📯📍Rollbit | 2025/26 Champions League Pool | ⚽️ Discussion | ~$15,000 prizes!

[cryptofrka]

That's correct. The penalty is against your Total, so effectively, you are incurring a permanent penalty that applies to all future points earned. This was introduced because of players who complained that risktakers were just... taking risks. Personally, I felt that the risk of getting 0 from risky picks was enough. I prefer penalising low risk takers haha but the rules and adjustments are actually a result of pseudo-democracy.

If enough people complain against it, maybe we remove it.

Nah, not really. I was one of the 'complainers' because the result was that everyone from the bottom of the table simply picked the highest odds and put all the stakes there.
That isn't really risk-taking, it's mechanics exploiting. Ultimately, it led to a big possibility that you play the way it's meant to be and then in the semifinals Neuer gets red-carded, Porto wins 3-0 away to Bayern and you drop from 1st to 17th place - without any way to protect yourself from it.

Permanent penalties are better, non-recoverable stakes are personally the way to go (so if you start from 50, you keep only the winning ones and don't get them refilled). Then YOLO-ing on a 27 odds pair would be risk taking, otherwise it's simply like putting 2-1 on Superbru - if you don't do it, you're at a disadvantage.

[KTChampions]

Nah, not really. I was one of the 'complainers' because the result was that everyone from the bottom of the table simply picked the highest odds and put all the stakes there.
That isn't really risk-taking, it's mechanics exploiting. Ultimately, it led to a big possibility that you play the way it's meant to be and then in the semifinals Neuer gets red-carded, Porto wins 3-0 away to Bayern and you drop from 1st to 17th place - without any way to protect yourself from it.

Permanent penalties are better, non-recoverable stakes are personally the way to go (so if you start from 50, you keep only the winning ones and don't get them refilled). Then YOLO-ing on a 27 odds pair would be risk taking, otherwise it's simply like putting 2-1 on Superbru - if you don't do it, you're at a disadvantage.

I wrote about this last year as a fun theoretical possibility. But how do permanent penalties prevent this? Players could wait until the final rounds (making safe picks to avoid the accumulated large penalty) and then, for example, starting in the quarterfinals (the maximum penalty on a single winning super bet will be 10%), make crazy picks.
And frankly, I don't see why there should be protection against this. Those who take big risks have a chance of winning big, that's the essence of betting.

[cryptofrka]

I wrote about this last year as a fun theoretical possibility. But how do permanent penalties prevent this? Players could wait until the final rounds (making safe picks to avoid the accumulated large penalty) and then, for example, starting in the quarterfinals (the maximum penalty on a single winning super bet will be 10%), make crazy picks.
And frankly, I don't see why there should be protection against this. Those who take big risks have a chance of winning big, that's the essence of betting.

That would be OK, because if you play it safe the logic is that you're already in a decent position.
If from that position you want to risk it - go ahead. It will either pay out for you or you will lose a decent position - and potentially a small reward.

The thing I'm against is that you're shit throughout 95% of the season and then you go for the highest odds possible, you strike lucky and you win.
It wouldn't even be that much of a problem if 1 person did this, but everybody below the prizes did this - which means that if an upset happens in any of the last 5 rounds or so it automatically puts 20 people on 80+ points from that round alone.

[darbitmobilerecovery]

Markets are coming but I still can't post the round yet. Guess bookies want to wait til this week's rounds are all over...

I have one question about this, is not related to this contest but to overall bookies and odds.

Im the only one who feels like from a few years back to now the bookies shows much less markets and also they start to show upcoming matches just a few days before, when back in the past i remember seeing matches from much later days.

Im ok in my apreciation or is only subjective to me?

[KTChampions]

I wrote about this last year as a fun theoretical possibility. But how do permanent penalties prevent this? Players could wait until the final rounds (making safe picks to avoid the accumulated large penalty) and then, for example, starting in the quarterfinals (the maximum penalty on a single winning super bet will be 10%), make crazy picks.
And frankly, I don't see why there should be protection against this. Those who take big risks have a chance of winning big, that's the essence of betting.

That would be OK, because if you play it safe the logic is that you're already in a decent position.
If from that position you want to risk it - go ahead. It will either pay out for you or you will lose a decent position - and potentially a small reward.

