DADICE : exposing investors to more risk than their kelly, misleading informatio

[leen93]

I invested a certain amount of btc in DADICE at a kelly of 10, as far as I know this means I can only lose 10% of my profit in 1 bet.

Reading their website this was confirmed : https://www.dadice.com/print?investments
The maximum pay-out of the site is calculated by taking the sum of all the investments * risk * 0.01. So imagine we had user A with 10 Bitcoins invested at 1/2 Kelly, B with 10 at 5x and C with 10 at 10x. The maximum pay-out would be:

(10*0.5*0.01) + (10*5*0.01) + (10*10*0.01) = 1.55 Bitcoin




Then someone made 1 bet : #407989150
and my investment went immediately down by 29%
After talking to 1 staff member (M.F., full name and private info known) got the info that max bet is 20 btc and that it is independent of the amount invested. On the question why the above information was on their website and why they mention using the kelly criterion but are not doing that they couldn't give me an appropriate answer. If I ask what would happen if someone would win 100 x 20 btc (and investments would all be negative) he just said : "we will not pay him the won amount".

For this reason I would want to ask them to send me my losses  of ca. 2 BTC (only due to allowing a bet which shouldn't be allowed by the kelly criterion) to 1JnKcPAG8pieCdFA23X9yxvwMq5aeB9yqJ (+ 3 BTC for "trying" to expose my funds to more risk than I agreed"), and make their site implement the kelly criterion correctly (or remove every false/misleading information from their website and by doing that make the website completely untrustworthy)



*Investments are shown on the website as investment x kelly.

I DONT WANT TO SAY ANYTHING BAD ABOUT DADICE AND TILL NOW I DIDNT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH DADICE; THIS SCAM ACCUSATION IS JUST TO PUSH THEM TO SOLVE THIS ISSUE ASAP.

[1714027925]

1714027925

[1714027925]

1714027925

[1714027925]

1714027925

[1714027925]

1714027925

[Quickseller]

I invested a certain amount of btc in DADICE at a kelly of 10, as far as I know this means I can only lose 10% of my profit in 1 bet.

Reading their website this was confirmed : https://www.dadice.com/print?investments
The maximum pay-out of the site is calculated by taking the sum of all the investments * risk * 0.01. So imagine we had user A with 10 Bitcoins invested at 1/2 Kelly, B with 10 at 5x and C with 10 at 10x. The maximum pay-out would be:

(10*0.5*0.01) + (10*5*0.01) + (10*10*0.01) = 1.55 Bitcoin




Then someone made 1 bet : #407989150
and my investment went immediately down by 29%
After talking to 1 staff member (M.F., full name and private info known) got the info that max bet is 20 btc and that it is independent of the amount invested. On the question why the above information was on their website and why they mention using the kelly criterion but are not doing that they couldn't give me an appropriate answer. If I ask what would happen if someone would win 100 x 20 btc (and investments would all be negative) he just said : "we will not pay him the won amount".

For this reason I would want to ask them to send me my losses  of ca. 2 BTC (only due to allowing a bet which shouldn't be allowed by the kelly criterion) to 1JnKcPAG8pieCdFA23X9yxvwMq5aeB9yqJ, and make their site implement the kelly criterion correctly (or remove every false/misleading information from their website)



*Investments are shown on the website as investment x kelly.

I didn't know it was a secret that they are scamming. I am also not sure why you would invest in their site when they are refusing to disclose their cold storage addresses. Although in theory it should show up when they go to pay out this "player" who "won" on a single bet.

[leen93]

I invested a certain amount of btc in DADICE at a kelly of 10, as far as I know this means I can only lose 10% of my profit in 1 bet.

Reading their website this was confirmed : https://www.dadice.com/print?investments
The maximum pay-out of the site is calculated by taking the sum of all the investments * risk * 0.01. So imagine we had user A with 10 Bitcoins invested at 1/2 Kelly, B with 10 at 5x and C with 10 at 10x. The maximum pay-out would be:

(10*0.5*0.01) + (10*5*0.01) + (10*10*0.01) = 1.55 Bitcoin




Then someone made 1 bet : #407989150
and my investment went immediately down by 29%
After talking to 1 staff member (M.F., full name and private info known) got the info that max bet is 20 btc and that it is independent of the amount invested. On the question why the above information was on their website and why they mention using the kelly criterion but are not doing that they couldn't give me an appropriate answer. If I ask what would happen if someone would win 100 x 20 btc (and investments would all be negative) he just said : "we will not pay him the won amount".

