bustabit – The original crash game

[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.

[GSpgh]

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.

If it's random it can't be busting some users more often than others. Or are you playing captain obvious by saying that low probability bets are less likely to win?

[Lakai01]

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.

As already said "observations" are worthless (in terms of significance), you need statistically significant data to prove (or at least state) that high betters are more likely to get busted.
Our mind tends to remember bad things that happen to us, so everyone of us is prone to remember situations where we lost a lot of money or got the feeling that games are unfair etc.

[SquallLeonhart]

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.

As already said "observations" are worthless (in terms of significance), you need statistically significant data to prove (or at least state) that high betters are more likely to get busted.
Our mind tends to remember bad things that happen to us, so everyone of us is prone to remember situations where we lost a lot of money or got the feeling that games are unfair etc.

I would have totally understood that type of statement if the place was a brand new place, yet when you have literally hundreds of bitcoins lost in gambling here (investors took a huge hit time to time but overall we are in profit in long term) you do know that there are tons of people who do gamble with a ton of money and also win, how do we know?

Because, we are investors and we do realize when our money gets lower as investors. That is why there is literally no reason to think that "when someone gambles big, game is under 1.5" because there is literally no proof of that happening preferably. Its a regular gamble where the odds are there and you gamble knowingly and that's it, sure crash is a bit weird because you do not realize the house edge but in the end its provably fair.

[actmyname]

Our mind tends to remember bad things that happen to us, so everyone of us is prone to remember situations where we lost a lot of money or got the feeling that games are unfair etc.

Let's not forget the impact of holistic exponentiation - the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. When you play for less-likely events (with the same house edge), you will notice the smaller events less than the larger ones. This is why people are addicted to jackpots and don't focus on their losses, despite having outweighed their winnings.

[plast555]

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.

If it's random it can't be busting some users more often than others. Or are you playing captain obvious by saying that low probability bets are less likely to win?

No, I'm not playing Mr.Smart or Mr. Open-Eyed.
This is just my observation. I don't play every time, but instead of this, I only watch the games sometimes. This observation is not a proven data or statistic.
I just wanted to leave here a comment, that's all

[barbara44]

I would have totally understood that type of statement if the place was a brand new place, yet when you have literally hundreds of bitcoins lost in gambling here (investors took a huge hit time to time but overall we are in profit in long term) you do know that there are tons of people who do gamble with a ton of money and also win, how do we know?

Because, we are investors and we do realize when our money gets lower as investors. That is why there is literally no reason to think that "when someone gambles big, game is under 1.5" because there is literally no proof of that happening preferably. Its a regular gamble where the odds are there and you gamble knowingly and that's it, sure crash is a bit weird because you do not realize the house edge but in the end its provably fair.

I believe it is not about someone betting more or less that the result will be low or high. The reality is that when I gamble the game will end quickly and if I stop the game will go x100+ . We all have that gamblers fallacy and I have faced many times that whenever I made some profits from investment part and want to get it back (the interest lets say) and play with it and just go either all-in or just small time couple times in a row, I end up losing and suddenly I see the investment going down as well because someone won a huge amount after me.

It is really a kick in the guy because you see someone else betting and making a ton of money when you just lost but that is gamblers fallacy, you could potentially win a lot as well but you just happen to not because those are the odds.

[marcotheminer]

I would have totally understood that type of statement if the place was a brand new place, yet when you have literally hundreds of bitcoins lost in gambling here (investors took a huge hit time to time but overall we are in profit in long term) you do know that there are tons of people who do gamble with a ton of money and also win, how do we know?

Because, we are investors and we do realize when our money gets lower as investors. That is why there is literally no reason to think that "when someone gambles big, game is under 1.5" because there is literally no proof of that happening preferably. Its a regular gamble where the odds are there and you gamble knowingly and that's it, sure crash is a bit weird because you do not realize the house edge but in the end its provably fair.

I believe it is not about someone betting more or less that the result will be low or high. The reality is that when I gamble the game will end quickly and if I stop the game will go x100+ . We all have that gamblers fallacy and I have faced many times that whenever I made some profits from investment part and want to get it back (the interest lets say) and play with it and just go either all-in or just small time couple times in a row, I end up losing and suddenly I see the investment going down as well because someone won a huge amount after me.

It is really a kick in the guy because you see someone else betting and making a ton of money when you just lost but that is gamblers fallacy, you could potentially win a lot as well but you just happen to not because those are the odds.