The thing I'm against is that you're shit throughout 95% of the season and then you go for the highest odds possible, you strike lucky and you win.
It wouldn't even be that much of a problem if 1 person did this, but everybody below the prizes did this - which means that if an upset happens in any of the last 5 rounds or so it automatically puts 20 people on 80+ points from that round alone.

We need to somehow weigh the cost of risk. Look at last season's results: https://maisfacil.com/works/uclpredictor25/leaderboard.php
Everyone had 170 points, and in the end, only four people were able to increase them even slightly. First place was literally +22%, second and third +5%, and fourth place was +0%.
It turns out that risk doesn't pay off at all in the long run, meaning those who take risks have no single chance against those who play it safe. We shouldn't fear those who take mega-risks, and we shouldn't penalize them.

[cryptofrka]

We shouldn't fear those who take mega-risks, and we shouldn't penalize them.

Well, agreed there - but we should also protect the competition.
There has to be a tradeoff - risk taking is fine, but if 70% of the pool is making the same pick that is not risk taking - it's just bad mechanics.

It can happen now again, but if somebody does it in the last 6 rounds and gets it correctly once - he'll have to deal with a big 25% penalty. Therefore we will probably have more variety in risk taking, which is overall what you want.

Risk will now feel meaningful, and hitting it will feel deserved. If you win 70 points but 14 people alongside you do the same, you don't really feel that great - you feel annoyed.

[buwaytress]

Markets are coming but I still can't post the round yet. Guess bookies want to wait til this week's rounds are all over...

I have one question about this, is not related to this contest but to overall bookies and odds.

Im the only one who feels like from a few years back to now the bookies shows much less markets and also they start to show upcoming matches just a few days before, when back in the past i remember seeing matches from much later days.

Im ok in my apreciation or is only subjective to me?

It is not inaccurate, but I must say I'm no longer betting on normal bookies, nor on a lot of books... nor do I bet much.

But when I first started my style of betting with crypto books, I would bet on games many fixtures away to take full advantage of market risk adjustment (before the betting pot got big). I recall, with Bitcoinrush, using Pinnacle odds, if you looked at Liverpool, for example, you would get 5 future fixtures. And for longshot odds, 5 fixtures away, those were beauties. Start at 30/1, and by the time it's match day it would be 15/1. I miss those days.

I'm looking at UCL games right now on my book and half don't even have Over Under goal odds beyond 1-3 range. These are games a week away!

That would be OK, because if you play it safe the logic is that you're already in a decent position.
If from that position you want to risk it - go ahead. It will either pay out for you or you will lose a decent position - and potentially a small reward.

The thing I'm against is that you're shit throughout 95% of the season and then you go for the highest odds possible, you strike lucky and you win.
It wouldn't even be that much of a problem if 1 person did this, but everybody below the prizes did this - which means that if an upset happens in any of the last 5 rounds or so it automatically puts 20 people on 80+ points from that round alone.

We need to somehow weigh the cost of risk. Look at last season's results: https://maisfacil.com/works/uclpredictor25/leaderboard.php
Everyone had 170 points, and in the end, only four people were able to increase them even slightly. First place was literally +22%, second and third +5%, and fourth place was +0%.
It turns out that risk doesn't pay off at all in the long run, meaning those who take risks have no single chance against those who play it safe. We shouldn't fear those who take mega-risks, and we shouldn't penalize them.

That has been my thinking all along.

The only reason I ever came up with this style of questions was to try to shake up the common behaviour that always rewarded safe play (Superbru). In a line: to add more jeopardy. With odds-style, the reward was almost correctly quantified with the risk taken (we can pretend that odds are not swayed by the betting pot).

To my logic, if you bet on big odds and hit, then you are rewarded for that risk. But you are likelier to end up with zero points anyway. That... is a built-in penalty for risk-taking.

We introduced the penalty because of others who didn't like that someone could suddenly jump up and steal spots, and because they were the majority voice, their idea got implemented. I didn't mind that, it is the whole point of jeopardy, which I love in competitions.

This season I tried to bring the balance back to risk takers by implementing bonus points in the Scores predictions. Go against the crowd, maybe get more points.

And what we see reflects behaviour anyway reverts to predictability as you correctly observe. Those at the top were consistent performers and didn't suffer penalty points, and collected the lowest towards end of the season. And they picked the majority picks. This season, we have even fewer stakes (6) and well over 10 selections even on the final matchday, over 100 on group stages. No one went YOLO on Benfica losing, no one went YOLO on USG winning... so I definitely think we are far from a scenario with YOLO people all chasing the biggest odds. Would that change if we removed the penalty? Maybe. I don't think so

Let's keep tweaking the system (I think it's nicely balanced now, even if I feel personally a penalty is against my natural logic). In a system of risk and reward, doesn't make sense to penalise people who YOLO, because 0 points is the natural risk if you pick with greed. And that should be enough.

Maybe this season the top 10 will all be so close and all will pick safe points and nobody YOLOs for the last 3 rounds where all the picks are from 1 or 2 games. Should we penalise "safety first" players to try and get them to vary their picks? Where does the tweaking end? Maybe it never does? I keep thinking of video game patches where people are either OP or nerfed. Is this the way we should go, patching every season? Maybe!

But think about it: bookmakers actually encourage people to add more legs to their accas. It's now standard practice to boost winnings for every extra leg. In the long run, books don't fear mega risk takers. They embrace them. Because they will never be the majority that will ruin the house.

[darbitmobilerecovery]

Markets are coming but I still can't post the round yet. Guess bookies want to wait til this week's rounds are all over...

I have one question about this, is not related to this contest but to overall bookies and odds.

Im the only one who feels like from a few years back to now the bookies shows much less markets and also they start to show upcoming matches just a few days before, when back in the past i remember seeing matches from much later days.

Im ok in my apreciation or is only subjective to me?

It is not inaccurate, but I must say I'm no longer betting on normal bookies, nor on a lot of books... nor do I bet much.

But when I first started my style of betting with crypto books, I would bet on games many fixtures away to take full advantage of market risk adjustment (before the betting pot got big). I recall, with Bitcoinrush, using Pinnacle odds, if you looked at Liverpool, for example, you would get 5 future fixtures. And for longshot odds, 5 fixtures away, those were beauties. Start at 30/1, and by the time it's match day it would be 15/1. I miss those days.

I'm looking at UCL games right now on my book and half don't even have Over Under goal odds beyond 1-3 range. These are games a week away!

Thanks you for your detailed answer.

And yes that was my main point, im noticing this in every crypto or traditional bookie i saw, they are cutting very short the chances of us the users who wants to catch highers odds, i know they make this to be them much more safety, in fact i think in that way they are super covered from any big win without putting a ton of money from the player side.

In my bet on corners i dont even see anymore a lot of options with much higher odds, and i have to fight with only one or two selections and all between 1.5 to 2.5 odds, and that puts me on not so good position.

[KTChampions]

buwaytress I think in the future we should consider the possibility of creating a pool where there are no restrictions at all 
For example, each round is allocated (by the players themselves, haha) $10, and you can place any bets on the Champions League, whether with odds of 1.1 or 2000. And in each subsequent round, you can use your entire bankroll (what you've accumulated from previous rounds).
The only problem here is accounting, but this can be solved by requiring players to publish screenshots and bet IDs.
I think in such a race the adrenaline will be off the charts as players will be torn between reliability and the success of competitors who took the risk.
This will be really cool, right? And I'm sure the winners won't be the guys with a 100x result, but rather those who make 10-30% profit over the entire tournament.

[arallmuus]

The only problem here is accounting, but this can be solved by requiring players to publish screenshots and bet IDs.
I think in such a race the adrenaline will be off the charts as players will be torn between reliability and the success of competitors who took the risk.
This will be really cool, right? And I'm sure the winners won't be the guys with a 100x result, but rather those who make 10-30% profit over the entire tournament.

So its pretty much like ROI or PNL race. I guess this can be done onsite on Rollbit because I believe you can like create a sub balance account on Rollbit. Im not sure about this but I guess we could because the site will automatically create if for slot buy-in war

Maybe this season the top 10 will all be so close and all will pick safe points and nobody YOLOs for the last 3 rounds where all the picks are from 1 or 2 games.

Nah not yet, when the gap gets larger there will be alot more people that try to YOLO. So far there is really no merit to do especially in earlier stages like this where you could be getting decent points just by taking risk on 3-4x bet

Should we penalise "safety first" players to try and get them to vary their picks? Where does the tweaking end? Maybe it never does? I keep thinking of video game patches where people are either OP or nerfed. Is this the way we should go, patching every season? Maybe!

There is really no end in tweaking but so far I like this this season better than two previous seasons

[slaman29]

I like this format very much, personally, it is Champions League and if this disappears and we go back to Superbru I might even ignore it more than other competitions lol

I also like BSFL a lot BUT that is a completely different format where only the 'best' football games from every week are featured. And you can rely on mistakes from others, sometimes even get walkover lol

This competition is all about CL and about competing with everyone else to see who picks best and who uses stakes best. I like everything in every season, I don't mind penalties, I like this one most so far so great job guys

Regarding using Google or anything, I think that doesn't effect of anything on discussions here. This pool is always gonna be the worst because you have games for 3 nights, then quiet for 1 week or 1 month. BSFL is different format and has games practically every day except 1 week before new season, I think if you replace Google, its not gonna be any effect on BTT.

I like @KTChampions suggestion also but I think then it becomes pure betting rather than picks. And what if guy YOLOS and loses all stake for all season? Then we are going to have half pool silent after GW2 lol

[swogerino]

I am also liking this new format much better as anything can happen here during a single round. Normally I like more consistency than getting a huge amount of points from a single game, I remember someone in the previous pool winning a pick with 23 as odd as Manchester City made a big surprise result back then. So far this pool looks great with a lot of people being near equal points despite being in an early stage of the competition. I used to like Superbru much better before but now it looks like this system is well thought and honestly it works better. I think also other pools should switch to a more complex points system and not just Superbru, well except F1 pool.

[KTChampions]

The only problem here is accounting, but this can be solved by requiring players to publish screenshots and bet IDs.
I think in such a race the adrenaline will be off the charts as players will be torn between reliability and the success of competitors who took the risk.
This will be really cool, right? And I'm sure the winners won't be the guys with a 100x result, but rather those who make 10-30% profit over the entire tournament.

So its pretty much like ROI or PNL race. I guess this can be done onsite on Rollbit because I believe you can like create a sub balance account on Rollbit. Im not sure about this but I guess we could because the site will automatically create if for slot buy-in war

I don't think we should play with virtual money, real money is best. If $10 per round is too much, then we can play with $1 or $5—any amount that's approved by the majority.

~
I like @KTChampions suggestion also but I think then it becomes pure betting rather than picks. And what if guy YOLOS and loses all stake for all season? Then we are going to have half pool silent after GW2 lol

This will not be a case. You spend a new 10 bucks each round rather than having all bucks (10 * number of rounds) available at once. If you lost 10 bucks in the first round, then in the second you can bet 10 again, if in the first round you doubled 10 bucks, then in the second you must bet at least 10, and if you want, then from 10 to 30.

Incidentally, such a system would complicate the results calculation a bit - it would require analyzing screenshots (plus checking whether the player violated the limits), but it would free the organizers from the hassle of selecting outcomes, setting up the website, and so on.

[darbitmobilerecovery]

buwaytress I think in the future we should consider the possibility of creating a pool where there are no restrictions at all 
For example, each round is allocated (by the players themselves, haha) $10, and you can place any bets on the Champions League, whether with odds of 1.1 or 2000. And in each subsequent round, you can use your entire bankroll (what you've accumulated from previous rounds).
The only problem here is accounting, but this can be solved by requiring players to publish screenshots and bet IDs.
I think in such a race the adrenaline will be off the charts as players will be torn between reliability and the success of competitors who took the risk.
This will be really cool, right? And I'm sure the winners won't be the guys with a 100x result, but rather those who make 10-30% profit over the entire tournament.

In paper your idea is really cool and good, but believe me in the reality is gonna fail, not because is a bad one but because the people is super lazy and plus they are not gonna ended betting at all, im pretty sure if you adopt that system the number of players are gonna be less than 15 being regulars.

Most people here dont want to pay a fee to enter the contest when is much more what you can win than lose.

[buwaytress]

Great ideas and feedback, I'm sorry if I don't address something right away, or if I don't address at all. But rest assured at the end of a season I'll try and take every comment into account and when there are more than one or two comments asking for a feature, we'll look at them seriously.

KTChampions actually this idea has been requested before (a pure bankroll idea, do whatever you want) and in some way done on the forum (but usually without a bankroll limit where the failure begins with guys having unlimited tries).

Hhampuz has also expressed interest in a similar format, having a bankroll instead of stakes like we do, and then you do whatever you want with it.

A buy in every matchday is tough to enforce I think (without really asking) and having the sponsor actually host something like this on their own site seems to be something no casino has ever felt keen to do, so if that burden falls on us, then we'd definitely need a lot of players. This season's 40+ is below what I think its standard should be. But, let me remind myself to put it forward again to all participants.

On that note, tagging all the gentle people of this season to submit your picks for Matchday 3!

Matchday 3 Open for Submissions!

*deadline 21 October 4.45pm UTC/forum time

Code:

darxiaomi
LFC_Bitcoin
cryptofrka
Trofo
notblox1
Harkorede
Strongkored
joker_josue
leea-1334
Slaman29
crowolf
KTChampions
icopress
LTU_btc
mv1986
arallmuus
BABYSHOES
Igebotz
Ulven
el che
CryptopreneurBrainboss
swogerino
jeremypwr
Saint-loup
jayce
Hhampuz
CLS63
dittoup
Smartvirus
ILuckyGuyI
xLays
dzonikg28
logfiles

[darxiaomi]

Well after the BIB (boring international break), came to us all the homework, all the contest and all the pools comebacks, welcome back SuperBru tab, welcome back "mais facil" tab.

I hope to maintain my position here and if i can climb a few more.

Good luck to everyone.

[xLays]

Dang I didn’t know I’m second to the last on the leaderboard.. lol
Well, it’s only matchday 3, so anything can still happen. That 6 stake feature  in this pool makes this tournament really exciting because it gives good chance for someone to make a comeback in this UCL pool tournament. Hoping I can catch up with that feature since it can generate higher points compared to regular predictions.

Anyway I’ve already submitted my prediction. Good luck everyone..

[arallmuus]

and having the sponsor actually host something like this on their own site seems to be something no casino has ever felt keen to do, so if that burden falls on us, then we'd definitely need a lot of players.

Yeah I cant really recall but I guess aside from directbet back on the days, there isnt any site that want to do ROI or PNL type of competition. This would be fun to implement. Your UCL format is pretty much similar to this type of competition

This will not be a case. You spend a new 10 bucks each round rather than having all bucks (10 * number of rounds) available at once. If you lost 10 bucks in the first round, then in the second you can bet 10 again, if in the first round you doubled 10 bucks, then in the second you must bet at least 10, and if you want, then from 10 to 30.

Yeah ikr, this is fun until someone tries to bet on x100 betslip then somehow win it after 50+ tries but yeah this would be fun with some extra rules and restriction. This would be a neat format but for now buway's format is pretty good actually

If a betting site could host their own PNL competition with format like this then it would be great

[cryptofrka]

buwaytress I think in the future we should consider the possibility of creating a pool where there are no restrictions at all 
For example, each round is allocated (by the players themselves, haha) $10, and you can place any bets on the Champions League, whether with odds of 1.1 or 2000. And in each subsequent round, you can use your entire bankroll (what you've accumulated from previous rounds).
The only problem here is accounting, but this can be solved by requiring players to publish screenshots and bet IDs.
I think in such a race the adrenaline will be off the charts as players will be torn between reliability and the success of competitors who took the risk.
This will be really cool, right? And I'm sure the winners won't be the guys with a 100x result, but rather those who make 10-30% profit over the entire tournament.

I actually have a pitch for something like this prepared in my head, in my opinion it could be big and attract many players.
I just can't make myself write it into something concise and start offering it.

The best thing about it is that people won't YOLO with real money. It's easy to do it with stakes, but if you need to put down 20$ on a bet, there's a high chance you won't be chasing 20+ odds.
We'd get the most realistic betting competition and I hope we see something like this implemented in the future. No limits on amounts or numbers of games, no limits on sports, just initial bankroll and screenshots of betslips.

_____________________________

Sorry for the OT buwa. To be on topic - go Liverpool.

[slaman29]

Just one more comment on it all. Whatever you guys decide I will most likely play. It has been improving, and its still one of the most fun things to do on the forum.

I think in the end if you make some changes and some people leave, these are usually the people who contribute the least in terms of discussion and engagement so I don't think its a big loss.

Barca!!