|
Username: Yzusyvubos110
Deposit Amount: 0.667 BTC
|
|
|
|
Great News : We are Pawning 5% share on Wealthydice for 1 Year for 20 members at 0.5 BTC. We make 0.5% for ever BTC Wagered and Investors get 20th part of such Income for 1 Year. After 1 Year we will be refunding 0.5 BTC. The BTC collected during this period will be used for CJ development Anyone Interested can approach me via PM Welcome to Our 1st Investor in Cj/Wealthydice Congrats Simtho, Greetings from the Wealthydice, Thank you for your recent investment with us and congratulations on becoming a stakeholder of both Wealthydice casino. You are entitled to a 20th share of 100% of our Bitcoin based revenue (5% Share).You will now be added to our database to receive Bitcoin monthly dividends on the 1st of each month starting with your first payout on January 1st, 2017. This email should serve as a time-stamp for your one year stakeholder contract and does not expire until one year from this date. "total_wagered_btc":"1102.4134802795" at the time of Your Joining. Your dividends come from a volume based Bitcoin income on our casino. Wealthydice.com launched in August 2016 and has a total Bitcoin wagered volume 1,100+ at the time of this writing. Income during this time has totaled over 5.5 BTC. Wealthydice is in a position to do many more times that with the launch of CJ and CJ-Farming. The more volume on our site the more Bitcoin you will receive and this will vary month to month. The Bitcoin wallet address you provided to receive dividends can also be changed if you notify us via email at least 3 days before the 1st of each month. On Completion of exactly One year, Your BTC will be returned to the existing BTC address. If you have any questions please email us at cryptojacks@gmail.comAgain, welcome to CJ/Wealthydice and we hope to see a long and profitable future for everyone involved! Best fortune, Steve John If I understand right, you are selling off 100% of the bitcoin based revenue and at the end are refunding the initial investment? How will you do this if you sell 100%? |
|
|
|
|
What are the terms of this auction? Is that the buy it now price?
|
|
|
|
0.13 BTC
This post seems to be 9 minutes too late. Sorry. |
|
|
|
 . Looks like I won. I will send my choice in the morning when I wake up. |
|
|
|
www.Moneypot.com would like to acknowledge your limits of 0.5 - 5x kelly that you have stated in our thread. Thank you for the heads up.
|
|
|
|
|
Again, just to be clear, the only change we had made during that time was having 20% of the house edge deducted as commission on every bet and the rest was kept the same. Not saying that Ryan had set it up wrong, but we are just showing that we didn't do any crazy changes away from the system we were given.
The 'isn't even remotely accurate part' i disagree with.
If you extrapolate our current data with 5000 / 73,755 Bitcoin wagered being over 66.66% of the max plus say an additional 1000 being added to it, with the rest being well under, do you still believe that investors would lose it all in the end also taking into account that the beginning ratio is likely to go down since even whales have a finite amount of bitcoin they can afford to lose before giving up?
I do see your point, that hypothetically if we had massive constant whale action liken to BetKing, our model wouldn't be the most efficient.
However, we have been doing an average of 2.5 Million bets a day and 200 Bitcoin wagered with whale sessions happening maybe once every 3-5 days. It is setup this way (like you explained earlier) to allow people to yolo, or martingale, or do a short angry tilt session.
To apply this and say that we are deliberately ignoring the bankroll management aspect and positioning investors in a bad situation is wrong. We have shown that we are watching and willing to adjust as necessary.
Lastly, I don't know why everyone needs to try and attack everyone else. I see no reason to try and belittle our competition. It's clear that we are trying to provide gamblers and investors alike a better experience the best way we can. We are all established and want the same things. We should be helping each other, but instead there's always personal attacks and subtle jabs. All this bickering is not good for the industry on the whole. There doesn't need to be a 'winner' for an argument. The goal should be to find the best solutions. Focus your negative efforts on sites that are purposely trying to deceive and steal from users. For the rest of us, let's help each other. I am personally sick of it and you guys should be too. Seriously, please stop.
|
|
|
|
Say you are playing roulette on 2 wheels at the same time and always bet red:
On Wheel 1, you hit 8 reds out of 10.
