bustabit – The original crash game

[devans]

The problem is that it's not realistic to be able to monitor the investment all the time and therefore to deposit that offsite money if needed. So if the casino keeps losing, your "leverage" grows at a higher than the desired rate, so potentially you could lose all your onsite investment (as the casino assumes you still have the same amount offsite which you could deposit). It may be an extremely unlikely event, but eventually it will happen.

Sure, that's always the risk of investing on margin. But as I mentioned in my previous post, static leverage does not solve that problem. If you aren't willing to intervene when necessary then the net result is virtually the same in that regard whether you use an offsite system or static leverage.

In case you're worried about not being able to move your offsite funds onsite quickly you can simply deposit your entire investment and not use the offsite system at all.

[1715121546]

1715121546

[1715121546]

1715121546

[1715121546]

1715121546

[Timetwister]

Not quite. 1 - 0.99 / m is the probability of losing a bet at m. So 0.01 is actually the probability of losing a bet at 1.00x if such a bet were possible.

What's the probability of it busting at M? Would it be: 0.99/M-0.99/(M+0.01)

For example, probability of busting at 1.02 would be:

0.99/1.02-0.99/1.03=0.97058823529411764705882352941176-0.96116504854368932038834951456311=0.00942318675042832667047401484865


Probability of busting at 10:

0.99/10-0.99/10.01=0.099-0.0989010989010989010989010989011=0.0000989010989010989010989010989

[RHavar]

What's the probability of it busting at M? Would it be: 0.99/M-0.99/(M+0.01)

For example, probability of busting at 1.02 would be:

0.99/1.02-0.99/1.03=0.97058823529411764705882352941176-0.96116504854368932038834951456311=0.00942318675042832667047401484865


Probability of busting at 10:

0.99/10-0.99/10.01=0.099-0.0989010989010989010989010989011=0.0000989010989010989010989010989

That looks correct, although it's a bit weird to have a x/y/z type fraction. It's a bit nicer to simplify it instead as:  (0.99 / M) - (0.99 / (M+0.01))


Which is actually kind of neat, because we can see the structure of it. Before we said 0.99/M is the probability of winning.

So if you look at that formula, it is easy to see that it's "The probability of winning at M  subtract  the probability of winning at M+0.01"

[Timetwister]

On average, is the casino making more money (EV) now than when there was the bonus system?

What about offering both, the current system and the old one (with the original 1% bonus or a different percentage)? That way players would be able to choose between one of them. If they think they have a +EV strategy that works in bonus games (or just like that kind of game more), they can play there. If they aren't interested in bonuses, they can play in the current game. Just like casinos offer poker tables (people play there because they expect to have a +EV strategy, or just like the game) and games played against the house (like roulette, craps, slot machines, etc.).

In that case I think it would be safe to use the same bankroll for both games, therefore increasing wagered/bankroll.

[devans]

On average, is the casino making more money (EV) now than when there was the bonus system?

What about offering both, the current system and the old one (with the original 1% bonus or a different percentage)? That way players would be able to choose between one of them. If they think they have a +EV strategy that works in bonus games (or just like that kind of game more), they can play there. If they aren't interested in bonuses, they can play in the current game. Just like casinos offer poker tables (people play there because they expect to have a +EV strategy, or just like the game) and games played against the house (like roulette, craps, slot machines, etc.).

In that case I think it would be safe to use the same bankroll for both games, therefore increasing wagered/bankroll.

The casino (bustabit + investors) has a higher EV than in v1, but not because the bonus system was removed. The bonus system is EV-neutral for the house as players pay for it via busts at 0.00x.

The majority of players are better off without the bonus system, so it is unlikely to ever come back to the core game. A dedicated game mode with a significantly larger bonus could definitely be interesting, though. So far I haven't made any plans to build such a mode.

[BTCevo]

On average, is the casino making more money (EV) now than when there was the bonus system?

What about offering both, the current system and the old one (with the original 1% bonus or a different percentage)? That way players would be able to choose between one of them. If they think they have a +EV strategy that works in bonus games (or just like that kind of game more), they can play there. If they aren't interested in bonuses, they can play in the current game. Just like casinos offer poker tables (people play there because they expect to have a +EV strategy, or just like the game) and games played against the house (like roulette, craps, slot machines, etc.).

