|
Title: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Sir_lagsalot on January 29, 2016, 10:42:51 AM Sorry guys, I don't know how long it's been this way, as I don't check up on my investment that frequently, (They're mebbr to be long term, so I have an excuse for not checking every few days, alright?) But I've recently found my invested 0.1 turned to dust. Not a very encouraging thing, at 3 AM.
So, how long has it been like this? Does anyone know who won this big amount? Or was there a glitch allowing gamblers to bet with a negative house edge? ;D Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Mickeyb on January 29, 2016, 11:03:33 AM Pretty much this
I was actually thinking of investing and noticed in the last hour it went from +16 to -36. Someone hit a nice bet for sure. Yes i think he is so lucky can't find where he won that much, Investor are in total loss now after being in profit for almost year. Investing in a gambling site seems also risky like doing gambling.It has certainly shown me the potential risks involved. I think the issue stems from such a small bankroll currently. Moneypot has been in the negatives multiple times over the past year. Even sites like JD got hit once by a whale (look up the Nakowa situation), which took months to recover from. Welcome to variance. What app was the big win in? I can not seem to find where someone did so well. Plinkopot. Info here: https://www.moneypot.com/users/moneypity Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ndnh on January 29, 2016, 11:06:35 AM Sorry guys, I don't know how long it's been this way, as I don't check up on my investment that frequently, (They're mebbr to be long term, so I have an excuse for not checking every few days, alright?) But I've recently found my invested 0.1 turned to dust. Not a very encouraging thing, at 3 AM. So, how long has it been like this? Does anyone know who won this big amount? Or was there a glitch allowing gamblers to bet with a negative house edge? ;D Don't know what exactly the issue is here. Right now the profit shows : Investor Profit: -27,307,361 bits May be the investor profit was reset under new ownership? (It was like 100BTC last time I checked) But in either case, 0.1BTC won't turn to dust.. Or is it that you were not aware of the change? MoneyPot.com is under new ownership. All old balances and sensitive information is with the old owner (rhavar) at mp.bustabit.com You can login here with your old moneypot account as well. You can log in on mp.bustabit.com and check if you have the balance. Edit: Or because of the big win, :o :o if you meant dust to be like 0.04-0.06 of the 0.1. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: janggernaut on January 29, 2016, 11:12:02 AM Pretty much this I was actually thinking of investing and noticed in the last hour it went from +16 to -36. Someone hit a nice bet for sure. Yes i think he is so lucky can't find where he won that much, Investor are in total loss now after being in profit for almost year. Investing in a gambling site seems also risky like doing gambling.It has certainly shown me the potential risks involved. I think the issue stems from such a small bankroll currently. Moneypot has been in the negatives multiple times over the past year. Even sites like JD got hit once by a whale (look up the Nakowa situation), which took months to recover from. Welcome to variance. What app was the big win in? I can not seem to find where someone did so well. Plinkopot. Info here: https://www.moneypot.com/users/moneypity damn, big won , investor profit on money pot down to -27 btc Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Sir_lagsalot on January 29, 2016, 11:20:34 AM Sorry guys, I don't know how long it's been this way, as I don't check up on my investment that frequently, (They're mebbr to be long term, so I have an excuse for not checking every few days, alright?) But I've recently found my invested 0.1 turned to dust. Not a very encouraging thing, at 3 AM. So, how long has it been like this? Does anyone know who won this big amount? Or was there a glitch allowing gamblers to bet with a negative house edge? ;D Don't know what exactly the issue is here. Right now the profit shows : Investor Profit: -27,307,361 bits May be the investor profit was reset under new ownership? (It was like 100BTC last time I checked) But in either case, 0.1BTC won't turn to dust.. Or is it that you were not aware of the change? MoneyPot.com is under new ownership. All old balances and sensitive information is with the old owner (rhavar) at mp.bustabit.com You can login here with your old moneypot account as well. You can log in on mp.bustabit.com and check if you have the balance. Edit: Or because of the big win, :o :o if you meant dust to be like 0.04-0.06 of the 0.1. Yes, dust as in more than half of my investment gone. I am well aware of the ownership changed, and as soon as mp.bustabit came online I withdrew and deposited into the new moneypot. I originally ended up somewhere like 0.12 which was great, so I left it to its own business and its practically nothing now to me. I still want it though, don't ask me for it :) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Sir_lagsalot on January 29, 2016, 11:23:21 AM Wow! Turns out that this guy: https://www.moneypot.com/users/moneypity won 55 btc on plinko. Impressive feat. He joined but a few hours ago. I joined multiple hours ago and i'm a couple of hundered thousands down...
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: cjmoles on January 29, 2016, 11:27:53 AM Pretty much this I was actually thinking of investing and noticed in the last hour it went from +16 to -36. Someone hit a nice bet for sure. Yes i think he is so lucky can't find where he won that much, Investor are in total loss now after being in profit for almost year. Investing in a gambling site seems also risky like doing gambling.It has certainly shown me the potential risks involved. I think the issue stems from such a small bankroll currently. Moneypot has been in the negatives multiple times over the past year. Even sites like JD got hit once by a whale (look up the Nakowa situation), which took months to recover from. Welcome to variance. What app was the big win in? I can not seem to find where someone did so well. Plinkopot. Info here: https://www.moneypot.com/users/moneypity damn, big won , investor profit on money pot down to -27 btc Wow....That's a pretty big wig win. I'm glad I pulled out just before ownership changed hands. Is it real? Or, is it some sort of typo..???..investor profit negative 27 BTC? So, does that mean the investors still owe 27 BTC? I don't quite understand the ramification of it all. Does the winner OWN moneypot.com now? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: TwitchySeal on January 29, 2016, 11:47:18 AM Pretty much this I was actually thinking of investing and noticed in the last hour it went from +16 to -36. Someone hit a nice bet for sure. Yes i think he is so lucky can't find where he won that much, Investor are in total loss now after being in profit for almost year. Investing in a gambling site seems also risky like doing gambling.It has certainly shown me the potential risks involved. I think the issue stems from such a small bankroll currently. Moneypot has been in the negatives multiple times over the past year. Even sites like JD got hit once by a whale (look up the Nakowa situation), which took months to recover from. Welcome to variance. What app was the big win in? I can not seem to find where someone did so well. Plinkopot. Info here: https://www.moneypot.com/users/moneypity damn, big won , investor profit on money pot down to -27 btc Wow....That's a pretty big wig win. I'm glad I pulled out just before ownership changed hands. Is it real? Or, is it some sort of typo..???..investor profit negative 27 BTC? So, does that mean the investors still owe 27 BTC? I don't quite understand the ramification of it all. Does the winner OWN moneypot.com now? It just means that the investor bankroll has lost 27% (which will make the max bet lower as well. Also, it looks like hes down 12 btc on dustdice. Bankroll: 105,004,937 bits Wagered: 2,057,379,113 bits Investor Profit: -27,281,233 bits Bets: 18,664,467 Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Mickeyb on January 29, 2016, 11:47:37 AM Wow....That's a pretty big wig win. I'm glad I pulled out just before ownership changed hands. Is it real? Or, is it some sort of typo..???..investor profit negative 27 BTC? So, does that mean the investors still owe 27 BTC? I don't quite understand the ramification of it all. Does the winner OWN moneypot.com now? Lol no. Just means investors lost 27 BTC , from what I've seen, about 30% of bankroll was lost. Will take at least a few months to recover but bankroll will get to the spot it was before this win eventually.Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: TwitchySeal on January 29, 2016, 11:51:22 AM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: JackpotRacer on January 29, 2016, 11:51:53 AM Wow....That's a pretty big wig win. I'm glad I pulled out just before ownership changed hands. Is it real? Or, is it some sort of typo..???..investor profit negative 27 BTC? So, does that mean the investors still owe 27 BTC? I don't quite understand the ramification of it all. Does the winner OWN moneypot.com now? Lol no. Just means investors lost 27 BTC , from what I've seen, about 30% of bankroll was lost. Will take at least a few months to recover but bankroll will get to the spot it was before this win eventually.a few months to recover 27 BTC? we had a player not long ago who lost 15 BTC in 2 short sessions Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: FruitsBasket on January 29, 2016, 11:54:12 AM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. I don't think so ::) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on January 29, 2016, 12:00:35 PM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. I don't think so ::) it looks to me that you are not a gambler and if I am right you can't win such an amount. only a gambler can win such an amount and because of this fact he can lose an amount like this very easily. easy come easy go Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: cjmoles on January 29, 2016, 12:02:09 PM Well, anybody who bets all maniac like that on games with a house edge is bound to throw it all back sooner or later...variance is a sour apple at times. It's easy come and easy go in the minds of those who have the bug. But, wow...it looked like investors were just cruising for awhile there...now a third of their investment gone! Ouch!
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: TwitchySeal on January 29, 2016, 12:17:03 PM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. I don't think so ::) I might. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: yahoo62278 on January 29, 2016, 12:18:47 PM Hopefully he goes full maniac on my site bubblesbit :)
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: twister on January 29, 2016, 01:00:39 PM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. I don't think so ::) I have seen people win 100s of BTC on gambling sites and lose them same day after couple of hours. So sooner or later the house will make up the losses and investor's money with it. The house always wins, right? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: panjul07 on January 29, 2016, 01:01:18 PM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. Hope he wont be greedy to put it all back to try to gain more and more profit. If I was him, I would prefer to cash out 90% of the profit or even more then continue to play just for fun. :) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: DeathAngel on January 29, 2016, 01:04:08 PM Well, anybody who bets all maniac like that on games with a house edge is bound to throw it all back sooner or later...variance is a sour apple at times. It's easy come and easy go in the minds of those who have the bug. But, wow...it looked like investors were just cruising for awhile there...now a third of their investment gone! Ouch! Yep, anybody who bets huge amounts at 98% or whatever will win lots but all it takes is one unlucky go & BOOM, all gone. The house always wins in the end, it's basic math. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: tommygunyeah on January 29, 2016, 01:06:53 PM Well, anybody who bets all maniac like that on games with a house edge is bound to throw it all back sooner or later...variance is a sour apple at times. It's easy come and easy go in the minds of those who have the bug. But, wow...it looked like investors were just cruising for awhile there...now a third of their investment gone! Ouch! Yep, anybody who bets huge amounts at 98% or whatever will win lots but all it takes is one unlucky go & BOOM, all gone. The house always wins in the end, it's basic math. Eventually the house will always win. We all know that. The fact is that the house may be rigged, and then it might end up being profitable, after all... Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Emerge on January 29, 2016, 02:00:02 PM It DID say
"Invest what you can afford to lose" Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Game_Seller on January 29, 2016, 02:37:55 PM People forget the house doesn't always win when they invest.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: EngiNerd on January 29, 2016, 04:46:30 PM Wow, that was quite a hit. I had just decided yesterday not to divest :P Shoulda listened to my gut...
Variance can be a bitch, but investing in MoneyPot is still +EV (over an infinite amount of time) since you're backed by the house edge, but short terms losses can suck. My congrats to the winner, and may he continue to gamble ;) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: maku on January 29, 2016, 04:56:33 PM Wow! Turns out that this guy: https://www.moneypot.com/users/moneypity won 55 btc on plinko. Impressive feat. He joined but a few hours ago. I joined multiple hours ago and i'm a couple of hundered thousands down... Was this all legit win? Or it is another feat similar to HufflePuff exploiting the system? There is saying that the House always wins. And you see, that is not always true.And it is a reminder: investing is not so different from gambling, you still can lose your money. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Falconer on January 29, 2016, 05:25:12 PM Was this all legit win? Or it is another feat similar to HufflePuff exploiting the system? There is saying that the House always wins. And you see, that is not always true. And it is a reminder: investing is not so different from gambling, you still can lose your money. There has no confirmation yet from the new owner and since no one posted about withdrawal delay from moneypot then we can assume that the player has withdrawn some of its bitcoin already so it could be considered as a legit win. Someone won over 50 btc as well IIRC from dustdice but soon after that investor got its luck back Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: cjmoles on January 29, 2016, 05:26:53 PM Eventually the house will always win. We all know that. The fact is that the house may be rigged, and then it might end up being profitable, after all... This reminds of a funny story. I was playing slots in an Indian casino and about 30 minutes into the game I hit a big jackpot. At that very instant, guy's with cameras came popping up out of nowhere snapping pictures...bout knocked me off my stool they flew up so fast! I remember thinking, "they must've set this up to promote the casino." The kicker was that I didn't want my picture taken because I was supposed to be somewhere else...One never knows when they'll be the chosen one! Sometimes brick and mortar clubs loosen their slots for advertising equity. They eventually get it all back. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: panjul07 on January 29, 2016, 05:41:57 PM Was this all legit win? Or it is another feat similar to HufflePuff exploiting the system? There is saying that the House always wins. And you see, that is not always true. And it is a reminder: investing is not so different from gambling, you still can lose your money. There has no confirmation yet from the new owner and since no one posted about withdrawal delay from moneypot then we can assume that the player has withdrawn some of its bitcoin already so it could be considered as a legit win. Someone won over 50 btc as well IIRC from dustdice but soon after that investor got its luck back The owner has just confirmed regarding this big winning https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1140898.msg13715691#msg13715691 , he said "suspicious bets" means that he think there were something wrong on moneypity's bets. Lets wait for moneypot staff to investigate this.. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Rmcdermott927 on January 29, 2016, 07:24:15 PM Was this all legit win? Or it is another feat similar to HufflePuff exploiting the system? There is saying that the House always wins. And you see, that is not always true. And it is a reminder: investing is not so different from gambling, you still can lose your money. There has no confirmation yet from the new owner and since no one posted about withdrawal delay from moneypot then we can assume that the player has withdrawn some of its bitcoin already so it could be considered as a legit win. Someone won over 50 btc as well IIRC from dustdice but soon after that investor got its luck back The owner has just confirmed regarding this big winning https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1140898.msg13715691#msg13715691 , he said "suspicious bets" means that he think there were something wrong on moneypity's bets. Lets wait for moneypot staff to investigate this.. I had quotes around "suspicious" because several people in the MP thread were calling them that. Until there is a investigation of the moneypot logs, no one knows if they were real, or if the guy was just insanely lucky. I know the staff is looking at it though. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: actmyname on January 29, 2016, 07:45:38 PM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. I don't think so ::) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: kotwica666 on January 29, 2016, 07:56:11 PM Wow! Nice hit!