For this reason I would want to ask them to send me my losses  of ca. 2 BTC (only due to allowing a bet which shouldn't be allowed by the kelly criterion) to 1JnKcPAG8pieCdFA23X9yxvwMq5aeB9yqJ, and make their site implement the kelly criterion correctly (or remove every false/misleading information from their website)



*Investments are shown on the website as investment x kelly.

I didn't know it was a secret that they are scamming. I am also not sure why you would invest in their site when they are refusing to disclose their cold storage addresses. Although in theory it should show up when they go to pay out this "player" who "won" on a single bet.

Disclosing cold storage doesn't assure they are trustworthy. Not having implemented the kelly criterion while spreading it out on their website (after discovering more problems like investing right after a big loss and starting with a large profit) is more a red flag for me and I hope they can sort this out soon.

[Quickseller]

Well not disclosing their cold storage is a pretty good indication that they are not trustworthy. If they are going to lie about how much money they are holding on their investor's behalf, then why do you think they would otherwise act honestly?

You are right that they messed up big time on that bet, assuming it was in fact a mistake (which I honestly doubt).

[dooglus]

I invested a certain amount of btc in DADICE at a kelly of 10, as far as I know this means I can only lose 10% of my profit in 1 bet.
[...]
Then someone made 1 bet : #407989150
and my investment went immediately down by 29%

The 'effective bankroll' (ie. actual investments times Kelly multiplier) was over 1000 BTC at the time. That means the maximum profit per bet should have been over 10 BTC. So when someone wins 20 BTC because the site is risking too much, it's not more than double the correct amount to be risking.

The most you should have been able to lose is 10% of your investment per roll.

Even taking this fixed 20 BTC maximum profit into account, the most you should have been able to lose is ~20% of your investment per roll.

So how on earth did you end up losing 29%?

It seems there's more than one bug here.

It will be interesting to hear DaDice staff try to explain their way out of this major fuckup.

[leen93]

I invested a certain amount of btc in DADICE at a kelly of 10, as far as I know this means I can only lose 10% of my profit in 1 bet.
[...]
Then someone made 1 bet : #407989150
and my investment went immediately down by 29%

The 'effective bankroll' (ie. actual investments times Kelly multiplier) was over 1000 BTC at the time. That means the maximum profit per bet should have been over 10 BTC. So when someone wins 20 BTC because the site is risking too much, it's not more than double the correct amount to be risking.

The most you should have been able to lose is 10% of your investment per roll.

Even taking this fixed 20 BTC maximum profit into account, the most you should have been able to lose is ~20% of your investment per roll.

So how on earth did you end up losing 29%?

It seems there's more than one bug here.

It will be interesting to hear DaDice staff try to explain their way out of this major fuckup.

completely right,
I talk to them tomorrow on skype. I just got mutted in the chat because I announced this...

[agustina2]

Well not disclosing their cold storage is a pretty good indication that they are not trustworthy. If they are going to lie about how much money they are holding on their investor's behalf, then why do you think they would otherwise act honestly?

You are right that they messed up big time on that bet, assuming it was in fact a mistake (which I honestly doubt).

Why should they disclose this information? What about the investors who dont want to be identified? Should DaDice Just disregard them and make their information public?

[erwin45hacked]

I talk to them tomorrow on skype. I just got mutted in the chat because I announced this...

So in the end they use the last thing they can do to silence this issue by muting you. Quite a honorable action from them to their investor. Censorship means people are hiding some stuff up on their sleeve

[leen93]

Well not disclosing their cold storage is a pretty good indication that they are not trustworthy. If they are going to lie about how much money they are holding on their investor's behalf, then why do you think they would otherwise act honestly?

You are right that they messed up big time on that bet, assuming it was in fact a mistake (which I honestly doubt).

Why should they disclose this information? What about the investors who dont want to be identified? Should DaDice Just disregard them and make their information public?

They should proof they own the bitcoin in cold storage, not who the investors are (which in fact they even don't know theirselves)

[leen93]

I talk to them tomorrow on skype. I just got mutted in the chat because I announced this...

So in the end they use the last thing they can do to silence this issue by muting you. Quite a honorable action from them to their investor. Censorship means people are hiding some stuff up on their sleeve

And I was not even accusing them, I was just explaining the kelly criterion 

[Quickseller]

Well not disclosing their cold storage is a pretty good indication that they are not trustworthy. If they are going to lie about how much money they are holding on their investor's behalf, then why do you think they would otherwise act honestly?

You are right that they messed up big time on that bet, assuming it was in fact a mistake (which I honestly doubt).

Why should they disclose this information? What about the investors who dont want to be identified? Should DaDice Just disregard them and make their information public?

How is anyone going to be confident that they actually have the bankroll to cover the bets they are allowing players to make?

