Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game

[itod]

2) While the Martingale system is a for sure loser on paper things get much more cloudy when you allow 1 satoshi bets and virtually no maximums. There's no way you haven't looked into this and I'm sure the conclusion is "but they'll be winning dust" which may be true but the right person could put a real hurt on a casino with this kind of spread and such favorable odds even if it were 25 cents at a time.

1 satoshi != 25 cents. If you run a martingale with a reasonable amount to start with, you'll hit max bet pretty fast.

I am well aware of how the Martingale works and I only mentioned one satoshi because it is the minimum bet. If you want to get down to it someone could have 10,000 bots winning 1 satoshi at a time with virtually no risk in about 2 hours. Of course they would increase that regularly as needed.

I brought up quarters because if you start at 25 cents you would be wagering a mere $128 bet on the 10th loss. The odds of losing 10 in a row if you set the odds to exactly 50% are 1:1024. On just-dice you could, with a large bankroll, get to the 20th bet before reaching the maximum profit per hand. The odds of losing 20 hands in a row set at 50% are one in a million.

In addition, there are ways to adjust the martingale so that you change the distribution of wins and losses in ways beneficial to you. This is especially true when you can adjust the odds to anything you want, from 0.01% up to 99.9%. I'm not interested in getting into the math involved but go look up how you can effect win distributions with gambling strategies for a good place to start.

You shake all that up and mix in a 1% edge, a lot of major BTC holders that are extremely well versed in mathematics (comes with the territory) and a very forgiving bet spread and it can lead to extensive losses for the "house that can't lose".

Once you start getting to numbers like 1 in a million, where it is more likely you win a small lottery than lose your bet on a gambling site, it's not a giant leap to think someone ballsy enough to sit on 10k or so BTC might decide to give it a shot. If the 1 in a million hits then the casino looks golden, but with those kinds of odds it wouldn't be unusual too far outside of a standard deviation for 10's of millions of iterations to go by without it ever happening. And you have to remember, the person "beating the odds" will be accumulating bankroll all along the way making it even harder to "bust" them.

Edit: And the fact that the 1 in a million hitting wouldn't even bust some of those that have graced the tables of just-dice makes it that much worse. Now you need that 1 in a million to come around on schedule every time and the player to not take his wins and go home. With that kind of betting system one could religiously beat the house for months and months on end and in the world of computers he could do so with a bot.

1 in a million is nothing, it's a certainty it will happen if you start with 1 satoshi and you want to gain 1 BTC, because you need 100 million martingale wins to achieve that. Much bigger loosing streak than loosing 20 in a row is almost a certainty when you chase a whole BTC as a reward.

There's obviously something counter-intuitive about the fact martingale will always loose. But it will, it's a proven fact as long as there's limited maximum bet.

[nicolaennio]

1) Big time gamblers like Phil Ivey often get kicked out of establishments for "beating the house". They know that with the right minimum and maximum bet limits that they can walk away winners, and they do.

2) While the Martingale system is a for sure loser on paper things get much more cloudy when you allow 1 satoshi bets and virtually no maximums. There's no way you haven't looked into this and I'm sure the conclusion is "but they'll be winning dust" which may be true but the right person could put a real hurt on a casino with this kind of spread and such favorable odds even if it were 25 cents at a time.

Past experience with successful gamblers in JD (Nakowa for example) has shown that the most effective strategy is just tossing a coin at 50% odds and betting the maximum each time. No trace of strategy there.

[tucenaber]

Regarding the paradox where a martingale strategy is both better and no better at the same time, I think the answer lies in a trade off between expected value and variance. In one case the bet size is fixed and in the other case the bet size is a random variable. The latter thus has a higher variance.

I was sloppy and need to correct myself again The variance is of course smaller for the martingale, which is bad news for the player. The player has a negative ev and therefore needs a high variance to have any chance at all. The martingale strategy is therefore as safe for the house as single bets because even though the edge is smaller, the probability of losing much is also smaller.

