Can you still believe aTriz words? Reopened, too many open questions

[nullius]

Is this the script worth 50 BTC?

Yes, that was the claim.

Although I would imagine there's probably a good discount available now. 100% off sounds about right.

Well, 50 BTC what she effectually claimed her damages would be if aTriz released the script.  She was actually running a thread selling it for—what was the per-copy price, 0.99 BTC?  (IIRC, off the top of my head.)

So, anybody want to buy?  I am now selling pirate copies.  Instead of a discount, I am pricing in Btrash—which is LOL because I don’t have a Btrash wallet.  Send 0.99 BCH to 1111111111111111111114oLvT2, and I will give you a secret pirate link to where you can download the wonder-script!

Though the thing I don't understand is why does the script warrant a dox if it's so simple?

She was gonna dox aTriz regardless. Hell hath no fury like a scammer scorned. She didn't even wait for the script to be posted.

She was vengeful against aTriz, for some (un)reason.  I wonder why not so much against me.  —Oh yes, she has no leverage against me.

she should really decease

bit harsh innit?

I will reply by referring to the etymology of “draconian”.  Anyway, I insist she desist.  And decease.  LOL.


I suggest that from the recent events transpiring in this thread, we can conclude:

• Alia is even worse than a scamgirl:  Alia is evil, actively malicious and sadistic.
• The script is even stupider than “stupid equations”.
• aTriz has no programming knowledge whatsoever.  (Sorry, but—LOL.)
• Most questions on this thread have been answered, the primary one for which it was reopened being the existence, identity, and content of the script.  What’s left to wrap up?
• I can probably resume (cough) normal posting habits.  Sorry, folks who watch me.  Time to put the drama of the Alia affair on the back burner—again.

[1715392032]

1715392032

[Quickseller]

Script

Code:

var config = {
  baseBet: { value: 100, type: 'balance', label: 'base bet' },
  payout: { value: 1.08, type: 'multiplier' },
  stop: { value: 1e2, type: 'balance', label: 'stop if bet >' },
  loss: {
    value: 'increase', type: 'radio', label: 'On Loss',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Back to base bet, noob' },
      increase: { value: 2, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  },
  win: {
    value: 'base', type: 'radio', label: 'On Win',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Return to base bet' },
      increase: { value: 1.02, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  }
};


log('Script is running..');

var currentBet = config.baseBet.value;

// Always try to bet when script is started
engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);

engine.on('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
engine.on('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);

function onGameStarted() {
  engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);
}

function onGameEnded() {
  var lastGame = engine.history.first()

  // If we wagered, it means we played
  if (!lastGame.wager) {
    return;
  }

  // we won..
  if (lastGame.cashedAt) {
    if (config.win.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.win.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.win.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We won, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  } else {
    // damn, looks like we lost :(

    if (config.loss.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.loss.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.loss.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We lost, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  }

  if (currentBet > config.stop.value) {
    log('Was about to bet', currentBet, 'which triggers the stop');
    engine.removeListener('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
    engine.removeListener('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);
  }
}

hash stuff

Code:

hex: e9474064aaeb4d07689d80952adb4d785d318fcd43947b90ec25c12450876f50
HEX: E9474064AAEB4D07689D80952ADB4D785D318FCD43947B90EC25C12450876F50
h:e:x: e9:47:40:64:aa:eb:4d:07:68:9d:80:95:2a:db:4d:78:5d:31:8f:cd:43:94:7b:90:ec:25:c1:24:50:87:6f:50
base64: 6UdAZKrrTQdonYCVKttNeF0xj81DlHuQ7CXBJFCHb1A=

Do your worst.

If this is what aTriz was vouching for, then he very clearly did not do any kind of due diligence prior to vouching for the script, and was negligent in giving his vouch.

I have serious doubts that aTriz is able to provide evidence that he can produce evidence that he actually ran this script between when alia started selling the script and when he provided the vouch, that is in line with his other statements. I might be wrong about this, and being proven wrong about this would not change my opinion about aTriz. 

