bustabit.com -- The Social Gambling Game

[blockage]

It would be nice to see a graph of your entire history in one shot. I don't know how practical it is, but the automatic scaling of your last X bets is obviously more useful. Perhaps just for the novelty of seeing your entire history on one graph it would be interesting.

Yes, and that's something I'm sure I've asked for before.

Now I opened a github issue asking for it:

https://github.com/moneypot/webserver/issues/77

Let's see what happens. Since it's open source, the response will probably be "patches are welcome"...

In the meantime, here is your profit chart and I also included the bottom 98% of your cashout distribution:

[dooglus]

In the meantime, here is your profit chart and I also included the bottom 98% of your cashout distribution:

Thanks!

[hopenotlate]

I took the martingale strategy and slightly modified it, to make sure it starts at my base bet, and to allow me to bet with my choice of payout multiplier:

Code:

var baseBet = 1; // in Bits
var mult = 2.01;

var satoshis = baseBet * 100;
var crash = Math.floor(mult*100 + 1e-6);
var currentBet = false;

engine.onGameStarting = function () {
    if (currentBet && engine.lastGameWasLost()) {
        currentBet *= 2;
        console.log('double bet to', currentBet/100);
    } else {
        currentBet = satoshis;
        console.log('reset bet to', currentBet/100);
    }
    if (currentBet < engine.getBalance()) {
        console.log('place bet of', currentBet/100, 'at', crash/100);
        engine.placeBet(currentBet, crash, false);
    }
    else {
        engine.stop();
        console.log('You ran out of bits :(');
    }
};

It seems to be working:

I am a computer illiterate and don't know how to code: being that said I would like to know if I can use the strategy you coded on Windows OS and how to do it in case it is possible.

What is in your opinion a minimum starting bankroll that could fit this strategy?

[dooglus]

I am a computer illiterate and don't know how to code: being that said I would like to know if I can use the strategy you coded on Windows OS and how to do it in case it is possible.

What is in your opinion a minimum starting bankroll that could fit this strategy?

You can copy the code exactly how I posted it, go to the 'strategy' tab on moneypot, click in the text area, hit control-a to select all, then paste in my script. Then click 'RUN!' to run it. It will bet 1 bit at 2x and double until you win, then reset to 1 bit and repeat, forever. Click 'STOP' or reload the page to stop it.

It's not a winning strategy - eventually you'll run into a long enough run of low crashes to bust you. So no bankroll is enough, really. I wrote it for fun and to test out the new strategy engine.

Also note that in general it's dangerous to copy/paste people's strategy code because it could do nasty stuff like steal your account and/or bitcoins. But my code doesn't do that.

[hopenotlate]

I am a computer illiterate and don't know how to code: being that said I would like to know if I can use the strategy you coded on Windows OS and how to do it in case it is possible.

What is in your opinion a minimum starting bankroll that could fit this strategy?

You can copy the code exactly how I posted it, go to the 'strategy' tab on moneypot, click in the text area, hit control-a to select all, then paste in my script. Then click 'RUN!' to run it. It will bet 1 bit at 2x and double until you win, then reset to 1 bit and repeat, forever. Click 'STOP' or reload the page to stop it.

It's not a winning strategy - eventually you'll run into a long enough run of low crashes to bust you. So no bankroll is enough, really. I wrote it for fun and to test out the new strategy engine.

Also note that in general it's dangerous to copy/paste people's strategy code because it could do nasty stuff like steal your account and/or bitcoins. But my code doesn't do that.

Thx for you reply and wnaty to make clear that:
 - being a gambler I know martingale isprovably a losing method in the long run
 - only asked to use YOUR code as you are one, if not the, most trusted members here

thx again for your help

[dooglus]

thx again for your help

You're welcome.

I made some changes to my strategy code:

Code:

var baseBet = 10; // in Bits

var cashout;
var mult;

// set one of mult or cashout, and the other will be calculated for you:

// mult = 1.12;
cashout = 1.5;

// what percentage to increase the net profit by each time we lose a bet; 0 for pure martingale
greed_percent = 5;

if (!mult)
    mult = cashout / (cashout - 1) * (1 + greed_percent/100);
else if (!cashout)
    cashout = mult / (mult - 1) * (1 + greed_percent/100);

var satoshis = baseBet * 100;
var crash = Math.floor(cashout*100 + 1e-6);

var currentBet = false;

engine.onGameStarting = function () {
    if (currentBet && engine.lastGameWasLost())
        currentBet *= mult;
    else
        currentBet = satoshis;

    if (currentBet < engine.getBalance()) {
        console.log('place bet of', Math.round(currentBet/100), 'at', crash/100);
        engine.placeBet(Math.round(currentBet/100)*100, crash, false);
    }
    else {
        engine.stop();
        console.log('You ran out of bits :(');
    }
};

Now you can tell it what multiplier to cashout at, or how much to multiply the stake by each time, and it will calculate the other accordingly. There's also a greed percentage, which you can set to make it increase your net winnings by a percentage each time you lose.

