Crash games: what science says about your odds (2026 study)

The UNLV 2026 study, in brief

The study in brief — Title: "Cash or Crash: Return to Player Percentages and Expected Value of Crash Games"
Authors: Robert H. Scott III, Mikhail M. Sher, Jonathan Daigle
Journal: UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, February 4, 2026
Read the study: https://oasis.library.unlv.edu/grrj/
Method: history of crash games, theoretical derivation of expected value, analysis of real player data on two popular crash games.
Key result: the theoretical calculations confirm that very large multipliers are mathematically rare; the study then measures player behaviour and observed RTP.
Limit: data on two games only; it names no "good" game and validates no strategy.
Transparency note: at the time of writing, only the public abstract was accessible — the authors' exact figures could not be verified; the numerical illustrations on this page come from standard crash-game mathematics, not from the study's results.

The question: "do crash games pay well?"

RTP is the theoretical share of stakes returned to players over the very long term (98% = €98 returned on average for €100 staked; €2 = the house edge). But it says nothing about how often you win, what one evening costs, or whether a "strategy" changes anything. That is what a team of American researchers examined.

What the researchers did

In three parts: the history (Bustabit, the first crash game — a crypto casino; then DraftKings' Rocket: the niche that became a format in its own right); the mathematics (deriving the theoretical values: the expected value of a round — negative for the player, like every casino game); the real data (real players' behaviour and observed RTP on two popular crash games — the calculations-versus-facts confrontation that makes the study interesting).

What they found — in plain language

Very large multipliers exist, but the calculations show they are rare. Illustration (standard mathematics, NOT the study's results): on a classic crash game with a ~1% house edge — reaching ×2: ~1 round in 2; ×10: ~1 in 10; ×100: ~1 in 100. The crash can also occur at ×1.00 (stake lost outright) — that is the mechanism by which the operator takes its margin. These orders of magnitude vary with each operator's parameters.

What the study does not prove

It does not say which game to choose (two games studied, no generalisation). It validates no strategy (martingale, auto cash-outs, "waiting for the big hit": none modifies the expected value; they change the distribution, never the long-term average). It does not predict your rounds (round independence — the ball has no memory).

What you take away

1. RTP is an average over millions of rounds, not a promise for your evening (variance).
2. No strategy beats the mathematics.
3. The crash can occur at any moment, including immediately; big multipliers are real but rare.
4. Check the parameters of the game you play.

Adults only (18+). Gambling must stay entertainment: never stake a sum you cannot afford to lose.

What does the UNLV 2026 study say about crash-game RTP?

That the player starts out losing on average: the expected value of a round is negative, and RTP is read over millions of rounds — it promises nothing for any given evening.

How often does a ×100 multiplier appear?

As a standard order of magnitude: about one round in 100. And the crash can also occur as early as ×1.00 — these very large multipliers exist, but stay rare.

Can a martingale change the expected value?

No. These approaches redistribute outcomes differently; the expected value does not move, and every round stays independent of the previous ones.