[Trade101]

where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

[oda.krell]

where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

Can't speak for everyone of course, but for me the decision to take out my investment mainly had to do with a more volatile market (i.e. a price that breaks out of the straight up trend once in a while). Since my goal is to increase my btc total, I believe I can make more profit on the market right now than by lending my coins to j-d. Plus, the fact that profits aren't exactly looking pretty right now doesn't help either :/

[malevolent]

where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

There can be a few reasons:

- low or negative profit during the term that someone held bitcoins on just-dice
- increase in BTC and altcoin prices, people wanting to invest elsewhere or not comfortable in keeping too much money at one place
- Christmas

[autotoss]

- low or negative profit

Do you mean the actual profits? I was worried about wagered per day. It has halved less in the last days.

[Rampion]

where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

I guess that was Nakowa divesting his coins to gamble them all.

Holden your seatbelts, gents.

[Trade101]

where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

I guess that was Nakowa divesting his coins to gamble them all.

Holden your seatbelts, gents.

nakowa didn´t have invested 32k coins with just-dice... according to the blogposts of dooglus (or rather his girlfriend) the
biggest investor had around 12k coins invested. so more than one big investor has left "the ship"

[Rampion]

where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

I guess that was Nakowa divesting his coins to gamble them all.

Holden your seatbelts, gents.

nakowa didn´t have invested 32k coins with just-dice... according to the blogposts of dooglus (or rather his girlfriend) the
biggest investor had around 12k coins invested. so more than one big investor has left "the ship"

Thats right, nakowa has divested his 12k coins and probably he will gamble them all - he's already down 2.3k

[oda.krell]

niiiice

I divested a while ago, but right now, whoever is still in, can look at a sweet ~6% profit just from nakowa's latest streak by the looks of it.

[SebastianJu]

niiiice

I divested a while ago, but right now, whoever is still in, can look at a sweet ~6% profit just from nakowa's latest streak by the looks of it.

*lol* Youre right... finally something that looks like a house advantage... couldnt believe it till now since i always was crawling below my investment.

[SebastianJu]

Someone knows how save investments on that website are? The owner is trustworthy and known in person, website is security checked and so on? I mean the revenue looks a bit like ponzi's look though it might be explainable because of the players. On the other hand its hard for me imagine there are so many users believing they could win something there...
I would like to invest more but im not yet confident about it.

[qxzn]

Someone knows how save investments on that website are? The owner is trustworthy and known in person, website is security checked and so on? I mean the revenue looks a bit like ponzi's look though it might be explainable because of the players. On the other hand its hard for me imagine there are so many users believing they could win something there...
I would like to invest more but im not yet confident about it.

Here we go again. A small run of good returns = onset of the fair-weather investors.

If you're thinking of investing, you should be ready to lose a significant percentage (10%, 20%+) of your investment at times. It has happened in the past on just-dice, and it will probably happen again. Investing is almost a bad term for it. Being an "investor" is actually putting on a highly volatile, ever-so-slightly positive expectancy bet. If you aren't into that sort of thing, you should invest in one of the other dice sites that scams their players by making it so that the house literally can never lose.

[SebastianJu]

Someone knows how save investments on that website are? The owner is trustworthy and known in person, website is security checked and so on? I mean the revenue looks a bit like ponzi's look though it might be explainable because of the players. On the other hand its hard for me imagine there are so many users believing they could win something there...
I would like to invest more but im not yet confident about it.

Here we go again. A small run of good returns = onset of the fair-weather investors.

If you're thinking of investing, you should be ready to lose a significant percentage (10%, 20%+) of your investment at times. It has happened in the past on just-dice, and it will probably happen again. Investing is almost a bad term for it. Being an "investor" is actually putting on a highly volatile, ever-so-slightly positive expectancy bet. If you aren't into that sort of thing, you should invest in one of the other dice sites that scams their players by making it so that the house literally can never lose.