[HCP]

For those who aren't so great at deciphering javascript gambling scripts... I've coded a script for a "well known dicebot"...

Code:

basebet = 0.00000001
basechance = 91.851
firstLossMultiplier = 4
lossMultiplier = 5
lossChance = 79.360

nextbet = basebet
chance = basechance

function dobet()

  if (win) then
    nextbet = basebet
    chance = basechance
    
  else
    if currentstreak == -1 then
      -- first loss
      nextbet = previousbet * firstLossMultiplier
    else
      nextbet = previousbet * lossMultiplier
    end
    
    chance = lossChance
    
  end
  
end

It seems to have a SHA256 "similar" to: e9474064aaeb4d07689d80952adb4d785d318fcd43947b90ec25c12450876f50 *wink wink*

So, I estimate it's worth about 50 BTC! *cough* #makeMartingaleGreatAgain

[TMAN]

This is brilliant. Call that a gambling script shitcunt? Really I mean really? You are more stupid than a meth head on a 10 day binge who is being offered free bags of meth.

Shitcunt isn't good enough, I have tried to think up a new nickname and even dedicated 4 minutes of my life to the task.. Alas I was laughing to hard to think clearly, so we will have to stick to shitcunt for now. You really are a stupid shitcunt thinking you can come to a form where there are some seriously clever guys and try to pull this shit.

Does this mean You will finally stop gracing us with your presence now shitcunt ?

[Joel_Jantsen]

For those who aren't so great at deciphering javascript gambling scripts... I've coded a script for a "well known dicebot"...

It seems to have a SHA256 "similar" to: e9474064aaeb4d07689d80952adb4d785d318fcd43947b90ec25c12450876f50 *wink wink*

So, I estimate it's worth about 50 BTC! *cough* #makeMartingaleGreatAgain

And here is a prettier version of the script,

Code:

let initialBettingValues = {
  baseBet : 0.0000001,
  baseChance : 91.851,
  firstLossMultiplier : 4,
  lossMultiplier : 5,
  lossChance : 79.360
}
let nextBet = initialBettingValues ? initialBettingValues : "0"
let chance = baseChance ? baseChance : "0"

doBet =(win,currentStreak,previousbet)=> {
  if(win){
  nextBet = initialBettingValues.baseBet
  chance = baseBet
  } else if (currentStreak === -1){
  //First Loss
  nextBet = previousbet * firstLossMultiplier
  } else {
  nextbet = previousbet * lossMultiplier
  }
  chance = lossChance
}

Does this makes it any valuable ? lol

[LoyceV]

Not very. And yes, no magic - just calculated risk. It is almost guaranteed that by tomorrow my profit will be 0.01-0.02 BTC higher than it is today. I am saying this openly and in public, and the proof is in the link I gave. Just see for yourself.

They key word here is "almost".
And the big question is: what's your bankroll? It's very likely to go up a small percentage of your bankroll. Until you bust, as all Martingale will eventually do.

I obtained the exact same results from the same tool, copypasting in the script with no trailing newline:

I've had similar problems with online hashes when I tried to do that for md5sum.

[o_e_l_e_o]

Script

Code:

var config = {
  baseBet: { value: 100, type: 'balance', label: 'base bet' },
  payout: { value: 1.08, type: 'multiplier' },
  stop: { value: 1e2, type: 'balance', label: 'stop if bet >' },
  loss: {
    value: 'increase', type: 'radio', label: 'On Loss',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Back to base bet, noob' },
      increase: { value: 2, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  },
  win: {
    value: 'base', type: 'radio', label: 'On Win',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Return to base bet' },
      increase: { value: 1.02, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  }
};


log('Script is running..');

var currentBet = config.baseBet.value;

// Always try to bet when script is started
engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);

engine.on('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
engine.on('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);

function onGameStarted() {
  engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);
}

function onGameEnded() {
  var lastGame = engine.history.first()

