bustabit – The original crash game

[GSpgh]

Why are you both talking about the limit on funds and the maximum bet when I said that there is a reset to the initial? You can repeat it 100 times "there is no pattern, there is nothing except random" or something else, all this from the reluctance to think.

It's the same thing. By resetting it yourself you're basically setting a max bet limit for yourself. Eventually you'll lose because you'll hit your limit without the wins that you expect.

How is it possible that the game crashes below my cash-out value at 4x 2 times in a row exactly until the script stops doubling the bet?

You've heard the asnwer so many times but you refuse to accept it: "random".

[1714116919]

1714116919

[1714116919]

1714116919

[davinchi]

Martingale and both reset strategy is not really "good" in any sense other than losing all your money. Does it really matter or do you really think it matters HOW you gamble when there is a house edge? There is really no solution that could somehow make you money.

If there was a method that you can use to make money from a casino, if there was then we would all use that method to make money and casinos would go bankrupt right away. It wouldn't be possible to sustain something like that which means people are actually thinking something impossible to happen to maybe happen with a "method" they find. So the reality is that martingale or reset or any other method would not make any money, some could be faster, some could be slower but all leads to losing all your money anyway.

[JollyGood]

How is it possible that the game crashes below my cash-out value at 4x 2 times in a row exactly until the script stops doubling the bet?

The chances of that happening must be very low but we can all be confident that there is no scam involved.

[redsun114]

You've heard the asnwer so many times but you refuse to accept it: "random".

Yeah, random is the most important part of the deal and people have been still trying to calculate how the results could be good or bad in a row.

Now what you don't realize is that when you do martingale and bet 100 satoshi for example on 2x that means if you win 5 times in a row that is 500 satoshi won and you will not realize it more often, however when you lose 5 times in a row that will go from 100 to 200 to 400 to 800 to 1600 and you will lose 3300 satoshi, so 5 times in a row winning gives you 500 satoshi but your 5 times in a row lose gives you 3300 loss which is why there is really no way of not noticing the losses but it is quite easy to not see the wins.

Yeah, there are still people who check the wins as well but the results will be a "random" way of losing money in the end.

[GamblingSiteFinder]

Yeah, random is the most important part of the deal and people have been still trying to calculate how the results could be good or bad in a row.

Now what you don't realize is that when you do martingale and bet 100 satoshi for example on 2x that means if you win 5 times in a row that is 500 satoshi won and you will not realize it more often, however when you lose 5 times in a row that will go from 100 to 200 to 400 to 800 to 1600 and you will lose 3300 satoshi, so 5 times in a row winning gives you 500 satoshi but your 5 times in a row lose gives you 3300 loss which is why there is really no way of not noticing the losses but it is quite easy to not see the wins.

Yeah, there are still people who check the wins as well but the results will be a "random" way of losing money in the end.

Elaborating on your comment, what makes the crash gambling concept brilliant (from the casino's perspective) is that it hones in on many of the cognitive distortions often found in gamblers:

• Attribution: Problem gamblers may believe their winnings occur as a result of their efforts and not randomly.
• Systems: Problem gamblers may believe that by learning or figuring out a certain system (a pattern of betting in a particular way), the house advantage can be overcome.
• Selective recall: Problem gamblers tend to remember their wins and forget or gloss over their losses.
• Near miss beliefs: Problem gamblers reduce the number of losing experiences in their minds by thinking they “almost” won. This justifies further attempts to win.

[source: verywellmind.com]

[Battareus]

Now definitely not an accident has happened. The game hung at a value of about 2x. Interestingly because someone had to win a large sum (there was a bet on 100,000 bits that would not play) or something else this time?
What happens if someone puts a large amount, like this 100,000 with a cashout for 1000x, the owner makes the payment or the game will freeze like this?

[RHavar]

What happens if someone puts a large amount, like this 100,000 with a cashout for 1000x, the owner makes the payment or the game will freeze like this?

There's a max-profit, which people can't attempt to win more than. So the site never really has to worry about stuff like that.

[Battareus]

What happens if someone puts a large amount, like this 100,000 with a cashout for 1000x, the owner makes the payment or the game will freeze like this?

There's a max-profit, which people can't attempt to win more than. So the site never really has to worry about stuff like that.

Ok, what happens if several players make a bet in total more than the maximum allowable win at the moment?

[RHavar]

Ok, what happens if several players make a bet in total more than the maximum allowable win at the moment?

There's also a separate max-profit per round, which applies to the sum of everyones win. If that ever gets hit, everyone gets cashed out. So it basically acts as a stop-loss for the house.

In bustabit v1 there was actually only this limit (no separate per-player one, as exists now) and it used to annoy the crap out of everyone. But now it basically never gets triggered as it more or less requires at least 2 whales playing at the same time.

[sana54210]

There is a reason why there is a "max bet", that Is calculated for being a very minimum of what could be the max bankroll, so the max bet is not like 25% of all bankroll, it is quite small (I forgot what it was but it was something like 1% or something) and that Is why you can literally have 50 people all betting max (and most of the time there are not that many people with that much money who would be willing to bet that much let alone at the same time) and you would still have a good bankroll.

There is literally almost no chance of bankrupting the bankroll because you can gamble at most the max amount and when you lose it you can't martingale it higher, so you need to keep try to win the same amount and when you do you may end up even further in loss as well.

[malevolent]

There is a reason why there is a "max bet", that Is calculated for being a very minimum of what could be the max bankroll, so the max bet is not like 25% of all bankroll, it is quite small (I forgot what it was but it was something like 1% or something) and that Is why you can literally have 50 people all betting max (and most of the time there are not that many people with that much money who would be willing to bet that much let alone at the same time) and you would still have a good bankroll.