To add onto that, our mind loves to "recognise" patterns and spot the shortcuts to anticipate a certain outcome. Combine it with fallcy and well one gets the belief they can beat the game.. haha. In a sense, your bets' outcomes are sealed beforehand and so is your fate (it is only luck that decides if you get more wins than losses in X-Y number of rolls).

[fullhdpixel]

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.

If it's random it can't be busting some users more often than others. Or are you playing captain obvious by saying that low probability bets are less likely to win?

No, I'm not playing Mr.Smart or Mr. Open-Eyed.
This is just my observation. I don't play every time, but instead of this, I only watch the games sometimes. This observation is not a proven data or statistic.
I just wanted to leave here a comment, that's all

So, what is your observation exactly? We may not really understand what you were trying to say. On one hand you are saying that results are random and provably fair, on another you are saying people are more inclined to lose when they bet higher. So which one is it, is it random? Or is it when people gamble a lot?

What you should accept is that when you say "the odds are when people gamble higher amounts they end up losing" doesn't really sound "random" and "provably fair" like you claim.

We all agree that it is definitely random and provably fair, you do agree on that as well but you insist that people lose when they gamble high amounts. If you could explain to us how a game could be both provably fair and still make people lose when they bet more, I am sure we could understand you better.

[jostorres]

^^ The reality is that people don't really care about others results as much as their own.
If a guy wins 100 bitcoin from gambling here, they will say that it is a hack or even casino itself stealing money from investors.

If they win money it is of course a win because they have lost so much. If others lose they don't care who lost how much in how many times in a row and so forth yet when they lose it is "how could they lose after so many losses in a row" or whatever the reason they find. Nobody cares if the other person has a 17 times in a row, they only care their own 3 times in a row more than any other persons 17 in a row.

In any case we all know what type of place bustabit is, it is a provably fair and it is a decent place, run by a very decent guy and adviser is a favorite of the forum. What else we need to keep on playing here?

[Battareus]

I was on road to catch high bust but my script (and others on the site) was stoped right before it.



Daniel, will you compensate this?

[GSpgh]

I was on road to catch high bust but my script (and others on the site) was stoped right before it.

https://i.imgur.com/Kb3XDzZ.png

Daniel, will you compensate this?

You've been arguing with everyone here that your script can win despite the randomness of the game. Are you now asking for a compensation for losing bets? 

[Battareus]

I was on road to catch high bust but my script (and others on the site) was stoped right before it.

https://i.imgur.com/Kb3XDzZ.png

Daniel, will you compensate this?

You've been arguing with everyone here that your script can win despite the randomness of the game. Are you now asking for a compensation for losing bets? 

Maybe it was a coincidence, this malfunction of the site was random, but the fact that I was supposed to get a plus at 500x remains a fact, but as a result of this malfunction (I repeat, all the scripts on the site stopped at this moment) I accumulated minus. If you suffered such a loss due to a malfunction would you be funny?

[BayAreaCoins]

If you suffered such a loss due to a malfunction would you be funny?

[Yabes]

Maybe it was a coincidence, this malfunction of the site was random, but the fact that I was supposed to get a plus at 500x reains a fact, but as a result of this malfunction (I repeat, all the scripts on the site stopped at this moment) I accumulated minus. If you suffered such a loss due to a malfunction would you be funny?

Something went wrong with your signal Did you check it before?

[hopenotlate]

If you suffered such a loss due to a malfunction would you be funny?

[Kprawn]

The in-game chat should be moderated.  ---> http://prntscr.com/q2gynl  Why should people have to read this nonsense, when it is supposed to

be a enjoyable interaction for everyone? I am not a prude, but I sometimes play/gamble on these sites with small kids running around in the house

and they will peek over my shoulder to watch what I am doing. This is the only thing I hate with in-game chat features like this, because it quickly

turns into a freak zone. 

[marcotheminer]

Lol ^ No wonder we call these chats trollboxes

[GSpgh]

I sometimes play/gamble on these sites with small kids running around in the house

Don't we all. I always take my kids when I go to my local casino but the management there also doesn't want to accommodate my family by removing scantily-clad women and alcohol from the premises. They should have an officially posted age restriction or something.

[malevolent]

The in-game chat should be moderated.   ---> http://prntscr.com/q2gynl  Why should people have to read this nonsense, when it is supposed to

be a enjoyable interaction for everyone? I am not a prude, but I sometimes play/gamble on these sites with small kids running around in the house

https://www.bustabit.com/tos

"Users younger than 18 years of age are prohibited from using the service."

and:

"The operator is not liable for content that other users post or link to in the chat."

And it's not like posted links are hot-linked, nothing is going to happen to them if they read the chat.