On Wheel 2, you hit 4 reds out of 10.
You shouldn't quit wheel 2 and play wheel 1 only based on this.
But how do you know that the odds are not skewed favoring more reds than blacks on Wheel 1 and vice versa on Wheel 2? I think after so many spins we will inevitably make our choice in favor of a certain wheel. In regards to casinos, it is not particularly different. You will prefer that casino which gives you most profits, and unlike roulette, the chances that the "odds" are really "skewed" in favor of that casino are higher. Math and Probability. |
|
|
|
|
For those wondering what happened to the profit, user 'AllOrBroke' won over 70 Bitcoin today.
All betting took place at Bit-Exo.com and the vast majority of this user's bets were 5 Bitcoin wagers decided by votes (ie: bitcoingg hi or lo?, bitcoingg: hi, allorbroke bets 5 Bitcoin > 50.4999 High).
Other bets were placed by a Bot that tallied user votes and bet on his behalf. Client seed was never changed throughout the session.
We are currently investigating further into the matter.
|
|
|
|
I understand the reasoning behind allowing for Kelly (trying to make it so that investors have less exposure), but it seemed like everyone preferred to use 10x Kelly with their full investment (I'd imagine most players on JD have max leverage as well) which went against what was initially trying to be accomplished.
Why's that? If everyone is leveraged at 10x, it should mean that (rational) investors are storing a lot less on site then they otherwise would -- and thus achieving the goal of exposing investors to less counter party risk. Of course there will be some "gambling investor" who are over leveraged -- but if they wish to gamble like that, that's their prerogative. They might do super well, but on the whole they should expect to lose their money and be outperformed by the people who didn't over leverage their position. Investors, especially those in gambling investments, aren't always the most rational . I'd guess that the majority of those that are leveraged at 10x are applying it to what they fully planned to invest initially. You must be kidding. Investors anywhere and into anywhere are not very rational on the whole. Just because we can come to a conclusion if a certain investment was rational only in hindsight for the most part. In other words, if an investment turned out to be profitable, it had been a rational investment, if not then it hadn't. Success is never blamed. I'm sorry, I'm not really following what you are saying. What I'm trying to say is that we shouldn't use past results to dictate future ones or influence the way investments should be decided. From what I read earlier, it seemed like decisions were being made that way (BetKing being praised and Bitvest being put down solely because of their results). Say you are playing roulette on 2 wheels at the same time and always bet red: On Wheel 1, you hit 8 reds out of 10. On Wheel 2, you hit 4 reds out of 10. You shouldn't quit wheel 2 and play wheel 1 only based on this. Similarly, I don't think you should quit one investment and move it all to one site because one was doing bad and one was doing good. |
|
|
|
There is already a primedice thread, promotional threads belong in games and rounds like they always have.
I don't believe mods are really enforcing anything anymore. There are several sites who have multiple threads open. Back when I just started gambling with bitcoin, mods where only called for stuff that people in chat couldn't handle .. usually for people spamming after losing their bankroll. The rest of the people that where begging or trying to spread malware scripts ~ well they were up for scrutiny and shunning and the regulars in chat did a pretty good job calling them out on their bs or behavior in chat. Problem now is that it doesn't happen anymore. Any and all pains are just reported to mods. This player hurt my feelings. That guy sent one msg in all caps. This person edited a screenshot of rolls, thus he is trying to scam and therefor must get muted! Also there are always two sides to the story and the chat is divided overall. One group of people saying mods do nothing and are useless. When the chat rules are enforced more tightly then another (or the same) group goes on about abusing mod powers and being a nazi* .. There simply is no middle ground whichever way you look at it. I was referring to this forum's moderators. Sorry, I should have made that more clear. |
|
|
|
There is already a primedice thread, promotional threads belong in games and rounds like they always have.
