Topic: Deleted (Read 1423 times)

4% profit today after a little amount of betting, since I'm the only one in the pool.

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. :-)

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.

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. :-)

Finally somebody else who sees this for what it is. Thanks.

either you don't understand what you're talking about, or you do, and you're a scammer. which one are you?

But it still has a house edge. That you can't, and won't beat.

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.

I think the smart thing to do is always get a new account also, dont use the same account, less risk as well, right?

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.

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

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...

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?

Wrong. If you are betting at 50% you are expected to win 50% of the rolls. What are you talking about?

Okay, go use your amazing bot then, why are you here? :-)


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 :-)

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


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.


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.

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 :-)

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

I strongly disagree martingale is a bad strategy, there is a reason professional gamblers use it. Every strategy is going to fail in the long run, that is why Casinos exist.

From what I gather you are essentially trying to count cards that you cannot see-Which is impossible

You are also banking that a group of rolls are going to be dependent on each other-Which they aren't

Like I said I wish you the best of luck, but when it comes down to it you are essentially asking people to pay you so you can gamble for them when they have just as good as shot as you.

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.

Hmm is this another Primedice addict? 

Actually Martingale is one of the best strategies there is, if not the best. 

If you have 10 BTC and bet .001 you can lose 14 times in a row which roughly happens once every 14,252 rolls, say it does happen on the 14,252 roll, you will have gained 14,251*.001 = 14.251BTC, which isn't too bad at all.  In which case say you do lose the next roll, you will still have a profit of 4.251 BTC which still isn't that bad...

If you were smart you would play Martingale, that is by far the best method with a larger bankroll.

Anyway I guess I wish you luck, if you aren't playing the best strategy unfortunately you will probably fail and lose everyone their money:( 

Good luck!

So you are saying your strategy is to lose when you bet small and win when you bet big?

Do you have some sort of plan on accomplishing this?  I think that is what every gambler since the dawn of time has tried to do.

It is the reason martingale was invented....

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.

Looks interesting. I will give it a shot after a few people report their successes or failures. Pools have a somewhat successful run here.

Deleted