If you had 50 people max betting (96.58 BTC bets each as of now), the game would cash out at 1.02x, because that's when bustabit would be risking exactly 1.5% of its bankroll (onsite + offsite bankroll).

What happens when the server forces people to cash out?

Under some circumstances, the server will force people to cash out.

The most common reason is that the game multiplier has gotten so large that we are risking too much of our bankroll (1.5%). If a player has won more than 1% of the bankroll, that player is also forced to cash out his winnings.

Of course that's extremely unlikely as it's pretty rare to see even one person bet more than 1 BTC at a given time.

[JollyGood]

There is a reason why there is a "max bet", that Is calculated for being a very minimum of what could be the max bankroll, so the max bet is not like 25% of all bankroll, it is quite small (I forgot what it was but it was something like 1% or something) and that Is why you can literally have 50 people all betting max (and most of the time there are not that many people with that much money who would be willing to bet that much let alone at the same time) and you would still have a good bankroll.

If you had 50 people max betting (96.58 BTC bets each as of now), the game would cash out at 1.02x, because that's when bustabit would be risking exactly 1.5% of its bankroll (onsite + offsite bankroll).

What happens when the server forces people to cash out?

Under some circumstances, the server will force people to cash out.

The most common reason is that the game multiplier has gotten so large that we are risking too much of our bankroll (1.5%). If a player has won more than 1% of the bankroll, that player is also forced to cash out his winnings.

Of course that's extremely unlikely as it's pretty rare to see even one person bet more than 1 BTC at a given time.

How do calculate those sums? Do they pop in to your head or do you use a calculator?

I thought I was fairly good at maths so would like to know the answer 

[malevolent]

How do calculate those sums? Do they pop in to your head or do you use a calculator?

I thought I was fairly good at maths so would like to know the answer  

1.5% of the total bankroll:

6438 and some change * 0.015 = 96.58

(50 * 96.58 * 1.02) — (50 * 96.58) = 96.58

If in such a scenario the game multiplier were to reach 1.03x, bustabit would be risking not 1.5% but 2.25% of the total bankroll.

max bet has increased to 97.09 now but the principle remains the same

[Ringg]

How do calculate those sums? Do they pop in to your head or do you use a calculator?

I thought I was fairly good at maths so would like to know the answer  

1.5% of the total bankroll:

6438 and some change * 0.015 = 96.58

(50 * 96.58 * 1.02) — (50 * 96.58) = 96.58

If in such a scenario the game multiplier were to reach 1.03x, bustabit would be risking not 1.5% but 2.25% of the total bankroll.

max bet has increased to 97.09 now but the principle remains the same

Wouldn't the max bet just result in auto cashout around ~1.5? (Due to max profit being hit)

[JollyGood]

1.5% of the total bankroll:

6438 and some change * 0.015 = 96.58

(50 * 96.58 * 1.02) — (50 * 96.58) = 96.58

If in such a scenario the game multiplier were to reach 1.03x, bustabit would be risking not 1.5% but 2.25% of the total bankroll.

max bet has increased to 97.09 now but the principle remains the same

What is the most percentage-wise that the bankroll has been paid out on a single bet and on one particular crash to winners accumulatively? Does anybody know?


This happened a little while ago

[ronaldo40]

1.5% of the total bankroll:

6438 and some change * 0.015 = 96.58

(50 * 96.58 * 1.02) — (50 * 96.58) = 96.58

If in such a scenario the game multiplier were to reach 1.03x, bustabit would be risking not 1.5% but 2.25% of the total bankroll.

max bet has increased to 97.09 now but the principle remains the same

as you can see in the screenshot below that the max bet right now at bustabit is 97.09 so if bet that amount you need to reach 1.66x to make the game instant stop because it reaches the max profit

[GamblingSiteFinder]

It sure looks like user Krills is trying to bankrupt Bustabit right now. What a run!

[malevolent]

as you can see in the screenshot below that the max bet right now at bustabit is 97.09 so if bet that amount you need to reach 1.66x to make the game instant stop because it reaches the max profit

Yes, but we were talking about a scenario when 50 people are max betting during the same round.

What is the most percentage-wise that the bankroll has been paid out on a single bet and on one particular crash to winners accumulatively? Does anybody know?

No idea, I'm curious myself.

Wouldn't the max bet just result in auto cashout around ~1.5? (Due to max profit being hit)

If only a single person made a bet, and if they made a max bet, the game player would be auto-cashed before reaching 1.67x.

[RHavar]

If only a single person made a bet, and if they made a max bet, the game would auto-cashout before reaching 1.67x.

I don't think that's quite correct. That user will be auto-cashed out at 1.67x or what ever, but not the game itself. The game itself has a separate higher limit. Hence for the game limit to be hit, you generally require >= 2 whales playing at once (or it happens at a very high bust point).

And ideally, the per-game limit never gets triggered, because it's rather shitty for players that their bets are affected by other players action (even though it doesn't change the EV, it still sucks)

[JollyGood]

Ah just I was getting my head around the sums involved here you go and throw a spanner in the works

If only a single person made a bet, and if they made a max bet, the game would auto-cashout before reaching 1.67x.

I don't think that's quite correct. That user will be auto-cashed out at 1.67x or what ever, but not the game itself. The game itself has a separate higher limit. Hence for the game limit to be hit, you generally require >= 2 whales playing at once (or it happens at a very high bust point).

And ideally, the per-game limit never gets triggered, because it's rather shitty for players that their bets are affected by other players action (even though it doesn't change the EV, it still sucks)