Just-Dice.com : now with added CLAMs : Play or Invest

[Cluster2k]

It was interesting watching 'percent' play last night.  He or she had massive swings, 10 wins or losses in a row betting 60 btc were quite common.  Balls of steel.  What was more interesting was watching the reaction of the investors.  Some claimed the bettor has 'found a system' and was exploiting it, or betting small then big when 'variance was in their favour' or 'they knew they'd hit a streak'.  Anyone with a passing familiarity of gambling mathematics would know how silly that talk all is.  

Other investors day traded, moving their money in or out when they felt 'percent' would hit a losing streak.  This is nonsense too of course, as no one can predict such a streak and the only rational action is to stay invested.  'percent' of course ended up losing a few thousand bitcoins, as compulsive gamblers usually do.  

As an investor big swings down when players get lucky have been painful, but it's also a given (assuming JD is not a crooked site, by fault or design) that there will be big swings upwards.  The laws of mathematics haven't been violated.  There is a 1% house edge.  Casinos the world over run French roulette wheels with a 1.5% house edge and they're not closing their doors in bankruptcy.

Watching 'percent' play was interesting.  Part of me was glad to see bitcoins returning to the site.  Part of me was amazed that someone just dropped the equivalent of US$300k.  That's a 30 year mortgage in many parts of the world done in a couple of hours.  

[andrew12]

Wow, I went from loving this place to complete and utter disgust.

Here is the charts Doog posted in chat on when 0.25% change was made, even if you hate Nakowa for things in the past this is beyond dirty.

https://i.imgur.com/hL1xQ7Y.png
https://i.imgur.com/qfERYcK.png

Gamblers should not be playing here and giving money to these guys anymore specifically guys like Mechs who whined about this yesterday and left other investors guys I really like out to hang, to probably never to see their losses turned over.

What are you trying to say?

[Cluster2k]

Wow, I went from loving this place to complete and utter disgust.

Here is the charts Doog posted in chat on when 0.25% change was made, even if you hate Nakowa for things in the past this is beyond dirty.

As an investor I was concerned about the change.  People watching the action in the chatroom were going off their nut about losing money as investors, but clearly there was a downward trend in nakowa/percent/whatever's winnings after a run of extraordinary luck.  Reducing the maximum bet reduced the ultimate returns for the investors.

[chriswen]

Yup, 0.25% means investors who wanted exposure have less exposure.  The thing is that you can always invest less, but you can't invest more (if you're maxed out).  So basically 0.25% makes it a lot safer for wimps, more people will invest more, and for the people who were already invested the most they wanted to, they'll own less % of the house.

[organofcorti]

Wow, I went from loving this place to complete and utter disgust.

Here is the charts Doog posted in chat on when 0.25% change was made, even if you hate Nakowa for things in the past this is beyond dirty.

https://i.imgur.com/hL1xQ7Y.png

<snip>

And interestingly, all this chart shows  is that the variance post change is about a quarter of the variance pre change.

[grau]

There is the house edge providing positive expected value to investors, just like dividends for stocks. Investors however are less concerned of dividend risk, but on total return of capital after the investment is sold.

The line between an investor and gambler is blurred, but there are some levels of risk appetite typical for them. Investments have annualized return volatilities of roughly 1-10% for bonds 10-40% for blue chips, a return volatility above 100% is rather gambling.

Assuming gambler on JD play >50.5%, then the volatility is proportional to Sqrt[n*0.505*0.495] for n rolls.
An investor into the site has an annualized volatility of return of about betsize/bank*Sqrt[betsperyear*0.505*0.495].
Note that with varying bet size or bets other than >50.5% the volatility increases, therefore next calculations are lower limits of the actual volatility.

The expected number of bets per year extrapolated form today's stat is: 521890, the average bet size before Nakowa were: 8.1 BTC, bankroll was around 50,000.

An investor faced annualized return volatility of at least 5.8%.

After Nakowa the average bet size is: 90.1 and bankroll is 30,000 that leads to at least 108% return volatility.

Investors are gamblers now, therefore I disinvested until doog reduces the max bet size with a magnitude.

Interesting. Thanks for posting this.

But I wonder, isn't reducing max betsize only a moderately effective solution? Say *max bet size* is reduced to a tenth of its previous value, but as a result *number of bets increases tenfold* (not completely unlikely). Then, according to your formula, return volatility is reduced only by a factor of about 3 (/10, *sqrt(10)).

The return is dominated by the binomial distribution but modified with varying bet size and varying p for which distribution is unknown The lower limits of risk (aka. volatility) I calculated are assuming pure binomial.

Yes, the return volatility within the same timeframe increases with increasing number of bets (n), proportional to sqrt(n).
The expected return (out of house edge) increases proportional to n and proportional to bet size.

People use annualized volatility to be able to compare risk of things that are influenced by events of different frequency or over different time horizon.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution
Hints: volatility is the square root of statistical Variance. Statistical Mean is the expected return out of house edge.

[Coornail]

I can see that it is really hard to get on a common page with the max profit per bet %.

I think it would be worth to make the Max profit configurable per user.

• People who are currently unhappy with their max profit per bet could set their percentage back
• It would add an another game layer for investors
• The Max profit for the site would likely increase, which is attractive for the players

I was thinking about 10%, 1%, 0.25%, 0.1% 0.01%. What do you guys think?

[Elokane]

Great idea. This would, in effect, limit the amount of exposure each individual has per bet.

