Exploring the math behind Plinko on Stake

[bitcasinorank]

Hi all!

Collaboration between the YouTube channel Minding the Data and crypto casino site Bitcasinosrank.com continues!

In the new article, MTD dived into the math of the original Plinko game at Stake.com.

Article: Exploring the Mathematics Behind Stake Plinko

If you are interested in this topic, we would be grateful if you would read the article, share it with your friends, and give us your feedback. And feel free to suggest the games you want us to explore in the future!

Other articles from the series:

• The Math Behind Roobet's Towers

[bitcasinorank]

Just want to push the thread, cause I believe this article deserves more attention

[dansus021]

Just want to push the thread, cause I believe this article deserves more attention

It is worth more attention in my opinion I also curious about all the slot machines and all the games in online casinos because I just want to know what is the winrate and how the system picks the winner and etc. Some people said that at some moment there is some kind of human monitoring all your bets and when the admin likes it you could win the game from the admin dashboard.

But i want really know how the system works, maybe you can provide a simple explain in sort of video and second you may post in gambling discussion rather than here

[swogerino]

I wish it was possible to read the data of a totally irregular and complex algorithm that runs behind these games including Plinko you are referring to. You may think you have read correctly some statistical data and mathematical behavior but let me assure you that you can never be sure of such calculations. I know the channel Mind Your Data on Youtube to be a good one though never as good as giving us real useful data, all we have like in all other cases referring to such algorithms is just assumption and who believes otherwise and go try some kind of strategy will be burned real bad by the game.

[seoincorporation]

I didn't like the article because It use as example the low risk plinko while most users like to play with the high risk versión, so, It would be nice if you add the technical data of the hard version.

From what I understand the odds of getting the x999 is like 0.0034%, but im not sure, I make the math some years ago and now I don't remeber the exact number.

[Hispo]

I didn't like the article because It use as example the low risk plinko while most users like to play with the high risk versión, so, It would be nice if you add the technical data of the hard version.

From what I understand the odds of getting the x999 is like 0.0034%, but im not sure, I make the math some years ago and now I don't remeber the exact number.

Disregarding the amount of risk they decided to use to run this experiment, still I believe it is worth of appreciation, in spite of most users going for the highest multipliers they can get in a single session. I am sure there mush be less risk-tolerant gamblers out there who wish to go for the moderate or even the losw risk version of Stakes Originals Plinko balls.

This could be only the beginning for these people, so they can further dive into the world of casino game analysis, which is already difficult, considering most casinos do not openly share the official data or source code of the game they host on their websites, so they need to pot for mathematical analysis and the laws of probabilities to come up with an approximation to what happens in reality.

[yahoo62278]

I didn't like the article because It use as example the low risk plinko while most users like to play with the high risk versión, so, It would be nice if you add the technical data of the hard version.

From what I understand the odds of getting the x999 is like 0.0034%, but im not sure, I make the math some years ago and now I don't remeber the exact number.

I don't know the exact % as it has been years since we worked for luckyb.it, but we do know that the odds of hitting the x999/1000 are 1 in 32000 bets. It's a little higher but basically 1 in 32000 bets will hit the edge.

[seoincorporation]

I didn't like the article because It use as example the low risk plinko while most users like to play with the high risk versión, so, It would be nice if you add the technical data of the hard version.

From what I understand the odds of getting the x999 is like 0.0034%, but im not sure, I make the math some years ago and now I don't remeber the exact number.

I don't know the exact % as it has been years since we worked for luckyb.it, but we do know that the odds of hitting the x999/1000 are 1 in 32000 bets. It's a little higher but basically 1 in 32000 bets will hit the edge.

I remember the logic behind that game, it used to be awesome, from the sha string they take the last 4 chars, and then convert it from hex to binary, that way the FFFF string was 1111 1111 1111 1111, and 0000 string was 0000 0000 0000 0000, 1 was right and 0 was left, that way the ffff string and the 0000 used to be the big multiplier.

i remember when they created a line with a x9900, it was a crazy multiplier for Plinko and i only got it once, it wasn't cheap but was 0.1 BTC profit in those days when bitcoin was cheap AF. 

[vd309]

I've never thought about plinko probability but my understanding from this is that every row we have 50/50 chance to go left or right.
Going in the middle have many 'paths' so high probability low payout. And going for the biggest multies have only 1 possible path.

[btcltcdigger]

You are correct. Each path has 50% chance to go. And with each level, it's 50% again and again.

Untill you get to some small numbers that make it almost unwinable.

But i like to look at it another way. To me it's 50/50

Either you win, or you don't

[bitcasinorank]

I didn't like the article because It use as example the low risk plinko while most users like to play with the high risk versión, so, It would be nice if you add the technical data of the hard version.

From what I understand the odds of getting the x999 is like 0.0034%, but im not sure, I make the math some years ago and now I don't remeber the exact number.

Actually, we calculated all risk levels, you can check them in this table. And the fun thing is 8 rows at High risk seems the most profitable option.

[AmoreJaz]

You are correct. Each path has 50% chance to go. And with each level, it's 50% again and again.

Untill you get to some small numbers that make it almost unwinable.

But i like to look at it another way. To me it's 50/50

Either you win, or you don't

That's how I look at this game also. Because like it or not, either we win or not. If you will calculate the probability and other mathematical formulas related to it, you will have a headache. This is gambling, and luck plays the major role in winning. You can't beat such luck factor as there is no mathematical formula in such aspect. You will only put yourself in terrible situation if you find a way how to beat this part of gambling.

[btc_angela]

You are correct. Each path has 50% chance to go. And with each level, it's 50% again and again.

Untill you get to some small numbers that make it almost unwinable.

But i like to look at it another way. To me it's 50/50

Either you win, or you don't

That's how I look at this game also. Because like it or not, either we win or not. If you will calculate the probability and other mathematical formulas related to it, you will have a headache.

Of course for others who don't want co complicate things, that's how gambling its, 50/50. But since this is a luck base games then probably the OP wanted to share the data and the math as what actually our chances of hitting either side with the highest multiplier.

And we all know that it's not going to be 50/50, there are times that you need a lot of balls to drop and hope that it will land on the higher multiplier for a good return. Or just got busted early on without hitting any with many balls.

[ImThour]

Hi,

I genuinely went ahead to read this article as I found it very interesting but I am honestly disappointed with multiple popups that I got while scrolling.
Please get rid of those, I wasn't even interested to sign up or do something, was there only to read this article.

Article on the other hand was very well detailed, good job on that.