None of this is very well tested; use at your own risk; etc.

Here (on the left) is a 5x martingale sequence:



and here are a couple of 20x martingale sequences:

[omahapoker]

someones gonna beat this game now.


whats the bankroll at now?

[Jungian]

Large enough. Since the last limits tightening the site profit have grown 20 BTC, so we're sitting in a rather comfortable place. We continually monitor the site bankroll, and are committed to either readjusting the limits (as we did last time) or even pausing game play to ensure we are never insolvent.

Once the investor system is finished, which is developing nicely, the bankroll and breakdown between balances and invested will be publicly shown (and visible in a cold storage address) along with limits that are a function of that.

Will a trusted third party hold the a set of keys? To avoid another running off with the funds.

[dooglus]

Will a trusted third party hold the a set of keys? To avoid another running off with the funds.

Here's the problem:

Even if the majority of the investor funds are held by a 100% trustworthy and secure third party, there's no waythat I can think of to stop the site's owner from playing his own game and slowly winning all the coins. Especially for a game like moneypot where the crash point has to be known by the server before the players finish acting.

So is it really worth insisting that the funds are held by a third party when it really doesn't protect the investors anyway?

Edit: one thing that is worth noting: from what I've heard, the plan is to allow investors to only actually deposit a fraction of the amount they want to risk. So you'll be able to say "I have 100 BTC and want to risk 1% of it per game; here's 10 BTC of it for now". So if they do run off, they only get 10 BTC not your full 100, but you'll get profit (or loss) as if you had invested the full 100 BTC.

[Jungian]

Will a trusted third party hold the a set of keys? To avoid another running off with the funds.

Here's the problem:

Even if the majority of the investor funds are held by a 100% trustworthy and secure third party, there's no waythat I can think of to stop the site's owner from playing his own game and slowly winning all the coins. Especially for a game like moneypot where the crash point has to be known by the server before the players finish acting.

So is it really worth insisting that the funds are held by a third party when it really doesn't protect the investors anyway?

Edit: one thing that is worth noting: from what I've heard, the plan is to allow investors to only actually deposit a fraction of the amount they want to risk. So you'll be able to say "I have 100 BTC and want to risk 1% of it per game; here's 10 BTC of it for now". So if they do run off, they only get 10 BTC not your full 100, but you'll get profit (or loss) as if you had invested the full 100 BTC.

Slowly winning the coins is less likely to lose 100% of your funds.

Ofc it doesn't offer perfect protection, but I think it's still better than them holding all the coins and doing s "spur of the movement" run or whatever.

[jaysabi]

Will a trusted third party hold the a set of keys? To avoid another running off with the funds.

Here's the problem:

Even if the majority of the investor funds are held by a 100% trustworthy and secure third party, there's no waythat I can think of to stop the site's owner from playing his own game and slowly winning all the coins. Especially for a game like moneypot where the crash point has to be known by the server before the players finish acting.

So is it really worth insisting that the funds are held by a third party when it really doesn't protect the investors anyway?

Edit: one thing that is worth noting: from what I've heard, the plan is to allow investors to only actually deposit a fraction of the amount they want to risk. So you'll be able to say "I have 100 BTC and want to risk 1% of it per game; here's 10 BTC of it for now". So if they do run off, they only get 10 BTC not your full 100, but you'll get profit (or loss) as if you had invested the full 100 BTC.

This is a potential solution to hedge your 'investment' from some of the risk of investing, but at this point, god speed to anyone who wants the risk of trusting any of these sites anymore with loads of your coins. Site operator knows the crash point of how many games in advance? He can run a dozen bot accounts that slowly drain investment by winning without making it obvious he's doing that. I'm starting to wonder why anyone- with how many times this community has been burned- would put themselves at risk anymore. How many times will it take?

[4ever]

Site operator knows the crash point of how many games in advance?

Just like dice sites, the site operator knows the outcome of each roll.

[finnile]

Site operator knows the crash point of how many games in advance?

All. Just like all investor schemes I'm aware of, it's not provably fair for investors. The new scheme being built for money pot however, is the best I think we have -- it allows you to invest a huge amount of money, while minimising your counter-party risk. It's also great from Money Pot's perspective, as it minimizes the total liability it holds to investors, a very under appreciated thing.

I don't think you will have to worry about knowing the rolls. Thats because, all investment sites can play against the investors, and people are willing to take the risk.

[alani123]

So, leveraged investments? This definitely sounds interesting and I can say that I'm looking forward to the release.