  // If we wagered, it means we played
  if (!lastGame.wager) {
    return;
  }

  // we won..
  if (lastGame.cashedAt) {
    if (config.win.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.win.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.win.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We won, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  } else {
    // damn, looks like we lost :(

    if (config.loss.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.loss.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.loss.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We lost, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  }

  if (currentBet > config.stop.value) {
    log('Was about to bet', currentBet, 'which triggers the stop');
    engine.removeListener('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
    engine.removeListener('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);
  }
}

For anyone not familiar with the code, what this script does is the following:

Bets 1 bit at x1.08.
If you lose, doubles the bet, still at x1.08.
If you win, returns to the base bet of 1 bit.
Repeat

There are additional options to change the max bet and tweak the multipliers, but the script will run as above unless changed.

It is laughably simple. It is just Martingale, but even worse since you don't even recover your losses after a run of reds (x1.08 multiplier rather than the usual x2). At a 1.08 multiplier, with a success rate of 91.67%, you are making an average profit of (0.9167*0.08)-([1-0.9167]*1)=-1%. Over the long term, you will then run in to the problem of any Martingale with exponentially increasing losses.

In my personal opinion, to claim that this is worth 50BTC is nothing short of delusional. The most impressive thing is the amount of forum activity she has created surrounding a script that could be written by a middle-schooler, and equally proved to be worthless by a middle-schooler.

[o_e_l_e_o]

And here is a prettier version of the script,

Code:

let initialBettingValues = {
  baseBet : 0.0000001,
  baseChance : 91.851,
  firstLossMultiplier : 4,
  lossMultiplier : 5,
  lossChance : 79.360
}
let nextBet = initialBettingValues ? initialBettingValues : "0"
let chance = baseChance ? baseChance : "0"

doBet =(win,currentStreak,previousbet)=> {
  if(win){
  nextBet = initialBettingValues.baseBet
  chance = baseBet
  } else if (currentStreak === -1){
  //First Loss
  nextBet = previousbet * firstLossMultiplier
  } else {
  nextbet = previousbet * lossMultiplier
  }
  chance = lossChance
}

I've also been watching her betting history and can confirm this is exactly the new script she is using. The only differences are you calculated the base chance and loss chance incorrectly. Accurate values are base chance = 0.99/1.08 = 0.9167 and loss chance = 0.99/1.25 = 0.792.

This, as previously, is just another modified Martingale. This one at least recovers your losses after a run of reds, but has the same problems as any Martingale, in that bets grow exponentially on a run of losses, leading to rapid bankruptcy.

[actmyname]

At a 1.08 multiplier, with a success rate of 91.67%, you have a 50/50 chance to hit a red every 8 bets, making an average profit of (7*0.08)-1=-44%

0.9167 * 0.08 + 0.0833 * -1 ≈ -0.01 average profit, as is the house edge

[LoyceV]

For anyone not familiar with the code, what this script does is the following:

Bets 1 bit at x1.08.
If you lose, doubles the bet, still at x1.08.
If you win, returns to the base bet of 1 bit.
Repeat

Many sites even have build in bots that do this for you. All designed to make you wager more, because your total wagered amount is the only thing the site cares about. The more you wager, the more the house earns.

Running it at a low multiplier is a terrible strategy when it comes to house edge: you wager high amounts for small profits! Doing the same with much higher multiplier gives you a much smaller house edge. I call this the Landen strategy, named after the guy who successfully used this for months at Rollin. See this spreadsheet. The win chance on each run is very high, that's why it can last for months if your bankroll is high enough.

It is laughably simple.

It's exactly what was to be expected. Some kid thinks he can beat the house with Martingale.
Isn't that the first thing any starting gambler does? Start small, double when you lose, think you're really smart, and profit a bit?

[o_e_l_e_o]

At a 1.08 multiplier, with a success rate of 91.67%, you have a 50/50 chance to hit a red every 8 bets, making an average profit of (7*0.08)-1=-44%

0.9167 * 0.08 + 0.0833 * -1 ≈ -0.01 average profit, as is the house edge

Just spotted your post - had already made the corrections, but thank you nonetheless. Coming off a double shift with no sleep evidently impacts my mathematical abilities.

