PrimeDice Strategy - 15 BTC Winnings in 24 Hrs - Limited Release

[calci]

Honestly I feel happy that guy lost his btc again  He's not even worth, in general he' still lucky
he bet + 1000 btc, on average he should have lost + 10 btc

I think primedice has a little lower edge than 1%, so that should be less.

[FanEagle]

He had to rain more in my opinion, karma helps alot.

[mindrust]

Wow what a story.

I just read the first page and this one.

up to 30btc then go to "zero"!?

Wtf man...

[4ever]

Wow what a story.

I just read the first page and this one.

up to 30btc then go to "zero"!?

Wtf man...

I have seen worse. People gone to 300 btc and back to 0. 

[dooglus]

Since you're all talk and you claim to have created a +EV system lets do this, 1 BTC wager on each side. I put up 1 BTC you do the same. Dooglus or any trusted escrow holds them. Dooglus, the dice and gaming expert looks at your code and posts his findings. If true you win my coin and a big ego. Otherwise we prove you had nothing to sell, we're lying about you're offering and thus in essense...a scammer.

Let's go OP, put your money where your mouth is.

I'm afraid I wouldn't be a good candidate to escrow that bet. Because I would want to take part in it too.

No way has OP created a +EV betting system in Excel.

[4ever]

Since you're all talk and you claim to have created a +EV system lets do this, 1 BTC wager on each side. I put up 1 BTC you do the same. Dooglus or any trusted escrow holds them. Dooglus, the dice and gaming expert looks at your code and posts his findings. If true you win my coin and a big ego. Otherwise we prove you had nothing to sell, we're lying about you're offering and thus in essense...a scammer.

Let's go OP, put your money where your mouth is.

I'm afraid I wouldn't be a good candidate to escrow that bet. Because I would want to take part in it too.

No way has OP created a +EV betting system in Excel.

It already failed and the op has lost most of his coins.  He is now at a profit of only 1 BTC.

[dooglus]

Apart from the Excel, is there any way to even create a system that would be +EV for the gambler?

No. As wikipedia puts it:

In most casino games, the expected value of any individual bet is negative, so the sum of lots of negative numbers is also always going to be negative.

[Minnlo]

Honestly I feel happy that guy lost his btc again  He's not even worth, in general he' still lucky
he bet + 1000 btc, on average he should have lost + 10 btc

I think primedice has a little lower edge than 1%, so that should be less.

PD has a house edge of 1% now.

During the early stage of PD3, there was a jackpot feature that brought house edge to 0.91%.

[magicmexican]

How is anyone surprised?

What is more surprising to me, that OP himself knew that his strategy is not profitable in the long run, but still contuniued to push it nonetheless.

Greed? Delusion of being a genius and "cracking the code"? Or the combination of both?

[caga]

How is anyone surprised?

What is more surprising to me, that OP himself knew that his strategy is not profitable in the long run, but still contuniued to push it nonetheless.

Greed? Delusion of being a genius and "cracking the code"? Or the combination of both?

I will say it was greed more than getting a feeling that he "cracked the code". Its because, if he went from 18 to 10, and then back up , till 33. He should have realized after the first swing that it can definitely fail(specially since the strat looked like martingale). After being 33 in the green, he should have stopped, and be proud of defeating a -EV game.

[BitCoinNutJob]

told ya if you kept playing you'd lose it back, you might aswell just share the system and quit while ahead before it gets ugly.

[dooglus]

told ya if you kept playing you'd lose it back, you might aswell just share the system and quit while ahead before it gets ugly.

He already shared it: he uses the built-in martingale bot.

[caga]

told ya if you kept playing you'd lose it back, you might aswell just share the system and quit while ahead before it gets ugly.

He already shared it: he uses the built-in martingale bot.

That just makes him look more stupid here. Its because, he posted that he programmed the bot to use an advanced strategy which was +EV as it only lost 20% of the times. And if he had some brains, he should have known that martingale has never succeeded for anyone in the long run. Once he was +33 BTC, he should have stopped.

[MadZ]

told ya if you kept playing you'd lose it back, you might aswell just share the system and quit while ahead before it gets ugly.

He already shared it: he uses the built-in martingale bot.

That just makes him look more stupid here. Its because, he posted that he programmed the bot to use an advanced strategy which was +EV as it only lost 20% of the times. And if he had some brains, he should have known that martingale has never succeeded for anyone in the long run. Once he was +33 BTC, he should have stopped.

To play devil's advocate here, people also said he should stop at +15 btc, but he didn't, and ended up winning twice as much. It's easy once he has actually lost to say "ha, what an idiot, he should have stopped while he was ahead", since you have the benefit of knowing when he was actually at his peak. At the time, no one knew.

