bustabit – The original crash game

[beerlover]

Seems like Wang may have learned his mistakes and just gambled a few games and stopped, probably invested his bitcoins back into bustabit in order to recoup the loss in a long term but more guaranteed way without risking anything further, which if you ask me is a brilliant plan.

After all we are talking about investing into a casino and that is being on the side of house edge instead of being against the house edge and nobody knows how hard it is being against house edge as well as Wang Tang does . So, this time around just like he used to, he decides to invest in order to gain back what he lost. Or maybe I am wrong and he didn't do any of that and was just busy and when he comes back he will just start gambling like crazy once again and win/lose huge amounts, who knows?

[1713304316]

1713304316

[1713304316]

1713304316

[1713304316]

1713304316

[panjul07]

It will be something negative towards bustabit or devans...
This user always seems to bash or bad talk bustabit...

How many hashes will you post will you make until you tell us?

How about collect hashes and make them all in one post with a explanation?

I agree with that I think you should try to keep it on one post, I was wondering when was that right time I'm quite curious about this one. What exactly he is doing?

There are always users who are trying to ruin or demolish reputations. I should not pay to much attention into these users.
If you keep feeding them, they will have the reasons to reply.

He accuse bustabit as scam since more than a year ago, but he is still playing till now.
It wont give any effects to bustabit's reputation IMO as I do not even see any single valid evidences of his accusation.
High possibility he is just a player who cant accept losses on gambling then start crying and screaming to say that the site is scam.
Surprisingly he do it against bustabit only, there must be a specific motive behind his action against Bustabit and team.

[xxjumperxx]

I dont think there is a motive. I think it must be one of the only sites he plays on and therefore when he loses he comes here to this thread and claims a scam.
There are people betting hundreds if bitcoins, well because they trust this site more than any other!
Some sites would hope to have whale action like bustabit!

[JeromeTash]

There are always users who are trying to ruin or demolish reputations. I should not pay to much attention into these users.
If you keep feeding them, they will have the reasons to reply.

After looking through his negative feedback and following up what transpired back then. I stopped believing the crap he's posting. If he's trying to create a smear campaign against Bustabit, then he's totally wasting his time.

[janggernaut]

I dont think there is a motive. I think it must be one of the only sites he plays on and therefore when he loses he comes here to this thread and claims a scam.
There are people betting hundreds if bitcoins, well because they trust this site more than any other!
Some sites would hope to have whale action like bustabit!

Since you do believe there is no any motive, you can just ignore him and done. Or just report his post to moderator and say off topic or spam post since his post isn't make any sense.

[xxjumperxx]

I meant there isnt a motive especially aimed towards Bustabit!
Im pretty sure he is losing and is looking for any kind of straw to make the site look unfair of some kind.
Well, we‘ll see when he comes back and explains what the hashes are for.

[ultrloa]

I meant there isnt a motive especially aimed towards Bustabit!
Im pretty sure he is losing and is looking for any kind of straw to make the site look unfair of some kind.
Well, we‘ll see when he comes back and explains what the hashes are for.

Then that's a motive already since if he don't have any plan to destroy the reputation of bustabit then he should go and move on think about what good things to do next time around but he select to create a noise which is totally not a good thing to do so best if we ignore those kind of allegation if there's no strong proof about his claims.

[RHavar]

I saved my game results over a month ago.
Today, after checking the chain, the results did not match. This happens at certain parts of the chain.

I assume there's some sort of misunderstanding, if you provided more information (e.g. what was it before, what it is it now, what is the game, etc.) it'd be a lot easier to help you.

Each game is verifiable immediately after it ends, and there is unambiguously only one possible hash chain (that's what the published terminating hash guarantees). So it's simply not possible for the hash chain to change, and especially not parts of it

[JollyGood]

I have had that particular user on ignore for a very long time because at some point is gets very tedious and tiresome reading posts from the same user with unsubstantiated anti-Bustabit sentiment. I advise all users to add that user to their ignore list too.

