bustabit – The original crash game

[BayAreaCoins]

I just wanted to poke my head in here and say two things.

1.  That Dean is utterly deceitful and dishonest in my opinion and experience.

2.  My website, FreeBitcoins.com, is using the source code from https://github.com/FuzzyHobbit/bustabit-gameserver/blob/master/license.txt under the license http://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html.  After discussing with Deb and Dooglus (they aren't involved with FreeBitcoins, I was just blabbering with Deb and Deb was blabbering with Doog)... it seems we have to open source our stuff as well to comply with this license.  We are going to open source to adhere to the agreement.  If I'm missing anything, please let me know.  We'll do just about anything not to be a "Dean."

I haven't even made a Bitcointalk thread yet for our little gay rocket game, but I'll make sure that we open source the site before I make a thread.  (Clarification Edit: We do have a thread for investment stuff, but not like an "official thread.")

Thank you very much!

https://github.com/l0rdicon/bustabit-webserver

https://github.com/l0rdicon/bustabit-gameserver

Tis my understanding that we are now in compliance.

Thanks for the bit of time!

[1713989033]

1713989033

[1713989033]

1713989033

[Vilrex]

Can someone explain a little bit better how the onsite and offsite bankroll investing works? what I understand is that if I deposit 1 btc and put it in the bankroll and then say I have another 1 btc offsite then my 1 btc invested onsite becomes 2 by the power of leveraging? so if I would lose 50% of my investment then I would really loose 100% because I am leveraged by 2x by saying I have 1 btc offsite?

If this is like this then it means I can have 1 btc onsite and 9 btc offsite and then I would be leveraged by 10x and so my looses and wins would all move quicker and there is obviously a bigger chance of loosing it all by the high leverage you use

if this is true which is the maximum leverage I can use? 100x? please explain the offsite and onsite bankroll investment thanks

[Timetwister]

Can someone explain a little bit better how the onsite and offsite bankroll investing works? what I understand is that if I deposit 1 btc and put it in the bankroll and then say I have another 1 btc offsite then my 1 btc invested onsite becomes 2 by the power of leveraging? so if I would lose 50% of my investment then I would really loose 100% because I am leveraged by 2x by saying I have 1 btc offsite?

If this is like this then it means I can have 1 btc onsite and 9 btc offsite and then I would be leveraged by 10x and so my looses and wins would all move quicker and there is obviously a bigger chance of loosing it all by the high leverage you use

if this is true which is the maximum leverage I can use? 100x? please explain the offsite and onsite bankroll investment thanks

Maximum is 1:3 (1 onsite+2 offsite), which is already quite reckless. 1:10 would be stupid..

[RHavar]

Can someone explain a little bit better how the onsite and offsite bankroll investing works? what I understand is that if I deposit 1 btc and put it in the bankroll and then say I have another 1 btc offsite then my 1 btc invested onsite becomes 2 by the power of leveraging? so if I would lose 50% of my investment then I would really loose 100% because I am leveraged by 2x by saying I have 1 btc offsite?

If this is like this then it means I can have 1 btc onsite and 9 btc offsite and then I would be leveraged by 10x and so my looses and wins would all move quicker and there is obviously a bigger chance of loosing it all by the high leverage you use

if this is true which is the maximum leverage I can use? 100x? please explain the offsite and onsite bankroll investment thanks

The offsite system is a bit complex, honestly I'd probably just recommend avoiding it. That way you can't burn yourself.

The most important formula to remember is this:

yourBankroll = onsite + offsite


Where onsite is how much you physically have in the sites bankroll. It's the amount that is literally "onsite" as in, the amount bustabit has control over. When you make a profit, this number will increase (as you have more money onsite in the bankroll. When you lose money, this will decrease).

And "yourBankroll" is just controlling how much you are risking per bet. Bustabit uses the kelly, so you'll be risking something like 0.75% (can't remember exactly...) of the "yourBankroll" value.

Now the "offsite" thing is pretty much just an arbitrary number you can set. As you can see (from the above formula) it is used to tweak the "yourBankroll". The main motivation for supporting this is to allow investors to try expose themselves to more variance from gamblers while keeping the money safe in their own control (to limit counter-party risk for things like exit scams).

Because it's a static number, (and not a leverage multiplier...) the best thing to do is set it to the amount of money you have "offsite" that you want to risk, but don't want to immediately deposit.  But just be careful when doing it, as you expose yourself to a lot of other risks (like getting margin called) so make sure to go over all the FAQs before you do it.


(Not that anyone asked, but in my opinion it's probably best to avoid using offsite. I'm a big fan of a very passive "invest a tiny amount you can afford to lose in the bankroll, then come back and check on it every few months", but offsite doesn't quite allow you to do that, as you always need to be monitoring your investment to top-up the onsite incase you're getting close to margin-called)

[Mirae]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090610.0
You guys okay with some halfass made website basically stealing your domain name ?

[milewilda]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090610.0
You guys okay with some halfass made website basically stealing your domain name ?

