As the title says, I am wondering where would be the correct place in this forum to open a thread about a (new) blockchain game ? I recently saw UNIQUE GAME 🔥 Satoshi Battles 🔥 QUESTS - RPG - LEVELING - EVENTS 🔥 MMORPG being posted in Bitcoin Forum > Economy > Marketplace > Gambling. It's a play-to-earn game, where you have to invest some BTC first to play and it's a skill game so I think Gambling section fits - though you wouldn't refer to it as gambling from my understanding. It's gaming, but where is the line and there is no dedicated blockchain gaming section afaik. What if it's a blockchain game on an "Altcoin-Platform" with maybe another non-BTC in-game cryptocurrency on top, but play-to-earn, skill/strategic game, fully decentralized ? Is the Gambling section only restricted to Bitcoin "things". There are Tron-based gambling projects f.e. too, but I am not sure tbh  |
|
|
|
Well, I am out at #50. Had a chance to triple up, but my QT didn't hold up against T9 and 95 pre-flop all-in  At least Steve went out with me too  Thanks for this nice tournament, was fun to play even though the end was not nice, but thats mainly always the case in poker  Good luck to you guys figment and arallmuus  |
|
|
|
It's a very weird tournament for me - I am either getting premium hands (2x KK, 1x AA) or really nothing at all. When I try my luck with limping some suited connectors, there is lots of action behind me or I totally miss the flop But still alive....a chip and a chair. |
|
|
|
What if the money collected for the lottery would go to the runners-up tournament prize pool instead? Then the difference between Grand and small Final isn't that big anymore, which it should be though imo. And upping the prize pool for small final won't help the weaker players - they have no incentive to participate regularly in the tournaments, because they see no way of getting any money in return ever. A lottery gives them the incentive to participate and even if they don't finish in the points and thus have no shot at the Grand Final, they will get tickets for the lottery with each participation. (And a spot for small final) You need to have a good foundation for such a series, i.e. regular players. The players that will leave, are the ones that only ever contribute to the pot, but never (are able to) take anything out of it. You have to make sure, that these players have an incentive to keep playing. A lottery (maybe) does that. |
|
|
|
my bets for this 2 games are
bayern wins
werder wins In the first 20 minutes the werder is winning, but it seems to me that it is still too early to think that he has already won that game because SC Paderborn is pushing hard and may end up scoring a goal. I believe bayern will win today's match Paderborn needs 3 points here, they will push even when the game is drawn in the latter stages, so will maybe look to lay some stake off then (lay the draw). so far Paderborn is losing Thanks for your valuable insights, they help a lot Now the Werder is already leading 3-0 and I think I have to admit defeat here and today. Werder is playing really good, super aggressive, lethal upfront. If they played like this all season, they could knock on the EL places, the potential was there all along. Quite some goals today...... |
|
|
|
|
I am playing Paderborn 1X for odds over 2 today. There is no way in this world, that Bremen is 1,94 favourite here, lol. Paderborn was doing ok lately, only losing 1 out of 5 (against Dortmund). They also didn't win recently, but I don't need them to win for my bet to give me profit. Paderborn needs 3 points here, they will push even when the game is drawn in the latter stages, so will maybe look to lay some stake off then (lay the draw).
|
|
|
|
@tyKiwanuka I dont think our prizes are bad tbh Hehe, not at all, don't get me wrong. SwC has been very generous and you did a fantastic job organizing all this sponsoring. I am happy with the way the series is all in all, but the trend shows some decline in participants and how do you get more people to join and stay around ? Money Money always works. But there is the "Quadratur des Kreises", where you need to make everyone happy with low entry fees - low entry fees to keep attracting new players. And then the winners also want to win more than their entry fee^^ So with the "fixed" sponsoring we get from SwC, we would need to up the fees we pay and I am fine with that. I think this series works with a minimum of 18 regular players, but anything lower than that probably not longterm. And then again, the series doesn't work with like 100 regular participants imo unless you make big changes (to internal point structure mainly). So there needs to be some equilibrium. - Don't worry about runners-up tournament - there will be one next time, I will take care of that  Good news. Here needs to be some rule then as well, like minimum of 6/8 tournaments played or whatever.