[alia_alt2]

Script

Code:

var config = {
  baseBet: { value: 100, type: 'balance', label: 'base bet' },
  payout: { value: 1.08, type: 'multiplier' },
  stop: { value: 1e2, type: 'balance', label: 'stop if bet >' },
  loss: {
    value: 'increase', type: 'radio', label: 'On Loss',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Back to base bet, noob' },
      increase: { value: 2, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  },
  win: {
    value: 'base', type: 'radio', label: 'On Win',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Return to base bet' },
      increase: { value: 1.02, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  }
};


log('Script is running..');

var currentBet = config.baseBet.value;

// Always try to bet when script is started
engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);

engine.on('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
engine.on('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);

function onGameStarted() {
  engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);
}

function onGameEnded() {
  var lastGame = engine.history.first()

  // If we wagered, it means we played
  if (!lastGame.wager) {
    return;
  }

  // we won..
  if (lastGame.cashedAt) {
    if (config.win.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.win.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.win.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We won, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  } else {
    // damn, looks like we lost :(

    if (config.loss.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.loss.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.loss.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We lost, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  }

  if (currentBet > config.stop.value) {
    log('Was about to bet', currentBet, 'which triggers the stop');
    engine.removeListener('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
    engine.removeListener('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);
  }
}

For anyone not familiar with the code, what this script does is the following:

Bets 1 bit at x1.08.
If you lose, doubles the bet, still at x1.08.
If you win, returns to the base bet of 1 bit.
Repeat

There are additional options to change the max bet and tweak the multipliers, but the script will run as above unless changed.

It is laughably simple. It is just Martingale, but even worse since you don't even recover your losses after a run of reds (x1.08 multiplier rather than the usual x2). At a 1.08 multiplier, with a success rate of 91.67%, you are making an average profit of (0.9167*0.08)-([1-0.9167]*1)=-1%. Over the long term, you will then run in to the problem of any Martingale with exponentially increasing losses.

In my personal opinion, to claim that this is worth 50BTC is nothing short of delusional. The most impressive thing is the amount of forum activity she has created surrounding a script that could be written by a middle-schooler, and equally proved to be worthless by a middle-schooler.

This is incorrect. I gave specific values to aTriz to plug into the script (1.08x is correct but some other values are supposed to be changed, the 2x is supposed to be much lower and every 1 hour you are supposed to change some values). Luckily he didn't leak all of that.

And here is a prettier version of the script,

Code:

let initialBettingValues = {
  baseBet : 0.0000001,
  baseChance : 91.851,
  firstLossMultiplier : 4,
  lossMultiplier : 5,
  lossChance : 79.360
}
let nextBet = initialBettingValues ? initialBettingValues : "0"
let chance = baseChance ? baseChance : "0"

doBet =(win,currentStreak,previousbet)=> {
  if(win){
  nextBet = initialBettingValues.baseBet
  chance = baseBet
  } else if (currentStreak === -1){
  //First Loss
  nextBet = previousbet * firstLossMultiplier
  } else {
  nextbet = previousbet * lossMultiplier
  }
  chance = lossChance
}

I've also been watching her betting history and can confirm this is exactly the new script she is using. The only differences are you calculated the base chance and loss chance incorrectly. Accurate values are base chance = 0.99/1.08 = 0.9167 and loss chance = 0.99/1.25 = 0.792.

This, as previously, is just another modified Martingale. This one at least recovers your losses after a run of reds, but has the same problems as any Martingale, in that bets grow exponentially on a run of losses, leading to rapid bankruptcy.

You are right. However, it completely depends on your bank roll. If you have a BR of 1000 BTC and you run the script with 1 bit at a time, the chances of you ever going bust are nearly zero. You cannot possibly know the odds of me going bust without knowing my BR.

