Pages:
Author

Topic: ⭐ Crypto.Games ⭐ 0.8% House Edge on Dice ⭐ Largest wagering contest...ever ⭐ - page 58. (Read 345939 times)

legendary
Activity: 2030
Merit: 1189
Is nobody going to talk about how these high rollers just nabbed a solid $4,000 from the bank with no losses?



Vickyddude had the balls to wager $2,500, and walked away $2,500 richer! Very impressive bro.
legendary
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1014
Bitdice is scam scam scammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Is it just me or this lottery competition seems a bit off - I mean look at the entry price and then compare that to the prize money for the 3rd place, too me it makes it almost unattractive to enter the competition
knowing that I'll probably not get on neither the 1st nor 2nd place.


I suppose those that just want to play for the thrill don't mind this so much, but I like to winning and I try to go when I've got the best odds  Grin

The vast majority of the lottery prize goes to the player in first place, whereas second and third place still get more than their ticket cost.

Also, this isn't the final values, a good proportion of lottery tickets are sold during the final few hours when people have seen how big the pot is.

In any case, a lot of people get lottery tickets given to them for free from the live chat, so these guys can essentially win the whole pot for nothing.

I do not know why it isn't popular since its house edge free.
hero member
Activity: 3010
Merit: 794
Someone hit up some portion of the pot again.




In any case, a lot of people get lottery tickets given to them for free from the live chat, so these guys can essentially win the whole pot for nothing.
Exactly.  Smiley
legendary
Activity: 2030
Merit: 1189

Is it just me or this lottery competition seems a bit off - I mean look at the entry price and then compare that to the prize money for the 3rd place, too me it makes it almost unattractive to enter the competition
knowing that I'll probably not get on neither the 1st nor 2nd place.


I suppose those that just want to play for the thrill don't mind this so much, but I like to winning and I try to go when I've got the best odds  Grin

The vast majority of the lottery prize goes to the player in first place, whereas second and third place still get more than their ticket cost.

Also, this isn't the final values, a good proportion of lottery tickets are sold during the final few hours when people have seen how big the pot is.

In any case, a lot of people get lottery tickets given to them for free from the live chat, so these guys can essentially win the whole pot for nothing.
hero member
Activity: 1638
Merit: 576
Leading Crypto Sports Betting & Casino Platform
ETH Lottery round 196 ends in 13hrs!


First place
0.0360 ETH

Second place
0.0067 ETH

Third place
0.0022 ETH

Total tickets (of all players)
30

Price per ticket
0.0015 ETH

Is it just me or this lottery competition seems a bit off - I mean look at the entry price and then compare that to the prize money for the 3rd place, too me it makes it almost unattractive to enter the competition
knowing that I'll probably not get on neither the 1st nor 2nd place.


I suppose those that just want to play for the thrill don't mind this so much, but I like to winning and I try to go when I've got the best odds  Grin
hero member
Activity: 3010
Merit: 794
ETH Lottery round 196 ends in 13hrs!


First place
0.0360 ETH

Second place
0.0067 ETH

Third place
0.0022 ETH

Total tickets (of all players)
30

Price per ticket
0.0015 ETH
legendary
Activity: 2030
Merit: 1189
We've already had 4 Dice Jackpot hits this month, 2 of them were hit this morning:




Congrats!

Looks like today has been a lucky day overall for players on crypto-games;



Several players are absolutely dominating with Dice right now too.
hero member
Activity: 3010
Merit: 794
BTC Lottery round 453 ends in 13hrs!


