifty pounds into the account, and under a British licence nothing in the terms may cap what comes back out of that pile. Out here the same fifty pounds is governed by the terms alone.

Here is what this card has weighed, in four figures. Fifty pounds matched pound for pound, at twenty times the credit, sends £1,000.00 over Big Bass Raceday Repeat at the published 96.51 per cent, costs £34.90 and leaves £15.10. On a tile printing 96.07 per cent it leaves £10.70, which prices the name at £4.40. Every ten times of requirement costs £17.45 of this credit, which prices any multiple a reader meets on this tile. And the ceiling a licence puts on the multiple is worth £17.45 on exactly these figures, which is the second half of the requirement and more than the credit is otherwise expected to leave.