🌟🎲🌟 MoneyPot.com

[Text]

Anyone here can guide me how to invest for this site? I am interested. Is there a minimum amount of bitcoins for the initial capital? I trust this one, it seems a lot of gamble site here was linked here. I want to try and to know how it works.

[1714868389]

1714868389

[1714868389]

1714868389

[Bit-Exo.com]

Anyone here can guide me how to invest for this site? I am interested. Is there a minimum amount of bitcoins for the initial capital? I trust this one, it seems a lot of gamble site here was linked here. I want to try and to know how it works.

You can invest by going to https://www.moneypot.com/investment. Minimum investment is 1 satoshi, altho you need to invest more for a chance at profits.

[dooglus]

If investing wasn't risky, nobody would ever need an investment. The whole point behind it is to help lessen the personal risk, otherwise why would you give everyone else guaranteed income when you could have taken it all for yourself? NO investment is guaranteed.

I see things the same way. What I'm trying to understand is what you have in mind for the 'fixed' investment. Dogedigital described it like this:

It'll be a set % roi by the term you select for those wishing to have a constant and steady source of positive investment rather than 'gamble' with the volatility of the house bankroll.

That doesn't sound risky. How are you planning to offer a steady positive return without volatility? That's what I'm asking about.

[dooglus]

They can't risk using that 100 BTC to pay out winners, because they need to keep it in reserve to pay me back at the end of the year.

Well, I think that constraint needs to be relaxed for fixed-interest investing to make sense.


Let's say I borrowed 1000 BTC from you at 3% interest over a year. I throw that 1000 BTC in my bankroll, knowing that I can attract more action on my site. Even if a whale wins a lot of that money in the short term, he (or someone else) will probably maybe lose it back to the site. If everything goes well after a year, I give you back 1030 BTC and profited from the increased action on my site. If things go badly, I need to refinance the loan or declare bankruptcy.  

I would be better off investing the money in the bankroll myself (assuming an expected >3% return) if you're going to pass on any losses to me.

It doesn't sound particularly appealing for investors (and even stressing on MP's behalf, as it would effectively imply fractional reserving and needing to worry about bank runs and blah blah), but in the real world there are billions of dollars of loans/investments built on pretty similar principles

We already have too many sites that we suspect are risking more than they can sensibly afford to risk, and others with possible solvency issues. I think MoneyPot aims to size their max bets properly and also to maintain solvency. I can't imagine that their "fixed investment" idea involves taking risks that could end up bankrupting them.

Clearly lots of real world investments do exactly that, but when things go wrong they are "too big to fail" and get bailed out at public expense. I don't think modelling MoneyPot on such real world fractional reserve disasters is helpful.

[gamblingbad]

How did this bet got accepted? Bet of 50,000 bits attempted to win 500 bitcoins...
https://www.moneypot.com/bets/631806614

Thats insane. How can invest alot if someone can win all in one bet?

[gapjustin]

How did this bet got accepted? Bet of 50,000 bits attempted to win 500 bitcoins...
https://www.moneypot.com/bets/631806614

Oh wow that's me
My assumption is that it has to do with the chance to actually win lol
I think the max bet is HE * BR and 50k bits certainly is below that

[gamblingbad]

How did this bet got accepted? Bet of 50,000 bits attempted to win 500 bitcoins...
https://www.moneypot.com/bets/631806614

Oh wow that's me
My assumption is that it has to do with the chance to actually win lol
I think the max bet is HE * BR and 50k bits certainly is below that

sane people not want take your bet

[gapjustin]

How did this bet got accepted? Bet of 50,000 bits attempted to win 500 bitcoins...
https://www.moneypot.com/bets/631806614

Oh wow that's me
My assumption is that it has to do with the chance to actually win lol
I think the max bet is HE * BR and 50k bits certainly is below that

sane people not want take your bet

a 0.00002384185791015625% winchance bet?
Pretty sure people accept those
also known as lotteries.

[Text]

You can invest by going to https://www.moneypot.com/investment. Minimum investment is 1 satoshi, altho you need to invest more for a chance at profits.

Thank you so much for providing the link, follow up question. Does anyone here is already earning? Is it worth it? Can someone explain me the process so I can understand carefully how it works? So i need to deposit first. What are the risks and rewards?

[gapjustin]

You can invest by going to https://www.moneypot.com/investment. Minimum investment is 1 satoshi, altho you need to invest more for a chance at profits.

Thank you so much for providing the link, follow up question. Does anyone here is already earning? Is it worth it? Can someone explain me the process so I can understand carefully how it works? So i need to deposit first. What are the risks and rewards?

Basically here's what happens
Someone wins a bet -> your investment goes down
Someone loses a bet -> your investment goes up
The chance that someone loses is higher than the chance he wins.