My proposal - Entry fee: 1300 - 100 chips go to Grand Final - 200 chips go to lottery - there will be a small final (sponsored by SwC ?) for all participants that joined minimum 6/8 tournaments - every participant is eligible for lottery, tickets are based on # of participations and points accumulated For the series #2, this would transfer to: - 14,500 chips additional prize money for Grand Final - eligible for small final: tyKiwanuka, SyGambler, Improved, Trofo, BitcoinGirlClub, morvillz7z, jayce (too few, but should get better with new structure then) - 29,000 chips for the lottery and the following number of tickets per user:  - per every 10k chips, one prize is created for the lottery, so 29k chips = 3 prizes á 9666 chips, only one prize per user max. - the overall prize money for Grand Final would be a bit lower then, but these players can still get prize from lottery |
|
|
|
Sorry, if my comments offend you, that is not my intention, don't take it personal Why all the fuss with 200 players? That was in reference to your previous thread, which you referenced in the first post here. In the end it boils down to 2 players going against each other for the win of all the money in the game - no matter how many players joined the game initially. The whole task can be reduced to just one player with 200 dollars. Then it is a bankroll of 1000 USD versus a bankroll of 200 USD, the point of discussion in this thread (of which you are certainly aware). But that's all side issues as the main issue here is still not settled decidedly, i.e. whether it is a bust and a win or a definite no-win for either player if the bankrolls are the same as well as large enough in a PVP game like heads or tails (with square odds in mind). And yes, it is important to know the answer to this dilemma, and it is not like everyone agrees with the conclusion set forth in the OP. From a theoretical point of view, one player will bust in the end. This could be the player with the 200 USD, but also the player with the 1000 USD. It's more likely to be the player with the 200 USD though, because to put it very simple: It's more likely to occur a 200-winning-streak with 50/50, than to occur a 1000-winning streak with 50/50. But both are possible. From a practical point of view......well.....I guess you know what I would write here |
|
|
|
I am expecting much more players, this is on done on Sportsbet and they have a lot of high rollers there, 2 mBTC is nothing for most of them. After all the prize is big and for that 20$ you get a free Watford FC shirt which costs around 100$ I guess. Of course if you don't mind giving an address and phone number.
Last time they had this tournament it was a freeroll and there was 500 participants.
Anyway, I'll take my shot at the prize and collect my free jersey at least. I too think, that it will be way more players, hundreds maybe. Are you sure that this jersey is like a real on-field Watford jersey ? I can't imagine that tbh They just say "shirt" and I think it's just some basic T-shirt with some Watford logo.
