|
I was missing the other retard who I have on ignore for showing up on the thread, lol. And scammers both, they have a lot of things in common.
I'm going to put the OP on ignore too and I'm done with this conversation.
|
|
|
|
I believe you too can find the irony that when asked further details about this new innovative project, your answer is basically, "try it yourself". Last time I check, that's not how to prove people that your platform [or any platform] will not rug-pull them.
That's presupposing too much intelligence on his part. From what you can see from the replies in this thread, the fact that he started a thread about his "business" and deleted it to make a new self-moderated one and that he calls it what he calls it you can get an idea of how reliable his business is. There are many legitimate business in the Gambling Section, the ones that are not, like his, you can spot them fast. |
|
|
|
|
The retard by the looks of it has lost interest in this thread since it was moved here.
|
|
|
|
In the end, yes, 0% house edge means that no one wins but when I say risky, I mostly mean that casino has many other expenses while player has none. Casino has to maintain and improve the product, casino has to pay salaries, marketing, bonuses and so on. What is player's duty? To win, just to profit, but casino on the other hand, has to spend significant portion of its profit on many things. That's why I think that 0 house edge is a risky thing for casino but I can be wrong.
If I were a casino owner, I probably wouldn't offer anything lower than 1% or would probably offer something like progressive house edge, just like moneypot.com does.
But what you have not seen in the case of Monk.gg is that the 0% HE is more a way to attract customers. They don't offer it in all games to begin with: 0% house-edge with $MONK for select games And apart from the ones that offer it, it is because you have to buy that shitcoin, which will give them some profit. Poker Player, lets just say.
Even if I was a fraud.
You would still play my game moron.
 What you don't understand, is my technology, has changed and upgraded, the gambling technique.
All scammers say the same thing when we start questioning you, that we don't understand you. |
|
|
|
You don't operate a casino, so the chances of you being aware of all the mechanics are slim to none.
What I don't operate is a scam, which is what you do. What you do not realize, is mostly, all gambling games, are player vs player in the backend. Some corps, just do need reveal this information.
How can you be so retarded? You do not operate a casino, why speak about things you do not know?
What I don't do is operate a scam, unlike you. Even cards on stake, is player vs player.
If you win too much, you will start losing, your money will go to other players.
I've told you before, retard, in PvP games there is a rake or a commission charged by the house. There can't be a HE because you don't play against the house, retard. Likewise, I own a game. Entirely Player vs Player. No House Edge. But the edge is still there.
Well, with this I'm not going to answer you anymore because the level of retardation you have is god mode. You've been saying the whole conversation that in PvP games there is a HE, me telling you there isn't, and now you admit there is no House Edge? Dumbass. |
|
|
|
But as Poker Player say, the risk is the variance, make 100 bets, with 50% chance of winning, if most of them lose then double the bet, and that way you can win in the long run against the house.
Here you are describing the Martingale and it sounds like I have seen you in some thread also talking about this. It is basically a bad method because by doubling the bet you increase the risk exponentially to win only the initial bet on net. |
|
|
|
See, you cannot even interpret what I am saying. Lol.
Obviously, if a game has a 0% house edge, the game consists of users playing against each other.
You do not understand the concepts of house edge mate.
No, retard, no. If you play roulette, and it has a 0% HE, you don't even need other players to play. In the long run, with HE, you will tend to stay with the same money you start with, and if there are other players playing at the same time as you, the same thing will happen to them. In a given session you may end up in profit or loss, just like them, and just as it happens when there is a HE higher than 0, but in the long term the tendency is not to win and not to lose, but to stay with your initial balance. I am not explaining this to you because you are so retarded that you will not understand it, but I hope that those who have some brains and doubts about the concept can understand it. |
|
|
|
It's a shame that such campaigns are leaving the forum.
This is all I can say. I can't even rate it, because this is not what I want to read.  Well yes, it's a shame I was just about to log off and I see this. I was part of the campaign for a while too, when it was second best after CM. It looks like there are only going to be casino campaigns left here, and we don't know for how long. |
|
|
|
And likewise, no i'm not referring to your idiotic questions and assumptions.
The main, point is you don't know what you are talking about.