Doesnt matter because it isnt actually similar to be a crashgame and infact just take a look on all busta-similar sites with other name? Popularity of the original would still remain
and also http://bustabit.us/ is just like a school project. lol

[Timetwister]

This likely means that the "real leverage" player does worse than the fixed offsite investor in the much more common case where the player wins and loses more equally.

Shouldn't "real leverage" still do better in that scenario if the players lose slightly more than they win as expected due to house edge?

I kind of ran out of steam at that point. I can't imagine that "real leverage" is better than "offsite investing" in every case. Shouldn't there be a trade-off?

Back to the example:

A has 10 onsite and 90 offsite.
C has 10 onsite with 10x "real" leverage.

Suppose a whale plays for a long period with 50% chance of winning each bet. All bets are the maximum, aiming to win 1% of the bankroll. The payout when he wins is 1.98x (1% house edge), and he wins and loses the same amount of bets (as he is expected to do, long term). Let's call the effective bankroll "B".

50% of the time the player wins 1% of the bankroll: B/100. When this happens, A's effective bankroll is multiplied by 99/100, and C's is multiplied by 90/100.

The other 50% of the time the player loses his stake. He's aiming to profit by B/100, with a payout multiplier of 1.98x, so he's risking and losing B/98. When this happens, A's effective bankroll is multiplied by 99/98, and C's is multiplied by 108/98.

Since the whale wins and loses the same number of bets, we can pair these bets. Each pair consists of one win and one loss.

For each pair, A's effective bankroll is multiplied by 99/100 and 99/98, for a net growth factor of 99/100 * 99/98 = 9801/9800 ~= 1.0001x

And C's effective bankroll is multiplied by 90/100 and 108/98, for a net growth factor of 90/100 * 108/98 = 9720 / 9800 ~= 0.9918x

And so we see that my intuition was correct, and that "real" leverage is worse than this "offsite investment" thing. The "offsite investment" has a (small but) positive expected bankroll growth whereas the "real leverage" expects to lose almost 1% of the bankroll for every pair of (1 win + 1 lose) bets.

This is interesting... What would the gambler have to do so that investor A has negative bankroll growth?

[RHavar]

This is interesting... What would the gambler have to do so that investor A has negative bankroll growth?

The specific scenario Dooglus was using that caused it:

Suppose a whale plays for a long period with 50% chance of winning each bet. All bets are the maximum, aiming to win 1% of the bankroll.

Which is actually a slight simplification (it ignores BaB commissions, which causes the max profit to be a bit smaller than 1% ... but same logic applies with a max-bet). And iirc the BaB max-profit system has a few "soft" limits because of the multiplayer nature (e.g. it allows 2 players to aim for a higher max-profit than it would allow a single player to aim for)

But more generally: The BaB investor system is designed to more or less be "optimal" (in terms of expected bankroll growth, which is actually what you care about) if you are at 1x leverage, assuming a whale is max-profit betting. The higher your "leverage" is > 1x, the worse expected bankroll growth you'll have until the point you hit 2x leverage where you'll have 0 expected bankroll growth. As your leverage is gets higher from there, the lower and lower your expected bankroll gets (e.g. further negative).


But that's all based around the "worst case" of a player targeting the max-profit. If you know for a fact that no one is ever going to target more than half the max-profit, it's actually ideal to have an effective leverage at 2x for instance.

[Timetwister]

Another question. Considering the current onsite and offsite bankroll, what percentage of the onsite bankroll would have the casino to lose so that a player with 1:3 leverage (1 onsite, 2 offsite) would lose everything she deposited?

Would it be 1/(investor's leverage/average leverage) ?

So in this example: 1/(3/(5243/2978)=1/(3/1.76)=1/1.7=0.59; 59% drop; 2978*0.59=1757 BTC lost by the casino

[BTCevo]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090610.0
You guys okay with some halfass made website basically stealing your domain name ?

I do not think that it is related to what buatabit right now? How can you said that they are stealing buatabit domain? I do not see anything similar towards this issue right now. And what milewilda said is true though, so there is nothing to be so special to tell everyone. Btw do you even seen tons of similar sites as bustabit? I believe every single sites that similar to bustabit are using their open source v1 and try to make some money there but no one can really beat the real bustabit v2

[Josepht]

Another question. Considering the current onsite and offsite bankroll, what percentage of the onsite bankroll would have the casino to lose so that a player with 1:3 leverage (1 onsite, 2 offsite) would lose everything she deposited?

Would it be 1/(investor's leverage/average leverage) ?