[abovemike]

today's nakstats: starting -2750. high point -2950. ending -1750.
bust #1 -200. bust #2 -300. bust #3 -500.
deposit #4 1000(pending)


16 loss streak in bust #3
https://i.imgur.com/E1aS9NZ.png

[Cluster2k]

today's nakstats: starting -2750. high point -2950. ending -1750.
bust #1 -200. bust #2 -300. bust #3 -500.
deposit #4 1000(pending)


16 loss streak in bust #3

What an extremely long run of bad luck. 

[ghibly79]

It would have been a total of 20k loss between yesterday and today, with the old max bet (assuming he would have followed the same pattern). Site would have been up 15000.

[akeetlebeetle]

It would have been a total of 20k loss between yesterday and today, with the old max bet (assuming he would have followed the same pattern). Site would have been up 15000.

Wow, you guys are still on about that?

He was 30 BTC away from his stated goal yesterday. Instead, he ended down a few thousand. Today, he never got a momentum going.

If he knows that he has a shot of winning (large bets + luck) he keeps playing. The smaller bets are proving to him that he can't rake the house over the coals anymore. Enjoy the +4000BTC site profit.

Doog probably just saved your asses from another 3-5k loss, the least you could do is thank him.

[RationalSpeculator]

It would have been a total of 20k loss between yesterday and today, with the old max bet (assuming he would have followed the same pattern). Site would have been up 15000.

Wow, you guys are still on about that?

He was 30 BTC away from his stated goal yesterday. Instead, he ended down a few thousand. Today, he never got a momentum going.

If he knows that he has a shot of winning (large bets + luck) he keeps playing. The smaller bets are proving to him that he can't rake the house over the coals anymore. Enjoy the +4000BTC site profit.

Doog probably just saved your asses from another 3-5k loss, the least you could do is thank him.

"We must recognize the frequent contradictions between short-term benefit and long-term harm."

[akeetlebeetle]

It would have been a total of 20k loss between yesterday and today, with the old max bet (assuming he would have followed the same pattern). Site would have been up 15000.

Wow, you guys are still on about that?

He was 30 BTC away from his stated goal yesterday. Instead, he ended down a few thousand. Today, he never got a momentum going.

If he knows that he has a shot of winning (large bets + luck) he keeps playing. The smaller bets are proving to him that he can't rake the house over the coals anymore. Enjoy the +4000BTC site profit.

Doog probably just saved your asses from another 3-5k loss, the least you could do is thank him.

"We must recognize the frequent contradictions between short-term benefit and long-term harm."

There is no long-term harm as Dooglus said this is not a long-term solution. He's giving you back what you want - 1% max bet, but adding some other options along with it. He just needs some time to code it. Are you guys willing to give him that?

If not, I suggest divesting until your optimal situation arises.

[mechs]

It would have been a total of 20k loss between yesterday and today, with the old max bet (assuming he would have followed the same pattern). Site would have been up 15000.

That is so inaccurate a statement it borders on absurd.  Just because the max profit would have been 4x higher (well not really, many more would divest) does not mean he would have followed the identical betting pattern x 4.  He typically has an amount up or down he stops at.  I personally would be fine with 0.5%, some like .25 and some want 1% or higher.
    I think Doog's idea may be a good one to let each player choose their own max profit and this risk level, though I am worried it will have un intended consequences.  For example, individual variance for some investors will go off the charts and you will have bots which keep the investor highly leveraged for smaller bets and when large bets detected, knocks down the leverage to being under leveraged leading to big swings in max profit and those investors not using such a bot more exposed than they intended when everyone else abruptly lowers their max profit % with bots or when online, while they are offline.

[4mherewego]

Yup, 0.25% means investors who wanted exposure have less exposure.  The thing is that you can always invest less, but you can't invest more (if you're maxed out).  So basically 0.25% makes it a lot safer for wimps, more people will invest more, and for the people who were already invested the most they wanted to, they'll own less % of the house.

Wimps should not invest in gambling.

I have had huge swings in my career as a trader, often lost much more in one day than I dare invest in JD(because of the scam risk), if you can't handle -50% in one day, then don't be the house in the casino. More investors won't mean more profits for the investors, I'd much rather have 30k invested and 1% allowed than 120k invested and 0.25% allowed given that we get the same action from bettors. Sure the variance will be lower at 120k, but the expected value also lower. So I will have a higher scam risk but the same variance and same expected value.

For most investors this will be a very small part of their investment(otherwise the investors are not rational and the discussion is pointless) so utility value of the investments don't really matter.

[marcovaldo]

Max profit for a single bet by the system should not be more than 0.01 %, but it should be possible to bet and win more automatically by splitting the higher bets into several smaller ones.

[FloridaBear]

Max profit for a single bet by the system should not be more than 0.01 %, but it should be possible to bet and win more automatically by splitting the higher bets into several smaller ones.

Where do you get 0.01%? For the current ~32,000 bankroll, that would mean a max profit of 3.2 BTC. That is way too low.

[markjamrobin]

Max profit for a single bet by the system should not be more than 0.01 %, but it should be possible to bet and win more automatically by splitting the higher bets into several smaller ones.

Where do you get 0.01%? For the current ~32,000 bankroll, that would mean a max profit of 3.2 BTC. That is way too low.

On a limb here, he meant .01 times the bankroll, or 1%, but mixed them together.

[saif313]

Max profit for a single bet by the system should not be more than 0.01 %, but it should be possible to bet and win more automatically by splitting the higher bets into several smaller ones.

Where do you get 0.01%? For the current ~32,000 bankroll, that would mean a max profit of 3.2 BTC. That is way too low.

On a limb here, he meant .01 times the bankroll, or 1%, but mixed them together.

what is minimum limit for deposit and just one payment inputs works no other