Side note: @theymos you banned me for doxing, but all I did was post the name of aTriz, which was already plastered all over the forum by him. It's not a dox if it's public info made available by him. Please clear this up

[o_e_l_e_o]

Script

Code:

var config = {
  baseBet: { value: 100, type: 'balance', label: 'base bet' },
  payout: { value: 1.08, type: 'multiplier' },
  stop: { value: 1e2, type: 'balance', label: 'stop if bet >' },
  loss: {
    value: 'increase', type: 'radio', label: 'On Loss',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Back to base bet, noob' },
      increase: { value: 2, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  },
  win: {
    value: 'base', type: 'radio', label: 'On Win',
    options: {
      base: { type: 'noop', label: 'Return to base bet' },
      increase: { value: 1.02, type: 'multiplier', label: 'Increase bet by' },
    }
  }
};


log('Script is running..');

var currentBet = config.baseBet.value;

// Always try to bet when script is started
engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);

engine.on('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
engine.on('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);

function onGameStarted() {
  engine.bet(currentBet, config.payout.value);
}

function onGameEnded() {
  var lastGame = engine.history.first()

  // If we wagered, it means we played
  if (!lastGame.wager) {
    return;
  }

  // we won..
  if (lastGame.cashedAt) {
    if (config.win.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.win.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.win.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We won, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  } else {
    // damn, looks like we lost :(

    if (config.loss.value === 'base') {
      currentBet = config.baseBet.value;
    } else {
      console.assert(config.loss.value === 'increase');
      currentBet *= config.loss.options.increase.value;
    }
    log('We lost, so next bet will be', currentBet/100, 'bits')
  }

  if (currentBet > config.stop.value) {
    log('Was about to bet', currentBet, 'which triggers the stop');
    engine.removeListener('GAME_STARTING', onGameStarted);
    engine.removeListener('GAME_ENDED', onGameEnded);
  }
}

For anyone not familiar with the code, what this script does is the following:

Bets 1 bit at x1.08.
If you lose, doubles the bet, still at x1.08.
If you win, returns to the base bet of 1 bit.
Repeat

There are additional options to change the max bet and tweak the multipliers, but the script will run as above unless changed.

It is laughably simple. It is just Martingale, but even worse since you don't even recover your losses after a run of reds (x1.08 multiplier rather than the usual x2). At a 1.08 multiplier, with a success rate of 91.67%, you are making an average profit of (0.9167*0.08)-([1-0.9167]*1)=-1%. Over the long term, you will then run in to the problem of any Martingale with exponentially increasing losses.

In my personal opinion, to claim that this is worth 50BTC is nothing short of delusional. The most impressive thing is the amount of forum activity she has created surrounding a script that could be written by a middle-schooler, and equally proved to be worthless by a middle-schooler.

This is incorrect. I gave specific values to aTriz to plug into the script (1.08x is correct but some other values are supposed to be changed, the 2x is supposed to be much lower and every 1 hour you are supposed to change some values). Luckily he didn't leak all of that.

And here is a prettier version of the script,

Code:

let initialBettingValues = {
  baseBet : 0.0000001,
  baseChance : 91.851,
  firstLossMultiplier : 4,
  lossMultiplier : 5,
  lossChance : 79.360
}
let nextBet = initialBettingValues ? initialBettingValues : "0"
let chance = baseChance ? baseChance : "0"

doBet =(win,currentStreak,previousbet)=> {
  if(win){
  nextBet = initialBettingValues.baseBet
  chance = baseBet
  } else if (currentStreak === -1){
  //First Loss
  nextBet = previousbet * firstLossMultiplier
  } else {
  nextbet = previousbet * lossMultiplier
  }
  chance = lossChance
}

I've also been watching her betting history and can confirm this is exactly the new script she is using. The only differences are you calculated the base chance and loss chance incorrectly. Accurate values are base chance = 0.99/1.08 = 0.9167 and loss chance = 0.99/1.25 = 0.792.

This, as previously, is just another modified Martingale. This one at least recovers your losses after a run of reds, but has the same problems as any Martingale, in that bets grow exponentially on a run of losses, leading to rapid bankruptcy.

