bustabit – The original crash game

[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)

[sana54210]

I think the person doesn't even get cashed out is he? Like he suppose to win 10x but if it is 1.67 that he gets the max then he gets the max, could be 15000x on the game all we care as long as he hits the max he gets the max nothing more as far as I know.

That is why it is a max, you are not allowed to make more from the max, I mean I am trying to make it sound like a question because I can't think of a single reason and single way how a person could make more than the allowed max win but it sounds just too silly, if there was a way to make more than the max then there would be a higher max because if you made more than the "max" that means that wasn't the max to begin with, max should be something you can't win more than that amount. I think I didn't make any sense at all but you guys got me .

[tim-bc]

I can't think of a single reason and single way how a person could make more than the allowed max win but it sounds just too silly, if there was a way to make more than the max then there would be a higher max

It's because there are actually two max wins:

Per-player (a single player can win max 1% of bankroll, per round)
Per-round (everyone together can win max 1.5% of bankroll per round).

If a whale plays on one account, he/she can win max 1% of bankroll per round (limited by the per-player max). However, if the whale plays on two accounts simultaneously, he/she can win max 1.5% of bankroll per round (limited by the per-round max), as now only 0.75% goes to each account.

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.

I'm curious about this as well. In game 1257652, baaaitcoin bet 1 btc and was forced to cash out at 38.08x. He has several more bets where he was forced to cash out at 1% of bankroll.

baaaitcoin also played on what I assume was an alt account (lolbaity42) simultaneously for some time. On games such as game 1257628, the server was forced to cash out due to the per-round max (1.5% of bankroll). In this round baaaitcoin and lolbaity42 together earned more than 57 btc of profit.

So in terms of percentages, both maximums have been hit before.

[plast555]

I noticed something playing crash here.

If users place a high bet, you are usually busted before 1.50x. But when the odds are low, the pointer can go up to 50x.

This is, of course, my observation, it may be wrong. But I have long observed the same thing, and so far, this result has not changed.

Besides, I respect Bustabit for creating a sustainable and provably casino.

[RHavar]

I noticed something playing crash here.

If users place a high bet, you are usually busted before 1.50x. But when the odds are low, the pointer can go up to 50x.

This is, of course, my observation, it may be wrong. But I have long observed the same thing, and so far, this result has not changed.

Besides, I respect Bustabit for creating a sustainable and provably casino.

Well precisely because it's provably fair, you can prove the bust points aren't reacting to players bets. However, it still would be possible for players to be reacting to the game bust (i.e. they might know effectively know the server-seed). If that was the case, though, you'd probably expect to see the opposite (players betting on high busts).

That said, in v2 players have bet 486,760 BTC and the return-to-player has been 481,827 BTC or 98.986% . ... which is extraordinarily close to 99%, which is the expected value due to the house edge. So I doubt there's anything strange going on, with the most likely explanation is just something like confirmation bias 

[Lakai01]

So I doubt there's anything strange going on, with the most likely explanation is just something like confirmation bias  

Exactly. We would need way more data than "I noticed something when playing". Peoples mind tend to remember  situations where something negative happened ("immediatly lost when playing high bets") way better and in more detail than positive situations ("won a high bet").

So if you really think that something is wrong you have to play an statistically significant amount of games and write down in detail what happened (amount wagered, outcome, ...). Without that data its simply not possible (or totally biased) to state that something may not working as expected.

[mitchr4]

So I doubt there's anything strange going on, with the most likely explanation is just something like confirmation bias  

Exactly. We would need way more data than "I noticed something when playing". Peoples mind tend to remember  situations where something negative happened ("immediatly lost when playing high bets") way better and in more detail than positive situations ("won a high bet").

So if you really think that something is wrong you have to play an statistically significant amount of games and write down in detail what happened (amount wagered, outcome, ...). Without that data its simply not possible (or totally biased) to state that something may not working as expected.

There is no need for additional data because it clearly doubts their Probably Fair system. It doesn't matter if we make high or low bets the result will be the same even if people bet low it can be busted under 1.5 in a row. Indeed it is true that he only thinks of the negative side, not the positive things they think. So it is easily doubtful about the fairness of a site.

[Timetwister]

I noticed something playing crash here.

If users place a high bet, you are usually busted before 1.50x. But when the odds are low, the pointer can go up to 50x.

This is, of course, my observation, it may be wrong. But I have long observed the same thing, and so far, this result has not changed.

Besides, I respect Bustabit for creating a sustainable and provably casino.

Selective memory.

[JollyGood]

I'm curious about this as well. In game 1257652, baaaitcoin bet 1 btc and was forced to cash out at 38.08x. He has several more bets where he was forced to cash out at 1% of bankroll.

baaaitcoin also played on what I assume was an alt account (lolbaity42) simultaneously for some time. On games such as game 1257628, the server was forced to cash out due to the per-round max (1.5% of bankroll). In this round baaaitcoin and lolbaity42 together earned more than 57 btc of profit.