[caga]

To play devil's advocate here, people also said he should stop at +15 btc, but he didn't, and ended up winning twice as much. It's easy once he has actually lost to say "ha, what an idiot, he should have stopped while he was ahead", since you have the benefit of knowing when he was actually at his peak. At the time, no one knew.

Yes, thats true maybe he should have. Staying ahead could also mean a profit of 1 btc , and would have been a good move to stop then also. But, my point is, that if the strategy was martingale all along, then why risk so much of a bankroll, when it is obvious that martingale fails all the time over a long time.

[rayhan]

told ya if you kept playing you'd lose it back, you might aswell just share the system and quit while ahead before it gets ugly.

He already shared it: he uses the built-in martingale bot.

That just makes him look more stupid here. Its because, he posted that he programmed the bot to use an advanced strategy which was +EV as it only lost 20% of the times. And if he had some brains, he should have known that martingale has never succeeded for anyone in the long run. Once he was +33 BTC, he should have stopped.

indeed and I thought every user  have their way to win
have a good method but always got greedy that will make you always lost too

[MadZ]

To play devil's advocate here, people also said he should stop at +15 btc, but he didn't, and ended up winning twice as much. It's easy once he has actually lost to say "ha, what an idiot, he should have stopped while he was ahead", since you have the benefit of knowing when he was actually at his peak. At the time, no one knew.

Yes, thats true maybe he should have. Staying ahead could also mean a profit of 1 btc , and would have been a good move to stop then also. But, my point is, that if the strategy was martingale all along, then why risk so much of a bankroll, when it is obvious that martingale fails all the time over a long time.

Why bother gambling if your expected return is negative. Sometimes you get lucky and profit more than you should, sometimes you lose. Being up 33 btc, his decision to keep playing should be the same as his decision to play when he was up 0 btc, past results don't matter in the future.

[noma]

To play devil's advocate here, people also said he should stop at +15 btc, but he didn't, and ended up winning twice as much. It's easy once he has actually lost to say "ha, what an idiot, he should have stopped while he was ahead", since you have the benefit of knowing when he was actually at his peak. At the time, no one knew.

Yes, thats true maybe he should have. Staying ahead could also mean a profit of 1 btc , and would have been a good move to stop then also. But, my point is, that if the strategy was martingale all along, then why risk so much of a bankroll, when it is obvious that martingale fails all the time over a long time.

Why bother gambling if your expected return is negative. Sometimes you get lucky and profit more than you should, sometimes you lose. Being up 33 btc, his decision to keep playing should be the same as his decision to play when he was up 0 btc, past results don't matter in the future.

Not taaking sides, but when I visit a casino, and win 5000$. I don't keep playing to win again. I become happy with it, and go out for a party.

[rayhan]

To play devil's advocate here, people also said he should stop at +15 btc, but he didn't, and ended up winning twice as much. It's easy once he has actually lost to say "ha, what an idiot, he should have stopped while he was ahead", since you have the benefit of knowing when he was actually at his peak. At the time, no one knew.

Yes, thats true maybe he should have. Staying ahead could also mean a profit of 1 btc , and would have been a good move to stop then also. But, my point is, that if the strategy was martingale all along, then why risk so much of a bankroll, when it is obvious that martingale fails all the time over a long time.

Why bother gambling if your expected return is negative. Sometimes you get lucky and profit more than you should, sometimes you lose. Being up 33 btc, his decision to keep playing should be the same as his decision to play when he was up 0 btc, past results don't matter in the future.

Not taaking sides, but when I visit a casino, and win 5000$. I don't keep playing to win again. I become happy with it, and go out for a party.

nah i like your way

[opossum]

To play devil's advocate here, people also said he should stop at +15 btc, but he didn't, and ended up winning twice as much. It's easy once he has actually lost to say "ha, what an idiot, he should have stopped while he was ahead", since you have the benefit of knowing when he was actually at his peak. At the time, no one knew.

Yes, thats true maybe he should have. Staying ahead could also mean a profit of 1 btc , and would have been a good move to stop then also. But, my point is, that if the strategy was martingale all along, then why risk so much of a bankroll, when it is obvious that martingale fails all the time over a long time.

Why bother gambling if your expected return is negative. Sometimes you get lucky and profit more than you should, sometimes you lose. Being up 33 btc, his decision to keep playing should be the same as his decision to play when he was up 0 btc, past results don't matter in the future.

People gamble for the fun of it. The EV is only applicable for the long run, if you gamble for the short term (as most people do) then you can potentially make money.

You also have the social aspect of conversing with others at the table (or in bitcoinworld in the chatroom)