I was always sure that the casino has to earn for themselves. It seems that not always .. Do you know any more pages / casino where you can invest this way? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: onlinedragon on January 29, 2016, 08:12:23 PM Was this all legit win? Or it is another feat similar to HufflePuff exploiting the system? There is saying that the House always wins. And you see, that is not always true. And it is a reminder: investing is not so different from gambling, you still can lose your money. There has no confirmation yet from the new owner and since no one posted about withdrawal delay from moneypot then we can assume that the player has withdrawn some of its bitcoin already so it could be considered as a legit win. Someone won over 50 btc as well IIRC from dustdice but soon after that investor got its luck back The owner has just confirmed regarding this big winning https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1140898.msg13715691#msg13715691 , he said "suspicious bets" means that he think there were something wrong on moneypity's bets. Lets wait for moneypot staff to investigate this.. I had quotes around "suspicious" because several people in the MP thread were calling them that. Until there is a investigation of the moneypot logs, no one knows if they were real, or if the guy was just insanely lucky. I know the staff is looking at it though. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Indianacoin on January 29, 2016, 09:53:12 PM In general all plinko type games are really risky I guess.
Eventually as an average it will look as if the game is in favor of the house. But in general they are too risky since nobody knows on which multiplier will a ball pot. Btw can anyone send me the seed of that revolutionary bet? Moneypot needs to detect whether its flawed or not. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: mtnsaa on January 29, 2016, 09:57:14 PM Moneypot seemed one of the only few sites where you could expect not to lose money but in Bitcoin all these sites usually scam you one way of another. I'm not implying they did it on purpose but something always happened, it's sad that Bitcoin always have this tainted image that is very true. It's just the problem of being unregulated.
To be clear, if you invest in a Casino, you shouldn't be losing money in the long run, there's actually no risk, the Casinos always win right!? So please explain why all these sites can't promise or guarantee at least some profit in the long run (I understand you can lose for some days due to a bad streak). Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: KnightTrader on January 29, 2016, 10:02:12 PM If it's fair won they they have to lower the max bet By my understanding that is pretty much automatic in MoneyPot and already lowered to respond current bankroll. Apps can have not updated info, but user get error message if bet is too high :)Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on January 29, 2016, 10:40:13 PM I had quotes around "suspicious" because several people in the MP thread were calling them that. Until there is a investigation of the moneypot logs, no one knows if they were real, or if the guy was just insanely lucky. I know the staff is looking at it though. I just checked his bet history. He made almost all his profit from a single bet: https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298 The payout table was set to: 121 47 13 5 3 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.4 3 5 13 47 121 and he hit the 121x He bet 400k bits and so made a profit of 48 BTC. When I set up the payout table like that myself it tells me the max bet is around 9k bits, so I don't understand why this bet was allowed to go ahead. https://i.imgur.com/m2sK0b1.jpg This is in agreement with the moneypot FAQ, which says: https://i.imgur.com/o4wmixA.png I never looked in detail at how the kelly criterion works when there are multiple mutually exclusive outcomes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion#Many_horses) like in the case of plinko bets; maybe it says we should risk this much. Could someone look into it and see? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: EngiNerd on January 29, 2016, 10:46:34 PM I just checked his bet history. He made almost all his profit from a single bet: https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298 The payout table was set to: 121 47 13 5 3 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.4 3 5 13 47 121 and he hit the 121x He bet 400k bits and so made a profit of 48 BTC. When I set up the payout table like that myself it tells me the max bet is around 9k bits, so I don't understand why this bet was allowed to go ahead. [/snip] This is in agreement with the moneypot FAQ, which says: [/snip] I never looked in detail at how the kelly criterion works when there are multiple mutually exclusive outcomes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion#Many_horses) like in the case of plinko bets; maybe it says we should risk this much. Could someone look into it and see? That is really interesting...nice work dooglus. I'm assuming the max bet would be lower now after such a huge loss, but it wouldn't have dropped from 400k to 9k on that line. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: yahoo62278 on January 29, 2016, 10:58:57 PM I just checked his bet history. He made almost all his profit from a single bet: https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298 The payout table was set to: 121 47 13 5 3 1.4 1.0 0.5 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.4 3 5 13 47 121 and he hit the 121x He bet 400k bits and so made a profit of 48 BTC. When I set up the payout table like that myself it tells me the max bet is around 9k bits, so I don't understand why this bet was allowed to go ahead. [/snip] This is in agreement with the moneypot FAQ, which says: [/snip] I never looked in detail at how the kelly criterion works when there are multiple mutually exclusive outcomes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion#Many_horses) like in the case of plinko bets; maybe it says we should risk this much. Could someone look into it and see? That is really interesting...nice work dooglus. I'm assuming the max bet would be lower now after such a huge loss, but it wouldn't have dropped from 400k to 9k on that line. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on January 29, 2016, 11:07:44 PM When I set up the payout table like that myself it tells me the max bet is around 9k bits, so I don't understand why this bet was allowed to go ahead. https://i.imgur.com/m2sK0b1.jpg That's definitely a huge underestimate. The max bet should be considerably larger. Although, I'm quite surprised it would allow 0.4 BTC bet -- that seems a bit much to me. By any chance, did the owners of MoneyPot.com change the bankroll risk to a 10x kelly? If anyone wants a worked example of figuring out the max bet for a normal kelly the maths is this: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/662104/kelly-criterion-with-more-than-two-outcomes If no one else does it, i'll go through it for that bet and see what it should be Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: TwitchySeal on January 29, 2016, 11:13:41 PM Within Kelly?
This is after the bankroll took big hit from 121x Outside paid 29,900,000 The max bet fluctuates constantly right? Wager: 9,997,748 bits Profit: +999,774.80 bits Investor Profit: -1000417.2563276 bits App Dev Profit: 642.456327602647 bits House Edge: 0.96% https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18559115 Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on January 29, 2016, 11:37:05 PM If no one else does it, i'll go through it for that bet and see what it should be My (untested) calculations: The kelly for that bet is a staggering 0.353028752 (aka the house should risk 35% of it's bankroll)?! wtf? Seems rather unintuitive, and likely I made a mistake (and possibly twice, once when first writing the generalize kelly code). Most of the work is in inverting the bet to be from the houses perspective, so here's what I came up with if it is of any help to anyone: Code: { profit: -4800000000, probability: 0.0000152587890625 },Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: klf on January 29, 2016, 11:38:09 PM Well, anybody who bets all maniac like that on games with a house edge is bound to throw it all back sooner or later...variance is a sour apple at times. It's easy come and easy go in the minds of those who have the bug. But, wow...it looked like investors were just cruising for awhile there...now a third of their investment gone! Ouch! In gambling site investments it is common and these are very high risky investments so no need to worry much. That's why we shouldn't put all our money in any one site to reduce our loses like this. Very rarely people win like this big amount from gambling and if he clever than he should withdraw his winnings. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: fullypak on January 30, 2016, 12:06:15 AM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. I don't think so ::) That is true. After winning gamblers start thinking today they may be lucky so they can try some more time to win even bigger and mostly they will lose there winnings and only smart guys will withdraw either full or partial amount to enjoy there success. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: futurebit640 on January 30, 2016, 12:37:21 AM ...Will take at least a few months to recover... Maybe. Or maybe he'll give it all back and then some in the next 20 minutes. I don't think so ::) That is true. After winning gamblers start thinking today they may be lucky so they can try some more time to win even bigger and mostly they will lose there winnings and only smart guys will withdraw either full or partial amount to enjoy there success. Once people addicted to gambling both winning and losing are problems for them because if they lose than they will try for winning and if they win and they will try for more profits so they don't have any intention to stop so gambling addiction is very bad for any one. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: blockage on January 30, 2016, 01:08:03 AM If no one else does it, i'll go through it for that bet and see what it should be My (untested) calculations: The kelly for that bet is a staggering 0.353028752 (aka the house should risk 35% of it's bankroll)?! wtf? Seems rather unintuitive, and likely I made a mistake (and possibly twice, once when first writing the generalize kelly code). Most of the work is in inverting the bet to be from the houses perspective, so here's what I came up with if it is of any help to anyone: Well 35% seems rather large, but I believe that was within the range of the ~150-160 BTC bankroll, so bet #18530298 (https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298) at least doesn't seem fishy that way. What's fishy is the 35%. So I went and calculated the kelly criterion for that payout table (https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298). Here is some Haskell code: Code: table :: [(Double, Double)] Which tells me Code: λ> kelly To me ~0.29% seems more realistic than 35.3028752%. So assuming the bet was a max bet (which it probably wasn't but was close) the house overbet by a factor of roughly 120x. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: EngiNerd on January 30, 2016, 01:09:07 AM Within Kelly? This is after the bankroll took big hit from 121x Outside paid 29,900,000 The max bet fluctuates constantly right? Wager: 9,997,748 bits Profit: +999,774.80 bits Investor Profit: -1000417.2563276 bits App Dev Profit: 642.456327602647 bits House Edge: 0.96% https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18559115 Whoa, so it allowed a bet of 9 BTC?? How is that possible? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on January 30, 2016, 01:18:17 AM Whoa, so it allowed a bet of 9 BTC?? How is that possible? The restriction is on profit, not wagered. You could wager >1000 BTC if you wanted, as long as you weren't trying to win too much To me ~0.29% seems more realistic than 35.3028752%. So assuming the bet was a max bet (which it probably wasn't but was close) the house overbet by a factor of roughly 120x. Good job! While it's more realistic, I think it doesn't pass the sniff test either. I believe the absolute lower bound would be the house edge, which in this case is ~0.92%. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: actmyname on January 30, 2016, 01:57:20 AM It does seem a little bit sketchy to me, though. Perhaps some thorough investigation and people that are great at maths should go into the statistics of this.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on January 30, 2016, 04:09:50 AM What's fishy is the 35%. So I went and calculated the kelly criterion for that payout table (https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298). Here is some Haskell code: To me ~0.29% seems more realistic than 35.3028752%. So assuming the bet was a max bet (which it probably wasn't but was close) the house overbet by a factor of roughly 120x. Good job! Kelly tells us (http://math.stackexchange.com/a/662210/35101) to maximise the sum of the probabilities times the log of (1 + b.x) where b is the profit divided by the stake, and x is the proportion of the bankroll to risk. Plotting that function against x I see: https://i.imgur.com/RWRoe2n.png Find the x value where that peaks, and we have the proportion of the bankroll to risk. It looks like it peaks at around 0.3, meaning we risk 30%. Let's zoom in: https://i.imgur.com/hWTG1zI.png So it peaks very close to 0.353, meaning we risk 35.3% of the bankroll. Thanks Kelly! Is your Haskell code remembering that we aren't risking the stake which is returned to the player? On the potential profit (payout - stake) is "risk" to the bankroll. Edit: I should post the equation of the curve I'm plotting so you can check I didn't do anything stupid. I'm looking at the bet 'backwards', ie. from the house's point of view. I am considering the house bet size to be the most it can lose on the bet. So the 'b' for the jackpot is -1 (a profit of -1 times the bet size). 'b' for the 2nd highest win is -46/120 (we only lose 46/120ths as much as we were willing to risk because the highest two payouts are 121 and 47). Etc: Code: plot [0.352:0.354] \ Edit2: I tried reading the Haskell code. (I don't know Haskell. I don't even know how many L's it has): Code: table = It looks like you're using newton's method to maximize the sum of the products - but you're using the payout multipliers from the player's point of view. You need to look at it from the other side. The house never wins 121x. The player's big wins are the house's big losses. We need to calculate each house profit or loss as a multiplier of the amount the house is risking. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Emerge on January 30, 2016, 04:34:20 AM So in layman's terms, did the bet go through due to an error or was it simply just luck? A huge heap ton of luck?