They can't exactly keep their cold storage private forever (assuming they actually have any cold storage) as players will eventually win (as in this case) and will need to pay out from their cold storage.

To take their argument that their investors want their addresses to be "private" seriously is just naive.

[leen93]

Well not disclosing their cold storage is a pretty good indication that they are not trustworthy. If they are going to lie about how much money they are holding on their investor's behalf, then why do you think they would otherwise act honestly?

You are right that they messed up big time on that bet, assuming it was in fact a mistake (which I honestly doubt).

Why should they disclose this information? What about the investors who dont want to be identified? Should DaDice Just disregard them and make their information public?

How is anyone going to be confident that they actually have the bankroll to cover the bets they are allowing players to make?

They can't exactly keep their cold storage private forever (assuming they actually have any cold storage) as players will eventually win (as in this case) and will need to pay out from their cold storage.

To take their argument that their investors want their addresses to be "private" seriously is just naive.

it's naive and there are enough option to mix bitcoins
People who want to be anonymous will also use anonymous bitcoin addresses so they will never be traced back. I fixed some earlier problems with them before and now I hope to keep working with them in making everything legit and open.

[erwin45hacked]

I talk to them tomorrow on skype. I just got mutted in the chat because I announced this...

So in the end they use the last thing they can do to silence this issue by muting you. Quite a honorable action from them to their investor. Censorship means people are hiding some stuff up on their sleeve

And I was not even accusing them, I was just explaining the kelly criterion 

So question is why would you even want to put investment in there ?  . This is a warning for the others because Kelly criterion is a standard thing in gambling industry, if they dont know how to do this properly then people should stay away from this

[leen93]

I talk to them tomorrow on skype. I just got mutted in the chat because I announced this...

So in the end they use the last thing they can do to silence this issue by muting you. Quite a honorable action from them to their investor. Censorship means people are hiding some stuff up on their sleeve

And I was not even accusing them, I was just explaining the kelly criterion 

So question is why would you even want to put investment in there ?  . This is a warning for the others because Kelly criterion is a standard thing in gambling industry, if they dont know how to do this properly then people should stay away from this

They just should implement it...

[Ruzka]

From all of that, I would really like to see the part where you say they said to you that..

If I ask what would happen if someone would win 100 x 20 btc (and investments would all be negative) he just said : "we will not pay him the won amount".

That above is a game changer and no doubt if you have proof they said this then you are going to have a nice big offer to keep it to yourself,, but you should protect the community and not greed and release proof of this.

I am standing by waiting to see this proof.

[leen93]

From all of that, I would really like to see the part where you say they said to you that..

If I ask what would happen if someone would win 100 x 20 btc (and investments would all be negative) he just said : "we will not pay him the won amount".

That above is a game changer and no doubt if you have proof they said this then you are going to have a nice big offer to keep it to yourself,, but you should protect the community and not greed and release proof of this.

I am standing by waiting to see this proof.

If they don't implement the kelly criterion I'll post a proof of this. If they implement it soon this fact will be completely irrelevant.

[NLNico]

Too bad you didn't read at least some pages of the previous scam accusation. This has been known for a while and obviously DD didn't do much about it:

Actually it is very strange they had a fixed max 20 coin profit too. How does that work with investors and kelly selections ? :s The max profit must be based on the invested amount and with the kelly selection the investor is selecting the max loss (= max profit for player) per bet he can have. This is how all dice invest sites work.

Now, with more and more investors and different kelly selections, the picture is even more bizarre
 Like ours:
 Bankroll is currently 924
Actually available 546

..

No it is not. We have a maximum payout of 20 btc currently.

Just think how logical this fixed max payout is

[Amadues]

leen93, you don't talk good about them, but you take their signature …

[leen93]

leen93, you don't talk good about them, but you take their signature …

I am not talking good or bad about them. I am just talking about the truth. About the non-implementation of the kelly criterion you just can't say anything good.
I didn't get paid for a long time for my sign campaign but don't mind too much about this, just want all problems at dadice solved. That's where I am caring the most about right now.

[leen93]

Too bad you didn't read at least some pages of the previous scam accusation. This has been known for a while and obviously DD didn't do much about it:

Actually it is very strange they had a fixed max 20 coin profit too. How does that work with investors and kelly selections ? :s The max profit must be based on the invested amount and with the kelly selection the investor is selecting the max loss (= max profit for player) per bet he can have. This is how all dice invest sites work.

Now, with more and more investors and different kelly selections, the picture is even more bizarre
 Like ours:
 Bankroll is currently 924
Actually available 546

..

No it is not. We have a maximum payout of 20 btc currently.

Just think how logical this fixed max payout is

The fact more people knew this before doesn't make it less urgent to change it...