No, I was editing that by hand, and haven't touched it for a long time now.

The "biggest bets" report now lists the individual biggest bets over various time periods too.

A pretty good week this week, returning 0.83% to anyone who was with us all week, and somehow holding on to 2.5% of the total amount wagered:

There is now - I added 'site profit' to the 'wagered per day' report.

The sad thing is that even when people do read it they aren't able to understand what it means and how it proves the rolls are fair.

Part of that could be due to my lack of ability to explain it, but I think there's more to it than that.

I would like to see it too.

Also, is there a limit to how many 0.5 BTC payments I can make?

I would like to double around 50,000 BTC, but worry that it will take too long to send 100,000 separate deposits.

Is there a bulk-deposit option?

Right, so at the next level up, it would make sense to be nakowa, because it's so obvious nobody would believe it!

Basically it's a random walk - each bet either wins or loses. People spot patterns in the results, like winning streaks, losing streaks, periods where the player is breaking even - but really it's just a sequence of independent random wins and losses.

One path you missed, that I saw happen recently:

player deposits 3 BTC, loses it all
player redeposits 12 BTC, bets 6 BTC on first bet, recovering all previous losses and then some, makes a few small bets, then withdraws with a healthy net profit.

Sometimes chasing your losses works, but in general it's a bad idea.

I think I did the right thing.  I would have done it more quickly, and been clearer about it.  For a few days I was thinking I had to eat the loss myself.

Also, in retrospect, I would have debited the account before making the manual payout.

Did you see this list?

The 1300 BTC snafu is the 26th biggest "incident" on the list.

You can watch Steve Wynn recount the story here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_THiMy4CEU


I think in the early days a lot of the investors were concerned that I wouldn't make enough from running the site to make it worth my while. As well as encouraging me to roll back the 1300 BTC snafu they also told me that only taking 1% of profits as commission was too little.

It's in their interest to make sure that it's in my interest to run an honest game, odd as that sounds.

It gets easier, but I still can't stop the nagging doubt when someone has a lucky run that they must have found an exploit and are cheating.

We recently had a guy deposit 0.73 BTC and a few hours later withdraw 64 BTC. That's almost a 100x return, from playing at 66% over and over. Quite incredible, and a little worrying for me. Days later he lost it all back again playing the same strategy.

Each time this pattern repeats itself I get a little more comfortable with it, but that nagging worry never completely goes away.

When nakowa first started winning big I spoke to an experienced gambling site operator about it. He told me words to the effect of "welcome to running a casino; that's how it is; you'll never be able to stop worrying about people cheating you".

There was a whole thread about this recently.  OP basically was saying he was thinking of opening a 0% edge casino because "players play until they lose" and that aspect of player psychology would give his 0% edge casino an effective edge.

I think I managed to convince him (via simulation, ultimately) that it was a bad idea. Random walks without an edge pulling you down often go very high. You can have 5 players who play until they lose their $100 deposit, but if the 6th player gets lucky he can easily turn his $100 deposit into several thousand.

I'll see if I can dig up the old thread.

Edit: here it is -- https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=639787

He was an investor from July 6th 2013.

The following 'milestones' are in date order, and only consider his first two accounts, nakowa (2548) and cici (9075):


His first bet was as 'nakowa' for 0 BTC #21500735 at 2013-07-12 10:21:04.


His first non-zero bet was for 0.01 BTC #23153894 as "cici" at 2013-07-13 11:22:13.

His first bet of 1 BTC or more as 'cici' was for 1.6 BTC #23156384 at 2013-07-13 11:23:40.

His first bet of 10 BTC or more as 'cici' was for 16 BTC #23181632 at 2013-07-13 11:41:37.

His first bet of 100 BTC or more as 'cici' was for 100 BTC #23249498 at 2013-07-13 12:20:19.

His first bet of 200 BTC or more as 'cici' was for 289 BTC #23430396 at 2013-07-13 14:19:31.

'cici' never made a bet of 300 BTC or more.


His first non-zero bet as 'nakowa' was for 0.01 BTC #23467388 at 2013-07-13 14:53:12.

His first bet of 1 BTC or more as 'nakowa' was for 2 BTC #23467629 at 2013-07-13 14:53:23.

His first bet of 10 BTC or more as 'nakowa' was for 10 BTC #23467767 at 2013-07-13 14:53:33.

His first bet of 100 BTC or more as 'nakowa' was for 160 BTC #23468783 at 2013-07-13 14:54:14.

His first bet of 200 BTC or more as 'nakowa' was for 200 BTC #23510066 at 2013-07-13 15:27:45.

His first bet of 300 BTC or more as 'nakowa' was for 303 BTC #23563297 at 2013-07-13 16:12:19.

'nakowa' never made a bet of 400 BTC or more.


As I remember it, 'cici' played first. He claimed it was a friend of his for a while, but I think later admitted it was really himself. I could be wrong about that; maybe it was a friend, or maybe it wasn't and he never admitted it.

I think 'cici' ended up losing a lot, then 'nakowa' played and recovered 'cici's losses.

It might if you were lucky.

But in the long term it wouldn't, because the payout is always less than the reciprocal of the probability.

If you bet with a 0.2 probability of winning, the payout is a little (1%) less than 1/0.2 = 5 times your stake when you win.

I manage that address manually.

I used to move coins in and out of it a lot more frequently than I do now.

The way I manage the coins now is that there are usually enough coins available to the site to process most withdrawals. Whenever there are too many online, the excess are automatically sent to a local (to me) online wallet.  When that in turn gets "too full", I move 500 BTC into the cold wallet. So the local wallet acts as a buffer to save me having to go to the offline machine too often, because frankly it's a pain to use the offline machine. I never use networking or physical storage devices on it; I only use webcams and QR codes to pass messages to and from it, to keep it airgapped from the 'net. This 'buffer' wallet between the 'hot' and 'cold' wallets will be why you see weeks of inactivity on the cold wallet - the buffer was big enough to smooth out the ebb and flow of coins.

The 100 data points in a single day would probably be the day that I decided I was going to use individual transaction outputs of 500 BTC in the cold wallet, and tidied the whole thing up into neat 500 BTC bundles - that's the big dip you see over the word 'Nov' in the chart.

I think what they meant was:

"we're stupid and don't know what we're talking about; we hope you are stupid too; send coins"

Cars aren't a currency, but if the police catch you in a stolen car they can do something about it.

What makes you think the police only police currency?

For most players I think it's more like:

You lose the same amount, but it lasts much longer at JD.

People tend to keep playing until they lose their deposit.  It's just a matter of time.

Sometimes they manage to withdraw while they're ahead.  And sometimes they even manage not to re-deposit it!

If that happened every day would anyone still play?

I already see people saying it's rigged after one day of good/bad luck (depending on which did you're on)...