Comeon... i invested a week ago and since then i only saw my investment crawling below my invested amount. Now i saw the chart and it looks like the advantage is there seeing the actual investment. I doubted that before for obvious reasons. It was hard to imagine that all the games happening in the last week didnt show the house advantage. But it was that way.

*lol* Such sites, where players are scammed, exist and investors can invest? Hard to imagine that investors wont be scammed at some point too then. Not to say about players that should stop playing there if they find out. Again hard to imagine that such site remains alive.

I read many posts of dooglus now but still i dont know if he is an anonymous entity in the forum or if he is known.

And i found a debate about allowing investors to chose the risk of 1% to be changed. This settings wasnt implemented at the end?

[qxzn]

Comeon... i invested a week ago

Nice. Consider yourself lucky.

and since then i only saw my investment crawling below my invested amount. Now i saw the chart and it looks like the advantage is there seeing the actual investment. I doubted that before for obvious reasons.

just-dice returns are bursty. They are small and quiet for long stretches then have wild swings when whales show up.

It was hard to imagine that all the games happening in the last week didnt show the house advantage. But it was that way.

It seems you are looking for some sort of pattern in the returns that reflects what you think it should look like based on the house edge. The issue is, with such a low house edge, you really can't count on being able to "see" the house advantage. Furthermore, when a whale shows up, you can't even begin to see the house edge because it's negligible compared to the vol.

I realize I am being somewhat discouraging, but that's because you seem to have unrealistic expectations from just-dice. The returns from the last 24 hours will not keep up. Returns will often look negative and for long stretches. Some of the big investors were negative for *months*. That doesn't mean the math is wrong, it just means your expectations are wrong if you think this should not be possible.

And i found a debate about allowing investors to chose the risk of 1% to be changed. This settings wasnt implemented at the end?

Correct. If you want to reduce your risk, it's easy. Divest a portion of your invested amount, and hold the divested amount in cold storage. Voila, reduced risk, reduced return.

I suspect most of the pushing for this feature was from people who were simply overinvested and weren't comfortable with the resulting volatility.

[SebastianJu]

I would more tend to raise the 1% than lowering. Though im not so sure anymore since i read that 1% is the optimum for some reason.

Regarding the 1%... since i saw the charts i believe its seeable: http://bitcoinproject.net/just-dice-casino/just-dice-charts/profit-chart
See the second chart... it has the house advantage attached. So im pretty sure the profit is relatively consistent.

[qualia8]

Ideally, the percentage would rise and fall in response to "investment" vs. "bets".  As betting volume decreases, lower the percentage.  As investment falls, increase the take.  Determine the ideal ratio of bets to investment and float the rate to keep that ratio.

[nicolaennio]

I would more tend to raise the 1% than lowering. Though im not so sure anymore since i read that 1% is the optimum for some reason.

Regarding the 1%... since i saw the charts i believe its seeable: http://bitcoinproject.net/just-dice-casino/just-dice-charts/profit-chart
See the second chart... it has the house advantage attached. So im pretty sure the profit is relatively consistent.

The profit looks consistent because the majority of bets are much smaller than the 1%. But during the Nakowa's bettings at 1% there was much variance and the chart was giving a completely different impression.

[kgo]

I would more tend to raise the 1% than lowering. Though im not so sure anymore since i read that 1% is the optimum for some reason.

Regarding the 1%... since i saw the charts i believe its seeable: http://bitcoinproject.net/just-dice-casino/just-dice-charts/profit-chart
See the second chart... it has the house advantage attached. So im pretty sure the profit is relatively consistent.

The profit looks consistent because the majority of bets are much smaller than the 1%. But during the Nakowa's bettings at 1% there was much variance and the chart was giving a completely different impression.

The max bet is actually 0.5% now.  This is a totally different number than the 1% house edge.  I believe it got dropped to 0.5% because of Nakowa's streak, but that was before my time following just-dice.