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on January 30, 2016, 04:58:43 AM So in layman's terms, did the bet go through due to an error or was it simply just luck? A huge heap ton of luck? The bet going through or not is something completely deterministic. As in, if it's "kelly compliant" it will go through. If it's not, it won't. So there's no luck involved. The greater question is, was the bet "kelly complaint" or not? I'm not really sure. Both Dooglus and I have independently calculated it, and are getting the same result (which would indicate it is). Blockage has calculated it, and believes the house is risking ~120x too much. Honestly, I don't know which is right. I have very little confidence in the hacked up code I wrote and the results are rather unintuitive (e.g. in some cases, Dooglus found it's recommending the casino to risk 90% of it's bankroll for a plinko bet with < 1% edge). Perhaps Dooglus and I are making the same mistake and getting the same result. But I also feel strongly like blockage's results are incorrect. I think that the house edge should be a lower-bound for the kelly, and blockage's result is under that. Although, it wouldn't be the first time he's proven me wrong. Anyway, maths if for nerds. Just simulate it and it should be be easy to see :P Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: blockage on January 30, 2016, 05:01:52 AM Edit: I should post the equation of the curve I'm plotting so you can check I didn't do anything stupid. I'm looking at the bet 'backwards', ie. from the house's point of view. I am considering the house bet size to be the most it can lose on the bet. So the 'b' for the jackpot is -1 (a profit of -1 times the bet size). 'b' for the 2nd highest win is -46/120 (we only lose 46/120ths as much as we were willing to risk because the highest two payouts are 121 and 47). Etc: Code: plot [0.352:0.354] \ Why exactly do you divide by 120? The only difference to what I calculated is that factor in the 'b's. So my plot looks like https://i.imgur.com/iKxFqcQ.png Code: plot [0:0.006] [-1e-5:3e-5] \ Edit2: I tried reading the Haskell code. (I don't know Haskell. I don't even know how many L's it has): Code: table = It looks like you're using newton's method to maximize the sum of the products - but you're using the payout multipliers from the player's point of view. You need to look at it from the other side. The house never wins 121x. The player's big wins are the house's big losses. We need to calculate each house profit or loss as a multiplier of the amount the house is risking. No, it's from the house's point of view. Notice the 1 - 121.0 in the second component of the first entry? It takes the stake of 1 into account and subtracts the payout to get the profit (-120) for the house in that case. Sorry I should've normalized the table a bit more. Edit: Oh I see what you're doing. You're normalizing the stake for the house. Let me ponder about that some more. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on January 30, 2016, 05:12:22 AM When I set up the payout table like that myself it tells me the max bet is around 9k bits, so I don't understand why this bet was allowed to go ahead. https://i.imgur.com/m2sK0b1.jpg That's definitely a huge underestimate. The max bet should be considerably larger. Although, I'm quite surprised it would allow 0.4 BTC bet -- that seems a bit much to me. By any chance, did the owners of MoneyPot.com change the bankroll risk to a 10x kelly? If anyone wants a worked example of figuring out the max bet for a normal kelly the maths is this: http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/662104/kelly-criterion-with-more-than-two-outcomes If no one else does it, i'll go through it for that bet and see what it should be To answer this, none of the site's code has been touched since the takeover still. No alterations have been made anywhere in the site, nor has it been rebooted or anything. Current dev. is supposed to be getting this done asap (including things like the support emails), afaik. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: TwitchySeal on January 30, 2016, 05:13:13 AM So in layman's terms, did the bet go through due to an error or was it simply just luck? A huge heap ton of luck? The bet going through or not is something completely deterministic. As in, if it's "kelly compliant" it will go through. If it's not, it won't. So there's no luck involved. The greater question is, was the bet "kelly complaint" or not? I'm not really sure. Both Dooglus and I have independently calculated it, and are getting the same result (which would indicate it is). Blockage has calculated it, and believes the house is risking ~120x too much. Honestly, I don't know which is right. I have very little confidence in the hacked up code I wrote and the results are rather unintuitive (e.g. in some cases, Dooglus found it's recommending the casino to risk 90% of it's bankroll for a plinko bet with < 1% edge). Perhaps Dooglus and I are making the same mistake and getting the same result. But I also feel strongly like blockage's results are incorrect. I think that the house edge should be a lower-bound for the kelly, and blockage's result is under that. Although, it wouldn't be the first time he's proven me wrong. Anyway, maths if for nerds. Just simulate it and it should be be easy to see :P Yes, he got very lucky. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: blockage on January 30, 2016, 05:26:23 AM Edit2: I tried reading the Haskell code. (I don't know Haskell. I don't even know how many L's it has): Code: table = It looks like you're using newton's method to maximize the sum of the products - but you're using the payout multipliers from the player's point of view. You need to look at it from the other side. The house never wins 121x. The player's big wins are the house's big losses. We need to calculate each house profit or loss as a multiplier of the amount the house is risking. No, it's from the house's point of view. Notice the 1 - 121.0 in the second component of the first entry? It takes the stake of 1 into account and subtracts the payout to get the profit (-120) for the house in that case. Sorry I should've normalized the table a bit more. Edit: Oh I see what you're doing. You're normalizing the stake for the house. Let me ponder about that some more. Ok, I now believe that you are correct and my initial calculation is invalid. The payouts need indeed be normalized by the house's risk, i.e. the biggest amount the house can lose, which is 120 in this case. So the code isn't faulty per se, but the payout table was. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Game_Seller on January 30, 2016, 06:24:50 AM So this means if I bet on any of the moneypot plinko games then there is a very tiny chance to win big money? Not a bad thing for us players but looks like odds are still very tough to beat. These bets are crazy look at dem odds.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on January 30, 2016, 06:58:08 AM So this means if I bet on any of the moneypot plinko games then there is a very tiny chance to win big money? Not a bad thing for us players but looks like odds are still very tough to beat. These bets are crazy look at dem odds. At plinkopot you can set your own payout table, so long as the house edge isn't under 0.9%. So whether you have a tiny chance of winning big money really depends on the payout table you select. MoneyPot allows you to set the payout multiplier to over 1000x, but plinkpot apparently doesn't. If you set the payout table to: [1.0656, 1.0585, 1.0368, 1.0155, 0.9616, 0.9841, 0.9895, 0.9918, 0.9962, 0.9918, 0.9895, 0.9841, 0.9616, 1.0155, 1.0368, 1.0585, 1.0656] then the house edge is 0.9997% and I believe moneypot will risk up to 99.974% of its bankroll per bet. So in theory it is possible for someone to win almost all of the bankroll in a single bet. But in practice to win 150 BTC when the highest payout is only 1.0656x you would have to be betting 150 / (1.0656 - 1) = 2286.58 over 2.2k BTC per bet... Somewhat more practically, the default 'orange' row at plinkpot has these payouts: [23, 9, 3, 2, 1.5, 1.2, 1.1, 1, 0.4, 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2, 3, 9, 23] and moneypot will risk up to 83.90% of its bankroll per bet on that line. To win 150 BTC at 23x you need to bet just 150.0 / (23 - 1) = 6.818 BTC per ball. (And get lucky). Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Game_Seller on January 30, 2016, 07:06:48 AM So this means if I bet on any of the moneypot plinko games then there is a very tiny chance to win big money? Not a bad thing for us players but looks like odds are still very tough to beat. These bets are crazy look at dem odds. At plinkopot you can set your own payout table, so long as the house edge isn't under 0.9%. So whether you have a tiny chance of winning big money really depends on the payout table you select. MoneyPot allows you to set the payout multiplier to over 1000x, but plinkpot apparently doesn't. If you set the payout table to: [1.0656, 1.0585, 1.0368, 1.0155, 0.9616, 0.9841, 0.9895, 0.9918, 0.9962, 0.9918, 0.9895, 0.9841, 0.9616, 1.0155, 1.0368, 1.0585, 1.0656] then the house edge is 0.9997% and I believe moneypot will risk up to 99.974% of its bankroll per bet. So in theory it is possible for someone to win almost all of the bankroll in a single bet. But in practice to win 150 BTC when the highest payout is only 1.0656x you would have to be betting 150 / (1.0656 - 1) = 2286.58 over 2.2k BTC per bet... Somewhat more practically, the default 'orange' row at plinkpot has these payouts: [23, 9, 3, 2, 1.5, 1.2, 1.1, 1, 0.4, 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2, 3, 9, 23] and moneypot will risk up to 83.90% of its bankroll per bet on that line. To win 150 BTC at 23x you need to bet just 150.0 / (23 - 1) = 6.818 BTC per ball. (And get lucky). I see so plinkopot max at 999x and betterbets has 9999x which means a much smaller bet could win large part of bankroll now the odds must be astronomical to win this. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on January 30, 2016, 07:54:22 AM I see so plinkopot max at 999x and betterbets has 9999x which means a much smaller bet could win large part of bankroll now the odds must be astronomical to win this. It's 1 in 65536 to end up in the left hand position, and 1 in 32768 to end up in either of the outside positions. So not really "astronomical". If you bet once per second you would hit one of the outside pockets every 9 hours or so. Edit: on average, of course! I don't mean every 9 hours. I mean the average time between hits would be 9 hours in the (very) long run. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: EngiNerd on January 30, 2016, 03:23:11 PM Somewhat more practically, the default 'orange' row at plinkpot has these payouts: [23, 9, 3, 2, 1.5, 1.2, 1.1, 1, 0.4, 1, 1.1, 1.2, 1.5, 2, 3, 9, 23] and moneypot will risk up to 83.90% of its bankroll per bet on that line. To win 150 BTC at 23x you need to bet just 150.0 / (23 - 1) = 6.818 BTC per ball. (And get lucky). Should they be risking that much of their bankroll in a single bet? It seems like as we've just seen, that leaves MoneyPot and its investors exposed to a whale getting lucky and wiping them out. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on January 30, 2016, 03:57:35 PM I see so plinkopot max at 999x and betterbets has 9999x which means a much smaller bet could win large part of bankroll now the odds must be astronomical to win this. It's 1 in 65536 to end up in the left hand position, and 1 in 32768 to end up in either of the outside positions. So not really "astronomical". If you bet once per second you would hit one of the outside pockets every 9 hours or so. Edit: on average, of course! I don't mean every 9 hours. I mean the average time between hits would be 9 hours in the (very) long run. if you are saying that "the chance is 1 in 32768 to end up in either or the outside positions" do you mean that for all color bet options? in case of green it is 3X in case of orange it is 23X in case of red it is 121X Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Blazed on January 30, 2016, 04:50:15 PM So if I understand this correctly... tl;dr That is how plinkopot works and this guy just got really lucky? or is their an error with kelly?
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: EngiNerd on January 30, 2016, 04:57:39 PM I see so plinkopot max at 999x and betterbets has 9999x which means a much smaller bet could win large part of bankroll now the odds must be astronomical to win this. It's 1 in 65536 to end up in the left hand position, and 1 in 32768 to end up in either of the outside positions. So not really "astronomical". If you bet once per second you would hit one of the outside pockets every 9 hours or so. Edit: on average, of course! I don't mean every 9 hours. I mean the average time between hits would be 9 hours in the (very) long run. if you are saying that "the chance is 1 in 32768 to end up in either or the outside positions" do you mean that for all color bet options? in case of green it is 3X in case of orange it is 23X in case of red it is 121X Yes, the odds are "1 in 32768" to end up in either of the outside positions for all color bet options. The color of the row has no impact on the odds at all, just the payout multiplier. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on January 30, 2016, 05:15:13 PM Should they be risking that much of their bankroll in a single bet? It seems like as we've just seen, that leaves MoneyPot and its investors exposed to a whale getting lucky and wiping them out. According to the Kelly criterion, yes they should be. You need to me risking that much to maximum the expected log of your bankroll. If you only risk 1% of your bankroll on the highest payout, you're risking much less than 1% of your bankroll on the other payouts, and those are the most common. The big payouts are rare enough that apparently it's worth risking more than 1% and relying on the fact that they don't come up very often. if you are saying that "the chance is 1 in 32768 to end up in either or the outside positions" do you mean that for all color bet options? in case of green it is 3X in case of orange it is 23X in case of red it is 121X Those are the payouts. I'm talking about the chance of them coming up, not the payouts when they do. The payouts are much lower than the odds against them happening because you also get paid when they don't come up. If you could set the payouts to 32768 in the two outsides and 0 everywhere else, that would be a zero house edge game. So if I understand this correctly... tl;dr That is how plinkopot works and this guy just got really lucky? or is their an error with kelly? The guy hit a 1-in-32k shot on his 27th attempt betting 0.4 BTC on the red line. That's about a 1 in 1200 chance of happening. So he got kind of lucky. It appears that the bet was less than a full Kelly, and that the proportion of the bankroll that Kelly tells us to risk is much higher than our intuition would suggest. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on January 30, 2016, 05:19:42 PM I see so plinkopot max at 999x and betterbets has 9999x which means a much smaller bet could win large part of bankroll now the odds must be astronomical to win this. It's 1 in 65536 to end up in the left hand position, and 1 in 32768 to end up in either of the outside positions. So not really "astronomical". If you bet once per second you would hit one of the outside pockets every 9 hours or so. Edit: on average, of course! I don't mean every 9 hours. I mean the average time between hits would be 9 hours in the (very) long run. if you are saying that "the chance is 1 in 32768 to end up in either or the outside positions" do you mean that for all color bet options? in case of green it is 3X in case of orange it is 23X in case of red it is 121X Yes, the odds are "1 in 32768" to end up in either of the outside positions for all color bet options. The color of the row has no impact on the odds at all, just the payout multiplier. are you sure? because this would be a terrible bet for a player if I see it as a standalone bet. for example I would bet 1 satoshi 32768 times (=32768 satoshi) to win a bet to get 3 satoshi - 23 satoshi or 121 satoshi edit: I see now that dooglus answered it Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on January 30, 2016, 05:32:55 PM According to the Kelly criterion, yes they should be. You need to me risking that much to maximum the expected log of your bankroll. If you only risk 1% of your bankroll on the highest payout, you're risking much less than 1% of your bankroll on the other payouts, and those are the most common. The big payouts are rare enough that apparently it's worth risking more than 1% and relying on the fact that they don't come up very often. 1 in 32768 is not rare imo and it would depend on how much you will earn with those other payouts to justify such an high payout (in relation to the Bank Roll) for the outside chance. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on January 30, 2016, 08:39:48 PM Should they be risking that much of their bankroll in a single bet? It seems like as we've just seen, that leaves MoneyPot and its investors exposed to a whale getting lucky and wiping them out. According to the Kelly criterion, yes they should be. You need to me risking that much to maximum the expected log of your bankroll. If you only risk 1% of your bankroll on the highest payout, you're risking much less than 1% of your bankroll on the other payouts, and those are the most common. The big payouts are rare enough that apparently it's worth risking more than 1% and relying on the fact that they don't come up very often. if you are saying that "the chance is 1 in 32768 to end up in either or the outside positions" do you mean that for all color bet options? in case of green it is 3X in case of orange it is 23X in case of red it is 121X Those are the payouts. I'm talking about the chance of them coming up, not the payouts when they do. The payouts are much lower than the odds against them happening because you also get paid when they don't come up. If you could set the payouts to 32768 in the two outsides and 0 everywhere else, that would be a zero house edge game. So if I understand this correctly... tl;dr That is how plinkopot works and this guy just got really lucky? or is their an error with kelly? The guy hit a 1-in-32k shot on his 27th attempt betting 0.4 BTC on the red line. That's about a 1 in 1200 chance of happening. So he got kind of lucky. It appears that the bet was less than a full Kelly, and that the proportion of the bankroll that Kelly tells us to risk is much higher than our intuition would suggest. Dooglus the math wizard comes through again, :p. To me, risking up to almost 100% of the bankroll is ludicrous. Regardless of the CHANCE of that happening, it's essentially taking the risk that at some point (which, statistically speaking, would happen given enough time) someone completely wipes it. While the house could win 10,000 BTC before that happens, the risk of an all or nothing is still fairly great. From the player's perspective, it's a great deal -- it essentially says that if you lose enough, you can keep your bets in line with the entire bankroll and at some point win back not only ALL your losses so far, but everyone else's losses + all investments that were made. It's definitely a system that needs to be re-evaluated risk-wise. Plinko is an interesting game due to how it works, though. Ideally, what seems the best from a non-mathematically-inclined perspective is to take the maximum win allowed (say 1%, 2%, whatever) and divide it by the highest multipliers to determine the maximum bet allowed. But I'm sure I'm missing something here... Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Quickseller on January 31, 2016, 03:07:23 AM To me, risking up to almost 100% of the bankroll is ludicrous. Regardless of the CHANCE of that happening, it's essentially taking the risk that at some point (which, statistically speaking, would happen given enough time) someone completely wipes it. Regardless of if this bet was kelly compliant, regardless of the question of if it was appropriate to allow this bet, and regardless of what the setters of MoneyPot were under RHaver, if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. I would tend to agree that allowing this much of the bankroll to be potentially lost in a single bet is probably not a good idea. According to dicesites.com, many of the top gambling sites have more then ~32k bets placed every day, which puts an excessive risk on the bankroll, as if bets are large enough, then the bankroll could potentially be wiped out multiple times per day. I am not exactly sure why the kelly suggests that this would be an appropriate risk, however this would probably be an example when what the kelly say should be 'overridden' and to allow less of a risk. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Dannie on January 31, 2016, 03:20:42 AM if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. The problem is he (and probably all the investors) didn't know. In fact, even dooglus's first post in this thread said "I don't understand why this bet was allowed to go ahead...I never looked in detail at how the kelly criterion works when there are multiple mutually exclusive outcomes like in the case of plinko bets" and RHaver said "I'm quite surprised it would allow 0.4 BTC bet -- that seems a bit much to me". They are only aware of what Kelly formula suggested in this case now, after seeing that bet happened and re-visiting the math behind it. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Quickseller on January 31, 2016, 03:30:14 AM if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. The problem is he (and probably all the investors) didn't know. (AFAIK) dooglus, nor RHaver are the ones who own MoneyPot, therefore it is not their responsibility to make sure that bets do not expose MoneyPot bankroll investors to excessive risk Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Dannie on January 31, 2016, 03:46:13 AM if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. The problem is he (and probably all the investors) didn't know. (AFAIK) dooglus, nor RHaver are the ones who own MoneyPot, therefore it is not their responsibility to make sure that bets do not expose MoneyPot bankroll investors to excessive risk But then the same could be applied to the investors. On the investment page, there is a reminder "Never invest more than you are willing to lose, and do not invest unless you clearly understand the risks and rewards." and on the FAQ page, it tells investors "We use the generalized kelly criterion, to determine if a bet is acceptable or not". I do agree with you that it may not be the best idea for sites to completely follow Kelly formula in this case though. Yup dooglus has nothing to do with MP while RHaver no longer owns it. What I was trying to say is that even the math gurus didn't realize the potential problem before it happened and I could understand why the current owners of MP didn't know the problem. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on January 31, 2016, 03:52:00 AM if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. The problem is he (and probably all the investors) didn't know. (AFAIK) dooglus, nor RHaver are the ones who own MoneyPot, therefore it is not their responsibility to make sure that bets do not expose MoneyPot bankroll investors to excessive risk I am not speaking on behalf of MP, I'm speaking on behalf of myself. Any official correspondence from MP itself will come from the official account. That said, I personally don't even understand Kelly, how it works, and how to break it down mathematically. It's not my area of expertise and I would never insinuate I know anything about it. I'm also not a developer, nor would I ever claim to be. As such, this entire discussion is completely foreign to me, :). Things like Kelly are way over my head. Looks like it's above others', too, with Bitvest's hefty loss today (9.2 BTC loss on a 0.1 BTC bet, with a 160 BTC bankroll). Wondering what their mass loss per roll is. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: lorylore on January 31, 2016, 04:13:58 AM as being an investor for myself, i believe that the policy is made up to profit the investor and the mp. if the casino function does not follow the rules set by us, should we still acknowledge the whole bet and pay the full price???
