Pages:
Author

Topic: Deleted (Read 1435 times)

member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 16, 2014, 02:13:16 PM
#29
4% profit today after a little amount of betting, since I'm the only one in the pool.
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 16, 2014, 10:01:30 AM
#28
either you don't understand what you're talking about, or you do, and you're a scammer. which one are you?
Finally somebody else who sees this for what it is. Thanks.
Really? If you have a dice bot and rather use that, go ahead. I'm not claiming to guarantee profits everyday. You might go a whole week without seeing profits. THAT'S WHY IT'S GAMBLING.

That being said, I'm funding the pool myself with 0.1 btc and will be updating everyday. :-)

So why should people invest with you instead of in the house? They're doing the exact same thing you are but with better odds.

Well, if you invest, your investment will be a tiny portion of the house's bankroll. Your investment is safer with the house, but you will also make much less.

If you want something 100% safe in the long run invest in the house. :-)
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 16, 2014, 09:58:59 AM
#27
either you don't understand what you're talking about, or you do, and you're a scammer. which one are you?
Finally somebody else who sees this for what it is. Thanks.
Really? If you have a dice bot and rather use that, go ahead. I'm not claiming to guarantee profits everyday. You might go a whole week without seeing profits. THAT'S WHY IT'S GAMBLING.

That being said, I'm funding the pool myself with 0.1 btc and will be updating everyday. :-)

So why should people invest with you instead of in the house? They're doing the exact same thing you are but with better odds.
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 16, 2014, 09:49:33 AM
#26
either you don't understand what you're talking about, or you do, and you're a scammer. which one are you?
Finally somebody else who sees this for what it is. Thanks.
Really? If you have a dice bot and rather use that, go ahead. I'm not claiming to guarantee profits everyday. You might go a whole week without seeing profits. THAT'S WHY IT'S GAMBLING.

That being said, I'm funding the pool myself with 0.1 btc and will be updating everyday. :-)
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 16, 2014, 09:22:00 AM
#25
either you don't understand what you're talking about, or you do, and you're a scammer. which one are you?

Finally somebody else who sees this for what it is. Thanks.
b!z
legendary
Activity: 1582
Merit: 1010
April 16, 2014, 09:02:20 AM
#24
either you don't understand what you're talking about, or you do, and you're a scammer. which one are you?
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 05:53:13 PM
#23
Ok, you clearly can't be convinced, so let me ask you a very simple question.

If it's possible to make money from playing dice, why doesn't everybody do it?
I know what you are trying to say. Gamblers are gamblers, but it is a ONE percent house edge. There a reason the house limits the amount they will risk per bet. They aren't trying to get a small return and be at peace. They are betting half their BR per bet etc...
Whales and fish feeds the house and the disciplined :-)

No actually, the disciplined lose money just like everybody else. I'll leave you this http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/

Roulette has 5x the house edge.

Also, to everyone else... If you think a bot is better, use a bot. If you think there's no way to profit, don't play. It is as simple as that.

But it still has a house edge. That you can't, and won't beat.
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 05:42:29 PM
#22
Quote
I think the smart thing to do is always get a new account also, dont use the same account, less risk as well, right?
Risk of what? Changing accounts will not make much difference. The number of bets in the account is also taken into account when creating the hash for the rolls, but it doesn't matter.  It's easier to change client seeds.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
April 15, 2014, 05:26:50 PM
#21
Your post contradicts itself. You admit that the house always wins in the long run, yet you think your daily returns will average out to a positive return at the end of the week? If you want investors you'll need to better explain how you think you can beat the house, in either the short or long term, and what you plan to do if you lose the money.

Thank you for your feedback. I have updated the thread with a bit more information :-)

We basically are not going to try to beat the house the odds. The house will win 1% more bets than us in the long run no matter what. To put it in very simple terms, the goal is to keep the bets insignificantly low for most of the losses and higher for most of wins possible.

If losses reach 10% for the day, everything will be stopped no matter what and the will be updated.
There also will be a max profit cap of 50% to keep things safe. After reaching 50% profit all betting will stop for the day and thread will be updated.