For our poker series Sportsbet would be the better place to play I think in terms of some sponsoring and also attracting new/more players. They are very generous with all their promotions etc. and they have quite a huge customer base and could promote us in their BTT thread etc. But their poker software is just very annoying and I don't enjoy playing there at all unfortunately. |
|
|
|
Yes, this is a correct statement. And now ? I think everyone will agree. And then ? What is your conclusion for real world ? Ever gambled on the street? This topic has everything to do with how things are going to pan out there. And you are in for a big surprise if you expect "a zero-sum game" there. It is also called "learning it the hard way". Can anything be more practical and realistic? I never gambled on the street, no, sorry And while I agree this is being "practical and realistic", it's unrealistic again then. You are comparing a realistic scenario with unrealistic assumptions and rules. Please give an example how such a "street game" would look for you with all the parameters and what you would expect the result to be. Lets say you have 1,000 USD bank roll and there are 200 players with 1 USD bankroll each. Now you toss a coin with each one of them, stake 1 USD. What do you expect your profit to be ? In first round you would eliminate 100 players. 100 players remain with bankroll of 2 USD each; your bankroll is still 1,000. Then in second round, third round etc. you would keep eliminating players, until there is only one player left with bankroll of 200 and you still have your 1,000 bankrolll. You will eliminate that player too sooner or later. And then we are here again: As long as your bankroll is finite, the staked amount is not zero, and remains the same (e.g. 1 dollar), on an infinitely long timeframe you will either bust or win provided the same terms are honored by your opponent too. Is all this a realistic scenario ? No. Players that are in profit will leave the game before it ends. Now you will say: but, street rules. Yes, street rules, but no sane person will play against you. |
|
|
|
Ok, so I have a finite bankroll of 100,000,000,000,000 USD and I stake 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of it with every bet. My Stake is divisible into any imagineable amount - it can get as low as I want or as I need it to be, if I get very unlucky and lose 100000000000000000000000000000000 bets in a row. How can I bust ? As long as your bankroll is finite, the staked amount is not zero, and remains the same (e.g. 1 dollar), on an infinitely long timeframe you will either bust or win provided the same terms are honored by your opponent too Yes, this is a correct statement. And now ? It's against proper money management though, since when you are down to 1 USD, you shouldn't stake that 1 USD on one bet/toss And if the (finite) bankrolls are big enough, assuming 1USD stakes, this will take like forever - at least longer than this world will exist And with "my" case I can't go broke, which is more realistic imo - the staking with % of your bankroll that is. Always staking the same amount regardless of your bankroll is not what any gambler should do. I admit, that I have trouble to understand what you are trying to achieve with this and the other thread. This is so far from reality, that it's just theoretical discussion, which is of course fine and interesting too. But it seems to me, that you are trying to prove something, what will have no added value to you, since it's not realistic to happen in real world. |
|
|
|
It doesn't take a lot of brain power to see the overall dynamic, and draw a reasonable conclusion that it doesn't really matter what fraction of the bankroll the two players stake at each toss since on a long enough timescale one of them is still set to bust. It could be further generalized that on an infinite timeframe gambling on a 50% win chance with a finite bankroll inevitably ends in a bust of one of the players. This is what I would call a statistical certainty Ok, so I have a finite bankroll of 100,000,000,000,000 USD and I stake 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of it with every bet. My Stake is divisible into any imagineable amount - it can get as low as I want or as I need it to be, if I get very unlucky and lose 100000000000000000000000000000000 bets in a row. How can I bust ? Even if I have only 0.01 USD left and I always stake 50%, the next bet would be 0.005, next bet 0.0025 etc.. I can't go broke, it's not possible. |
|
|
|
Wie schon im XAYA Thread gepostet, wurde XAYA in das Ubisoft Entrepreneurs Lab Programm aufgenommen: Ubisoft Entrepreneurs Lab Kicks Off Its Fifth SeasonDaneben wurden mit Planetarium, Sky Mavis (Axie Infinity), Sorare und Splinterlands auch weitere in Blockchain-involvierte Projekte aufgenommen. Ob das für irgendeines dieser Projekte Früchte tragen wird, wird man dann irgendwann vielleicht mal sehen, aber es ist sicherlich für beide Seiten ein guter Lernprozess und eine Brücke von klassischem Gaming zu Blockchain Gaming (oder in den meisten Fällen ein Gaming mit Blockchain Komponente für assets etc.). |
|
|
|
in Zweite, HSV has another chance after missing Kiel winning on Monday, they play in Dresden, and that one should come for sure @1.5 I am not so sure about that. Quality difference is of course huge, but Dresden is doing ok-ish after finding some rhythm with ending quarantine. It was just Wehen and Fürth, where they got 4 points recently, but they have some momentum and self-confidence. And they have nothing to lose, because nobody is expecting anything from them today. Hamburg otoh once again shot themselves in the foot on Monday. They play good football, but only managed one win after the break against poor Wehen. They were unlucky with late goals against Fürth, Stuttgart and Kiel, but when it happens that often, there is something wrong, this is not just bad luck. Stuttgart was 1.60+ when they played at Dresden the other week - and that was when Dresden wasn't match-fit at all. Now Hamburg is 1.50+ and I think it's too low or fair at best. They should win, but 2. Bundesliga is crazy at times - I think Sandhausen has a great shot today at giving Bielefeld all sorts of trouble. Bielefeld seems to run a bit out of gas and they don't need the 3 points badly, a draw would do the trick as well. Neuhaus will take rather defensive approach imo and look to keep a clean sheet first and then hope for some Klos-Magic upfront. Sandhausen themselves are on a pretty good run and sitting comfortably in the middle of the table. This looks like a low-scoring draw (0-0/1-1) for me, but unfortunately the markets think the same and odds are not very tempting; the odds for Bielefeld look actually quite huge on paper. Probably a game to lay the team that manages to get the lead.
The sacking of Schreuder with Hoffenheim was really weird. They were doing quite good and didn't seem to play against their coach. They didn't play any top teams, but wins don't come easy in Bundesliga, even against the smaller teams. So something must have happened behind the curtains. Now with a new coach (or the old being sacked) I would normally expect Hoffenheim to come out firing on all cylinders, but this situation is a bit different On top of that they will play against their old coach Nagelsmann and surely want to show what they are capable of. 1.45 for Leipzig looks a bit low considering all circumstances. They were ruthless with Mainz and Köln in their away games, but Hoffenheim is a different caliber. |
|
|
|
Can I participate in the beta? This is "just" Exbet API beta (not sure, if you are aware), but if you want to participate, you have to send them a PM in this forum or message them via Twitter. |
|
|
|
That approval rating is only from CNN. CNN and the other mainstream media hate Trump from the beginning of his first campaign.
The other Trump approval ratings are more than 40%.
I still think it would make more sense for CNN to fake polls and approval ratings pro Trump - or at least that is what I would do, if I was to support Biden. I am thinking about those people who are not that eager to go voting, but lean (strongly) towards one of the candidates. If I lean towards Biden and see him being 60% favourite, I might say to myself, well, he will win anyway, so I don't need to give my vote. If I lean towards Trump and see him trailing, I might feel the urge to actually give my vote to him. This only works until a certain threshold of course, because at some point you will have discouraged the underdog voters; maybe they are trying to do that The sportsbooks and the pollsters had Hillary more as a certainty on 2016 than Biden for 2020. The 2016 election was so weird, I have never seen polls and markets being so wrong when it comes to an election anywhere in the world. Normally the odds are pretty good and I trust them way more than any polls. If you actually put your hard earned money on something, this has way more weight, than just participating in a poll, which costs you nothing and you can just lie without consequences. Polls and betting odds always go hand in hand more or less of course, but the odds reflect an all-in-one mix of all information, polls, bias etc. In 2016 the matrix was way off and it sill amazes me until today tbh. But when the overwhelming majority is placing their bets on low-ish odds based on public opionion and polls, even the sharps have a hard time moving the market. But they made good money I think. |
|
|
|
Im Oktober 2019 gab es folgenden Tweet von Xaya:  Quelle: https://twitter.com/xaya_tech/status/1179084431790870528Man beachte den Wortlaut "to be asked", denn es war wirklich Ubisoft, die auf Xaya zugekommen sind und nicht andersrum. Knapp neun Monate später wurde Xaya nun in das Entrepreneurs Lab Programm von Gaming Gigant Ubisoft aufgenommen, was natürlich extrem cool ist und vielleicht neue Möglichkeiten eröffnet: Ubisoft Entrepreneurs Lab Kicks Off Its Fifth Season
Ist das die Schatzsuche gewesen wo man kurz vorm Ziel immer abgefangen wurde ? Ja, ShillyBilly hat alle terrorisiert, was auch in dem Abschluss-Blogpost erwähnt wurde: The SME shares were particularly sought after. Player Pandora91 found some, and immediately received offers to buy them. Player Chainsaw purchased them for $100 USD then spent another $100 USD on additional vehicles to escort the shares to an obelisk to bank. However, Shillybilly swept in too quickly and robbed Chainsaw of the SME shares. There were other epic dramas and battles for other prizes too Quelle: https://medium.com/@XAYA/thank-you-to-all-participants-in-taurion-treasure-hunt-2-147a5f2b1503Combat