Eligius: 0% Fee BTC, 105% PPS NMC, No registration, CPPSRB

[wizkid057]

Variance being what it is, up front HW cost and ROI have to be factored into any decision to mine for more than just fun.

We took a HUGE hit on the 50% week, having launched a significant amount of hash against the pool, that will likely never be repaid.

Farms we set up earlier this year against Eligius are showing only ~80% of shares paid...  It doesn't help ROI if luck / variance takes YEARS to even out.
Sadly, math shows that running these farms against nicehash would have paid more over 3, 6, and 9 months than it has with Eligius.

LUCK is a fickle mistress, and has not been on St. Eligius' side lately.

The thing is that it's just that.  Luck/variance.  You have no way of knowing if running elsewhere would have paid more elsewhere as your own contributions there throw off the variance.  It's just as likely for any pool to have bad luck or good luck.

If you switch pools based on variance... well, that's just like changing casinos.  I will laugh a little if the alternative experiences similar bad luck, or worse, soon after.  The chances are just as high any time since no pool pays straight PPS.  Nicehash specifically I believe has a 3% fee and clouds the waters by preying on people who want to buy hash power but at a loss nearly 100% of the time.  So, there's that I guess.

[1714018399]

1714018399

[1714018399]

1714018399

[wizkid057]

It has become obvious to me the big pools are here stay and an old timer told me a long time ago "if you can't beat them join them"

That's pretty dangerous in the bitcoin world, and again doesn't guarantee anything since no pool pays straight PPS.

[sorry2xs]

Well how i understand pps the pool accepts all the shares submitted by the miner and rewards them predetermined amount base  on the current network diff. no block confirms are attached to the payment and of course the pools fee for the risk of no block confirms 

[wizkid057]

Well how i understand pps the pool accepts all the shares submitted by the miner and rewards them predetermined about based on the current network diff. no block confirms are attached to the payment and of course the pools fee for the risk of no block confirms

Thats straight PPS, yes.  No pools do this anymore since there is just too much risk involved.  There is essentially no reasonable fee that a pool could set to ensure they can pay a PPS rate.

[-ck]

Thats straight PPS, yes.  No pools do this anymore since there is just too much risk involved.  There is essentially no reasonable fee that a pool could set to ensure they can pay a PPS rate.

You keep saying that but that's wrong about there being no pool that pays PPS. Antpool and f2pool both offer PPS.

[Luke-Jr]

Well how i understand pps the pool accepts all the shares submitted by the miner and rewards them predetermined about based on the current network diff. no block confirms are attached to the payment and of course the pools fee for the risk of no block confirms

Thats straight PPS, yes.  No pools do this anymore since there is just too much risk involved.  There is essentially no reasonable fee that a pool could set to ensure they can pay a PPS rate.

Apparently F2Pool is 4%-fee PPS, and AntPool offers 2.5%-fee PPS.
I have not confirmed if they actually are straight PPS though.

[sorry2xs]

 Well i know that Eclipsemc is pps with 5 % fee but the pay rate maybe adjusted according to miner hash rate, f2pool is pps at 4 %, ant pool is pplns at 0 % and pps at 2.5 % with a pay scheme  of 2.5 x the current network diff. so there are some pps pools left
Edit: ant pool is pplns 0% @ 2.5 current network diff. and pps 2.5 % @ 1 diff. current network diff.

[wizkid057]

Well how i understand pps the pool accepts all the shares submitted by the miner and rewards them predetermined about based on the current network diff. no block confirms are attached to the payment and of course the pools fee for the risk of no block confirms

Thats straight PPS, yes.  No pools do this anymore since there is just too much risk involved.  There is essentially no reasonable fee that a pool could set to ensure they can pay a PPS rate.

Apparently F2Pool is 4%-fee PPS, and AntPool offers 2.5%-fee PPS.
I have not confirmed if they actually are straight PPS though.

I stand corrected, although I have some serious doubts about them actually paying straight PPS... I'll have to investigate one day if I get time.

Antpool and f2pool also don't pay transaction fees to miners.  This is going to become more important, especially after the next reward halving.

[Biodom]

color me confused.
On one hand OP says that it is all bad luck, like once in 20 years bad, which in itself is problematic in my opinion as it is less likely to happen.
On the the other hand, OP introduced a possibility of hardware/software shenanigans from outside the pool, presumably by manufacturer(s).
So, is it purely bad luck, shenanigans or a combination thereof?

I was under impression that after a year or so luck should be close to 100%.
Well, I've got slightly less than 92% on one account and 94% on another account (that got disconnected before the recent calamity) to show while hashing to eligius for >12mo, not a couple of hours or five days.
I am not complaining, but would like to understand the process a bit better.