No more than 0.25% of bankroll will EVER be wagered. That means we would be able to lose 40 FULL bets IN A ROW before the 10% loss threshold is reached and betting is stopped.

The chances for 40 losses in a row at 49.5% is ridiculously low. Personally have wagered 20 million bets and simulated 50 million bets and the most losses in a row even at 40% was 23.
This is just an example of the discipline. I HAVE NO PLANS IN WAGERING FULL BETS RECKLESSLY.



I think the smart thing to do is always get a new account also, dont use the same account, less risk as well, right?
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 04:39:46 PM
#20
Ok, you clearly can't be convinced, so let me ask you a very simple question.

If it's possible to make money from playing dice, why doesn't everybody do it?
I know what you are trying to say. Gamblers are gamblers, but it is a ONE percent house edge. There a reason the house limits the amount they will risk per bet. They aren't trying to get a small return and be at peace. They are betting half their BR per bet etc...
Whales and fish feeds the house and the disciplined :-)

No actually, the disciplined lose money just like everybody else. I'll leave you this http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/

Roulette has 5x the house edge.

Also, to everyone else... If you think a bot is better, use a bot. If you think there's no way to profit, don't play. It is as simple as that.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 04:36:24 PM
#19
Ok, you clearly can't be convinced, so let me ask you a very simple question.

If it's possible to make money from playing dice, why doesn't everybody do it?
I know what you are trying to say. Gamblers are gamblers, but it is a ONE percent house edge. There a reason the house limits the amount they will risk per bet. They aren't trying to get a small return and be at peace. They are betting half their BR per bet etc...
Whales and fish feeds the house and the disciplined :-)

No actually, the disciplined lose money just like everybody else. I'll leave you this http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/betting-systems/
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 04:34:20 PM
#18
Ok, you clearly can't be convinced, so let me ask you a very simple question.

If it's possible to make money from playing dice, why doesn't everybody do it?
I know what you are trying to say. Gamblers are gamblers, but it is a ONE percent house edge. There a reason the house limits the amount they will risk per bet. They aren't trying to get a small return and be at peace. They are betting half their BR per bet etc...



member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 04:21:02 PM
#17
Ok, you clearly can't be convinced, so let me ask you a very simple question.

If it's possible to make money from playing dice, why doesn't everybody do it?
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 04:17:23 PM
#16

Quote


This is how it really works. Except instead of winning 1000 out of 2000, you're only going to win 990 out of 2000, because the house always has an edge.
Wrong. If you are betting at 50% you are expected to win 50% of the rolls. What are you talking about?

Quote


I don't think you understand the concept of an algorithm. An algorithm follows the rules that I give it up front. It can change bets, style, and frequency in an optimal way, not one that relies on "whatever thought appropriate". It can stop betting if it hits too long of a losing streak. It wastes just as much of my time as you do. There is no element of betting that you do better than an algorithm.
Okay, go use your amazing bot then, why are you here? :-)

Quote
The gambler's fallacy, also known as the Monte Carlo fallacy or the fallacy of the maturity of chances, is the mistaken belief that if something happens more frequently than normal during some period, then it will happen less frequently in the future


Statistically speaking you will not win more roles, if you have lost more than expected in the past. The numbers will not regress to the average. Even if you lose 1,000,000 roles in a row, out of the next 1,000,000 you will win about 500,000.

I just said that is NOT always the case. That is incredibly rare to happen and the rolls are always where they should be after 2k rolls or ~1% away from where they should be and it does fluctuate. There is no gamblers fallacy here. There is a 100% random factor. No interference whatsoever.
I have tested millions and millions of bets and the result is the same. The number of won to lost bets is exactly what you would expect from a 1% house edge. Numbers cannot be changed. The only thing that can be change is the wagered amount.

The same way you can lose a lot more, you can win a lot more. The number always averages out. You have to be incredibly unlucky(or betting like an idiot, like most people do) for the numbers to not be close to where they should be after thousands of bets.
Use any bot, or any seed checker and simulate your rolls. The numbers do not change :-)
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 04:02:11 PM
#15
An example, we are betting at 50%. We are wagering 0.0001% of the BR each roll, we have lost 200 and won 100. That's roughly 33% wins for us. The numbers will eventually correct to almost exactly 50% if the rolls are truly random. That does NOT mean the next roll is gonna be a win, but statistically speaking we will win more rolls.