It will be something negative towards bustabit or devans...
This user always seems to bash or bad talk bustabit...

How many hashes will you post will you make until you tell us?

How about collect hashes and make them all in one post with a explanation?

[Naida_BR]

I meant there isnt a motive especially aimed towards Bustabit!
Im pretty sure he is losing and is looking for any kind of straw to make the site look unfair of some kind.
Well, we‘ll see when he comes back and explains what the hashes are for.

It is a common behavior for someone who losses his money in consecutive times.
He tries to explain his bad bets and blame bustabit for his losses.
An explanation by him will help however we are not going to see any real proof as the bustabit is provably fair and everything is visible by the casino.

[devans]

TL;DR: On December 15, all remaining offsite investments will be removed and the commission rate will become dynamic based on the bankroll's size. This is currently beneficial for investors as it will lower the commission rate, but will disincentivize the bankroll becoming larger in the future. Players are not affected.


When I increased the bankroll commission to 50% of the expected profits in September 2019 I had hoped to reduce the size of the bankroll and therefore the total amount of investors' money bustabit and bustadice are responsible for. However, one year later the combined bankrolls still total more than 11,000 BTC. To more actively manage the size of the bankrolls I will be making two changes effective December 15:

First, offsite investing will be retired completely. This will immediately reduce the size of the bankrolls by more than 4,000 BTC and is also in the interest of fairness towards the majority of investors who did not have the opportunity to invest offsite. All remaining offsite investments will be eliminated and affected investors will receive an equivalent amount of dilution fee credits.

Second, bustabit and bustadice will both move to a dynamic commission model where the commission changes in real-time based on the size of the bankroll:

commission rate = bankroll / 10,000 BTC

On bustabit this means that the commission rate will be roughly the same as now or slightly lower. On bustadice these changes slash the commission by more than half, down to ~20%.

[JollyGood]

I am not saying that any casino should do it or should not do it, I was correlating any similarities between the casino risk factor versus the user risk factor. There are some online casinos that place caps on the amounts users can bet and some have self-set alerts which indicate to the user that he is going over the limit he set for himself.

Whether a casino should or should not limit wager bets because the purpose behind it is to maximise wagered volume is a fair point for a certain perspective. I see that too but it does not mean all casino owners and casino operators hold the same view with the same distinction - some have explicit duty of care towards users and others do not.

Even if casinos limit wagers on a per-user basis it does not necessarily mean they are protecting the user because he just might go along to another casino and continue betting there.

The risk is definitely there for online casinos and gambling websites if there is a massive win but it also has plenty of problems for gamblers too. With almost no checks and balances in place to cap the amounts being bet by individuals it does create moral and ethical issues as I mentioned in my previous post.

I wonder if devans would consider adding some of cap to amount any given user could bet within a certain period such as 24 hours or 7 days or calendar month and regardless of whether it is considered it would be valuable feedback to hear from devans about his views on placing caps on user bets in general.

Regardless of investments and possible way to try to recoup the losses I think losing that amount of money (whether in Bitcoin or $4.5 million cash) is a huge blow to anybody. It must have a negative effect on the psyche. I think very few people would bet over $4 million at online casinos using a payment card or even by cash at the table at a top casino so why would someone bet it online using Bitcoin?

That in itself raises moral and ethical questions about whether online casinos should implement a stronger policy to cap user bets in order to try to suppress what might deemed as out-of-control or irregular betting which might be looked upon as addiction - some may agree and others may differ but casinos and online gambling sites do have responsibilities to their users.

Considering how most casinos have wagering limits per bet, usually 10BTC or such, I’m pretty surprised that Bustabit has no wagering limits of its own (based on what I read on the last few pages of this thread, as I never played there).

It’s actually risky for casinos to allow such high bets, because several of these bets made at the same time win large amounts of BTC and normal odds could bankrupt the casinos if they all win. Limits are put in place so whales can’t make huge bets like that for which the casino may not have enough liquidity for paying out and still have enough money to cover operating expenses of the rest of the bets for the day.