So in terms of percentages, both maximums have been hit before.

A 1 BTC bet bringing in a 38 BTC return is stunning but it was for a very big risk

[plast555]

I noticed something playing crash here.

If users place a high bet, you are usually busted before 1.50x. But when the odds are low, the pointer can go up to 50x.

This is, of course, my observation, it may be wrong. But I have long observed the same thing, and so far, this result has not changed.

Besides, I respect Bustabit for creating a sustainable and provably casino.

Selective memory.

Of course. For a gambler, everything is always wrong except himself, especially when he loses.

We know that this game is provably fair. This platform has been serving users for many years now, and they have never faced any scam claims.

This means that there are no problems with fairness.

As you said, this is just selective memory.

[redsun114]

If users place a high bet, you are usually busted before 1.50x. But when the odds are low, the pointer can go up to 50x.

This is, of course, my observation, it may be wrong. But I have long observed the same thing, and so far, this result has not changed.

Besides, I respect Bustabit for creating a sustainable and provably casino.

I am not entirely sure if the all results are stored somewhere but I am 100% sure that if we got a data like that that shows the results of each single bet every day and we can get like months of worth of results we could actually check the results on the "possibility" scale and see that in 500k+ bets there will be some reeeeeallly weird ones here and there.

I wouldn't be shocked if there was 10 in a row 1x bursts and I wouldn't be shocked 10 in a row 100x neither, now it doesn't mean they "will" happen but it means "if" they happened there has been so many bets, like literally millions of bets, that it would be only natural to have weird games happening here and there if they happen. However people just don't realize the winning ones as easily as the losing ones.

[shoreno]

If users place a high bet, you are usually busted before 1.50x. But when the odds are low, the pointer can go up to 50x.

This is, of course, my observation, it may be wrong. But I have long observed the same thing, and so far, this result has not changed.

Besides, I respect Bustabit for creating a sustainable and provably casino.

I am not entirely sure if the all results are stored somewhere but I am 100% sure that if we got a data like that that shows the results of each single bet every day and we can get like months of worth of results we could actually check the results on the "possibility" scale and see that in 500k+ bets there will be some reeeeeallly weird ones here and there.

I wouldn't be shocked if there was 10 in a row 1x bursts and I wouldn't be shocked 10 in a row 100x neither, now it doesn't mean they "will" happen but it means "if" they happened there has been so many bets, like literally millions of bets, that it would be only natural to have weird games happening here and there if they happen. However people just don't realize the winning ones as easily as the losing ones.

1k and 100 multiplier 10 in a row ? that is not possible to achieve anymore  .

 i can only see multiplier lower than 10 can achieve 10 times in a row but of course that can also rare to occur.  we gambler can realize the winning side but we do also realize our losses and i believe that there are more losses compare to the winnings because we oftently play gambling and in my case i play every single day

@redsun , you arent alone with that because that is also what i notice

[malevolent]

I wouldn't be shocked if there was 10 in a row 1x bursts and I wouldn't be shocked 10 in a row 100x neither, now it doesn't mean they "will" happen but it means "if" they happened there has been so many bets, like literally millions of bets, that it would be only natural to have weird games happening here and there if they happen. However people just don't realize the winning ones as easily as the losing ones.

Both ten 1.00x and ten 100x busts in a row are equally (un)likely, (0.01)^10 = 1e20. There were 2.5e6 games since January 2018 (announcement date of bustabit v2). Shiba tells me the longest streak of busts above 9.99 lasted for six games:

Code:

Seen 6 streak in games #954051 - #954056: 12x, 32.77x, 50.28x, 17.07x, 11.4x, 110.08x (1,590,329 games ago, 1y 1M 18d 11h 39m 22s ago)

And the longest streak of games busting at 1.00x:

Code:

Seen 4 streak in games #1066857 - #1066860: 1x, 1x, 1x, 1x (1,477,530 games ago, 1y 20d 4h 26m 41s ago)

[plast555]

If users place a high bet, you are usually busted before 1.50x. But when the odds are low, the pointer can go up to 50x.

This is, of course, my observation, it may be wrong. But I have long observed the same thing, and so far, this result has not changed.

Besides, I respect Bustabit for creating a sustainable and provably casino.

I am not entirely sure if the all results are stored somewhere but I am 100% sure that if we got a data like that that shows the results of each single bet every day and we can get like months of worth of results we could actually check the results on the "possibility" scale and see that in 500k+ bets there will be some reeeeeallly weird ones here and there.

I wouldn't be shocked if there was 10 in a row 1x bursts and I wouldn't be shocked 10 in a row 100x neither, now it doesn't mean they "will" happen but it means "if" they happened there has been so many bets, like literally millions of bets, that it would be only natural to have weird games happening here and there if they happen. However people just don't realize the winning ones as easily as the losing ones.

Actually, I didn't mention any data. I am aware that the results of the game are fair in a completely random and provably fair.
But my observation was a different claim that users were more likely to be busted when they do a high amount of betting.
There are different statements.