And users, lean towards your perspective
Idiotic questions and assumptions? You do not understand the concept of House Edge, as you are telling me in the other thread that there is a House Edge in games against other players when there is not, what there is is rake. House Edge applies only in games against the house. There can be no House Edge if you don't play against the house, something that even a 12 year old can understand, but from the looks of it you haven't understood. |
|
|
|
That's not correct.
In a game with 0 house edge, with other players, it is much easier to profit.
Are you going to give me lessons on gambling games vs. other players? FYI in games of skill vs other players there is no such thing as House Edge. 0% house edge is risky, isn't it?
Ehhh...no. What is the risk of 0% HE? Do you understand the concept? The only risk is the variance, but in the long run the risk tends to 0. (I am hopeful that you understand this but I am sure the unlimited scammer will have no fucking idea what I am talking about and will respond with a straw man fallacy, as usual). |
|
|
|
Hi, unlimitedscammer. FYI, if you want to open a thread about me, the correct section is Reputation. I saw the title and thought it was going to be about the feedback I left you for being a fucking scammer but you say so much bullshit that if it wasn't for putting my name in the title I wouldn't even know you were referring to me. I guess you are referring to comments like this one, this one and this one, but since you are so dumb you didn't understand anything I said. |
|
|
|
Let's add another one to the list of possible alts of the who finds his inspiration with an overdose of Doritos and Monster, lol: If you want to print money without equal to productivity of printed money amount in the real world then there is two ways how you can do that.
( The current orgie of gold rally its pretty much paper gold the London New York and China exchangers futures contracts just to speculate with gold price off course after that orgie the bill will be passed to commercial banks so they can direct this into MBS contracts and make the last call the start of mortgage orgie before the end of the bull circle)
1.You keep inflating the assets and real estate prices so they go up and rates go lower.
2.asset prices going down rates going up.
Off course the rates never goes up right to way at the end of the bull circle the smarter money want to exit safely so the market start slowly making lower highs and keep getting rates inside the 20-30 year time frame of bear market more the ratio of higher rates higher than lower rates.
We are at the end of the 30 year bull circle so the next circle will be higher rates and lower asset prices.
The start of the long time period bear market means higher dollar value and better yield for usd holders nowdays for usdc stakers and higher rates on loans and mortgage contracts.
I assume that the next rate cut/hike scenario would be inside 2 year time frame 2 lower rates and 6 higher rates.
We entry into bear market so we see as usual investors traders and all the others start calling bottom is in but it keep getting lower and lower while at the end of the bear circle the dips will be even more deeper and people will be more scared the smarter money will be buying that time.
So now the volatility will be here for the markets up and down traders can make good money but there will be not much for market investors.
20 years from here would be 2024+20= 2044 so the new bull circle can start when innovation will start also along with new funds what coming in to the markets.
I would say that he has seen this thread and he has decided to create an alt without numbers in the nick to go unnoticed. But it is so obvious that it is him..... I don't want to say the obvious similarities because I assume he will read the thread and try to correct them as well. |
|
|
|
You like to chase that "over 3.5" bet.
Dude, you really need to change your approach, otherwise you will burn the rest of your money as well.
I doubt you have any clue about the leagues you are betting since they are so minor and totally random.
WTF dude.
This is exactly how a gambling addict looks a like, most people already told @OP to stop gambling and looking for other way to get the 1.7 BTC, instead of listen to majority opinions, he choose to make deposit and gamble with the amount that he can't afford to lose!
We are watching live what we have known it happens behind closed doors, and even if I would like for the OP to make their dreams come true and reach the goal they are pursuing, this is not the way to do it and basically any red flag we could imagine is there..
Indeed, said to see. And as I have stated before, seems like his "tipster" doesn't know what he is doing also.
The under 3.5 bet lost by a wide margin since Slovako won by 1:0, very far away from 4 goals in this one. Another 0.1 bit the dust, hopefully OP learned his lesson!
I have had the same feeling as you. Basically the OP has ignored the advice we have given him and shows problem gambler behavior. He wanted to convert 0.05 Bitcoin into 1.7 and in the end has ended up losing 0.11 or so. He would have been better off saving that Bitcoin he had and looking for other ways to earn money to fund his Med school. |
|
|
|
All traditional bank gives personal loan without collateral just by verifying and keeping some documents.