[Dabs]

This is a potential solution to hedge your 'investment' from some of the risk of investing, but at this point, god speed to anyone who wants the risk of trusting any of these sites anymore with loads of your coins. Site operator knows the crash point of how many games in advance? He can run a dozen bot accounts that slowly drain investment by winning without making it obvious he's doing that. I'm starting to wonder why anyone- with how many times this community has been burned- would put themselves at risk anymore. How many times will it take?

This is becoming an issue with me, because I still have faith in humanity. A few bad apples do not make everyone else with similar plans just as evil and corrupt. The whole time there was never any proof that, for example, dooglus would not run, except his word that he would not do so. For many, it was enough to invest up to almost 70k. Mr. Previous Owner of this MoneyPot is still around, but he opened it with his real identity known.

I plan to open another fun game, because it's fun (well, it looks fun to me.) Or I plan to relaunch my old lotto game (or some variation of it.)

But no matter how provably fair we make the games (this or any other) for both players and investors, someone will accuse the operator of simply scamming away everything. Not unless we use some form of smart contract multi-signature scheme, where a dishonest player or investor can negatively impact site operations.

I mean, the world's largest and biggest bitcoin poker site is not provably fair.

The point is, sometimes, you've got to have a little faith. No scientific evidence is going to replace track record and integrity, but some people do deserve to get the benefit of the doubt.

Edit: one thing that is worth noting: from what I've heard, the plan is to allow investors to only actually deposit a fraction of the amount they want to risk. So you'll be able to say "I have 100 BTC and want to risk 1% of it per game; here's 10 BTC of it for now". So if they do run off, they only get 10 BTC not your full 100, but you'll get profit (or loss) as if you had invested the full 100 BTC.

Who's going to escrow the investor funds that have not yet been actually deposited? What if the site attracts a whale and some or all of the investors decide not to pony up?

[Dabs]

How about the "I have 1000 BTC, I just sent them 10 BTC, but they lost massively to a whale, and I'm outta here." ? Does your most recent answer address this? I'm a little bit confused, since if you won't let the investor lose much, that just means you don't need all his money anyway. But that's the reason you're supposed to have a large bankroll.

[jaysabi]

If an investor has 1000, but only 10 of it is onsite, and the site gets hit by a lucky whale -- the investor will have 990 offsite and 0 onsite -- and need to evaluate whether or not the lucky whale was Ryan with a hat on, or a natural whale before transferring more money on site. This is how the investor protects himself against counter-party risk.

If the site recovered before the investor topped up their investment, the investor would still be left with 0 in their onsite investment. That's why it's important that every investor decides carefully how much they wish to keep onsite, offsite and risk per game.

Aren't they being paid based on having 1000 btc invested though?

[jaysabi]

Aren't they being paid based on having 1000 btc invested though?

Sure, but I don't see any contradictions here. If it helps, you can think of it as investing 1000 BTC with a stop loss at 990.

The problem is you're paying someone based on how much they say they're investing but aren't actually investing. That means you're doing max bets/max wins based on a BR you don't actually have, which is problematic if the folks who say they're investing 1000 btc decide to walk away after they lose 10. And on the flip side, you're paying out profits based on amounts that aren't actually at risk and therefore not truly "invested." If someone says "I've got 1000 btc invested" but has .1% stop-loss, they've only got 10 btc at risk, so if a whale wipes out the 10 btc, they can walk away with minimal loss, but on the other hand, if the site profits, you're paying them a share of profit as if they had 1000 btc invested.

Is that an accurate description, or am I misunderstanding how the system works? And if it is accurate, does that seem fair?

[tripppn]

I was trying to remember the name of this game.  I got hooked a while ago.  I love this game.  Time to get hooked again!   

[jaysabi]

And if it is accurate, does that seem fair?

Imagine this: you have 1000 BTC and send it to PRCDice.com to invest. You have a bot that monitors your investment, and automatically cashes you out if your investment falls below 990. Ignoring for overshooting, you are only risking 10 BTC but have the upside of investing 1000. Does that seem fair?

So what the money pot investor scheme would allow you to do is achieve the same effect without ever having to expose yourself to the counter-party risk on that 990.

Ok, this makes sense. But is it that all 1000 coins are on the site and you just don't have access to them, or are they not on the site? I'm just trying to reconcile how the BR can be said to be 1000 and you're paying bets out thinking the BR is 1000 if you don't ever have full access to those 1000 coins because of a set limit by the investors.

For example and for the sake of simplicity, say you have one investor. He deposits 1000 coins, and so your BR is in theory 1000. But he sets a max loss of .1% or 10 btc. You are thinking you have a BR of 1000, so you've set the max payout per game to be based on a percentage of 1000 coins, when in reality, your BR is going to walk if it falls to 990, or once you lose 10 coins. Allowing max wins to be much higher than the actual BR will tolerate losses for increases the odds of you going bankrupt if you hit variance, doesn't it?