I don't believe mods are really enforcing anything anymore. There are several sites who have multiple threads open. |
|
|
|
Hello good people, starting December 15th, 2016 all Bitcoin volume on https://betterbets.io will be tracked for the upcoming upgrades and promotion
that will go live January 15th, 2017.As always we like to start each year off with something really special and this one is no different. In order to qualify for this bonus your player accounts must
have wagered at least 5BTC in betting volume by January 13th, 2017. At that time our developers will take the snapshot of each account's volume and we'll
give you an appropriate prize for your loyalty to our casino. There are more features coming, but it's best to save some things as good surprises for the launch date.
Happy holidays to everyone, and your family during this Christmas season.
So Remember, remember the 15th of December...the accounting starts then. not withdraw. help http://imgur.com/a/zKIJ1withdraw error "Erro something‘ s wrong, please report this to our staff. Validateaddress RPC call failed!)" HELPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP! I believe Rubies withdrawals are still under maintenance on BetterBets. |
|
|
|
|
Love the promotion.
Wish it was earlier so I could get more volume in. Although, the vig is crazy high though.
|
|
|
|
If I recall correctly, BetKing was offering somewhere around 450 Bitcoin Max bet when the bankroll was at 4500 Bitcoin? If this max bet won, regardless of what you had invested, you would stand to lose 10% for the bet and another 2.5% (?) for the commission for -12.5% of your investment from one bet.
I think you may have it wrong. BetKing was allowing each investor to set their own 'Kelly multiplier". If a player won 10% of the bankroll that loss would have been borne by those investors with the highest Kelly multipliers. Any investor with a regular 1x multiplier would have lost no more than 1% of their investment on any roll. It's not unreasonable to allow investors to use high leverage so they don't have to expose themselves to so much counterparty risk so long as you don't force it on everyone. Also, the commission was 25% of the profits plus 25% of the house edge. In the case of a winning player there's no profit, so the commission is just 25% of the house edge, or 25% of 1% of the stake, or 0.25% of the stake. Since it's the max profit per bet that is fixed and not the max stake, the commission depends on the payout multiplier. If the winning player bet at 98% (a roughly 1.010204x payout multiplier) to win 450 BTC profit, their stake would need to be 44100 BTC, and the commission on that bet would be 0.25% of that, or 110.25 BTC, in which case the investor at 1x Kelly would be losing 1.245% of their investment at most. At the other extreme, if the winning play bet at 0.0001% (a 990,000x payout multiplier) to win 450 BTC profit, their stake would need to be just 0.00045454 BTC, and so the commission on that bet would be pretty much zero, and the investor ends up losing at most 1.00000101% of their investment. All this is moot now of course since betking is moving from a model where investors get to keep 50% of the expected profit (before expenses) and can divest whenever they like to a new exciting model where they keep 30% of the profit (after expenses) and cannot divest. Always nice to have an accurate and insightful post from dooglus Thanks for clarifying. That makes more sense for the calculations. I understand the reasoning behind allowing for Kelly (trying to make it so that investors have less exposure), but it seemed like everyone preferred to use 10x Kelly with their full investment (I'd imagine most players on JD have max leverage as well) which went against what was initially trying to be accomplished. ----- Would this hypothetical scenario then be right for BetKing's old model? An investor has 400 Bitcoin invested at 10x Kelly which represents 10% of the entire bankroll (4000 Bitcoin). A whale bets 400 Bitcoin at 50% and wins. Commission taken is 400 * 0.0025 = 1 Bitcoin and the total bankroll loss is 401 Bitcoin. Bankroll is now 4000 - 401 = 3,599 Bitcoin. The investor still holds 10% of the entire bankroll and his investment is now 359.9 Bitcoin. The investor's loss on a single wager (40.1 BTC) is 10.025% of their investment. ----- Also, if the argument for why BetKing had much better bankroll management than BitVest was the option for 1x Kelly, Bitvest also allows 1x Kelly. Furthermore, not to knock on Crypto-games (I think they run their site well), limiting their max win to 0.5% of older than 1 week bankroll (currently 5.73 BTC) does not guarantee that a whale can't come in and do some great damage (N8snathan did heavy damage within this exact range of betting to Bitvest). My point is I still think these decisions and charts made by coingamblingreviews for where to invest are being based off of recent results which in a sense is just guessing and gambling (albeit at a +ev rate because all sites should yield positive earnings in the long run). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