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Quickseller on January 31, 2016, 05:23:48 AM if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. The problem is he (and probably all the investors) didn't know. (AFAIK) dooglus, nor RHaver are the ones who own MoneyPot, therefore it is not their responsibility to make sure that bets do not expose MoneyPot bankroll investors to excessive risk I am not speaking on behalf of MP, I'm speaking on behalf of myself. Any official correspondence from MP itself will come from the official account. That said, I personally don't even understand Kelly, how it works, and how to break it down mathematically. It's not my area of expertise and I would never insinuate I know anything about it. I'm also not a developer, nor would I ever claim to be. As such, this entire discussion is completely foreign to me, :). Things like Kelly are way over my head. Looks like it's above others', too, with Bitvest's hefty loss today (9.2 BTC loss on a 0.1 BTC bet, with a 160 BTC bankroll). Wondering what their mass loss per roll is. Since you were offering bankroll investments, it would be your job to understand how Kelly works. If I had to guess I would say that Stunna did not know how probably fair betting works prior to deciding to open PD, however likely deals with it on a daily basis now. He previously has stated that none of the owners of PD are devs. The same is likely true for other technical aspects of PD. When you are managing the risks of other's money then you should understand these risks before you start offering bankroll investments. This is similar to how am escrow service should know how to keeps funds secure prior to offering his services. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on January 31, 2016, 05:31:32 AM if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. The problem is he (and probably all the investors) didn't know. (AFAIK) dooglus, nor RHaver are the ones who own MoneyPot, therefore it is not their responsibility to make sure that bets do not expose MoneyPot bankroll investors to excessive risk I am not speaking on behalf of MP, I'm speaking on behalf of myself. Any official correspondence from MP itself will come from the official account. That said, I personally don't even understand Kelly, how it works, and how to break it down mathematically. It's not my area of expertise and I would never insinuate I know anything about it. I'm also not a developer, nor would I ever claim to be. As such, this entire discussion is completely foreign to me, :). Things like Kelly are way over my head. Looks like it's above others', too, with Bitvest's hefty loss today (9.2 BTC loss on a 0.1 BTC bet, with a 160 BTC bankroll). Wondering what their mass loss per roll is. Since you were offering bankroll investments, it would be your job to understand how Kelly works. If I had to guess I would say that Stunna did not know how probably fair betting works prior to deciding to open PD, however likely deals with it on a daily basis now. He previously has stated that none of the owners of PD are devs. The same is likely true for other technical aspects of PD. When you are managing the risks of other's money then you should understand these risks before you start offering bankroll investments. This is similar to how am escrow service should know how to keeps funds secure prior to offering his services. I just want to say that... I'm impressed. Even when two of the more mathematically-inclined people on the forums didn't fully understand the repercussions of the Kelly algorithm, you do. From now on, I will be sure to bring any math-based questions I have directly to you, since you're obviously now the most knowledgeable person on the forums. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Chemistry1988 on January 31, 2016, 05:39:56 AM as being an investor for myself, i believe that the policy is made up to profit the investor and the mp. if the casino function does not follow the rules set by us, should we still acknowledge the whole bet and pay the full price??? All the bets have a positive EV from the viewpoint of investors and the site, but that doesn't mean investors will certainly get a profit particularly in the short run. I am not sure what you meant by "rules set by us", since there is no rule set by individual investor and all investment are treated the same way following the Kelly criterion, which unlike on some dice sites that you can set your own Kelly multiplier. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on January 31, 2016, 05:46:36 AM I just want to say that... I'm impressed. Even when two of the more mathematically-inclined people on the forums didn't fully understand the repercussions of the Kelly algorithm, you do. I was going to avoid this thread, but I don't think that's fair. While I indeed underestimated how much the house can "sanely" risk for many plinko bets, I didn't not fully understand the repercussions. In fact, on numerous occasions I have told investors that they could lose (almost) the entire bankroll with a single bet. (The most trivial example: A dice bet with 99.99% house edge can win 99.99% of the bankroll) To me, risking up to almost 100% of the bankroll is ludicrous. Regardless of the CHANCE of that happening, it's essentially taking the risk that at some point (which, statistically speaking, would happen given enough time) someone completely wipes it. While the house could win 10,000 BTC before that happens, the risk of an all or nothing is still fairly great. From the player's perspective, it's a great deal -- it essentially says that if you lose enough, you can keep your bets in line with the entire bankroll and at some point win back not only ALL your losses so far, but everyone else's losses + all investments that were made. FWIW, even if you don't understand the maths you should at least understand the high level purpose of the kelly criterion. This is almost the exact opposite of reality, and what we just spent hours proving on your behalf. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on January 31, 2016, 05:52:38 AM FWIW, even if you don't understand the maths you should at least understand the high level purpose of the kelly criterion. This is almost the exact opposite of reality, and what we just spent hours proving on your behalf. Can you please tl;dr this for me then? Something I'm not catching on to I guess. If the risked amount is a % of the bankroll (as per Dooglus), that % remains the same. So let's say there's 100 BTC in the BR, and 99.84% can be lost (99.84). Player loses 100 BTC chasing it. Now there's 200 BTC there, but he can chase after 199.68 of it (meaning his 100 + 99.68/99.84 of what he was chasing), and this could go on forever. A cap would prevent this, is my understanding (based on a few others also breaking it down). But am I misunderstanding something with the above? And I absolutely thank you for your help better understanding this, and Dooglus as well, :). Despite the hiccups, I think it was fairly alerting. (Also, I wasn't trying to be abrasive or devalue your assistance and/or previous/current knowledge on the subject, but rather explain that if people that deal with this a lot weren't completely aware, then to expect someone -- since he calls out me, specifically -- with no math background to know it all is a bit asinine) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on January 31, 2016, 06:07:21 AM Can you please tl;dr this for me then? Something I'm not catching on to I guess. If the risked amount is a % of the bankroll (as per Dooglus), that % remains the same. So let's say there's 100 BTC in the BR, and 99.84% can be lost (99.84). Player loses 100 BTC chasing it. Now there's 200 BTC there, but he can chase after 199.68 of it (meaning his 100 + 99.68/99.84 of what he was chasing), and this could go on forever. So for argument sake, lets use a gambler with infinite money. The site starts with a 100 BTC bankroll, this means using Dooglus' payouts the gambler would have to bet 1524 BTC to aim at winning the 99.97% of the bankroll. As the gambler loses money, to the house, the more and more he needs to bet. By the time the gambler wins the 99.97% of the bankroll, he will have probably grown the bankroll so much that the remaining 0.03% is far bigger than the initial bankroll. So even with infinite money, the gambler is still -EV and the casino still have +expected bankroll growth Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on January 31, 2016, 06:17:08 AM Can you please tl;dr this for me then? Something I'm not catching on to I guess. If the risked amount is a % of the bankroll (as per Dooglus), that % remains the same. So let's say there's 100 BTC in the BR, and 99.84% can be lost (99.84). Player loses 100 BTC chasing it. Now there's 200 BTC there, but he can chase after 199.68 of it (meaning his 100 + 99.68/99.84 of what he was chasing), and this could go on forever. So for argument sake, lets use a gambler with infinite money. The site starts with a 100 BTC bankroll, this means using Dooglus' payouts the gambler would have to bet 1524 BTC to aim at winning the 99.97% of the bankroll. As the gambler loses money, to the house, the more and more he needs to bet. By the time the gambler wins the 99.97% of the bankroll, he will have probably grown the bankroll so much that the remaining 0.03% is far bigger than the initial bankroll. So even with infinite money, the gambler is still -EV and the casino still have +expected bankroll growth Ahh, I see now. He had said that Plinkopot didn't allow higher multipliers but MP does, which led me to believe that the bet needed would be much, much smaller than that. This makes sense. So essentially, a median needs to be reached between BR risk and allowing that thrilling chance (likely through a capped "if max. win > x% BR, decline, even if it meets Kelly" setup), so as to protect investors and still allow risk-takers to get their fix. And we can essentially classify the bet in question as being a rare event, but still something that's concerning solely because of its impact. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on January 31, 2016, 06:34:36 AM @Dooglus an interesting note:
Taking the payout line that was used: [ 121, 47, 13, 5, 3, 1.4, 1, 0.5, 0.3, 0.5, 1, 1.4, 3, 5, 13, 47, 121 ] We naively assumed the house had a 1% edge, but actually it's an illusion. We can actually normalize this payout line to: Code: [ 172.42857142857144, 66.71428571428572, 18.142857142857142, 6.714285714285714, 3.857142857142857, 1.5714285714285712, 1, 0.2857142857142857, 0, 0.2857142857142857, 1, 1.5714285714285712, 3.857142857142857,66.714285714285714, 18.142857142857142, 66.71428571428572, 172.42857142857144 ] So when betting 0.7 BTC, it's an identical bet! The EV stays the same (-0.01 BTC or what ever), but now we calculate the house edge, we'll figure it out as 0.01 / 0.7 ... or 40% higher. The "super payout" line you had, just exacerbates the problem. The most you could lose was ~4% of your bet, so with a 1% house edge, the *real* house edge, after you normalize the payouts would be 25%! So while crazy, it's not as crazy as you'd first think! -- One take away for plinko players would be that the house edge is rather misleading. You actually pay the house edge on the entire bet, rather than just what you're risking. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Wendigo on January 31, 2016, 06:40:32 AM That's an amazing win such a lucky guy. I haven't played Plinko in my life but what is the probability to hit that 121x? And did Moneypot pay him the whole amount because there is another thread where he claims he is still waiting for his withdrawal.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Shogen on January 31, 2016, 06:49:37 AM That's an amazing win such a lucky guy. I haven't played Plinko in my life but what is the probability to hit that 121x? And did Moneypot pay him the whole amount because there is another thread where he claims he is still waiting for his withdrawal. The chance is 1 in 32768 or 0.00305%. As Rmcdermott927 said in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1140898.msg13715691#msg13715691 yesterday, the moneypot staff were looking into it to make sure the bets placed were legitimate, which I think is a common practice. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on January 31, 2016, 09:43:18 AM (AFAIK) dooglus, nor RHaver are the ones who own MoneyPot Your grammar is weird, but to be clear I do not and never have owned any part of moneypot. I just want to say that... I'm impressed. Even when two of the more mathematically-inclined people on the forums didn't fully understand the repercussions of the Kelly algorithm, you do. From now on, I will be sure to bring any math-based questions I have directly to you, since you're obviously now the most knowledgeable person on the forums. Don't feed the troll. It's clear nobody understood the risks, not even the guy who coded moneypot... @Dooglus an interesting note: Taking the payout line that was used: [ 121, 47, 13, 5, 3, 1.4, 1, 0.5, 0.3, 0.5, 1, 1.4, 3, 5, 13, 47, 121 ] We naively assumed the house had a 1% edge, but actually it's an illusion. We can actually normalize this payout line to: Code: [ 172.42857142857144, 66.71428571428572, 18.142857142857142, 6.714285714285714, 3.857142857142857, 1.5714285714285712, 1, 0.2857142857142857, 0, 0.2857142857142857, 1, 1.5714285714285712, 3.857142857142857,66.714285714285714, 18.142857142857142, 66.71428571428572, 172.42857142857144 ] That is interesting. It took me a while to understand your point, so I guess others may not understand it too. You noticed than none of the payouts in the array are zero, so if you bet 1 BTC you can't lose the whole 1 BTC no matter which payout you get. And so in a sense you aren't really risking 1 BTC. The losest payout is 0.3x, so the worst that can happen is that you lose 0.7 BTC. So you recalculated the multipliers such that you get the same result from betting 0.7 BTC with your new payouts as you would have got betting 1 BTC with the original payouts. Then there's a zero in the array, and you're truly risking the whole amount you bet. Calculate the new multipliers as (oldMult - minOldMult) / (1 - minOldMult) So the 121 jackpot becomes (121 - 0.3) / (1 - 0.3) = 172.4285 So when betting 0.7 BTC, it's an identical bet! The EV stays the same (-0.01 BTC or what ever), but now we calculate the house edge, we'll figure it out as 0.01 / 0.7 ... or 40% higher. Right. The house edge of the original row of payouts is 0.9195%, and after 'normalizing' it, it goes up to 1.3136%. You're losing the same, but betting smaller, and so are losing a bigger percentage of your stake. The "super payout" line you had, just exacerbates the problem. The most you could lose was ~4% of your bet, so with a 1% house edge, the *real* house edge, after you normalize the payouts would be 25%! So while crazy, it's not as crazy as you'd first think! Yes. Before normalization the house edge of this line: [1.0656, 1.0585, 1.0368, 1.0155, 0.9616, 0.9841, 0.9895, 0.9918, 0.9962, 0.9918, 0.9895, 0.9841, 0.9616, 1.0155, 1.0368, 1.0585, 1.0656]; is 0.9997%. After normalization: [2.7083, 2.5234, 1.9583, 1.4036, 0.0, 0.5859, 0.7265, 0.7864, 0.9010, 0.7864, 0.7265, 0.5859, 0.0, 1.4036, 1.9583, 2.5234, 2.7083] it is 26.0342%. 