In that case I think it would be safe to use the same bankroll for both games, therefore increasing wagered/bankroll.

The casino (bustabit + investors) has a higher EV than in v1, but not because the bonus system was removed. The bonus system is EV-neutral for the house as players pay for it via busts at 0.00x.

The majority of players are better off without the bonus system, so it is unlikely to ever come back to the core game. A dedicated game mode with a significantly larger bonus could definitely be interesting, though. So far I haven't made any plans to build such a mode.

Are you really sure with this? I believe there are a lot of people complaining about the bonus system when you removed it. Because there are players who aimed only for bonus, to get slow profit of course. Some even said that they can really work that out by only aiming for bonus. But not comparing to your big whale there but still many of them are trying to get it

[devans]

The casino (bustabit + investors) has a higher EV than in v1, but not because the bonus system was removed. The bonus system is EV-neutral for the house as players pay for it via busts at 0.00x.

The majority of players are better off without the bonus system, so it is unlikely to ever come back to the core game. A dedicated game mode with a significantly larger bonus could definitely be interesting, though. So far I haven't made any plans to build such a mode.

Are you really sure with this? I believe there are a lot of people complaining about the bonus system when you removed it. Because there are players who aimed only for bonus, to get slow profit of course. Some even said that they can really work that out by only aiming for bonus. But not comparing to your big whale there but still many of them are trying to get it

Yes, I'm absolutely certain of that. 64% of players received less in bonuses than they paid into the bonus pool. And many of the players that broke even or profited from the bonus only did so incidentally, not because they were actively playing for the bonus. From observing players and talking to them it was clear that the overwhelming majority didn't care about the bonus and largely ignored it. Only a small number of players and bots actually competed for the bonus, yet everybody paid for it.

Taking into account how many players bustabit has I actually haven't received many complaints about the bonus system being removed at all. Obviously the players that benefited from the bonus—or at least thought they did—are going to be vocal with their complaints. But they are vastly outnumbered by the silent majority that didn't care about it then and doesn't care about it now.

[devans]

bustabit is currently undergoing scheduled maintenance and will be offline for about an hour. I will update this thread once bustabit is back online.

[zymok]

what if we were running a script ?

[devans]

bustabit is back online!  

The most important change in today's patch is increasing the dilution fee to 2% and decreasing the maximum leverage to 3:1. It also contains numerous minor bug fixes and improvements.

what if we were running a script ?

Your script stopped placing bets when the server went offline and unless you wait for your client to reconnect on its own you'll have to restart it.

[BTCevo]

The casino (bustabit + investors) has a higher EV than in v1, but not because the bonus system was removed. The bonus system is EV-neutral for the house as players pay for it via busts at 0.00x.

The majority of players are better off without the bonus system, so it is unlikely to ever come back to the core game. A dedicated game mode with a significantly larger bonus could definitely be interesting, though. So far I haven't made any plans to build such a mode.

Are you really sure with this? I believe there are a lot of people complaining about the bonus system when you removed it. Because there are players who aimed only for bonus, to get slow profit of course. Some even said that they can really work that out by only aiming for bonus. But not comparing to your big whale there but still many of them are trying to get it

Yes, I'm absolutely certain of that. 64% of players received less in bonuses than they paid into the bonus pool. And many of the players that broke even or profited from the bonus only did so incidentally, not because they were actively playing for the bonus. From observing players and talking to them it was clear that the overwhelming majority didn't care about the bonus and largely ignored it. Only a small number of players and bots actually competed for the bonus, yet everybody paid for it.

Taking into account how many players bustabit has I actually haven't received many complaints about the bonus system being removed at all. Obviously the players that benefited from the bonus—or at least thought they did—are going to be vocal with their complaints. But they are vastly outnumbered by the silent majority that didn't care about it then and doesn't care about it now.

