50BTC abnormally lucky? 50BTC full statistics of last 700 blocks.

[LudwigDG]

Hi I did some research about 50BTC their PPS payout system and saw something strange. I don't know if this is fully correct but isn't it so that 50BTC is abnormally lucky?

You can download the excel file with my calculations here www.glamdring.se/users/d9a55d121fc1beb7dbbc8c38d70dcbbb/50BTC_Statistics.xlsx

Like the difficulty is 19.339.259 at the moment. Yet with the history of the last 700 blocks calculated it seems like they always have a cost of only 54,30%
Doesn't this mean that they get double the amount of blocks found than what it needs to be?

I used the statistics from block 242659 till 238963 (about 700 block found by 50BTC there)

So what is your opinion and isn't it so that this makes sure that they get huge profits because they have a PPS system?

Best regards,

Ludwig.

[eleuthria]

Haven't gone through it all, but either something is wrong on your analysis, or 50BTC's statistics that you're pulling from are wrong (which given their history of screwed up/missing statistics reporting wouldn't be a surprise).

organofcorti's weekly pool statistics estimate 50BTC's speed based on how many blocks they have found.  This number is generally extremely close to the reported speed by 50BTC, which would be determined by the rate of shares being submitted.  If they were as luck as your summary claims, then organofcorti's stats would be showing their speed close to twice as high as the reported speed.

[LudwigDG]

I think you are right about the fact that the number don't add up.

50 BTC discovered 699 blocks. So 699*25= 17475 BTC.
In total of those 699 blocks they had 5.897.971.136 shares submitted. I did this times the average pay out per share for that period.

5.897.971.136*0,00000160 = 9445BTC So doing 17475-9445 = 8030BTC in profit.

Ok my apologies for making this topic. It seems like the reported shares in the statistics of 50BTC are way to low. Compared to the calculations that are made somewhere ells.

[LudwigDG]

I think I know from where the problem comes. It is the difference in difficulty level per share that you can select yourself.

A share with a difficulty of 64 should be counted as 64 shares and at this moment it is probably counting for 1.