This is the gambler's fallacy; you are 100% wrong. I quote, straight from wikipedia:

But of course, again the rolls are random, that's why in the case we get screwed and get the worst luck in the universe and, after 2000 rolls, we only won 1000 at 50% win chance, we have our 10% loss cap for the day.

This is how it really works. Except instead of winning 1000 out of 2000, you're only going to win 990 out of 2000, because the house always has an edge.

3. False. Here's why... This will be work, it won't be treated as gambling to me. My incentive to earn is to make the most educated decisions each bet. I, a human, have many many more features, as I can, and will change bets, style, and frequency whenever thought appropriate.
A bot betting thousands of times endlessly will eventually run into the nasty lose streak while using martingale, which is where every bot busts.
[...]
Of course you can use a bot. Or you can transfer all that responsibility and sit back and relax, not worry about wasting time or tilting :-)

I don't think you understand the concept of an algorithm. An algorithm follows the rules that I give it up front. It can change bets, style, and frequency in an optimal way, not one that relies on "whatever thought appropriate". It can stop betting if it hits too long of a losing streak. It wastes just as much of my time as you do. There is no element of betting that you do better than an algorithm.
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 03:48:39 PM
#14

I'm starting to think you don't understand basic math. How are you going to use statistics to your advantage, when the house already has an edge? Statistics says that with a 1% edge, the house will win 50.5% of the time, and you will win 49.5% of the time. You will eventually lose, it's that simple. If you can prove me wrong, you'll be the most popular man in Las Vegas.

Reading comprehension? I never said there's a way to beat the house edge. If you roll 1000 times you are expected to win ~490. How much you wager and when is what determine if you lose or not. And you realize the house edge in casinos is a shit ton more than 1%?


And to the guy above, martingale is not a good strategy. It might be good in the very short run, but it is not a good strategy. You can incorporate aspects of it in other strategy, but martingale itself is not good at all. I don't need opinions on martingale as I already said what mine is.

So you're going to magically (since you haven't bothered to explain how) wager high when you're going to win, and wager low when you're going to lose?

Have you heard of the gambler's fallacy?

Wow, haha. I hate people who don't read the main post and keeps speculating. I said the goal is to TRY.  It's a grinding process. Also, the 49.5 was used as an example.
I do not know what you don't get about the first sentence of the thread.

Yes, I have. That's exactly why I said pure martingale is not a good strategy.


Clearly I still don't understand, so I'd appreciate it if you could help me. Let me throw some statements out, and you tell me which ones are wrong, and why:

1. You cannot beat a house edge in the long term.
2. You have no way to know whether you will win or lose a roll.
3. You are far less disciplined than any non-random algorithm.
1. True. The goal is not to beat the house edge.
2. True. We can, however, know that we will lose roughly 50.5% of the rolls.
3. False. Here's why... This will be work, it won't be treated as gambling to me. My incentive to earn is to make the most educated decisions each bet. I, a human, have many many more features, as I can, and will change bets, style, and frequency whenever thought appropriate.
A bot betting thousands of times endlessly will eventually run into the nasty lose streak while using martingale, which is where every bot busts.

An example, we are betting at 50%. We are wagering 0.0001% of the BR each roll, we have lost 200 and won 100. That's roughly 33% wins for us. The numbers will eventually correct to almost exactly 50% if the rolls are truly random. That does NOT mean the next roll is gonna be a win, but statistically speaking we will win more rolls.

But of course, again the rolls are random, that's why in the case we get screwed and get the worst luck in the universe and, after 2000 rolls, we only won 1000 at 50% win chance, we have our 10% loss cap for the day.