First place
0.004720 BTC

Second place
0.000885 BTC

Third place
0.000295 BTC

Total tickets (of all players)
59

Price per ticket
0.000100 BTC
sr. member
Activity: 974
Merit: 264
Catch the winning spirit!
Current top 10 BTC players:




Current top 10 Ethereum players:




Current top 7 LTC players:




Current top 5 DOGE players:




The more you wager, the higher your reward. Check full rankings and estimated rewards for all coins on our website.
hero member
Activity: 3010
Merit: 794
Still have 5 days left before the monthly wager contest ends.
sr. member
Activity: 974
Merit: 264
Catch the winning spirit!
We've already had 4 Dice Jackpot hits this month, 2 of them were hit this morning:




Congrats!
legendary
Activity: 1199
Merit: 1047
Terrible news. At least you could had allowed current investors to keep their investment. Eventually you would had achieved your goal of decreasing the investments from "outsiders" anyway, but this way you would at least let those that helped you grow stay with you, while still getting a fee from their investment profit. I'm very disappointed.

I think it's reasonable to be disappointed, but I also think it's reasonable for them to change terms or cancel investments (even if abruptly). A bankroll investment sort of has this nice liquidity aspect, where you can pull your funds at any time -- but i think it's fair that that cuts both ways. I'd obviously feel very different if the investment was some sort of tokens or stake of the actual business but you (or at least me) don't invest in a site because it'll be profitable in the future, but because it's currently worth the risk/reward.

When I ran my casino, I always just had a private bankroll as I had enough funds that I could do that, and I suspect as crowd funded casinos themselves make enough money "going private" is just a sort of natural end and a positive outcome (compared to something that keeps investors up at night: exit-scam risk).


I think the other natural end would be the casino keeps increasing the commissions to the point that it still makes sense for them to keep having a crowd funded bankroll (e.g. 75%+ commissions on profit). I've always wondered if that would be preferable? Or would just generate too much bad will

Regarding buying "shares" in the casino, that could be an interesting option but quite harder to structure, the current system is way simpler.

75% would surely make most investors withdraw, and those that wouldn't would be paying so much that it should be attractive enough for the casino to keep them. At least in that case investors would have the option to stay, instead of being thrown away like nothing after years of helping them.

I'm going to agree that the site should have some way to benefit long-term investors. Some have been here since the site launched and have only continued to build their stake (and show trust) in the site's various coins. It's sad to see this situation happen. I understand WHY it is happening, and from a business perspective it makes sense, but there should be some way to say "thanks" for everyone who helped make the site possible and successful in the first place.

It doesn't make much sense from a business perspective. If in the future they start some other project, or let people invest in the casino again, potential investors will be more hesitant. This is only beneficial for them short term. Just not allowing people to increase their investment is the most reasonable option, as they would eventually achieve their goal of owning all the bankroll, but while letting investors stay if they want to (and they benefit from charging them a fee).
full member
Activity: 261
Merit: 100
Win 10,000$ Daily - click on sig
Terrible news. At least you could had allowed current investors to keep their investment. Eventually you would had achieved your goal of decreasing the investments from "outsiders" anyway, but this way you would at least let those that helped you grow stay with you, while still getting a fee from their investment profit. I'm very disappointed.

I think it's reasonable to be disappointed, but I also think it's reasonable for them to change terms or cancel investments (even if abruptly). A bankroll investment sort of has this nice liquidity aspect, where you can pull your funds at any time -- but i think it's fair that that cuts both ways. I'd obviously feel very different if the investment was some sort of tokens or stake of the actual business but you (or at least me) don't invest in a site because it'll be profitable in the future, but because it's currently worth the risk/reward.

When I ran my casino, I always just had a private bankroll as I had enough funds that I could do that, and I suspect as crowd funded casinos themselves make enough money "going private" is just a sort of natural end and a positive outcome (compared to something that keeps investors up at night: exit-scam risk).


I think the other natural end would be the casino keeps increasing the commissions to the point that it still makes sense for them to keep having a crowd funded bankroll (e.g. 75%+ commissions on profit). I've always wondered if that would be preferable? Or would just generate too much bad will

Regarding buying "shares" in the casino, that could be an interesting option but quite harder to structure, the current system is way simpler.

