Topic: FISHBITFISH.COM - page 9. (Read 27452 times)

Red Fish is win on round 558 and win 0.00264367 BTC  but any coin resent to my coin-swap wallet
my coin-swap wallet address is 1L6A9C6HGFESouJpb9JLVNwL8YdUj5gNws but show in game my address 1PL3EahprfZowxp8xvPNiDgUKF7Y4GFi1b
why? I haven't more bit coins please help me   

Yes, there is no official definition for the term "provably fair", therefore this discussion has little sense. I simply work with the real meaning of these two english words...

Is it provably fair or just fair?
Can you give me link to somewhere where is definition for provably fair?
I haven't heard it to be used anywhere else than with cases with hashesh.

If I bet in real life on you flipping a coin head or tail (and I'm next to you) then this is provably fair!
without any hashes 

"Hash of what??"
Exactly, of nothing, that is why this can't be provably fair.
Now this game is "Public Fair" because there is no hashes of the result before the end.
I mean this is fair, but not provably fair.
I can't find exact definition for provably fair but as I have understood there is always hashes required for provably fair.

1) Not true that richest player always wins. Just try it. The game a lot about luck - whether your transaction will be confirmed in time, or not.

2) "Provably fair" means that there is a public proof available that the game is fair. In our case it is the blockchain itself. Do you mean that our game is unfair? Or that there is no proof that it is fair?

You just added a random factor to the game. Why not, but don't call this feature "provably fair".

What do you mean?
Do you think the game in which the richest player always wins is provably fair ?!
If you do, please explain it to us how is that possible?


No, I think it's an efficient way of telling people that this game has a huge downsides, and that
there is an alternative which fights against all of them.
...

Hash of what??

"Provably fair" in case of fishbitfish.com means that the blockchain itself is sufficient as a proof that the game is fair.

Coinmagnets, unlike fishbitfish, works with some random factor, therefore they have to publish hashes to be provably fair.

We have no problem with coinmagnets, I wish good luck to them, I just wondered why they used "provably fair" statement as an advantage over fishbitfish.

 

suck game... big fee

It's just sad way of promoting your page

How could it be since it is luck based?
If you check their site you can find hash from there.
No hashes in your game.
But how it would even be possible since it is luck based?
Or at least I can't figure out how it even could be provably fair.

You mean that fishbitfish.com is not provably fair?!

But posting on your competitor thread is not ethical.

Nice!! I would like to try it soon 

We have made a game similar to this one but with a big difference!
Our game is Provably Fair, and everything happens in real time
Transactions appear on the website as soon as you send them.

http://coinmagnets.com/css/logo2.png
                coinmagnets.com

Official thread https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/coinmagnetscom-new-provably-fair-bitcoin-game-722841

Only part i don't like about this game is the fact that you can put in money, and even if you win you still lose.

That part should be fixed...shouldn't be any other way around it

There is always possibility to lose.
Once I lost because other side got confirmation 6 seconds before game ended...
So there is not strategy to 'always beat them all'.

I appreciate this game (I just won the round #424) though it makes no sens to play it
It makes no sense because no matter what you (as a player) do, you can always be beaten with 100% probability. Actually adding jackpot and incrementing the fee with time just obfuscates the picture.

The best strategy to win is to wait for others to bet and beat them just before it makes any point to bet again (that's what I did). However there is very little point to bet at the very begin as there is almost nothing to win from that (the jackpot) and the probability to be beaten is huge (as opposed to bet at the end).
In classic casino games the solution to that would be to limit the single bet. That's how we have a 1$, 10$, 100$ and high stakes tables in most casinos over the world. Unfortunately it's not possible with the way this game is implemented (I can use any address to send BTC to bypass that limitation).

Another problem was already mentioned: the game can be screwed in the way that winning the bet makes you loose the money. It's hard to consider that as fair. It was mentioned that it makes no sense for player to play in such way though it make a lot of sense to make such bet as a house. The house is not prohibited to participate in the game in any way. I'm not indicating that house is cheating on purpose but the sole possibility to do so make such game unfair.

The house is making enough profit of every game so it should pay a jackpot that is proportional to the income from the game and remove the skewed scenario.
Another improvement could be extra jackpot that is paid to the very first bidder, which would attract the early bidder as she'd have a 50/50 chance to retain that.
Still all of that would just make the game more complicated while not removing the strategy to 'always beat them all' as the game is not based on any luck.

True, it is an onchain game, like luckyb.it, no deposit or something else.
And i remember in the early rounds, site owner is adding the prize pool from his own pocket to attract players, so i assume that's how he give free bitcoins

There is no registering so how would you know who is new?
It is very easy to change address for every time.