'Kelly' tells us the same before and after normalization: risk 99.97% of the bankroll. This doesn't seem overly unreasonable. Who is going to play a 26% house edge game at large enough stakes to stand a chance of winning the whole bankroll? To gain an intuitive understanding of why Kelly tells us to risk more than 26% of our bankroll on a 26% house edge bet, it helps to see the plinko bet as 17 separate bets. For the low payout bets where the ball lands towards the middle we would want to set quite a high max bet, since the payout is a small multiplier of the stake, but for the high payout bets on the outside edges we would want to set a low max bet. We can only set a single max bet, and so we need to find some way of balancing the competing forces. It turns out we maximise the log of the bankroll by giving more weight to the max bet implied by the more common (inner, low payout) outcomes. As the wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion) says: Quote Even Kelly supporters usually argue for fractional Kelly (betting a fixed fraction of the amount recommended by Kelly) for a variety of practical reasons, such as wishing to reduce volatility, [...] One take away for plinko players would be that the house edge is rather misleading. You actually pay the house edge on the entire bet, rather than just what you're risking. And so you should never play a plinko game that doesn't have a 0x somewhere on it? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: TwitchySeal on January 31, 2016, 05:00:59 PM Regardless of if this bet was kelly compliant, regardless of the question of if it was appropriate to allow this bet, and regardless of what the setters of MoneyPot were under RHaver, if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. No it's not. As an investor - I would prefer the Bankroll not to be based on any humans personal risk tolerance level. (if my assumptions are accurate, then especially ranlos) I would prefer my investment to be subjected to the extreme risk they said it would be. I'm fully aware the bankroll could get wiped out and the upside that comes with it. That's one of the biggest reasons I find it appealing. https://i.gyazo.com/3446f76977ab43143bb715851ae80fe5.png ~32k bets placed every day, which puts an excessive risk on the bankroll, as if bets are large enough, then the bankroll could potentially be wiped out multiple times per day You've got it backwards. Volume reduces variance. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: MaritiJames3 on February 02, 2016, 04:11:01 PM That's an amazing win such a lucky guy. I haven't played Plinko in my life but what is the probability to hit that 121x? And did Moneypot pay him the whole amount because there is another thread where he claims he is still waiting for his withdrawal. At gambling you must have just really lucky. You can not just go win viz. You really need luck and at the right time. You also need to invest much else win you anything because. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Quickseller on February 02, 2016, 04:29:01 PM Regardless of if this bet was kelly compliant, regardless of the question of if it was appropriate to allow this bet, and regardless of what the setters of MoneyPot were under RHaver, if it is your opinion that this bet would allow excessive risks, then it is your responsibility as the owner/operator of MoneyPot to disallow such bets from being placed. As the owner/operator of MoneyPot, it is your responsibility to ensure that your bankroll investors are not exposed to excessive risk. No it's not. As an investor - I would prefer the Bankroll not to be based on any humans personal risk tolerance level. (if my assumptions are accurate, then especially ranlos) I would prefer my investment to be subjected to the extreme risk they said it would be. I'm fully aware the bankroll could get wiped out and the upside that comes with it. That's one of the biggest reasons I find it appealing. https://i.gyazo.com/3446f76977ab43143bb715851ae80fe5.png My point more is that if the person who is offering an investment personally thinks that such investment carries excessive risks then he should either not offer such investment or should disclose his opinion of such. ~32k bets placed every day, which puts an excessive risk on the bankroll, as if bets are large enough, then the bankroll could potentially be wiped out multiple times per day You've got it backwards. Volume reduces variance. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: EngiNerd on February 02, 2016, 05:31:27 PM Perhaps this is a silly question, but I'm curious why are we just now having this discussion? MoneyPot has been up and running for years, and I'm assuming its usage/implementation of the kelly criterion has remained the same over that time. It's just strange to me that previously there had not been any bets that drew this kind of attention to the % of bankroll kelly would allow to be risked.
Is it because of the additional nuances introduced by multi-results with the Plinko play-style? Or just simply due to the fact that in certain scenarios it's not as intuitive as previously thought? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Chemistry1988 on February 02, 2016, 05:42:44 PM Perhaps this is a silly question, but I'm curious why are we just now having this discussion? MoneyPot has been up and running for years, and I'm assuming its usage/implementation of the kelly criterion has remained the same over that time. It's just strange to me that previously there had not been any bets that drew this kind of attention to the % of bankroll kelly would allow to be risked. Moneypot (not to be confused with the game Bustabit which was originally called Moneypot) was launched last April, so it has been running for less than a year AFAIK. Yup the implementation of bet limit (just follow what Kelly criterion suggests) has not been changed since the beginning, but in the past no gambler was dare and lucky enough to make such a big bet on plinko and to win such a big amount. It seems no one even knows that the max bet limit on plinko is actually that high in the past. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 02, 2016, 06:04:50 PM Perhaps this is a silly question, but I'm curious why are we just now having this discussion? MoneyPot has been up and running for years, and I'm assuming its usage/implementation of the kelly criterion has remained the same over that time. It's just strange to me that previously there had not been any bets that drew this kind of attention to the % of bankroll kelly would allow to be risked. Moneypot (not to be confused with the game Bustabit which was originally called Moneypot) was launched last April, so it has been running for less than a year AFAIK. Yup the implementation of bet limit (just follow what Kelly criterion suggests) has not been changed since the beginning, but in the past no gambler was dare and lucky enough to make such a big bet on plinko and to win such a big amount. It seems no one even knows that the max bet limit on plinko is actually that high in the past. Yep, the bet is unprecedented. It was a risk of almost half a bitcoin on a very, very long shot. But it worked for him so all the more power to him, :). An official announcement will be posted soon, but the verdict is that he's seriously lucky and it was real (BTW, he has been paid already). A lot of time was spent verifying everything and there's no sign of foul play. His bet was recreated in an even more risky fashion (i.e., apparently he didn't do a max. bet) and worked as expected. @Dooglus and Ryan, I want to thank you both for your time here as well. Your math skills are way beyond most peoples', and far beyond mine (as you can see by my misunderstandings within this thread). It was a very interesting event, to say the least! And this situation will absolutely be bringing changes to the risk algorithm soon, :). Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on February 02, 2016, 07:10:23 PM You've got it backwards. Volume reduces variance. No. TS is correct. It's hard to argue against you when you only say "No" and fail to back it up with any kind of argument about why increased volume wouldn't lead to decreased variance. How it is/was setup is that if you make the maximum bet size, then once out of roughly every 30k bets the bankroll will lose ~99% of it's value. So while gamblers are making the other ~29,999 bets, the bankroll will be steadily increasing, as will the maximum bet size. On the 30kth roll, the bankroll would lose ~99% of it's value and would then be significantly less attractive to gamble against which would make it less likely that it would ever recover. You seem to be misunderstanding. During the ~29,999 losing bets the bankroll grows by a factor of more than 100, so when the lucky bet wins 99% of it the bankroll is still bigger than at the start. The current setting optimises the rate of growth of the logarithm of the bankroll, and so is set 'correctly', especially given the terms set out in the FAQ about allowing full-kelly bets. I expect the people running the site will overreact to this lucky win and reduce the maximum bet. In doing so they will be reducing their expected profit, and also their variance. I did the same at Just-Dice - it's hard not to overreact in the face of suffering a big loss like this. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ndnh on February 02, 2016, 07:47:09 PM So a bet that should have had a 30%+ house edge (which is certain to make most gambler's think twice) goes through at 0.92% HE? Isn't that considered negligence? Over months of running no one checked if max bet is in force for plinko?
The restriction is on profit, not wagered. You could wager >1000 BTC if you wanted, as long as you weren't trying to win too much I'd just take the highest multiplier as the trying to win amount. So the max-bet would be say on a 100BTC bankroll, and a 100x max multiplier on 1x kelly would be 0.01BTC. Edit: On a red (usually) line the player would be trying to hit the highest multiplier which should the trying-to-win amount, Looks like it's above others', too, with Bitvest's hefty loss today (9.2 BTC loss on a 0.1 BTC bet, with a 160 BTC bankroll). Wondering what their mass loss per roll is. Bitvest has only allowed the max bet that it states as limit against each line. The bet in question was around 0.008BTC that fell into a x1111 payout. The investor cannot claim not to know the risks. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on February 02, 2016, 07:54:55 PM So a bet that should have had a 30%+ house edge (which is certain to make most gambler's think twice) goes through at 0.92% HE? Isn't that considered negligence? Over months of running no one checked if max bet is in force for plinko? I think you may have missed the part of the thread, where it was demonstrated how and why it should have gone through. There was no mistake Quote I'd just take the highest multiplier as the trying to win amount. So the max-bet would be say on a 100BTC bankroll, and a 100x max multiplier on 1x kelly would be 0.01BTC. That's not a 1x kelly, though. What MP uses, is a 1x kelly. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ndnh on February 02, 2016, 08:01:05 PM Quote I'd just take the highest multiplier as the trying to win amount. So the max-bet would be say on a 100BTC bankroll, and a 100x max multiplier on 1x kelly would be 0.01BTC. That's not a 1x kelly, though. What MP uses, is a 1x kelly. Well, then I won't use kelly. ;D I don't seem to understand the kelly either. ;) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on February 02, 2016, 08:03:38 PM ~32k bets placed every day, which puts an excessive risk on the bankroll, as if bets are large enough, then the bankroll could potentially be wiped out multiple times per day You've got it backwards. Volume reduces variance. Of course it does. For instance, on BaB in the last 6 hours, we've had someone (Alexy (https://www.bustabit.com/user/Alexy)) win as much as the MP whale, and it's a total non-issue because of (our current high) volume. (In the same time period, another guy lost 10 BTC, and another couple people lost a bitcoin each) and in the course of the week the casino is still significantly up. As an investor, you wouldn't even be breaking as sweat. But with low volume site, if the whale doesn't come back (a reason i never delay withdrawals ;D) it's a possibility the investors will never even make their money back Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 02, 2016, 08:05:17 PM You seem to be misunderstanding. During the ~29,999 losing bets the bankroll grows by a factor of more than 100, so when the lucky bet wins 99% of it the bankroll is still bigger than at the start. the problem I see with this bet is that even the chance is 1 in ~30k the user can win it in his first bet before the 29,999 losing bets. or what do I miss here? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on February 02, 2016, 08:12:26 PM the problem I see with this bet is that even the chance is 1 in ~30k the user can win it in his first bet before the 29,999 losing bets. or what do I miss here? Sure, there's nothing stopping that happening. You can be the poor sucker who invests before someone wins 99% of the bankroll, and then get diluted and never get your money back. Bankrolling is a high-risk investment, treat it as such. Sometimes it seems low risk, because there's not much action happening, but it's just an illusion. (And that's even before you take into consideration the counter-party risks and what not). Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 02, 2016, 08:30:38 PM the problem I see with this bet is that even the chance is 1 in ~30k the user can win it in his first bet before the 29,999 losing bets. or what do I miss here? Sure, there's nothing stopping that happening. You can be the poor sucker who invests before someone wins 99% of the bankroll, and then get diluted and never get your money back. Bankrolling is a high-risk investment, treat it as such. Sometimes it seems low risk, because there's not much action happening, but it's just an illusion. (And that's even before you take into consideration the counter-party risks and what not). lets see what I am still missing here. I don't know any land based or online casino that would take the risk to lose 90%+ of his Bank Roll with one bet and actually risking to close down their casino. I am also not aware that they use KC. why would MP allow this kind of risk? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on February 02, 2016, 08:37:32 PM lets see what I am still missing here. I don't know any land based or online casino that would take the risk to lose 90%+ of his Bank Roll with one bet and actually risking to close down their casino. I am also not aware that they use KC. why would MP allow this kind of risk? Well for instance, when I ran MP I personally put 100 BTC in the bankroll. Had the casino lost 90% of it's bankroll, I would've re-evaluated the risk and put another 100 BTC in (and repeat). Alternatively, I could've say put 500 BTC in the bankroll and operated at a 0.2x kelly for instance. (For me the former is much better, especially in in the case of a hack or exploit or what not. And I wanted to hold as little of other peoples money as possible, so by making it stupidly risky, that kind of helped. Most of the big investors I talked to were comfortable with the idea of risking 99% of the money they put in) And while I'm not an investor in the current MP, if I did, I would much prefer it operating at a 1x kelly then something conservative. I think my biggest risk (as an investor) would be a hack, exploit or inside job. So minimizing the amount of money I physically deposit is ideal. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: asuryan180 on February 02, 2016, 08:52:59 PM I think my biggest risk (as an investor) would be a hack, exploit or inside job. So minimizing the amount of money I physically deposit is ideal. That's True,by considering he recent high rollers winning hundreds of bitcoins while playing against the house is kind strage and particularly when it happens at a publicly funded/invested site or any other gambling platform.Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: WEBcreator on February 02, 2016, 09:00:28 PM That's True,by considering he recent high rollers winning hundreds of bitcoins while playing against the house is kind strage and particularly when it happens at a publicly funded/invested site or any other gambling platform. There's nothing strange with it, as it has been explained by ranlo that there is no evidence of foul play and the bet was a legit bet. As has been stated in the FAQ as well that investing is an extremely risky action so potential investor needs to make sure that he can afford to invest since there are huge risks involved Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on February 03, 2016, 06:18:38 AM the problem I see with this bet is that even the chance is 1 in ~30k the user can win it in his first bet before the 29,999 losing bets. or what do I miss here? What you're missing is that on the other hand the same guy could make 99,999 losing bets in a row and never hit the 121x payout. It's a gamble, and nobody is saying the investors always win. By using the Kelly criterion the house is optimising the expected returns for the investors. That doesn't mean the investors won't be making a loss at times. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 03, 2016, 06:54:55 AM the problem I see with this bet is that even the chance is 1 in ~30k the user can win it in his first bet before the 29,999 losing bets. or what do I miss here? What you're missing is that on the other hand the same guy could make 99,999 losing bets in a row and never hit the 121x payout. It's a gamble, and nobody is saying the investors always win. By using the Kelly criterion the house is optimising the expected returns for the investors. That doesn't mean the investors won't be making a loss at times. yes the player could make 99,999 losing bets in a row but as it is a bet of 1 in ~30k he could still win the outer with his first few bets or even more than once in his first few bets. why should a casino take such a high and risky gamble? IMO a casino should never take such a high risk gamble with a possibility to get wiped out in one bet. as I posted before I don't know any land based or online casino beside MP that is taking such a dangerous risk. to me it looks like that this high risk KC handling is only for plinko or does MP have other games with such high risk payouts? maybe the previous MP owner could answer this question. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on February 03, 2016, 07:35:59 AM yes the player could make 99,999 losing bets in a row but as it is a bet of 1 in ~30k he could still win the outer with his first few bets or even more than once in his first few bets. why should a casino take such a high and risky gamble? Because it maximises the expected growth of the logarithm of their bankroll. IMO a casino should never take such a high risk gamble with a possibility to get wiped out in one bet. And they never do. The only time you risk 100% of your bankroll on a single event is if the house edge is 100% - and in that case the player is guaranteed to lose. as I posted before I don't know any land based or online casino beside MP that is taking such a dangerous risk. Then there are lots of places leaving money on the table. to me it looks like that this high risk KC handling is only for plinko or does MP have other games with such high risk payouts? maybe the previous MP owner could answer this question. If somebody wants to bet with a 99% house edge against them on a dice game, MP will happily risk 99% of its bankroll on that bet. An example of such a bet: you roll a number in the range 0.00 to 99.99. If it's less than 5.00 you double your money. Otherwise you lose. You have a 1 in 20 chance of doubling your money, and a 19 in 20 chance of losing it. Those are horrible odds for the player, and great odds for the house. The house has a 90% house edge. What percentage of your bankroll would you risk taking such a bet, if you were the house? The correct "Kelly" amount is to risk 90% of your bankroll, since the house edge is 90%. (RTP = 5 * 2 = 10%) I ran a simulation (https://gist.github.com/dooglus/1426a596d59b722d3312), having the house risk different percentages of its bankroll from 0% to 99% while the player max-bets against them 1000 times in a row. Here's a chart of the average of the log of the house bankroll for each percentage risked: https://i.imgur.com/6Qy3Tk4.png Notice how the house does best when it risks 90% of its bankroll per bet? That's the point. Edit: I re-ran the simulation, but for a 1% house edge bet. The variance is a lot higher, due to the smaller house edge, but the basic features of the curve are clear enough: risking 1% is optimal. risking 2% gives you a zero expected growth of log(bankroll), and higher than 2% risk is actually bad for business: https://i.imgur.com/uw0pYri.png Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: sana54210 on February 03, 2016, 08:03:40 AM Oh man , that is quite a news actually, I was almost certain to invest some amount there in moneypot, after watching for so many days. But meh, if someone can win so big on plinkopot, I will think thrice before investing anything now.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 03, 2016, 08:31:37 AM Oh man , that is quite a news actually, I was almost certain to invest some amount there in moneypot, after watching for so many days. But meh, if someone can win so big on plinkopot, I will think thrice before investing anything now. your view as an investor is very interesting and understandable. we need a poll where investors are asked if they would take this kind of risk to get wiped out in one bet. I for myself know what option I would choose :) lets take Ryan's comment (Most of the big investors I talked to were comfortable with the idea of risking 99% of the money they put in) IMO those big investors who are comfortable with this kind of risk are gamblers and not investors I need to read back because I think I remember that a poster wrote that no one knew about this high plinko risk and even not the MP coder. and if this is correct how could Ryan ask any investor if he will accept a 99% BR wipe out risk if he was not aware of this plinko risk? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on February 03, 2016, 05:53:21 PM I ran a simulation (https://gist.github.com/dooglus/1426a596d59b722d3312) I modified the simulation to it's running the 121x "red" plinkopot line: Quote r = random.random() * 65536 if r >= 26333 and r < 39203: p = 0.3 elif r >= 14893 and r < 50643: p = 0.5 elif r >= 6885 and r < 58651: p = 1 elif r >= 2517 and r < 63019: p = 1.4 elif r >= 697 and r < 64839: p = 3 elif r >= 137 and r < 65399: p = 5 elif r >= 17 and r < 65519: p = 13 elif r >= 1 and r < 65535: p = 47 else: p = 121 and generated some plots of the average log bankroll growth against percentage of bankroll risked. It takes a lot of rolls to get a good smooth curve, presumably because of the high variance of the 121x payout. First attempt: https://i.imgur.com/r9RFprA.png Second attempt: https://i.imgur.com/0GpnZMG.png Both show that risking somewhere around 40% of the bankroll per game is optimal, but that risking half that isn't anywhere near half as bad. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ndnh on February 03, 2016, 06:18:15 PM I think you may have missed the part of the thread, where it was demonstrated how and why it should have gone through. There was no mistake I tried to read and understand things again, but still can't seem to. Can someone summarize why the bet went through? Was the bet supposed to go through? https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298 shows <1% house edge. But risking tens of bitcoins at 1% edge is crazy, so I assumed it shouldn't have gone through ??? Edit: unless the max bet plinkopot shows is wrong, and the amount taken as trying to win is much lower than the max payout on the line. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 03, 2016, 06:23:57 PM I ran a simulation (https://gist.github.com/dooglus/1426a596d59b722d3312) I modified the simulation to it's running the 121x "red" plinkopot line: Quote r = random.random() * 65536 if r >= 26333 and r < 39203: p = 0.3 elif r >= 14893 and r < 50643: p = 0.5 elif r >= 6885 and r < 58651: p = 1 elif r >= 2517 and r < 63019: p = 1.4 elif r >= 697 and r < 64839: p = 3 elif r >= 137 and r < 65399: p = 5 elif r >= 17 and r < 65519: p = 13 elif r >= 1 and r < 65535: p = 47 else: p = 121 and generated some plots of the average log bankroll growth against percentage of bankroll risked. It takes a lot of rolls to get a good smooth curve, presumably because of the high variance of the 121x payout. First attempt: https://i.imgur.com/r9RFprA.png Second attempt: https://i.imgur.com/0GpnZMG.png Both show that risking somewhere around 40% of the bankroll per game is optimal, but that risking half that isn't anywhere near half as bad. very admirable your efforts to explain, to prove or to find the best KC %age for the plinko game. I would expect this effort from the ex owner or new owner of MP you are saying that risking 40% of the BR would be optimal but half = 20% would also be acceptable? did I get this right? what about those 83% or 99% KC risk for the plinko game? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ndnh on February 03, 2016, 06:31:52 PM In a case where a player's bankroll is higher than the site bankroll, wouldn't such a system maximize the risk (along with expected profit)? Is that desirable, say, against a 1% fixed max profit?
Am I correct to say that in such a case, an investment in bustabit would be safer than one in moneypot? Edit: What would be the max bet (on a 1% HE) on a 999x line on a 100BTC bankroll? I think it would be higher than LB's.. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on February 03, 2016, 07:19:33 PM Can someone summarize why the bet went through? Was the bet supposed to go through? The bet went through because the site was using the Kelly criterion to decide how much of its bankroll to risk. The Kelly criterion tells it to risk 35.3% of its bankroll when playing the 'red' line (with 121x max payout). https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298 shows <1% house edge. But risking tens of bitcoins at 1% edge is crazy, so I assumed it shouldn't have gone through ??? People are familiar with dice site style betting, where there are only two outcomes (win/lose). In that case Kelly tells us that the percentage of the bankroll to risk is the same as the percentage house edge. It's quite different for plinko games where there are a range of outcomes. In that case Kelly tells us to risk more than (house edge)% of the bankroll. See my most recent two charts. Risking 35% hits the peak of those charts. Risking only 1% gets you far lower expected log growth. you are saying that risking 40% of the BR would be optimal but half = 20% would also be acceptable? did I get this right? It appears that 35.3% is optimal (for the 121x red line - it differs vastly depending on the line we're talking about). And looking at the chart, it looks like risking half that doesn't reduce the expected log growth by a whole lot. what about those 83% or 99% KC risk for the plinko game? Those were for different payout lines. The 83% was for the 'orange' line, and the 99% was a silly extreme example where all the payouts were very close to 1x and the true house edge was much higher than 1% (since the player isn't really risking most of his stake at all when there's no chance of losing most of it). The orange line pays out like this: Quote if r >= 26333 and r < 39203: p = 0.4 elif r >= 14893 and r < 50643: p = 1 elif r >= 6885 and r < 58651: p = 1.1 elif r >= 2517 and r < 63019: p = 1.2 elif r >= 697 and r < 64839: p = 1.5 elif r >= 137 and r < 65399: p = 2 elif r >= 17 and r < 65519: p = 3 elif r >= 1 and r < 65535: p = 9 else: p = 23 and when I ran a simulation I got a plot of return against risk like this: https://i.imgur.com/Y6v3YVT.png It peaks around 83% as expected. Risking half that looks like it gets you around 60-70% of the expected growth. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ndnh on February 03, 2016, 07:25:55 PM Can someone summarize why the bet went through? Was the bet supposed to go through? The bet went through because the site was using the Kelly criterion to decide how much of its bankroll to risk. The Kelly criterion tells it to risk 35.3% of its bankroll when playing the 'red' line (with 121x max payout). https://www.moneypot.com/bets/18530298 shows <1% house edge. But risking tens of bitcoins at 1% edge is crazy, so I assumed it shouldn't have gone through ??? People are familiar with dice site style betting, where there are only two outcomes (win/lose). In that case Kelly tells us that the percentage of the bankroll to risk is the same as the percentage house edge. It's quite different for plinko games where there are a range of outcomes. In that case Kelly tells us to risk more than (house edge)% of the bankroll. See my most recent two charts. Risking 35% hits the peak of those charts. Risking only 1% gets you far lower expected log growth. Thanks for clearing it up. :D Makes perfect sense now. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: dooglus on February 03, 2016, 07:39:45 PM In a case where a player's bankroll is higher than the site bankroll, wouldn't such a system maximize the risk (along with expected profit)? Is that desirable, say, against a 1% fixed max profit? The charts I posted assume the player has an infinite bankroll, and makes a max bet every time. ie. I'm already assuming the player(s) have more than the site. Am I correct to say that in such a case, an investment in bustabit would be safer than one in moneypot? That would depend on how bustabit sets its maximum bet. I think Ryan sets it way too high most of the time relative to the site's bankroll. I expect he's operating way past the peak on the chart, and maybe has a negative expectation of log bankroll growth if everyone was to max bet all the time. But it's not (last i heard) open to public investment, and he's aware of the risks, so what can you do? Edit: What would be the max bet (on a 1% HE) on a 999x line on a 100BTC bankroll? I think it would be higher than LB's.. It would depend hugely on the other numbers in the payout table. The Kelly calculation is dominated by the more common payout multipliers. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Blazed on February 04, 2016, 05:27:32 AM I have been waiting 48 hours now for a withdraw... anyone else having issues? Is there a main thread for MoneyPot anymore?