You invest by doing the following:
Deposit BTC into moneypot
Head to https://www.moneypot.com/investment
use the invest option there
hit invest

Then just wait.

[Michail1]

How did this bet got accepted? Bet of 50,000 bits attempted to win 500 bitcoins...
https://www.moneypot.com/bets/631806614

Oh wow that's me
My assumption is that it has to do with the chance to actually win lol
I think the max bet is HE * BR and 50k bits certainly is below that

sane people not want take your bet

a 0.00002384185791015625% winchance bet?
Pretty sure people accept those
also known as lotteries.

Well, not if you consider:

20 BTC Max win in a single bet cap will go live today.

If you could win more than 20BTC, it goes above the amount in the above statement.
Although the odds are very against you winning, it shouldn't have been accepted (as I understand it).

This was put into place probably specifically because of the 'Nottardy' win:
0.0000071711838245391846%  - 9bits to win 95BTC

So, even though your chance was only
0.00002384185791015625%  it would have basically bankrupt the site.

(Even a real casino will not bet The Casino on a single bet (no matter how low the risk).)

[dooglus]

How did this bet got accepted? Bet of 50,000 bits attempted to win 500 bitcoins...
https://www.moneypot.com/bets/631806614

This question has come up before when there was a large win on plinkopot.

See this post, and the following posts in the same thread:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1345170.msg13720264#msg13720264

It turns out that the Kelly Criterion tells us to risk up to 81% of our bankroll on that 50k bit bet. Apparently it's worth a tiny chance of losing 81% of the bankroll in order to pick up all the 50k's when the bet loses.

I came up with that 81% by plotting:

Code:

      (         0.0 -       1024.0) * log(1 + x * (50000 - 51390.62 - 513906250)/(51390.62 + 513906250 - 50000)) + \
      (      1024.0 - 4123168604.0) * log(1 + x * (50000 - 51390.62            )/(51390.62 + 513906250 - 50000)) + \
      (4123168604.0 - 4294967296.0) * log(1 + x * (50000                       )/(51390.62 + 513906250 - 50000))

and visually finding the lowest point - very similar to in the linked post.

Well, not if you consider:

20 BTC Max win in a single bet cap will go live today.

If you could win more than 20BTC, it goes above the amount in the above statement.

It does. But that 20 BTC maximum win per bet seems like a silly rule to have made. Maybe the rule changed back again since?

(Even a real casino will not bet The Casino on a single bet (no matter how low the risk).)

Right, you should never risk 100% of your bankroll on a single bet. But apparently it is sometimes optimal to risk a large percentage of it.

[B_UN1T]

How did this bet got accepted? Bet of 50,000 bits attempted to win 500 bitcoins...
https://www.moneypot.com/bets/631806614

Ok this Is how i think about the bet.
Maybe a few saw the thread from the App where the bet come from
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1676865.msg16844809#msg16844809
As You can see there Is a jackpot. Other apps like exo do there Jackpot on a other way. The needed outcome Is nearly the Same but every coder Is Doing it on its own way. I think this will be the only way to do it on this way and mp only do the normal math about the bet and think a winchance about 0,00002384185791015625% will give a payout from x.
But this will only tell the app owner the jp Is hit.

The other question should be how Is it possible to have 2 different winchances like it is on this bet, plinko Is a different Story only to say. If this Is really possible and as we can See it is i would Tell every App owner to Import it like this.
J_ please do the Same on the exo sweeper and call it Secret Jackpot .

I have already Check it and all i can say Is normaly MP "reject" a bet that Is to high.
Before the question Is coming how i Check it. I want to bet 0.5btc on a plinko custom raw with x250 on both sides but mp doesnt Place the bet.

[Dogedigital]

The 20btc cap was in place but setup incorrectly.  This is on us, but investors were not affected.

The system was coded to restrict bets to 20 btc max win payouts.  If someone had hit a 64 bitcoin wager, the house bankroll would only be deducted 20 bitcoin and the player would be credited 20 bitcoin.

We realize this was not what we intended and we will be changing it.

We also realize that this was unfair to any player (there were only a very short few) that had an accepted bet that showed a higher payout than 20 bitcoin. We will be reviewing all those that were affected and contact them to credit their accounts for more than their potentially lost equity.

For simplicity and ease of coding, we are heavily discussing the possibility of abandoning kelly criterion completely and implementing a straight forward 1% of bankroll max win with a mandatory minimum house edge of 0.75%.

[MinerHQ]

The 20btc cap was in place but setup incorrectly.  This is on us, but investors were not affected.

The system was coded to restrict bets to 20 btc max win payouts.  If someone had hit a 64 bitcoin wager, the house bankroll would only be deducted 20 bitcoin and the player would be credited 20 bitcoin.

We realize this was not what we intended and we will be changing it.