You are right. However, it completely depends on your bank roll. If you have a BR of 1000 BTC and you run the script with 1 bit at a time, the chances of you ever going bust are nearly zero. You cannot possibly know the odds of me going bust without knowing my BR.

Side note: @theymos you banned me for doxing, but all I did was post the name of aTriz, which was already plastered all over the forum by him. It's not a dox if it's public info made available by him. Please clear this up

The numbers do not matter. Any variable of Martingale will lose money. Anyone with a middle school understanding of maths can see this.

25. Ban evasion (using or creating accounts while one of your accounts is banned) is not allowed.

Good riddance to you, scammer.

[LoyceV]

You are right. However, it completely depends on your bank roll. If you have a BR of 1000 BTC and you run the script with 1 bit at a time, the chances of you ever going bust are nearly zero. You cannot possibly know the odds of me going bust without knowing my BR.

Risking 1000 Bitcoin to win 100 Satoshi can work for a long time indeed. Until it doesn't work, at which point you'll realize you risked millions for cents.

Side note: @theymos you banned me for doxing, but all I did was post the name of aTriz, which was already plastered all over the forum by him. It's not a dox if it's public info made available by him. Please clear this up

Let me archive this ban evasion.

[o_e_l_e_o]

It's not ban evasion, it's a ban appeal. I think I have been wrongfully banned and I'm appealing theymos's decision.

25. If you get banned (temporary or permanently) and create a new account to continue posting / sending PMs, it's considered ban evasion. The only exception is creating a thread in Meta about your ban.

[alia_alt2]

It's not ban evasion, it's a ban appeal. I think I have been wrongfully banned and I'm appealing theymos's decision.

25. If you get banned (temporary or permanently) and create a new account to continue posting / sending PMs, it's considered ban evasion. The only exception is creating a thread in Meta about your ban.

Oh, sorry. I didn't read that. Apologies, people were acting very misinformed and I was itching to correct them... I'll go make a thread in Meta

[LoyceV]

Side note: @theymos you banned me for doxing, but all I did was post the name of aTriz, which was already plastered all over the forum by him. It's not a dox if it's public info made available by him. Please clear this up

Let me archive this ban evasion.

It's not ban evasion, it's a ban appeal.

You broke the rules:

25. If you get banned (temporary or permanently) and create a new account to continue posting / sending PMs, it's considered ban evasion. The only exception is creating a thread in Meta about your ban.

It's amazing how you went from "verified by theymos" to "red trust from theymos" to "banned by theymos"!

[alia_alt2]

Incorrect, nice guess though. Wait for tomorrow

On win you keep betting 1 bit at 1.08x.

On loss you're beting 4, 20, 100 bits at 1.25x - trying to get the lost bit back. There is no magic there. Same fallacy.

How big is your bankroll?

Not very. And yes, no magic - just calculated risk. It is almost guaranteed that by tomorrow my profit will be 0.01-0.02 BTC higher than it is today. I am saying this openly and in public, and the proof is in the link I gave. Just see for yourself.

To make 0.02 BTC at 0.08 bits per bet you're gonna need > 200k winning bets.

And if your bankroll is 1 BTC you have about a 1/100k chance to go bust.

Is that your "calculated risk"?

I have already made more than 0.02 BTC, and my bankroll is much, much lower than 1 BTC. Yet I have not gone bust... hmm... hmmmmmmmmm

[o_e_l_e_o]

I have already made more than 0.02 BTC, and my bankroll is much, much lower than 1 BTC. Yet I have not gone bust... hmm... hmmmmmmmmm

Same as every Martingale variation - it works great until you go bankrupt.

[TMAN]

I have already made more than 0.02 BTC, and my bankroll is much, much lower than 1 BTC. Yet I have not gone bust... hmm... hmmmmmmmmm

Same as every Martingale variation - it works great until you go bankrupt.

So she is insisting she has cracked the great mystery of martingale that millions of gamblers and hundreds of mathematicians have tried and failed to create the perfect system.. err someone thinks they are clever when they are dumb