75% would surely make most investors withdraw, and those that wouldn't would be paying so much that it should be attractive enough for the casino to keep them. At least in that case investors would have the option to stay, instead of being thrown away like nothing after years of helping them.

I'm going to agree that the site should have some way to benefit long-term investors. Some have been here since the site launched and have only continued to build their stake (and show trust) in the site's various coins. It's sad to see this situation happen. I understand WHY it is happening, and from a business perspective it makes sense, but there should be some way to say "thanks" for everyone who helped make the site possible and successful in the first place.

@Ranlo Like Moneypot?
legendary
Activity: 1988
Merit: 1007
Terrible news. At least you could had allowed current investors to keep their investment. Eventually you would had achieved your goal of decreasing the investments from "outsiders" anyway, but this way you would at least let those that helped you grow stay with you, while still getting a fee from their investment profit. I'm very disappointed.

I think it's reasonable to be disappointed, but I also think it's reasonable for them to change terms or cancel investments (even if abruptly). A bankroll investment sort of has this nice liquidity aspect, where you can pull your funds at any time -- but i think it's fair that that cuts both ways. I'd obviously feel very different if the investment was some sort of tokens or stake of the actual business but you (or at least me) don't invest in a site because it'll be profitable in the future, but because it's currently worth the risk/reward.

When I ran my casino, I always just had a private bankroll as I had enough funds that I could do that, and I suspect as crowd funded casinos themselves make enough money "going private" is just a sort of natural end and a positive outcome (compared to something that keeps investors up at night: exit-scam risk).


I think the other natural end would be the casino keeps increasing the commissions to the point that it still makes sense for them to keep having a crowd funded bankroll (e.g. 75%+ commissions on profit). I've always wondered if that would be preferable? Or would just generate too much bad will

Regarding buying "shares" in the casino, that could be an interesting option but quite harder to structure, the current system is way simpler.

75% would surely make most investors withdraw, and those that wouldn't would be paying so much that it should be attractive enough for the casino to keep them. At least in that case investors would have the option to stay, instead of being thrown away like nothing after years of helping them.

I'm going to agree that the site should have some way to benefit long-term investors. Some have been here since the site launched and have only continued to build their stake (and show trust) in the site's various coins. It's sad to see this situation happen. I understand WHY it is happening, and from a business perspective it makes sense, but there should be some way to say "thanks" for everyone who helped make the site possible and successful in the first place.
legendary
Activity: 1199
Merit: 1047
Terrible news. At least you could had allowed current investors to keep their investment. Eventually you would had achieved your goal of decreasing the investments from "outsiders" anyway, but this way you would at least let those that helped you grow stay with you, while still getting a fee from their investment profit. I'm very disappointed.

I think it's reasonable to be disappointed, but I also think it's reasonable for them to change terms or cancel investments (even if abruptly). A bankroll investment sort of has this nice liquidity aspect, where you can pull your funds at any time -- but i think it's fair that that cuts both ways. I'd obviously feel very different if the investment was some sort of tokens or stake of the actual business but you (or at least me) don't invest in a site because it'll be profitable in the future, but because it's currently worth the risk/reward.

When I ran my casino, I always just had a private bankroll as I had enough funds that I could do that, and I suspect as crowd funded casinos themselves make enough money "going private" is just a sort of natural end and a positive outcome (compared to something that keeps investors up at night: exit-scam risk).


I think the other natural end would be the casino keeps increasing the commissions to the point that it still makes sense for them to keep having a crowd funded bankroll (e.g. 75%+ commissions on profit). I've always wondered if that would be preferable? Or would just generate too much bad will

Regarding buying "shares" in the casino, that could be an interesting option but quite harder to structure, the current system is way simpler.

75% would surely make most investors withdraw, and those that wouldn't would be paying so much that it should be attractive enough for the casino to keep them. At least in that case investors would have the option to stay, instead of being thrown away like nothing after years of helping them.
sr. member
Activity: 974
Merit: 264
Catch the winning spirit!
Bitcoin Lotto round #452 will close in approx 7 hours!