Why on earth would a casino limit bets when its entire purpose is to maximize wagered volume?

Also, there is a check in place, it's called a round max profit which is Kelly compliant

[xxjumperxx]

TL;DR: On December 15, all remaining offsite investments will be removed and the commission rate will become dynamic based on the bankroll's size. This is currently beneficial for investors as it will lower the commission rate, but will disincentivize the bankroll becoming larger in the future. Players are not affected.


When I increased the bankroll commission to 50% of the expected profits in September 2019 I had hoped to reduce the size of the bankroll and therefore the total amount of investors' money bustabit and bustadice are responsible for. However, one year later the combined bankrolls still total more than 11,000 BTC. To more actively manage the size of the bankrolls I will be making two changes effective December 15:

First, offsite investing will be retired completely. This will immediately reduce the size of the bankrolls by more than 4,000 BTC and is also in the interest of fairness towards the majority of investors who did not have the opportunity to invest offsite. All remaining offsite investments will be eliminated and affected investors will receive an equivalent amount of dilution fee credits.

Second, bustabit and bustadice will both move to a dynamic commission model where the commission changes in real-time based on the size of the bankroll:

commission rate = bankroll / 10,000 BTC

On bustabit this means that the commission rate will be roughly the same as now or slightly lower. On bustadice these changes slash the commission by more than half, down to ~20%.

Thanks for keeping us up2date Devans!

I think its a smart decision to eliminate the Off Site Investment Option and super fair of you to credit everyone the dillution fee on those offsite investments!

I like the new commision model!

[RokokGudangGaram]

I was wondering what could be the average game per day on Bustabit, I will just use the information to do some computation with my bet, I was planning to run an overnight bet and see what could be the outcome of it.

[perla]

I was wondering what could be the average game per day on Bustabit, I will just use the information to do some computation with my bet, I was planning to run an overnight bet and see what could be the outcome of it.

I am not sure the number of games per game in bustabit but one thing's for sure what are you going to do is risky you should know that in long run you will lose. But still depends on how much bankroll you have on your account.

[safari88]

I was wondering what could be the average game per day on Bustabit, I will just use the information to do some computation with my bet, I was planning to run an overnight bet and see what could be the outcome of it.

I am not sure the number of games per game in bustabit but one thing's for sure what are you going to do is risky you should know that in long run you will lose. But still depends on how much bankroll you have on your account.

i'm not really sure about that. i tried that on fortunejack before on their dicegame and do an over night run and luckily i got a good profit out of it. i think still it depends on your hash and your luck.

[xxjumperxx]

I was wondering what could be the average game per day on Bustabit, I will just use the information to do some computation with my bet, I was planning to run an overnight bet and see what could be the outcome of it.

I am not sure the number of games per game in bustabit but one thing's for sure what are you going to do is risky you should know that in long run you will lose. But still depends on how much bankroll you have on your account.

There are plenty of people that run their script and have been having success. I tried multiple times and have honestly failed over night... I get up in the morning and check my Account Balance to see its empty. =)

[malevolent]

I was wondering what could be the average game per day on Bustabit, I will just use the information to do some computation with my bet, I was planning to run an overnight bet and see what could be the outcome of it.

About ~3600-4000 games per day give or take. You can get to the number by communicating with Shiba using "!bust" or "!streak" commands as it will tell you how many days and games ago have passed since the most recent bust or streak that you chose to query.

Long term, of course, the outcome is that you'll lose money if the site doesn't go offline.

There are more interesting information to be found here if you choose to invest instead of gambling: https://dicesites.com/bustabit

[Timetwister]

TL;DR: On December 15, all remaining offsite investments will be removed and the commission rate will become dynamic based on the bankroll's size. This is currently beneficial for investors as it will lower the commission rate, but will disincentivize the bankroll becoming larger in the future. Players are not affected.