Basically you have a human processor motivated by discipline as his bread and butter :-)

Of course you can use a bot. Or you can transfer all that responsibility and sit back and relax, not worry about wasting time or tilting :-)
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 03:22:09 PM
#13

I'm starting to think you don't understand basic math. How are you going to use statistics to your advantage, when the house already has an edge? Statistics says that with a 1% edge, the house will win 50.5% of the time, and you will win 49.5% of the time. You will eventually lose, it's that simple. If you can prove me wrong, you'll be the most popular man in Las Vegas.

Reading comprehension? I never said there's a way to beat the house edge. If you roll 1000 times you are expected to win ~490. How much you wager and when is what determine if you lose or not. And you realize the house edge in casinos is a shit ton more than 1%?


And to the guy above, martingale is not a good strategy. It might be good in the very short run, but it is not a good strategy. You can incorporate aspects of it in other strategy, but martingale itself is not good at all. I don't need opinions on martingale as I already said what mine is.

So you're going to magically (since you haven't bothered to explain how) wager high when you're going to win, and wager low when you're going to lose?

Have you heard of the gambler's fallacy?

Wow, haha. I hate people who don't read the main post and keeps speculating. I said the goal is to TRY.  It's a grinding process. Also, the 49.5 was used as an example.
I do not know what you don't get about the first sentence of the thread.

Yes, I have. That's exactly why I said pure martingale is not a good strategy.


Clearly I still don't understand, so I'd appreciate it if you could help me. Let me throw some statements out, and you tell me which ones are wrong, and why:

1. You cannot beat a house edge in the long term.
2. You have no way to know whether you will win or lose a roll.
3. You are far less disciplined than any non-random algorithm.
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 02:48:32 PM
#12

I'm starting to think you don't understand basic math. How are you going to use statistics to your advantage, when the house already has an edge? Statistics says that with a 1% edge, the house will win 50.5% of the time, and you will win 49.5% of the time. You will eventually lose, it's that simple. If you can prove me wrong, you'll be the most popular man in Las Vegas.

Reading comprehension? I never said there's a way to beat the house edge. If you roll 1000 times you are expected to win ~490. How much you wager and when is what determine if you lose or not. And you realize the house edge in casinos is a shit ton more than 1%?


And to the guy above, martingale is not a good strategy. It might be good in the very short run, but it is not a good strategy. You can incorporate aspects of it in other strategy, but martingale itself is not good at all. I don't need opinions on martingale as I already said what mine is.

So you're going to magically (since you haven't bothered to explain how) wager high when you're going to win, and wager low when you're going to lose?

Have you heard of the gambler's fallacy?

Wow, haha. I hate people who don't read the main post and keeps speculating. I said the goal is to TRY.  It's a grinding process. Also, the 49.5 was used as an example.
I do not know what you don't get about the first sentence of the thread.

Yes, I have. That's exactly why I said pure martingale is not a good strategy.
member
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 02:39:28 PM
#11

I'm starting to think you don't understand basic math. How are you going to use statistics to your advantage, when the house already has an edge? Statistics says that with a 1% edge, the house will win 50.5% of the time, and you will win 49.5% of the time. You will eventually lose, it's that simple. If you can prove me wrong, you'll be the most popular man in Las Vegas.

Reading comprehension? I never said there's a way to beat the house edge. If you roll 1000 times you are expected to win ~490. How much you wager and when is what determine if you lose or not. And you realize the house edge in casinos is a shit ton more than 1%?


And to the guy above, martingale is not a good strategy. It might be good in the very short run, but it is not a good strategy. You can incorporate aspects of it in other strategy, but martingale itself is not good at all. I don't need opinions on martingale as I already said what mine is.

So you're going to magically (since you haven't bothered to explain how) wager high when you're going to win, and wager low when you're going to lose?

Have you heard of the gambler's fallacy?
member
Activity: 104
Merit: 10
April 15, 2014, 02:32:25 PM
#10
His strategy might work in the long term or not. It's gambling! Who wants to let this guy gamble for them? I'm intrigued to find out! I will go in if someone else will as well.

Exactly! It's completely free until the 21st and I lowered the fee to 5% of profits. Again, No losses beyond 10% guaranteed. So you have time to withdraw whenever you want without worrying about going bust.
Pages:
Jump to: