The site so far has had 145,551,114 bets and cumulative luck for all players is at 100.49%. This seems like a large enough sample size that it should be converging on 100%. With a 1% edge assuming the most common bet is a 2x 49.5% bet, it would seem a player luck of 100.49% essentially means a historical house edge of 0.51%. Is that logic correct? If so, is this a probable result with a 1% house edge?
If I understand things correctly, the luck percentage has the house edge built in already. The luck percentage displayed shows how many rolls you have won compared to how many you 'should' have won. The luck percentage should, over time, be very close to 100%. Really? I think luck is supposed to approach around 101%. Dooglus made a comment about it being above 101% before. I thought luck is deviation from expected results. So with enough wagers, it invariably trend towards 100% It does not take into account bet sizes, only outcomes so it should have minimal effect from variance. It is a good test of how well the RNG is working. I feel like after 146 million wagers, a player luck of 100.49% seems high. Not sure how one would go about testing that. |
|
|
|
The problem I see is that we have all the small guys whining. The lowest I've seen investment is ~30k BTC. That leaves ~5-10k BTC left for swinging investors. What happened to the voice of the 30kBTC that has believed in the site from the start and has never left? I know this is america and the squeaky wheel gets the grease but for fucks sake. If you don't like it LEAVE. At this time YOU ARE THE MINORITY.
This is not america. The site is run by a canadian and investors come from all over the world. |
|
|
|
It's all rigged. These btc gambling sites are just used for money laundering.
Explain? OK, lemme jump in here: The way to do it (in theory) is the following; you (the guy with dirty money) bet whatever you want to launder at bets with a close to 50/50 chance of winning. This way you can launder almost arbitrary sums of money by betting on a 50/50 bet. Some times you win, some times you loose. After a couple of thousands of bets you come out more or less even. The only "fee" this costs you is the house edge. In this case 1%, which is another name for the banks advantage over you. So to launder 1 million USD you only have to pay 1% house edge, you throw it all against the casino and get payed out in "clean" money that you legitemately won. The same deal with sports bets where the outcome is almost 50% of winning. Especially popular with horse races or football matches among Asian money launderers. If the gamblers try to use the service as a "mixer" or "tumbler" (same thing), to reduce taint it wouldnt work very well though. With those amounts they are pretty much the only guys playing, just shoving their own coins around. At the end of the day they wont reduce their taint significantly, not even if justdice has to tap in their cold storage tro cover pay outs. This doesn't male any sense, because all just-dice bets are off-chain. certainly a site like J-D which has huge amount of coins coming in and out of it does act like a mixing service. |
|
|
|
It's all rigged. These btc gambling sites are just used for money laundering.
Explain? OK, lemme jump in here: The way to do it (in theory) is the following; you (the guy with dirty money) bet whatever you want to launder at bets with a close to 50/50 chance of winning. This way you can launder almost arbitrary sums of money by betting on a 50/50 bet. Some times you win, some times you loose. After a couple of thousands of bets you come out more or less even. The only "fee" this costs you is the house edge. In this case 1%, which is another name for the banks advantage over you. So to launder 1 million USD you only have to pay 1% house edge, you throw it all against the casino and get payed out in "clean" money that you legitemately won. The same deal with sports bets where the outcome is almost 50% of winning. Especially popular with horse races or football matches among Asian money launderers. If the gamblers try to use the service as a "mixer" or "tumbler" (same thing), to reduce taint it wouldnt work very well though. With those amounts they are pretty much the only guys playing, just shoving their own coins around. At the end of the day they wont reduce their taint significantly, not even if justdice has to tap in their cold storage tro cover pay outs. Thank you, that was an excellent explanation. I do not think that is what is going oin at J-D, but it definitely is food for thought |
|
|
|
The site so far has had 145,551,114 bets and cumulative luck for all players is at 100.49%. This seems like a large enough sample size that it should be converging on 100%. With a 1% edge assuming the most common bet is a 2x 49.5% bet, it would seem a player luck of 100.49% essentially means a historical house edge of 0.51%. Is that logic correct? If so, is this a probable result with a 1% house edge?
If I understand things correctly, the luck percentage has the house edge built in already. The luck percentage displayed shows how many rolls you have won compared to how many you 'should' have won. The luck percentage should, over time, be very close to 100%. After 146 million bets it just seems like luck should be a lot closer to 100% than it is currently. Though I do not have the math chops to really prove it. Hoping someone else could tell us how probably the current luck of all users are. |
|
|
|
|
The site so far has had 145,551,114 bets and cumulative luck for all players is at 100.49%. This seems like a large enough sample size that it should be converging on 100%. With a 1% edge assuming the most common bet is a 2x 49.5% bet, it would seem a player luck of 100.49% essentially means a historical house edge of 0.51%. Is that logic correct? If so, is this a probable result with a 1% house edge?
|
|
|
|
In all likelihood it would just be part of a check box questionnaire when you register to become a "qualified investor".
Even with IP/ISP blocks you will get a few percent of US customers using a vpn to get what they want.
There are blacklists of countries IP address ranges you can add to the HTAccess file on the server.
When I had my business I never sold to some countries due to the nature of the product, since they were making up a lot of my bandwidth attempting to hack my ecommerce site I just blocked them. It cut down on 99% of hacking attempts. The remainder were likely using a proxy/vpn to try to get to it.
Interestingly here in Canada they are going to try their own crypto "Mintchip" this year....so it would be pretty hypocritical to ban cryptos and try to produce your own. (I wouldn't put it past our asshat PM to try to do so though.) I think this is why they are staying so open to the idea of crypto currencies.
Mintchip is not crypto currency, it is digital centralized digital currency backed by the canadian gov |
|
|
|
|
It is in the interest of those who help bankroll the house to spread good publicity about he site (not just for the owner Dooglus). The site has a couple hundred investors. In theory, more volume wagered = more profit for investors, though sadly it has not worked out that way. With 3.6 million BTC wagered, the site has a loss of -3000 BTC
|
|
|
|
Dooglus. That 3.6m total wagered is an impressive number. It might be more impressive PR-wise to put a US$ equivalent of it in the top right. Ticking over like the US debt clock  it could attract media attention. It does not make any sense to convert all btc wagered at current btc/usd price. If btc price double up, the amount wagered (in usd) should not change. It would make sense to take the current btc/usd price of every bets, and make a cumulative number. But it would be very difficult, and I am not sure that it will be possible to calculate it for past bets. Marketing is about putting the site in a favorable light without blatant lying. Solex's suggestion fulfills that criteria |
|
|
|
@pascal257
re: withdrawal delay. Maybe not a withdrawal delay per se, because it could make the *gamblers* nervous, but an 'investment from new deposit' delay should have the same effect, and only affect investors
@rampion
re: house edge 1% vs 1.5%. Thanks for your support. I said I'd rather wait a bit with raising house edge. Let's be honest: if nakowa moves away completely now, we're in a deep minus that'll take a long time to reverse (though I hope nakowa's as compulsive as we think he is). So the edge might not affect him anyway.
On the other hand, if we wait another week, let's see what happens. If site profit keeps going down (to new lows), I agree, raise the house edge. But if it stabilizes or goes up, we won't have chased customers away to the competition.
But, yes, I ultimately agree with you: a site that is not profitbale for investors in a very very long time (say, many months), will ultimately become uninteresting.
It will stay interesting to gamblers. |
|
|
|
Very good post oda, I agree especially on you analysis on "investment daytrading".
Regarding the competitive advantage of the 1% edge, it looks to me that 1.5% might be less attractive for guys like Nakowa, but nevertheless investors would make more money which is ultimately the goal of the site. I might be wrong and we could lose too much volume, it's difficult to calculate.
Finally, I see the chance of Nakowa cheating almost none. Yesterday he lost two smallish deposits and he did a bigger one to cover that losses, as a degenerate gambler would do. He started with a high bet of 130BTC, after a few hours he went to 170BTC, and the last hours he just went berserk and started to make bets as high as max profit allowed hin. The amount if high bets in relation to the smaller ones also increased dramatically at the end of his session, like he was getting anxious.
Finally, in the first few hours he took the house to - 6k, which meant +4k for him, but nevertheless he didn't stop because his goal was to cover the 5k loss of his previous two sessions. Finally and after 14 extenuating hours he stopped by winning 1k coins, but in the process he risked up to 8k. First, that doesn't seem like an unlikely outcome. Secondly, all the above completely looks to me as the behavior of a deluded compulsive gambler, and not the behavior of a cheater.
I would move beyond the point of whether Nakowa is cheat at this point and instead more simply ask is the site functioning as intended. It seems we consistently come up with improbable results with yesterday just being the latest example. As an example, gambling for 14 hours straight and mostly spamming max bets should give the house edge an opportunity to work. That is on the gambling side. On the investment side, the intention was for profit or gain = % of bankroll X site profit or gain. I understand their may be some slight deviations from that, but myself and many of the other passive investors are experiencing significant deviations from this expectation. Personally, my personal loss was about 35% greater than expectations for the last session. This is due to meaningful fluctuation in the investment amount at the time of large fluctuations in the house profit. If Dooglus is okay with these phenomenon on both the gambling and and investment side, then let him say so and that will be the end of that. If either of these are deviating far from Dooglus' expectations and plans for J-D, then some sort of corrective action should be considered. Last 3 days % on USD lost/USD Wagered - Not really on the outside realm of possibilities -1.69% -0.19% -0.71%  \ I said improbable, not impossible. And I am talking over the longer term since the site started. |
|
|
|
Very good post oda, I agree especially on you analysis on "investment daytrading".
Regarding the competitive advantage of the 1% edge, it looks to me that 1.5% might be less attractive for guys like Nakowa, but nevertheless investors would make more money which is ultimately the goal of the site. I might be wrong and we could lose too much volume, it's difficult to calculate.
Finally, I see the chance of Nakowa cheating almost none. Yesterday he lost two smallish deposits and he did a bigger one to cover that losses, as a degenerate gambler would do. He started with a high bet of 130BTC, after a few hours he went to 170BTC, and the last hours he just went berserk and started to make bets as high as max profit allowed hin. The amount if high bets in relation to the smaller ones also increased dramatically at the end of his session, like he was getting anxious.
Finally, in the first few hours he took the house to - 6k, which meant +4k for him, but nevertheless he didn't stop because his goal was to cover the 5k loss of his previous two sessions. Finally and after 14 extenuating hours he stopped by winning 1k coins, but in the process he risked up to 8k. First, that doesn't seem like an unlikely outcome. Secondly, all the above completely looks to me as the behavior of a deluded compulsive gambler, and not the behavior of a cheater.
I would move beyond discussion of whether Nakowa is cheating at this point (which would require the OPs help which you have to trust to invest here) and instead more simply ask if the site functioning as intended? It seems we consistently come up with improbable results with yesterday just being the latest example. As an example, gambling for 14 hours straight and mostly spamming max bets should give the house edge an opportunity to work. In effect, this is acting more like a fair coin flip than a weighted dice roll. That is on the gambling side. On the investment side, the intention was for player profit or gain = player's % of bankroll X site profit or gain. I understand there may be some slight deviations from that, but myself and all the other "passive" investors are experiencing significant deviations from this expectation. Personally, my personal loss was about 35% greater than expectations for the last session based on the formula above. This is due to meaningful fluctuation in the investment amount at the time of large fluctuations in the house profit. If Dooglus is okay with these phenomenon on both the gambling and and investment side, then let him say so and that will be the end of that. If either of these are deviating far from Dooglus' expectations and plans for J-D, then some sort of corrective action should be considered. |
|
|
|
I think, that would be a good enough fix. There should be no delay on divesting, though. It can always be, that one really needs to divest now. Adding a delay of say, 15 min on Investments would be good. There is no reason besides gambling why you couldn't wait this long for your investment to count.
It won't solve much for mechs. Anyone will divest when profit will go to 3k or 4k or 5k and nakowa comes to gamble  Everyone will invest when the profit is down (15 min later or before does not change much). And it will take months for him to recover his loss, unless he invest more now. I am personally maximally invested at this point. Plus, everytime nakowa has come by, it has consistently ended in the site losing 1000s of bitcoins - it has been at least 7 different occasions now. It is true during the latest session the profit for the site went between +6000 and -5000 ending at -3100. Some made profits by divesting whenever there was a streak of losses for nakowa (and thus profit for the site) and then reinvesting when site profits went inevitably back down. That is why passive investors likely myself have losses magnified out of proportion to the site. Successful investors/traders diluted passive investors profits on the way up and magnify it on the way down. Hell even Dooglus divested when the sites profit was up to 3000 BTC today locking in profits and then magnifying losses of passive investors down to -3100. It seems like you do need to run a bot to actively invest/divest for swings in site profits or just be around for those times when nakowa is online. |
|
|
|
I will tell you for example that I am 25% down and I invested back in July and I stayed invested throughout
Wow. Man, good luck to get positive again, with all people investing when it is low (like now) and divesting when it is high. It will be harder :/ These guys are IMO Gamblers that have found a way to dodge the house edge. There should be something implemented to discourage this like f.e. a higher commission on high turnover invests, divests. Or a instant fee on every invest (that has to be made up before an invest has to pay any commissions of course). the instant fee will not help if they found a cheat against the house. they only solution is to find the cheat and eliminate it. I think he is refering to those who invest/divest during the whale betting successfully. That magnifies the losses of the passive investors who stay invested throughout. |
|
|
|
With only increasing regulatory scruitiny, it is more likely than not that bitfunder and haverlock will go the same way as btct.
Havelock is in Canada where regulators have given bitcoin a pass. All they need to do is make an attempt to dissuade U.S. citizens from investing. How can you do that without asking for identification verification and noone will want to give that out isn't it enough, from a legal point of view, to block USA's ip addresses? Unclear, it is up the discretion of the SEC and FinCen. It is trivial afterall to bypass blocking US IPs via Tor or VPNs. |
|
|
|
I will tell you for example that I am 25% down and I invested back in July and I stayed invested throughout
Wow. Man, good luck to get positive again, with all people investing when it is low (like now) and divesting when it is high. It will be harder :/ No kidding, that my biggest problem with the system personally. Once you take a loss, getting back to even becomes progressively more difficult due to continuous dilution. |
|
|
|
Or you'll get stuck divested at 5k and missing out on profits from 5k to 50k... (we can dream...)
Expected profit is 36k btc  But current profit is - 3k btc. People lost more than 3 k btc, considering the fact that old people invested and divested with a profit, and the website took commissions on that. For instance my profit on investment is: 0.12 btc. I wonder what is the "real" negative profit. I will tell you for example that I am 25% down and I invested back in July and I stayed invested throughout |
|
|
|
It's all rigged. These btc gambling sites are just used for money laundering.
Explain? 2 scenarios: a) Just-Dice is using their own funds to bet on their own site. Regardless of outcome, there is no net gain/loss. However, this generates artificial activity which can be used for publicity (like this thread), or to make the site look more popular. b) Just-Dice's owner runs a covert money laundering service. "Dirty" money comes into the site in the form of bets, "clean" money comes out in the form of the site's margin. This is assuming the site's bets can not be audited. I am confused by B. WHat does that have to do with one player winning a crap load and defying the odds? |
|
|
|
With only increasing regulatory scruitiny, it is more likely than not that bitfunder and haverlock will go the same way as btct.
Havelock is in Canada where regulators have given bitcoin a pass. All they need to do is make an attempt to dissuade U.S. citizens from investing. How can you do that without asking for identification verification and noone will want to give that out |
|
|
|
I just don't see the point of implementing the simple fractional kelly system when you can get the same thing from just investing less.
You don't get the same thing by investing less. There was an example earlier: A: invest 500 at 1% or B: 125 at 0.25%. You'd think they were the same, but they're not. After a few thousand losses, A has lost nearly 500 coins and B has lost nearly 125 coins. That's not the same at all... I don't see anyone screaming for 1% kelly anymore. Just leave it at 0.5%, the variance is plenty. I just don't get how after bidding for 12 hrs straight 1.6M bitcoins between 3 whales (mostly coming from 1), we end yet another session down significantly. It seems the edge is too small to overcome the variance at such high bids. I cannot explain it, but the results continue to confound logic and be 3+ SDs off from the expected results |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