When I increased the bankroll commission to 50% of the expected profits in September 2019 I had hoped to reduce the size of the bankroll and therefore the total amount of investors' money bustabit and bustadice are responsible for. However, one year later the combined bankrolls still total more than 11,000 BTC. To more actively manage the size of the bankrolls I will be making two changes effective December 15:

First, offsite investing will be retired completely. This will immediately reduce the size of the bankrolls by more than 4,000 BTC and is also in the interest of fairness towards the majority of investors who did not have the opportunity to invest offsite. All remaining offsite investments will be eliminated and affected investors will receive an equivalent amount of dilution fee credits.

Second, bustabit and bustadice will both move to a dynamic commission model where the commission changes in real-time based on the size of the bankroll:

commission rate = bankroll / 10,000 BTC

On bustabit this means that the commission rate will be roughly the same as now or slightly lower. On bustadice these changes slash the commission by more than half, down to ~20%.

This is very disappointing. Retiring the offsite part is very bad, it reduces drastically the expected returns for those investors that have trusted in your project for a long time, before Bustabit had the impressive track record that it currently has. By simply not allowing people to add anything to the offsite portion, over time, the offsite/onsite ratio would decrease, without having to penalize those investors that helped you make this such a successful project. Increasing the fee last year was annoying enough, but this is effectively reducing expected returns by up to 2/3.

Other than not letting people increase their offsite portion, the fair way to approach this situation would have been to gradually increase the dilution fee. This should limit the bankroll's growth without harming early investors. Another more extreme approach, but that you could consider, is simply not allowing new investments at all, but I think increasing the dilution fee is the fairest method by far. I'd also expect some of that dilution fee being cashed out by investors receiving it, so that you'll also achieve your goal of limiting the bankroll's size (or you can keep the dilution fee yourself, or part of it, instead of it being distributed to all investors, that's fine too).

About making the comission variable, I think that's a mistake too, as it makes it harder to estimate which are the expected returns. And obviously, if we get over 5,000 BTC bankroll, fees would be even higher than now, on top of not even being able to keep our offsite portion.

Please reconsider this point, you can achieve the same goal without damaging previous investors. I'd suggest you to try increasing the dilution fee, so that new investments are still allowed but new investors at least pay a premium for the privilege of joining this project when it's already mature. What you are proposing here is the opposite, penalizing previous investors.

[RHavar]

This is very disappointing. Retiring the offsite part is very bad, it reduces drastically the expected returns for those investors that have trusted in your project for a long time, before Bustabit had the impressive track record that it currently has.

 If you were using the offsite system as it was designed, you can easily just bring those funds onsite for free (with the dilution fee credits).

I think the running theme of your post is that early investors should have some sort of advantage over new investors. I get where you're coming from, and I say this as someone who literally invested in the bankroll on day #1 -- that I don't think that's fair. Earlier investors have already been rewarded by with crazy returns. When they did invest there was probably a lot more risk, and there definitely was a hugely higher expected returns. I have a solid stake in the bankroll, and have quite literally withdrawn way more than I've ever put in.  I guess I see it like bitcoin, it doesn't seem reasonable for early adopters to get some extra benefit/treatment for investing in the projects infancy. The reward is literally that it's worth so much more now.

Other than not letting people increase their offsite portion, the fair way to approach this situation would have been to gradually increase the dilution fee. This should limit the bankroll's growth without harming early investors. Another more extreme approach, but that you could consider, is simply not allowing new investments at all, but I think increasing the dilution fee is the fairest method by far.

Even if you did the more extreme version ( stop all new investments) the bankroll would continue to increase by the investor profit (minus divestments). Investor profit over the last 90 days has been 533.50 BTC, which is an insane amount. That's literally like $100k/day average. I assume Daniel is in the position where the bankroll has become so big, that the only thing that happens by it increasing is increasing his liability.


But if you think of it though, it's actually a pretty clever idea. I think it'll become the standard way of doing bankroll commissions in the future. Basically Daniel is running a sort of auction, where investors are basically bidding against each other to provide the bankroll bustabit needs. (Although for the record, I don't think a linear relationship is the most optimal way to model it, and I would've pegged it against USD or something a bit more elegant than a fixed number like the largest bet in the last 3 months)