So in this example: 1/(3/(5243/2978)=1/(3/1.76)=1/1.7=0.59; 59% drop; 2978*0.59=1757 BTC lost by the casino

I think it's like this:

The investor has 1/3rd of his investment onsite, and 2/3rd offsite. Wins and losses are added and subtracted from his onsite investment. If the total bankroll decreases with 1%, his total investment decreases with 1% (fees are not included in this example). Since the offsite investment profits are also added to the onsite investment, the offsite investment decreases with 3%.
We can conclude that if the total bankroll loses 33.3%, the onsite investment would be 'used up', and therefore will be gone. With the current total bankroll that would be (.33333 * 5050BTC =) 1683 BTC

[Timetwister]

Another question. Considering the current onsite and offsite bankroll, what percentage of the onsite bankroll would have the casino to lose so that a player with 1:3 leverage (1 onsite, 2 offsite) would lose everything she deposited?

Would it be 1/(investor's leverage/average leverage) ?

So in this example: 1/(3/(5243/2978)=1/(3/1.76)=1/1.7=0.59; 59% drop; 2978*0.59=1757 BTC lost by the casino

I think it's like this:

The investor has 1/3rd of his investment onsite, and 2/3rd offsite. Wins and losses are added and subtracted from his onsite investment. If the total bankroll decreases with 1%, his total investment decreases with 1% (fees are not included in this example). Since the offsite investment profits are also added to the onsite investment, the offsite investment decreases with 3%.
We can conclude that if the total bankroll loses 33.3%, the onsite investment would be 'used up', and therefore will be gone. With the current total bankroll that would be (.33333 * 5050BTC =) 1683 BTC

Actually what you are saying is the same, but easier. You lose everything when the total bankroll (the number you use, 5050, which was 5243 in my example) drops 1/(your leverage). It's the same as when the real, onsite, bankroll drops your leverage/the average leverage.

So the more leveraged other users are, the bigger the drop has to be based on the onsite number. In the extreme case that everybody was 1:3, the onsite bankroll would have to drop 100%, which is equivalent to the total bankroll dropping 1/3.

[sana54210]

I try to avoid things cleverer people than me say to avoid. Rhavar basically explained it amazingly and onsite is basically just regular bankroll investment we have known for years in this and other casino websites. Offsite is a bit too new for my test and I am not neither too familiar with the logic nor smart enough to take advantage of the opportunity right now hence I wouldn't go that road unless I would grasp it better.

For people who are really keen investors who know every detail that's probably a great thing to exists and provides more features if nothing else but for people like me who are new to investment or basically just go with it because they trust the website and not great on accounting parts, onsite is far better option, its simple yet very effective.

[JollyGood]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5090610.0
You guys okay with some halfass made website basically stealing your domain name ?

I doubt that the domain belongs to them, if it is available surely anybody can register it because it belongs to nobody.

In this case I doubt "Bustabit" is an actual registered trademark though it is a trading name used by the owners.

[statdude]

With the bonus feature (sadly) gone, does anyone know of any sites still offering such a thing?

Or, has there been any consideration made to bringing it back as a separate side game? Also, is there any info out there on the new ownership?

[Timetwister]

With the bonus feature (sadly) gone, does anyone know of any sites still offering such a thing?

Or, has there been any consideration made to bringing it back as a separate side game? Also, is there any info out there on the new ownership?

It's owned by devans.

[Josepht]

With the bonus feature (sadly) gone, does anyone know of any sites still offering such a thing?

Well, it has been gone for a long time already.

To answer your question: I know that ethercrash.io does offer the bonus feature.

[statdude]

With the bonus feature (sadly) gone, does anyone know of any sites still offering such a thing?

Well, it has been gone for a long time already.

To answer your question: I know that ethercrash.io does offer the bonus feature.

Thanks for the point out to EtherCrash, looks like a pretty busy site too!

I noticed there are a string of EOS-based crash sites. Two I saw are on-chain and using some form of the bonus feature. None are using the same classic Bustabit UI, though. EOSBET probably has the best and closest UI, but no P2P version (although they mention they have publicly tested one in the past and may in the future).

[BTCevo]

With the bonus feature (sadly) gone, does anyone know of any sites still offering such a thing?

I believe on bustabit v2 there is no way they can get it back again, but if you ask for site that still have this bonus, I can say that every site that still using bustabit v1 script, they all still have this bonus as well, but I never consider that you should really play it there since I do not really believe on their system as well, although it is like a copy paste exactly from bustabit. So I will still go on bustabit then other similar sites

[deisik]

With the bonus feature (sadly) gone, does anyone know of any sites still offering such a thing?

Well, it has been gone for a long time already.

To answer your question: I know that ethercrash.io does offer the bonus feature.

Thanks for the point out to EtherCrash, looks like a pretty busy site too!

I noticed there are a string of EOS-based crash sites. Two I saw are on-chain and using some form of the bonus feature. None are using the same classic Bustabit UI, though. EOSBET probably has the best and closest UI, but no P2P version (although they mention they have publicly tested one in the past and may in the future)

They are likely looking for ways to stake EOS coins

I've been looking for something similar myself probably combined with some good gaming experience (still trying to understand what's what in this department, so bear with me), and I ran across a multitude of these sites (games) offering such a possibility, including Ethereum staking (when the Constantinople fork gets released as I got it). Don't know if it is going to catch on, but the idea seems to be worth investigating it further