Current prizes:
1st place: 0.004320 BTC
2nd place: 0.000810 BTC
3rd place: 0.000270 BTC

Total tickets bought so far: 54
Price per ticket: 0.00010 BTC
Our lottery has no house edge; 100% of raised funds goes to winners.



We had 3 slot jackpot hits yesterday (21st), but still waiting for first hit with BTC this year. Jackpot pays out x1000, up to 5 BTC (max bet of 0.005 BTC).
legendary
Activity: 2198
Merit: 1014
Bitdice is scam scam scammmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Terrible news. At least you could had allowed current investors to keep their investment. Eventually you would had achieved your goal of decreasing the investments from "outsiders" anyway, but this way you would at least let those that helped you grow stay with you, while still getting a fee from their investment profit. I'm very disappointed.

I think it's reasonable to be disappointed, but I also think it's reasonable for them to change terms or cancel investments (even if abruptly). A bankroll investment sort of has this nice liquidity aspect, where you can pull your funds at any time -- but i think it's fair that that cuts both ways. I'd obviously feel very different if the investment was some sort of tokens or stake of the actual business but you (or at least me) don't invest in a site because it'll be profitable in the future, but because it's currently worth the risk/reward.

When I ran my casino, I always just had a private bankroll as I had enough funds that I could do that, and I suspect as crowd funded casinos themselves make enough money "going private" is just a sort of natural end and a positive outcome (compared to something that keeps investors up at night: exit-scam risk).


I think the other natural end would be the casino keeps increasing the commissions to the point that it still makes sense for them to keep having a crowd funded bankroll (e.g. 75%+ commissions on profit). I've always wondered if that would be preferable? Or would just generate too much bad will

It's better this way than to 'force' current and future investors to convert/invest into ICO in exchange for some sort of tokens and end up with way more than you initially invested.
BitDice is good example, they offered investors bonuses to buy tokens that will pay dividend and then become quiet and did almost nothing good for the site in past three years, you can find more information on what happened in linked thread.
newbie
Activity: 43
Merit: 0
Email [email protected] with your nickname.
No Thanks, I don't want to deal with your "Scam" casino. All the same, either ban or ... in anything. Yes, and perhaps you just write off my funds under the pretext of something from your rules.  I went to check how my account is doing on your site. And as it turned out, the account was blocked.
As I expected ...As I expected, "crooks" always do this when they cheat . Or write off or block the account or ..
legendary
Activity: 1463
Merit: 1886
Terrible news. At least you could had allowed current investors to keep their investment. Eventually you would had achieved your goal of decreasing the investments from "outsiders" anyway, but this way you would at least let those that helped you grow stay with you, while still getting a fee from their investment profit. I'm very disappointed.

I think it's reasonable to be disappointed, but I also think it's reasonable for them to change terms or cancel investments (even if abruptly). A bankroll investment sort of has this nice liquidity aspect, where you can pull your funds at any time -- but i think it's fair that that cuts both ways. I'd obviously feel very different if the investment was some sort of tokens or stake of the actual business but you (or at least me) don't invest in a site because it'll be profitable in the future, but because it's currently worth the risk/reward.

When I ran my casino, I always just had a private bankroll as I had enough funds that I could do that, and I suspect as crowd funded casinos themselves make enough money "going private" is just a sort of natural end and a positive outcome (compared to something that keeps investors up at night: exit-scam risk).


I think the other natural end would be the casino keeps increasing the commissions to the point that it still makes sense for them to keep having a crowd funded bankroll (e.g. 75%+ commissions on profit). I've always wondered if that would be preferable? Or would just generate too much bad will
legendary
Activity: 2030
Merit: 1189
Whoop whoop, looks like the high rollers are having a blast today;



At least one user is going with the old bet a lot, high win chance strategy to net some quick gains.
Pages:
Jump to: