FISHBITFISH.COM

[kairos]

Ah i don't speak clearly enough i guess, maybe it's my english...

1MyuTJRZUEjLo1RZoZx2XQhuVCMffRjAC7

Blockhain is right... but again:

IF this would be my transaction, i should have the adress:

1MyuTJRZUEjLo1RZoZx2XQhuVCMffRjAC7

in my wallet right? 

Sorry, i just don't get the point... xD

But, game is over... received 3 payouts, so everything is ok.
But still confused about that adress which is not in my wallet... maybe i should get deeper into blockchain wisdom!?

Thx and sorry onlinepro! 

If bitcoins came from this address, then it must be your address. It means that your wallet must know this address and must contain private key for this address (even though you may not explicitly know about this address, since it had been created automatically for you by your wallet).

[onlinepro]

This suck.
I was testing with calculator how much I get if I send 0.01BTC, it said I will get 0.015BTC but when I sent and reloaded page there was new deposit and now my estimated is 0.0098BTC
Should have reloaded page before sending and not just trust to the calculator.
If I would have noticed it and sent 0.005BTC I would have made some profit  

Edit: Something good too, I won 0.001BTC at yellow vs blue so I'm on profit now after all

[Bmystic62]

Round #367 Won....Yellow Fish

I did not receive my payment? What is up with that?

17jrCe3UwGyG6LeFN3het9bpkmBEAkf68L


Thanks

[xinzark]

I like the design and concept a lot, let me know when you have a referral program and I'll send lots of traffic your way

[kairos]

Sorry, I cannot find any payment from your address in this round. This is round #367 yellow fish...
https://blockchain.info/address/1GqgpENSF9jgU7Xd681FhNCG12zVCtJLon

Round #367 Won....Yellow Fish

I did not receive my payment? What is up with that?

17jrCe3UwGyG6LeFN3het9bpkmBEAkf68L


Thanks

[DjangoSi]

where is yellow vs blue?

[kairos]

where is yellow vs blue?

Gone. Every variant we tried (fixed fee, 0 to 100 % fee..) was far less successfull than the red vs green game.

[onlinepro]

where is yellow vs blue?

Gone. Every variant we tried (fixed fee, 0 to 100 % fee..) was far less successfull than the red vs green game.

Wasn't there over 1.25BTC total in it just couple rounds ago?
Or was it red vs green? I remember it was yellow vs blue though.

[DjangoSi]

where is yellow vs blue?

Gone. Every variant we tried (fixed fee, 0 to 100 % fee..) was far less successfull than the red vs green game.

Wasn't there over 1.25BTC total in it just couple rounds ago?
Or was it red vs green? I remember it was yellow vs blue though.

It was yellow vs blue.
I think you haven't present yellow vs blue correctly on the site.
The most people missed the link to the yellow vs blue
Maybe put booth together on one site.

[Sampisa]

Hello,
I have a (maybe not so) silly question. Do you pay taxes on incomes you receive from this game? What does law states in your country about this matter? And do you need any kind of permission from govenrment to put in place such kind of gambling sites?
Thanks

[monbux]

I like the design and concept a lot, let me know when you have a referral program and I'll send lots of traffic your way

Very interested in this.  I'm still playing the game but would love for the site to add an affiliate program.
Also, any new games you guys plan to release?  Maybe another game but it'll be player VS house this time?

[kairos]

Hello,
I have a (maybe not so) silly question. Do you pay taxes on incomes you receive from this game? What does law states in your country about this matter? And do you need any kind of permission from govenrment to put in place such kind of gambling sites?
Thanks

Yes, we pay the income tax.

I hope we don't break the law regulating lotteries, since bitcoin isn't considered as money here (moreover, I am not sure, if this game is gambling - there is no random factor...). But maybe we break some other countries' law... we have to do some more research if the game grow bigger. ;-)

[leex1528]

Question:  So the longer you wait the less % share you get back.....So you could technically win the bet, but lose money correct?