ist natürlich ein großer Teil dieses Spiels, aber in dem kommenden Treasure Hunt wird Shilly weit mehr Probleme haben imo und der Fokus liegt auch eher auf den Gebäuden und deren Nutzung. - Wie von @aundroid bereits erwähnt, wurde Treasure Hunt #3 angekündigt: Taurion Treasure Hunt #3Die vielleicht wichtigste Neuerung für lass-mich-mal-gucken-was-das-für-ein-Spiel-ist-Spieler ist, dass auch Taurion, ebenso wie SME, nun ein integriertes light wallet hat, womit man kein Xaya Full Node wallet mehr braucht. Mit Start des Spiel lädt auch das integrierte Electrum-Wallet und man kann direkt ohne syncen losspielen. Nur die seed phrase sollte man natürlich notieren. |
|
|
|
Do you make your own games ? Is there a list of games using your token ? Games being developed on Xaya platform right now (publicly known): Taurion, in-house game from Xaya team, in-game currency: CHI (or a variation like mCHI, vCHI), status: alpha, Treasure Hunt #3 in July most likely Soccer Manager Elite, developed by Soccer Manager, in-game currency: Soccer Manager Coins (can be purchased via CHI), status: beta running TreatFighter, developed by Tricky Fast Studios, in-game currency: Chrystals (can be purchased via CHI), status: unknown Isles of War, developed by Mud Hero Studios, in-game curreny: Warbux (can be purchased via CHI), status: full game (but still under development) Xaya team is helping all these developers with blockchain related issues. All games run completely decentralized and serverless on the Xaya Blockchain. For all games you need CHI to pay for transaction fees (like with Gas for Ethereum) - fractions of a cent with current prices. |
|
|
|
It can't possibly be a zero sum game for the simple reason someone is set to bust at the end of the day How so ? If I play with 0.1% stake (or whatever) of my bankroll for each "bet", I can never go broke. And with no house edge, over a big enough sample size, my bankroll will be the same as to when I started playing.
And I'm not sure what martingale has to do with that unless you actually mean the opposite of what you have written above. When you talk about "staying in the game longer", this is Martingale: (...) but it will still be making profits with a zero house edge simply because it will be able to stay in the game longer than any other player. If you disallow Martingale and everyone plays with a proper money management*, there are no winners here, it's a zero sum game. Doesn't matter if the casino has gazillion times the bankroll of all their players combined. *The casinos play with proper money management too, i.e. the bet limits they set for their customers. |
|
|
|
Das JINN Projekt wurde ja offiziell für beendet erklärt, wenn ich es richtig verstanden habe. Trotzdem verfügt JINN labs (=IOTA AS) ja noch über beträchtliches Vermögen, was u.a. mit dem Geld der ersten Investoren erwirtschaftet wurde. Da hier mW einige Leute sind, die damals JINN beim Sale gekauft haben, könnte das hier interessant sein: The story and request of jinn holdersThe founders of the project decide to separate their paths, without any processor developed, keeping all the funds of Jinn Labs/IOTA AS in their possession*, without rewarding the initial investors, or holders, although they promised this from the beginning.
*CFB agrees to share the funds with the holders, but David has control of them and he refuses. Auch wenn man beim damaligen JINN token Verkauf nicht mitgemacht hat, ist es interessant zu lesen. Diese Stelle ist mir beim CfB leak von vor ein paar Wochen schon aufgefallen und sagt - nicht nur zwischen den Zeilen - einiges aus:  Quelle: https://medium.com/@comefrombeyond/what-really-happened-before-david-sonstebo-and-cfb-parting-ways-chat-log-a2fcf2cb34b7 |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