Edit: it is a small amount also... little under .4BTC Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Falconer on February 04, 2016, 05:58:31 AM I have been waiting 48 hours now for a withdraw... anyone else having issues? Is there a main thread for MoneyPot anymore? Edit: it is a small amount also... little under .4BTC I withdrawed around 0.25 like 7 hours ago and it is sent immediately . The old thread by rhavar has been locked and there is a new moneypot's thread but it seems some app owner is derailing his personal issue there which clutter up the thread with the same complaint so ranlo locked the thread Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 04, 2016, 06:14:08 AM which clutter up the thread with the same complaint so ranlo locked the thread Misinformation ftw. Ranlo didn't start the thread so Ranlo had no control over the thread so Ranlo could not have possibly locked the thread. Ranlo never censors anyone. @Blazed, there was a note among admins about the withdrawal. Not sure why it hadn't been sent yet. I'll ping it... Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 04, 2016, 07:01:43 AM which clutter up the thread with the same complaint so ranlo locked the thread Misinformation ftw. Ranlo didn't start the thread so Ranlo had no control over the thread so Ranlo could not have possibly locked the thread. Ranlo never censors anyone. @Blazed, there was a note among admins about the withdrawal. Not sure why it hadn't been sent yet. I'll ping it... are you one of the new owners of MP? as far as I understood MP paid out the OP's big win and confirmed there was nothing wrong with his bets. why are you still delaying all withdrawals? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: sana54210 on February 04, 2016, 09:23:34 AM which clutter up the thread with the same complaint so ranlo locked the thread Misinformation ftw. Ranlo didn't start the thread so Ranlo had no control over the thread so Ranlo could not have possibly locked the thread. Ranlo never censors anyone. @Blazed, there was a note among admins about the withdrawal. Not sure why it hadn't been sent yet. I'll ping it... are you one of the new owners of MP? as far as I understood MP paid out the OP's big win and confirmed there was nothing wrong with his bets. why are you still delaying all withdrawals? I think when there are several admins such problems occur. If even one of them is no satisfied with a particular result, they will have to pause and stop withdrawals unless all are satisfied. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Blazed on February 04, 2016, 04:12:20 PM which clutter up the thread with the same complaint so ranlo locked the thread Misinformation ftw. Ranlo didn't start the thread so Ranlo had no control over the thread so Ranlo could not have possibly locked the thread. Ranlo never censors anyone. @Blazed, there was a note among admins about the withdrawal. Not sure why it hadn't been sent yet. I'll ping it... Alright...still nothing though. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 04, 2016, 08:53:41 PM which clutter up the thread with the same complaint so ranlo locked the thread Misinformation ftw. Ranlo didn't start the thread so Ranlo had no control over the thread so Ranlo could not have possibly locked the thread. Ranlo never censors anyone. @Blazed, there was a note among admins about the withdrawal. Not sure why it hadn't been sent yet. I'll ping it... are you one of the new owners of MP? as far as I understood MP paid out the OP's big win and confirmed there was nothing wrong with his bets. why are you still delaying all withdrawals? Nothing was delayed, per se. To keep a bit safer, the site runs far less BTC in the hot wallet than the cold wallet. There were a lot of withdrawals the day he tried to withdraw, which had drained the hot wallet. At this point, Blazed had made a withdrawal that exceeded its balance, which puts it in a "failed" state for admins to take care of. Shortly after, there were more deposits, but the system doesn't automatically attempt to keep pushing transactions through that are already "failed," so it still requires admin intervention. Past that, I apologize but I have no information, :(. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Blazed on February 05, 2016, 04:11:26 AM Well, my withdraw came through so all sorted out now. Thanks for getting this fixed up for me.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: hua_hui on February 06, 2016, 01:44:58 PM today i just went to see my moneypot and the drop is really very huge for me. it is gonna to take months to recover the losses.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: WEBcreator on February 06, 2016, 03:42:45 PM today i just went to see my moneypot and the drop is really very huge for me. it is gonna to take months to recover the losses. Depending on the amount wagered actually. Most of the sites in moneypot has a standard house edge of around 1 % so if they want to recover 25~ btc then it will need atleast 2500 btc wagered , around 25 days assuming it has 100 btc wagered per day without any surprise variance to take a hit for the house. Due note that this number is just average so it could be faster or slower Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: znickelbackz on February 06, 2016, 04:16:13 PM sound dangerous. must be aware about this. it's not look like it can turn back to normal anytime soon, but i really hope it will.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: BigMac on February 06, 2016, 04:27:01 PM today i just went to see my moneypot and the drop is really very huge for me. it is gonna to take months to recover the losses. I think "months" would very likely be an overstatement. In post #3, ndnhc posted that the investor profit was -27.3 btc on Jan 29. At this moment, the investor profit is only -19.0 btc. With this trend, the number could turn back positive in a month or so, but of course it could also receive another heavy blow. :P Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 06, 2016, 10:41:05 PM today i just went to see my moneypot and the drop is really very huge for me. it is gonna to take months to recover the losses. I think "months" would very likely be an overstatement. In post #3, ndnhc posted that the investor profit was -27.3 btc on Jan 29. At this moment, the investor profit is only -19.0 btc. With this trend, the number could turn back positive in a month or so, but of course it could also receive another heavy blow. :P And in the first 30 days, the site ended up like +28 BTC, so following that pattern, it should just be a couple weeks for breakeven. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: hua_hui on February 06, 2016, 11:50:44 PM well, why did i say months is becuz it took about 2 to 3 months for me to gain certain amount of btc and now to get back on the green, by the same rate i experience before, i would say need another month from this post onward.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 06, 2016, 11:54:02 PM well, why did i say months is becuz it took about 2 to 3 months for me to gain certain amount of btc and now to get back on the green, by the same rate i experience before, i would say need another month from this post onward. If you invested soon before the drop, I'd say you're looking at 1.5-2 months, assuming another hit doesn't come. But that's the joy with investments: you don't know what's going to happen. The only difference between investing in a site and playing on it is that the house (investment) has a long-term positive. It could take 6 months. It could take 5 years. It could take 50000 years. The math doesn't say *when* it will occur, just that, under mathematical principles, it will. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: hua_hui on February 07, 2016, 12:21:01 AM well, why did i say months is becuz it took about 2 to 3 months for me to gain certain amount of btc and now to get back on the green, by the same rate i experience before, i would say need another month from this post onward. If you invested soon before the drop, I'd say you're looking at 1.5-2 months, assuming another hit doesn't come. But that's the joy with investments: you don't know what's going to happen. The only difference between investing in a site and playing on it is that the house (investment) has a long-term positive. It could take 6 months. It could take 5 years. It could take 50000 years. The math doesn't say *when* it will occur, just that, under mathematical principles, it will. yup, i invested when mp since the available of the take over and it is still way deep in the red. well i am not complaining cause i believe in the end, i will still make it in the green. when i start to invest in mp, i also got hit by a huge loss but i still manage to bear it out, not as huge as this tho. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Quickseller on February 07, 2016, 12:26:36 AM well, why did i say months is becuz it took about 2 to 3 months for me to gain certain amount of btc and now to get back on the green, by the same rate i experience before, i would say need another month from this post onward. If you invested soon before the drop, I'd say you're looking at 1.5-2 months, assuming another hit doesn't come. But that's the joy with investments: you don't know what's going to happen. The only difference between investing in a site and playing on it is that the house (investment) has a long-term positive. It could take 6 months. It could take 5 years. It could take 50000 years. The math doesn't say *when* it will occur, just that, under mathematical principles, it will. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: TwitchySeal on February 07, 2016, 12:42:25 AM well, why did i say months is becuz it took about 2 to 3 months for me to gain certain amount of btc and now to get back on the green, by the same rate i experience before, i would say need another month from this post onward. If you invested soon before the drop, I'd say you're looking at 1.5-2 months, assuming another hit doesn't come. But that's the joy with investments: you don't know what's going to happen. The only difference between investing in a site and playing on it is that the house (investment) has a long-term positive. It could take 6 months. It could take 5 years. It could take 50000 years. The math doesn't say *when* it will occur, just that, under mathematical principles, it will. This is, of course, also assuming that a whale doesn't double the moneypot bankroll within the next 6 hours. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: erwin45hacked on February 07, 2016, 03:28:37 AM ]This is of course assuming that there is sufficient gambling volume that will allow the bankroll to recover. Moneypot will live as long as betterbets.io is still on moneypot. There are alot of other site as well however betterbets made alot of volume for them, without betterbetsthen it will probably take alot longer than expected . It will take some time but the volume needed to recover will be there. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: amacar2 on February 07, 2016, 04:08:17 AM I think plinko game is quite dangerous for moneypot. When they go beyond offering only dice games, they have to face this huge loss. I would like to say it is glitches in their api making them loss rather someone being over lucky to won big.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Superhitech on February 07, 2016, 04:25:29 AM today i just went to see my moneypot and the drop is really very huge for me. it is gonna to take months to recover the losses. I think "months" would very likely be an overstatement. In post #3, ndnhc posted that the investor profit was -27.3 btc on Jan 29. At this moment, the investor profit is only -19.0 btc. With this trend, the number could turn back positive in a month or so, but of course it could also receive another heavy blow. :P And in the first 30 days, the site ended up like +28 BTC, so following that pattern, it should just be a couple weeks for breakeven. I don't think we should be thinking in months, as it depends who and what amount they bet. Some whale could boost moneypot profit by a few bitcoins in less than a day if they are unlucky and bet a lot, but if no one bets a large sum of money, it could take many months to recover. It depends; investing is kind of like gambling, except of course, it is much safer. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: futurebit640 on February 07, 2016, 04:26:07 AM I think plinko game is quite dangerous for moneypot. When they go beyond offering only dice games, they have to face this huge loss. I would like to say it is glitches in their api making them loss rather someone being over lucky to won big. If they want to attract more gamblers to there apps than they have to take these risks otherwise if only dice game than you may not get so much traffic to make profits for them. These are the investment risks one should take if any one want make fast money in gambling. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 07, 2016, 04:54:39 AM today i just went to see my moneypot and the drop is really very huge for me. it is gonna to take months to recover the losses. I think "months" would very likely be an overstatement. In post #3, ndnhc posted that the investor profit was -27.3 btc on Jan 29. At this moment, the investor profit is only -19.0 btc. With this trend, the number could turn back positive in a month or so, but of course it could also receive another heavy blow. :P And in the first 30 days, the site ended up like +28 BTC, so following that pattern, it should just be a couple weeks for breakeven. I don't think we should be thinking in months, as it depends who and what amount they bet. Some whale could boost moneypot profit by a few bitcoins in less than a day if they are unlucky and bet a lot, but if no one bets a large sum of money, it could take many months to recover. It depends; investing is kind of like gambling, except of course, it is much safer. Definitely true, but when you don't have outside information available, you have to extrapolate from what you already know. The past month and a half is all there is to go by, and you can't necessarily rely on whales, so in terms of safety (read: a generalized idea) it's best to look at it as if things continued the same path, with the same loss/win ratio (note that this also differs, due to variance). At least to me, it's safer to assume it'll take 1.5-2 months than it is to keep thinking "a whale could turn this around TOMORROW!" In the former, it's more conservative. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Shogen on February 07, 2016, 05:18:20 AM I think plinko game is quite dangerous for moneypot. When they go beyond offering only dice games, they have to face this huge loss. I would like to say it is glitches in their api making them loss rather someone being over lucky to won big. What do you mean by "glitches in the api"? Are you referring to the decision of taking that bet, or the calculation of the bet result? For the former one, as dooglus has shown in https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1345170.msg13760281#msg13760281, it is in fact the right thing to do under Kelly formula. For the latter one, I believe the owners have checked it multiple times before processing the big withdraw. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: hua_hui on February 07, 2016, 06:41:00 AM today i just went to see my moneypot and the drop is really very huge for me. it is gonna to take months to recover the losses. I think "months" would very likely be an overstatement. In post #3, ndnhc posted that the investor profit was -27.3 btc on Jan 29. At this moment, the investor profit is only -19.0 btc. With this trend, the number could turn back positive in a month or so, but of course it could also receive another heavy blow. :P And in the first 30 days, the site ended up like +28 BTC, so following that pattern, it should just be a couple weeks for breakeven. I don't think we should be thinking in months, as it depends who and what amount they bet. Some whale could boost moneypot profit by a few bitcoins in less than a day if they are unlucky and bet a lot, but if no one bets a large sum of money, it could take many months to recover. It depends; investing is kind of like gambling, except of course, it is much safer. Definitely true, but when you don't have outside information available, you have to extrapolate from what you already know. The past month and a half is all there is to go by, and you can't necessarily rely on whales, so in terms of safety (read: a generalized idea) it's best to look at it as if things continued the same path, with the same loss/win ratio (note that this also differs, due to variance). At least to me, it's safer to assume it'll take 1.5-2 months than it is to keep thinking "a whale could turn this around TOMORROW!" In the former, it's more conservative. i would also like to think it as a safe approach. cant just always rely on the big whale to cash in for us. there will also have a limit to how much they can cash in and the huge risk they give us when they are betting too. huge whales have shown in the past that they can too damp our reserve by a lump sum too. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: lorylore on February 07, 2016, 07:33:51 AM a lot of people like to have the ideas of big whales coming to play it out. i believe the right behaviour should be focus on how to attract more players as it is not very healthy for sites or apps just to depend on a few big spenders to survive. similarly, if we are too dependent of the whale, wont that also means on a lucky day, the whales can severally dump our pots which is not a good thing to have.
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: BTCevo on February 07, 2016, 09:23:09 AM ]This is of course assuming that there is sufficient gambling volume that will allow the bankroll to recover. Moneypot will live as long as betterbets.io is still on moneypot. There are alot of other site as well however betterbets made alot of volume for them, without betterbetsthen it will probably take alot longer than expected . It will take some time but the volume needed to recover will be there. I am not so sure about it because nowadays their wagering is not as huge as the past few months ago. Because most of their big whale is already out from there. But I admit it that betterbets is giving the huge contribution for moneypot so that moneypot can still recover their loss before Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Dennis7777 on February 07, 2016, 09:46:50 AM ]This is of course assuming that there is sufficient gambling volume that will allow the bankroll to recover. Moneypot will live as long as betterbets.io is still on moneypot. There are alot of other site as well however betterbets made alot of volume for them, without betterbetsthen it will probably take alot longer than expected . It will take some time but the volume needed to recover will be there. I am not so sure about it because nowadays their wagering is not as huge as the past few months ago. Because most of their big whale is already out from there. But I admit it that betterbets is giving the huge contribution for moneypot so that moneypot can still recover their loss before I am not sure if the big whales has left Betterbets, but AFAIK Betterbets is still by far the most popular app on the Moneypot platform. Since the transfer of ownership of Moneypot, the total wagered on all apps combined is 2962 btc in which 1583 btc or 53.4% is on BB. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: lorylore on February 07, 2016, 02:38:55 PM ]This is of course assuming that there is sufficient gambling volume that will allow the bankroll to recover. Moneypot will live as long as betterbets.io is still on moneypot. There are alot of other site as well however betterbets made alot of volume for them, without betterbetsthen it will probably take alot longer than expected . It will take some time but the volume needed to recover will be there. I am not so sure about it because nowadays their wagering is not as huge as the past few months ago. Because most of their big whale is already out from there. But I admit it that betterbets is giving the huge contribution for moneypot so that moneypot can still recover their loss before I am not sure if the big whales has left Betterbets, but AFAIK Betterbets is still by far the most popular app on the Moneypot platform. Since the transfer of ownership of Moneypot, the total wagered on all apps combined is 2962 btc in which 1583 btc or 53.4% is on BB. i would see this as an win win situation for both betterbet and moneypot. With moneypot, more confidence will be in betterbet even though it was famous before. I feel that when it link with moneypot, a lot of new comers still to swarm in and keep it lively and become a great place to play. that is how i feel it is able to sustain the crowd from leaking out. However, that is really my personal opinion. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: cancerbola on February 10, 2016, 12:13:02 PM Well at least MP has recovered 10 BTC. Now investors are at around -14 BTC, which is a nice recovery.