Am I understanding that correctly?

I just put .05 on the fish that is going to win and I think I read it wrong...I thought it was 4% + x amount...but now it looks like it is 4% share = x amount....


I am hoping for the first to be true and not the 2nd...any clarification on that at all?

[achow101]

I almost forget this game I will back to play soon 

[laverre]

Good game

[Fiiasco]

They should give free bitcoins to new registers

[onlinepro]

They should give free bitcoins to new registers

There is no registering so how would you know who is new?
It is very easy to change address for every time.

[dbshck]

They should give free bitcoins to new registers

There is no registering so how would you know who is new?
It is very easy to change address for every time.

True, it is an onchain game, like luckyb.it, no deposit or something else.
And i remember in the early rounds, site owner is adding the prize pool from his own pocket to attract players, so i assume that's how he give free bitcoins

[emsi]

I appreciate this game (I just won the round #424) though it makes no sens to play it
It makes no sense because no matter what you (as a player) do, you can always be beaten with 100% probability. Actually adding jackpot and incrementing the fee with time just obfuscates the picture.

The best strategy to win is to wait for others to bet and beat them just before it makes any point to bet again (that's what I did). However there is very little point to bet at the very begin as there is almost nothing to win from that (the jackpot) and the probability to be beaten is huge (as opposed to bet at the end).
In classic casino games the solution to that would be to limit the single bet. That's how we have a 1$, 10$, 100$ and high stakes tables in most casinos over the world. Unfortunately it's not possible with the way this game is implemented (I can use any address to send BTC to bypass that limitation).

Another problem was already mentioned: the game can be screwed in the way that winning the bet makes you loose the money. It's hard to consider that as fair. It was mentioned that it makes no sense for player to play in such way though it make a lot of sense to make such bet as a house. The house is not prohibited to participate in the game in any way. I'm not indicating that house is cheating on purpose but the sole possibility to do so make such game unfair.

The house is making enough profit of every game so it should pay a jackpot that is proportional to the income from the game and remove the skewed scenario.
Another improvement could be extra jackpot that is paid to the very first bidder, which would attract the early bidder as she'd have a 50/50 chance to retain that.
Still all of that would just make the game more complicated while not removing the strategy to 'always beat them all' as the game is not based on any luck.

[onlinepro]

I appreciate this game (I just won the round #424) though it makes no sens to play it
It makes no sense because no matter what you (as a player) do, you can always be beaten with 100% probability. Actually adding jackpot and incrementing the fee with time just obfuscates the picture.

The best strategy to win is to wait for others to bet and beat them just before it makes any point to bet again (that's what I did). However there is very little point to bet at the very begin as there is almost nothing to win from that (the jackpot) and the probability to be beaten is huge (as opposed to bet at the end).
In classic casino games the solution to that would be to limit the single bet. That's how we have a 1$, 10$, 100$ and high stakes tables in most casinos over the world. Unfortunately it's not possible with the way this game is implemented (I can use any address to send BTC to bypass that limitation).

Another problem was already mentioned: the game can be screwed in the way that winning the bet makes you loose the money. It's hard to consider that as fair. It was mentioned that it makes no sense for player to play in such way though it make a lot of sense to make such bet as a house. The house is not prohibited to participate in the game in any way. I'm not indicating that house is cheating on purpose but the sole possibility to do so make such game unfair.

The house is making enough profit of every game so it should pay a jackpot that is proportional to the income from the game and remove the skewed scenario.
Another improvement could be extra jackpot that is paid to the very first bidder, which would attract the early bidder as she'd have a 50/50 chance to retain that.
Still all of that would just make the game more complicated while not removing the strategy to 'always beat them all' as the game is not based on any luck.

There is always possibility to lose.
Once I lost because other side got confirmation 6 seconds before game ended...
So there is not strategy to 'always beat them all'.