False, you are distorting the truth for what interests you. If the bank gives you a personal loan without collateral it is not just to give you some documents, first they will make sure that you have a good credit history, as mentioned, and above all that you have a regular source of income, usually having your paycheck deposited with them. |
|
|
|
The second graph was just to run a mock simulation to show how a house edge vs no house edge would affect a player's gambling session. You can see the house edge player approaching zero much more rapidly (should be self-explanatory as to why). If you're curious about the simulation parameters, I had a player start with 100 units, bet 1 unit per round on a random color, and have the game result be chosen randomly. You can see the code here if you'd like: https://pastebin.com/whdJNtG3Well, you seem to be a reasonable person, unlike the other retard, but here I doubt if you are missing the point on purpose or what. The problem with the second graph is not that the one who plays a game with HE loses money. The problem is that the one who plays a game with 0 HE has profits. If the time scale is the same as the other line that graph should be equal to the initial balance, 100, at approximately the same time that the one who plays a game with HE loses his money and is left at 0. In a game with 0 HE the long term tendency should be to stay with the initial balance, and not to have profits, as the blue line shows. |
|
|
|
Thanks. I may try again soon, with smaller amounts. Or one big amount, I'm not sure yet. I just want to achieve the goal. I could probably try with 0.1 BTC but then I would be dipping into money I cannot afford to lose. Even if you were good at sports betting, which doesn't look like it, you should have a very good bankroll management, and yours is pitiful. Think about whether it would not be better to save the money you are thinking of betting too much and earn money in other ways to finance your med school studies. I don't know much about sports betting but to get to 1.7 Bitcoin in poker starting from 0.05 you should spend a lot of time playing and the bets should not go over 0.002 (that in full stacks playing cash but in most plays you win or lose less than that). You are gambling, what you are doing has nothing to do with what a serious sports bettor would do. |
|
|
|
Poker Player, obviously paying a one time fee versus a fee every iteration is cheaper. Use your common sense. You are just stubborn and do not want to adapt to new practices, that will improve your gambling experience.
Are you going to give me lessons, you fucking swindler? The questions I raise are legitimate. The 2% iteration on multiple bets would be worse than a one time fee (actually two) if we were talking about I can only bet with Bitcoin but if we are talking about a shitcoin or a shitcoin casino token like the many we have seen here, well you have to factor in the risk, quite likely, of the value decreasing. And on the other hand the second graph is not true to reality and either the OP doesn't know it or is trying to mislead on purpose, I don't know which is worse. By the way he has not responded to this and you had to come out. What is your relationship with this project? |
|
|
|
|
I don't know what you're worried about, currently with little more than $1 you can get a transaction into the next block. I think you are late to worry about fees. There was a huge spike around halving and then ups and downs until we got to the levels we are at now, which are the lowest in quite some time recently. So no, right now there is nothing wrong with the Bitcoin blockchain.
By the way, we are on block 843380.
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you provide concrete evidence, I don't think there is anything unusual. Before they only had Brainboss as a merit source, and I don't know if theymos ended up appointing another one. But in any case, that merit circulates in a local section is normal and the Nigerian community is quite important in Bitcointalk. I'm sure most of those that come to mind, like Brainboss, Charles-Tim, Igebotz, Mia Chloe, Satoprincess and many others have earned their merits honestly.
|
|
|
|
For the past month we have been working with the Trump campaign to develop their bitcoin and crypto policy agenda. We proposed a comprehensive executive order for President Trump to sign on day 1. I will be sharing those details soon. This week Trump took the first step, but there is much work to do. We intend to raise a $100m war chest for the campaign to insure the next President of the United States is pro Bitcoin. If you can help, please reach out. https://x.com/davidfbailey/status/1789141605544538467I'm a bit surprised by this, as Trump didn't have a very good opinion on Bitcoin in the past, but everyone can change, look at Saylor. However, it is one thing for him to change his mind, but it is another for him to consider it important enough to take action on day 1. I have heard Trump say what he is going to do on day 1 if he wins and I have not heard him talk about Bitcoin. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