We also realize that this was unfair to any player (there were only a very short few) that had an accepted bet that showed a higher payout than 20 bitcoin. We will be reviewing all those that were affected and contact them to credit their accounts for more than their potentially lost equity.

For simplicity and ease of coding, we are heavily discussing the possibility of abandoning kelly criterion completely and implementing a straight forward 1% of bankroll max win with a mandatory minimum house edge of 0.75%.

This shows that you guys are implementing things without proper testing your scripts and that is not expected from any well-established site like money pot. Hope these things will not repeat because it is not even good for either players or investors. If player wins after taking such big risk and he get only 20 BTC means then it is considered as cheating to players. If your giving back the people who lost more in a single bet then it is a good move.

[BillyBurns]

As a investor on many sites I disagree with these changes to protect investors although I understand why your taking these measures. Investors should only be risking what they can afford to lose no investment is promised to win and they should be aware of that. By limiting what the investors can lose your also taking away from the players who want to go big or go home. Sure they can go big still and lose the majority of time they try but I imagine some players want the investors to feel some pain, which makes it more enjoyable to the player. A kelly option would help both players and investors  in this case.

[Michail1]

If player wins after taking such big risk and he get only 20 BTC means then it is considered as cheating to players. If your giving back the people who lost more in a single bet then it is a good move.

Ummm, what 'big risk' did the player make?
Also, if the bet isn't accepted, then it isn't cheating.  (Even a real casino has table limits (min AND max).)
They said they were going back to cover the winning bets which won over the 20BTC max since the system actually took their bets.  This is completely fair to the players.  (Only an investor could have an issue with this since it was declared no bets would be taken if the win was potentially over 20BTC).

As a investor on many sites I disagree with these changes to protect investors although I understand why your taking these measures. Investors should only be risking what they can afford to lose no investment is promised to win and they should be aware of that. By limiting what the investors can lose your also taking away from the players who want to go big or go home. Sure they can go big still and lose the majority of time they try but I imagine some players want the investors to feel some pain, which makes it more enjoyable to the player. A kelly option would help both players and investors  in this case.

In a way, I agree with you.  I do believe the site should work along the same lines of a real casino in that there should be limits (mins and max).  Casinos don't have 1penny min while having a 1% of casino value max.  Casinos try to limit exposure to around 8 consecutive doubling bets.   It's unlikely to lose 8 bets in a row; however, it's very very unlikely to lose 16 consecutive bets in a row. 

A real person wouldn't gamble if they started at a penny minimum bet if they walked in with $10k.  That said, it's easier to play this way if you had bots doing it for you automatically (19 bets).  Vegas must have a reason for doing it this way.  Just a thought.

[fullypak]

As a investor on many sites I disagree with these changes to protect investors although I understand why your taking these measures. Investors should only be risking what they can afford to lose no investment is promised to win and they should be aware of that. By limiting what the investors can lose your also taking away from the players who want to go big or go home. Sure they can go big still and lose the majority of time they try but I imagine some players want the investors to feel some pain, which makes it more enjoyable to the player. A kelly option would help both players and investors  in this case.

I do agree that all investments come with some risks, but the site also needs investors to maintain a healthy bankroll amount. If investors can't make profits, naturally they will pull out the money and put in some other sites where they can make profit and site may lose a lot of investors. So site owners have to do something to retain investors, or they can come up with their own bankroll.

[BillyBurns]

As a investor on many sites I disagree with these changes to protect investors although I understand why your taking these measures. Investors should only be risking what they can afford to lose no investment is promised to win and they should be aware of that. By limiting what the investors can lose your also taking away from the players who want to go big or go home. Sure they can go big still and lose the majority of time they try but I imagine some players want the investors to feel some pain, which makes it more enjoyable to the player. A kelly option would help both players and investors  in this case.

I do agree that all investments come with some risks, but the site also needs investors to maintain a healthy bankroll amount. If investors can't make profits, naturally they will pull out the money and put in some other sites where they can make profit and site may lose a lot of investors. So site owners have to do something to retain investors, or they can come up with their own bankroll.

But they can make profits they just were on the wrong end of variance and wined like babies. Fwiw I was apart of the big loses I just look at it differently but I have gambled as a living for over a decade and understand variance better  than most can.

[ranlo]

A real person wouldn't gamble if they started at a penny minimum bet if they walked in with $10k.  That said, it's easier to play this way if you had bots doing it for you automatically (19 bets).  Vegas must have a reason for doing it this way.  Just a thought.

It's actually more related to the cost of doing business. If you have a table with a player that is starting out at a penny, you get, let's say 30 hands per hour on average. That's a $0.30 return, while you're paying someone $15/hr for doing that. There are a lot of overheads of casinos that online sites aren't faced with. Add in things like security, other personnel, rent, etc. and it goes up. They base the minimum bets around what is worth it to them: if it's not worth the time to do a $5 hand but it is worth it for $10, they will set the min at 10.