Speaking of Moneypot, does anyone else notice that the footer of the MoneyPot page is still unchanged? "MoneyPot S.L.R. is a fully incorporated Costa Rican gaming company" Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: shulio on February 10, 2016, 01:18:47 PM Well at least MP has recovered 10 BTC. Now investors are at around -14 BTC, which is a nice recovery. Speaking of Moneypot, does anyone else notice that the footer of the MoneyPot page is still unchanged? "MoneyPot S.L.R. is a fully incorporated Costa Rican gaming company" The new owner probably purchase the license from ryan as well so the footer remain unchanged or if they didnt purchase it from ryan then all they need to do is to take down that words, not really a big deal anyway. Regarding the profit, it seems betterbets has made a good profit so far for moneypot Bets Profit 28,218,020.56 bits (1.49%) Expected Profit 18,845,955.14 bits (1.00%) Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 10, 2016, 02:01:58 PM Well at least MP has recovered 10 BTC. Now investors are at around -14 BTC, which is a nice recovery. Speaking of Moneypot, does anyone else notice that the footer of the MoneyPot page is still unchanged? "MoneyPot S.L.R. is a fully incorporated Costa Rican gaming company" The new owner probably purchase the license from ryan as well so the footer remain unchanged or if they didnt purchase it from ryan then all they need to do is to take down that words, not really a big deal anyway. Regarding the profit, it seems betterbets has made a good profit so far for moneypot Bets Profit 28,218,020.56 bits (1.49%) Expected Profit 18,845,955.14 bits (1.00%) there are also other apps beside BB which made a nice profit. just for info in case you oversaw it Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: RHavar on February 10, 2016, 03:54:31 PM Speaking of Moneypot, does anyone else notice that the footer of the MoneyPot page is still unchanged? "MoneyPot S.L.R. is a fully incorporated Costa Rican gaming company" Yeah, that's actually my company (which they didn't buy), which operates bustabit.com (but not moneypot.com) I've asked them a few times to remove it from their footer, but am still waiting for them to do so. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Pony789 on February 10, 2016, 06:42:02 PM Speaking of Moneypot, does anyone else notice that the footer of the MoneyPot page is still unchanged? "MoneyPot S.L.R. is a fully incorporated Costa Rican gaming company" Yeah, that's actually my company (which they didn't buy), which operates bustabit.com (but not moneypot.com) I've asked them a few times to remove it from their footer, but am still waiting for them to do so. Hmm removing that footer should be extremely easy. I wonder why does it take so much time for them to react, or maybe why did they ignore your reasonable request multiple times. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: jayce on February 11, 2016, 05:53:16 AM Hmm removing that footer should be extremely easy. I wonder why does it take so much time for them to react, or maybe why did they ignore your reasonable request multiple times. Everything has been slower ever since the new owner took over. It has been atleast 1 month or more after the purchase and there isnt anything new yet , not sure if they are just going to leave it as it is and hope to get back their bitcoin from the purchase first or whatever. Besides that, blazed small withdrawal took a while for him as well which has been resolved now Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: HackerBOSS on February 11, 2016, 07:27:23 AM is moneypot over?
can i use moneypot now? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: JackpotRacer on February 11, 2016, 07:29:27 AM is moneypot over? can i use moneypot now? what do you mean with >>> is moneypot over?<<< Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: powrslave on February 11, 2016, 08:07:51 AM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp?
Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: BTCevo on February 11, 2016, 10:32:59 AM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? I think you can directly go to their site to get this kind of information. https://www.moneypot.com/apps Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Dennis7777 on February 11, 2016, 10:39:28 AM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? I think you can directly go to their site to get this kind of information. https://www.moneypot.com/apps That page only shows the featured apps. To get a list of all apps, you could go from https://www.moneypot.com/apps/1, https://www.moneypot.com/apps/2, https://www.moneypot.com/apps/3 all the way through, but most of the apps are not working indeed. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: Mars110 on February 11, 2016, 10:57:45 AM is moneypot over? can i use moneypot now? You can use the moneypot whenever you want to, he is always there for all of us without limit. And you can use your funds to bet in the moneypot very quiet and with many options. You can do a lot with gambling options in it. Good luck Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 11, 2016, 11:13:16 AM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: fullypak on February 11, 2016, 01:05:19 PM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list I'm not a very regular moneypot visitor but what I know is in there site if we go to the apps page we can see all those list right? or only few of them we can see? If we can't see all of them in that page than the list will really help. Some one should post it, if they have the list. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: elm on February 11, 2016, 01:13:11 PM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list I'm not a very regular moneypot visitor but what I know is in there site if we go to the apps page we can see all those list right? or only few of them we can see? If we can't see all of them in that page than the list will really help. Some one should post it, if they have the list. you cannot see the list of all apps on their site. there are only a few apps seen there. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: HackerBOSS on February 11, 2016, 04:39:06 PM is moneypot over? can i use moneypot now? what do you mean with >>> is moneypot over?<<< I mean the end and close soon.. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: JackpotRacer on February 11, 2016, 04:57:58 PM is moneypot over? can i use moneypot now? what do you mean with >>> is moneypot over?<<< I mean the end and close soon.. I can say that moneypot is still open and you can use it. we have 3 game apps as seen in my signature. you are welcome to visit our poker or jackpotracer app and I will give you a free good karma bet :) please give me your moneypot user name and ask in chat for the free karma bet Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: bitlancr on February 11, 2016, 06:52:04 PM People often assume that they can win the top prize but that's often not the case. They would lose much more money than they win.
But the pity of it is that they realize it until later. And then it's often too late. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 11, 2016, 07:37:17 PM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list I'm not a very regular moneypot visitor but what I know is in there site if we go to the apps page we can see all those list right? or only few of them we can see? If we can't see all of them in that page than the list will really help. Some one should post it, if they have the list. Answering this and the other related questions together. There's plans to set up a database that shows all apps and is sortable (i.e., game type, house edge, wagered amount, whatever -- this part isn't set in stone yet). As part of this, the entire list will need to be pruned first. As it is, there are tons of entries for people that were just messing around. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: EngiNerd on February 11, 2016, 11:14:43 PM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list I'm not a very regular moneypot visitor but what I know is in there site if we go to the apps page we can see all those list right? or only few of them we can see? If we can't see all of them in that page than the list will really help. Some one should post it, if they have the list. Answering this and the other related questions together. There's plans to set up a database that shows all apps and is sortable (i.e., game type, house edge, wagered amount, whatever -- this part isn't set in stone yet). As part of this, the entire list will need to be pruned first. As it is, there are tons of entries for people that were just messing around. I'm very much looking forward to increased visibility and discovery of MoneyPot apps, and having it sortable via different filters is even better. Like you said, I'm sure one of the bigger challenges is "culling the herd" at this point. Are you doing this just based off app activity? Or maybe having a "confirm active app" process for app owners? Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: ranlo on February 11, 2016, 11:41:41 PM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list I'm not a very regular moneypot visitor but what I know is in there site if we go to the apps page we can see all those list right? or only few of them we can see? If we can't see all of them in that page than the list will really help. Some one should post it, if they have the list. Answering this and the other related questions together. There's plans to set up a database that shows all apps and is sortable (i.e., game type, house edge, wagered amount, whatever -- this part isn't set in stone yet). As part of this, the entire list will need to be pruned first. As it is, there are tons of entries for people that were just messing around. I'm very much looking forward to increased visibility and discovery of MoneyPot apps, and having it sortable via different filters is even better. Like you said, I'm sure one of the bigger challenges is "culling the herd" at this point. Are you doing this just based off app activity? Or maybe having a "confirm active app" process for app owners? Likely just by viewing. There's a lot of them that are just fillers. For example "testlol" and haven't ever been touched. I'm not 100% sure the best way to cull out the inactives yet so it'll start with ridding the obvious ones and will take it from there. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: fullypak on February 12, 2016, 03:34:34 AM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list I'm not a very regular moneypot visitor but what I know is in there site if we go to the apps page we can see all those list right? or only few of them we can see? If we can't see all of them in that page than the list will really help. Some one should post it, if they have the list. Answering this and the other related questions together. There's plans to set up a database that shows all apps and is sortable (i.e., game type, house edge, wagered amount, whatever -- this part isn't set in stone yet). As part of this, the entire list will need to be pruned first. As it is, there are tons of entries for people that were just messing around. I'm very much looking forward to increased visibility and discovery of MoneyPot apps, and having it sortable via different filters is even better. Like you said, I'm sure one of the bigger challenges is "culling the herd" at this point. Are you doing this just based off app activity? Or maybe having a "confirm active app" process for app owners? Likely just by viewing. There's a lot of them that are just fillers. For example "testlol" and haven't ever been touched. I'm not 100% sure the best way to cull out the inactives yet so it'll start with ridding the obvious ones and will take it from there. It is good move and hope to see these improvements soon and thanks for replying fast. The first thing all apps if we can see at one page than it will help and later can add all those filters. Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: JackpotRacer on February 12, 2016, 05:25:00 AM Is there a list of all the sites (apps) that are under mp? very good question and I also would like to see such a list. maybe someone from moneypot can give us such a list I'm not a very regular moneypot visitor but what I know is in there site if we go to the apps page we can see all those list right? or only few of them we can see? If we can't see all of them in that page than the list will really help. Some one should post it, if they have the list. Answering this and the other related questions together. There's plans to set up a database that shows all apps and is sortable (i.e., game type, house edge, wagered amount, whatever -- this part isn't set in stone yet). As part of this, the entire list will need to be pruned first. As it is, there are tons of entries for people that were just messing around. I'm very much looking forward to increased visibility and discovery of MoneyPot apps, and having it sortable via different filters is even better. Like you said, I'm sure one of the bigger challenges is "culling the herd" at this point. Are you doing this just based off app activity? Or maybe having a "confirm active app" process for app owners? Likely just by viewing. There's a lot of them that are just fillers. For example "testlol" and haven't ever been touched. I'm not 100% sure the best way to cull out the inactives yet so it'll start with ridding the obvious ones and will take it from there. It is good move and hope to see these improvements soon and thanks for replying fast. The first thing all apps if we can see at one page than it will help and later can add all those filters. thank you for this posting! this is exactly what should be done to give all apps a fair exposure and players will decide where to play and not moneypot as it was before and it is right now. inactive apps are inactive apps as the word is telling us and there is no reason to show inactive apps. it should be easy to filter inactive apps out apps containing the word "test" or free domains should'nt be shown and filtered out Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: jayce on February 12, 2016, 05:45:50 AM inactive apps are inactive apps as the word is telling us and there is no reason to show inactive apps. it should be easy to filter inactive apps out apps containing the word "test" or free domains should'nt be shown and filtered out The parameter to filter all these inactive apps is abit hard to code. Example if you put a parameter of X number of bets in one week then most sites wil be inactive however if someone put some bets on the site then the site will be listed as active again therefore the parameter is abit troublesome Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: JackpotRacer on February 12, 2016, 06:08:39 AM inactive apps are inactive apps as the word is telling us and there is no reason to show inactive apps. it should be easy to filter inactive apps out apps containing the word "test" or free domains should'nt be shown and filtered out The parameter to filter all these inactive apps is abit hard to code. Example if you put a parameter of X number of bets in one week then most sites wil be inactive however if someone put some bets on the site then the site will be listed as active again therefore the parameter is abit troublesome there is no need to code the filter regarding zero bets and keep it simple (in case coding a filter for zero bets is troublesome) just let app owners tell MP which app has not even one bet in last 7 days and take those apps out. and if the app owner does not want to be taken off the list he can do some bets as most app owners doing some bets on their apps anyway. we told Ryan that coining a dice had for 2 month not even one bet and he did not take it off the featured list :( players should decide and not MP which app they want to play Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: jayce on February 12, 2016, 06:41:34 AM inactive apps are inactive apps as the word is telling us and there is no reason to show inactive apps. it should be easy to filter inactive apps out apps containing the word "test" or free domains should'nt be shown and filtered out The parameter to filter all these inactive apps is abit hard to code. Example if you put a parameter of X number of bets in one week then most sites wil be inactive however if someone put some bets on the site then the site will be listed as active again therefore the parameter is abit troublesome there is no need to code the filter regarding zero bets and keep it simple (in case coding a filter for zero bets is troublesome) just let app owners tell MP which app has not even one bet in last 7 days and take those apps out. and if the app owner does not want to be taken off the list he can do some bets as most app owners doing some bets on their apps anyway. we told Ryan that coining a dice had for 2 month not even one bet and he did not take it off the featured list :( players should decide and not MP which app they want to play Then the owner will have absolute power of this issue, moneypot is an app that reflect decentralized so doing this will make the site has absolute power of what it decides. Although that ryan may not make this as his intention but the current set up for moneypot is pretty much reflect decentalization Title: Re: Moneypot just took a huge loss? Post by: JackpotRacer on February 12, 2016, 06:47:19 AM inactive apps are inactive apps as the word is telling us and there is no reason to show inactive apps. it should be easy to filter inactive apps out apps containing the word "test" or free domains should'nt be shown and filtered out The parameter to filter all these inactive apps is abit hard to code. Example if you put a parameter of X number of bets in one week then most sites wil be inactive however if someone put some bets on the site then the site will be listed as active again therefore the parameter is abit troublesome there is no need to code the filter regarding zero bets and keep it simple (in case coding a filter for zero bets is troublesome) just let app owners tell MP which app has not even one bet in last 7 days and take those apps out. and if the app owner does not want to be taken off the list he can do some bets as most app owners doing some bets on their apps anyway. we told Ryan that coining a dice had for 2 month not even one bet and he did not take it off the featured list :( players should decide and not MP which app they want to play Then the owner will have absolute power of this issue, moneypot is an app that reflect decentralized so doing this will make the site has absolute power of what it decides. Although that ryan may not make this as his intention but the current set up for moneypot is pretty much reflect decentalization maybe we misunderstood each other. I mean that MP will give the rules and filter and each app owner can act according to the filter. that would mean that each app owner can decide if he wants to be on the featured list. an app that does not have one bet in xxx days has no right to be on the featured list. |