[Luke-Jr]

If luck were measured with ignorance to stale blocks (which they are not on Eligius), then it should average 100% over the long run (which may be several years). Once stale blocks are excluded, 100% long-term-average becomes impossible.

[Biodom]

If luck were measured with ignorance to stale blocks (which they are not on Eligius), then it should average 100% over the long run (which may be several years). Once stale blocks are excluded, 100% long-term-average becomes impossible.

OK, what is the most realistic number  after a year: 98, 99%?
Alternatively, is 92-94% after a year low or as expected?

[Luke-Jr]

If luck were measured with ignorance to stale blocks (which they are not on Eligius), then it should average 100% over the long run (which may be several years). Once stale blocks are excluded, 100% long-term-average becomes impossible.

OK, what is the most realistic number  after a year: 98, 99%?
Alternatively, is 92-94% after a year low or as expected?

I don't have this information.

[sorry2xs]

Question;OK, what is the most realistic number  after a year: 98, 99%?
Answer;Once stale blocks are excluded, 100% long-term-average becomes impossible.

[RoadTrain]

If luck were measured with ignorance to stale blocks (which they are not on Eligius), then it should average 100% over the long run (which may be several years). Once stale blocks are excluded, 100% long-term-average becomes impossible.

OK, what is the most realistic number  after a year: 98, 99%?
Alternatively, is 92-94% after a year low or as expected?

Well, I guess 1-2% stale rates are reasonable over the long run. Though, Eligius has had too many of those during the last two weeks, add luck to that, and you'll see why the % is so low.

The good thing about Eligius is that it pays block fees towards the share log, which is a good sweetener At some point in the future, I guess, fees will be enough to compensate for orphan/stale blocks, and maybe more.

[Faceboss]

Over the past two years with 25% off time I mined 98.02%.

[wizkid057]

If luck were measured with ignorance to stale blocks (which they are not on Eligius), then it should average 100% over the long run (which may be several years). Once stale blocks are excluded, 100% long-term-average becomes impossible.

OK, what is the most realistic number  after a year: 98, 99%?
Alternatively, is 92-94% after a year low or as expected?

Well, I guess 1-2% stale rates are reasonable over the long run. Though, Eligius has had too many of those during the last two weeks, add luck to that, and you'll see why the % is so low.

The good thing about Eligius is that it pays block fees towards the share log, which is a good sweetener At some point in the future, I guess, fees will be enough to compensate for orphan/stale blocks, and maybe more.

As mentioned, I investigate every stale block.  Definitely might seem like there have been a few more than normal recently, but unfortunately nothing crazy.  Mainly just Eligius and another pool finding a block at roughly the same time and sometimes winning, sometimes not.

After the next halving transaction fees are going to be a larger percentage of the block reward and I think this is going to make a bit of a difference.  If transaction fees ever actually take off as a real source of income for miners then just putting them to the share log will have to be reevaluated, but for now there is no need since they don't quite offset stale blocks completely.

Transaction fees + NMC->BTC can be pretty close to covering that ~2% stale.

Over the past two years with 25% off time I mined 98.02%.

Yep, that's about the same as the lifetime long term average.  Additionally, the last I checked (not recently) other pools were roughly the same before their fees.

[paputa]

i have shares rewarded 47,88%
i will get paid in the future for these shares?

[wizkid057]

i have shares rewarded 47,88%
i will get paid in the future for these shares?

Maybe yes.  Maybe no.  Luck is luck.

Generally, though, if you continuously mine, as mentioned previously, your shares rewarded will tend towards 100% and land in the upper 90s% over time.  If you get a low shares rewarded over a short period, then quit mining, chances are much smaller of getting a higher shares rewarded percentage.

[Biodom]

i have shares rewarded 47,88%
i will get paid in the future for these shares?

Maybe yes.  Maybe no.  Luck is luck.

Generally, though, if you continuously mine, as mentioned previously, your shares rewarded will tend towards 100% and land in the upper 90s% over time.  If you get a low shares rewarded over a short period, then quit mining, chances are much smaller of getting a higher shares rewarded percentage.

Well, you keep talking about long term averages. Define long term, please. In finances long term is >1year.
I am telling you that I had one machine working almost constantly for 1 year with 94% average (this machine stopped working just before the recent calamity) and another working with some gaps for >1 year with 91.6% now (and still going down from the same 94% three weeks ago)
So here are my facts. I don't know what is causing a difference between expected 98% and 94% that I see. I would discount 91.6% (from 94) to bad luck in the last 2-3 weeks, but I won't discount 94 vs 98% expected.

What could be a potential cause?
I would like to hear possible explanation re this. Could it be that extended payout times caused it (because of higher probability of hitting an orphan during non-pay period)? Something else?

[sorry2xs]

Smoke and Mirrors