So that bonus did not do any effect on your new version, I thought that many of them complaining about it and in the end most of them are just bot want to get good profit. Because a lot of new crash game seems to implement back the bonus on their version, so I thought you guys have something to do with the bonus too. Thanks for clarifying it

[devans]

So that bonus did not do any effect on your new version, I thought that many of them complaining about it and in the end most of them are just bot want to get good profit. Because a lot of new crash game seems to implement back the bonus on their version, so I thought you guys have something to do with the bonus too. Thanks for clarifying it

Well, nearly every bustabit clone actually uses our old v1 software. That includes the bonus, so unless they make the effort to remove it their casinos will include the bonus, too.

[loldogeaments]

Hi, I'm wondering if ethercrash.io has the license from bustabit. I don't see them on https://www.bustabit.com/license.txt

Thank you

[joksim299]

Hi, I'm wondering if ethercrash.io has the license from bustabit. I don't see them on https://www.bustabit.com/license.txt

Thank you

They do not have licence even if they have it does not mean anything for your security

[HiDevin]

Hi, I'm wondering if ethercrash.io has the license from bustabit. I don't see them on https://www.bustabit.com/license.txt

Thank you

They do not have licence even if they have it does not mean anything for your security

Don't they have the license though? I'm pretty sure they still own the license because they only switch their site from ( ethcrash.io ) to ( ethercrash.io )
albeit it's almost the same people there as owners except Nekoz.

[devans]

While they have not purchased a license, they have permission to use bustabit's v1 source code without making their own code available to their users under the same terms as usually required by the AGPLv3.

[game-protect]

Not sure what the argument is here? Investors who cannot or are not willing to make capital calls are essentially just gambling that variance will swing their way

My argument is that RHavar and devans lied and deceived investors about the kelly criterion that they were being exposed to.

This led to a much higher negative expected bankroll growth ratio than expected and the time-to-bust, as well as the time management window, were subject to different extremes than advertised.  

The playing level for investors was not at all the same as RHavar, despite him consistently claiming lying so.  Unless you had inside knowledge, communication, top of the pyramid dilution benefits, and access to own funds deposited like Rhavar, you were at a great disadvantage.  

Some investors were greatly hurt by all of this.

• RHavar and devans tried to cover the whole thing up and never once admitted that it could be their fault
• RHavar and devans refused to make changes before, claiming there was no rhyme or reason for doing so
• RHavar and devans continued to solicit for a higher bankroll, leading to higher profits for them
• RHavar and devans created a predatory system where investors were punished for leaving
• They used different results at different times to try and back their claims, trying to state that it applied to the entire bustabit history
• They negative tagged people that spoke out about them  
• They resorted to insults instead of discussions
• They used their friends and status to bully people
• They misquoted and puts words in people's mouths in an attempt to change the narrative
• They selectively answered parts of people's questions while ignoring others
• They never took any replies serious and answered in the most sarcastic and condescending way, even though they are in charge of millions of dollars

The main problem is that RHavar and devans' egos are so inflated that they are willing to continue making crucial errors that negatively affect users for significant amounts of money rather than admit they made mistakes and seek a solution.  

It is this reason why both RHavar and devans should both be negative tagged themselves so that investors do not fall prey to their dishonest and shameful actions.

Is this scam accusation cleared?

[devans]

bustabit is offline for scheduled maintenance. The downtime should last less than an hour and I'll post an update in this thread once it's complete.

[devans]

And we're back online!

Apart from a few minor changes, today's update brings three notable improvements:

• Improved transaction fee estimation: bustabit's fee estimation is now quicker to react to changes in the Bitcoin fee market and better at choosing an appropriate fee. As a result, instant withdrawals are more likely to be confirmed within the two block target.
• Cancellation of queued withdrawals: Queued withdrawals that haven't been processed yet can now be cancelled from the withdrawal history. The withdrawal amount will be returned to your account's balance immediately.
• Deep linking to profit chart pages: Previously the only way to get to a specific part of a player's profit chart was to navigate there from the first or last page. Now any page can be linked to directly.

[Theb]

~snip~

Fantastic the site was just down for a moment and its now back up. The improvements you have done are not commonly complained in both the chat as well as in the ANN thread, but they are still nice additions to your gambling site nonetheless. Keep it up devans as you have improved the game and its services even if these areas are not yet causing a problem to majority of the community.