I(binbs in the JD chat) personally was vouching for a 0.25% max profit earlier today.
Nakowa could easily crush the site for another 3-6k and then what would happen? Im sure 80% of investors would take their money out.
Therefore I think its in the best interest of the investors to lower the max profit now and while it will take longer to get back to even and start to profit, the distance between the biggest bets and the median bet will be lower and therefore variance will be reduced and the site will have an easier time hiting its target of 1% edge.
Trust me, this move is best for all the investors. Just requires us to be more patient thats all. Investments are a longterm thing anyways. Just chill.
Topic: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game - page 142. (Read 435358 times)
I am just staying invested throughout this whole 'saga'. I dont believe its necessary to lower the max bet to 0.25% of bankroll though - I personally want him to bet big.
On another note, to prevent this from happening to unsuspecting investors in the future (though all should have known this could have happened) could it not be a possibility to offer two investment 'tiers' like this:
Tier 1: Investment covers the bank roll for bets up to 0.25% of bankroll, but will not be used to pay out bets over 0.25% of bankroll. This would offer a higher security and steady rate of growth for investors.
Tier 2: Investment covers bets up to 1% of the sites bankroll (still including smaller bets), obviously it would be 1% of whatever is invested in tier 2. This offers lower security - but higher chance of a quick upswing.
Maybe this is too complex though. Either way - I would bring 1% back.
On another note, to prevent this from happening to unsuspecting investors in the future (though all should have known this could have happened) could it not be a possibility to offer two investment 'tiers' like this:
Tier 1: Investment covers the bank roll for bets up to 0.25% of bankroll, but will not be used to pay out bets over 0.25% of bankroll. This would offer a higher security and steady rate of growth for investors.
Tier 2: Investment covers bets up to 1% of the sites bankroll (still including smaller bets), obviously it would be 1% of whatever is invested in tier 2. This offers lower security - but higher chance of a quick upswing.
Maybe this is too complex though. Either way - I would bring 1% back.
Maybe this could help:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-value#Coin_flipping
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution#Example
I'm taking math course right now but I don't feel confident to do the calculation myself.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P-value#Coin_flipping
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_distribution#Example
I'm taking math course right now but I don't feel confident to do the calculation myself.
I have reduced the max profit to 0.25% of bankroll for now, to prevent, or at least slow, the ongoing bleeding of funds.
When I've found the best way of implementing higher house edge for higher risk bets I'll put it back to 1%.
This shouldn't affect nakowa's play, since he's playing within his self-imposed 50 BTC limit today anyway.
When I've found the best way of implementing higher house edge for higher risk bets I'll put it back to 1%.
This shouldn't affect nakowa's play, since he's playing within his self-imposed 50 BTC limit today anyway.
Hmm, going crazy here:
In[1285]:=
profits =
Table[betAmount[[j]]* RotateRight[winOrLose, 0][[j]], {j, 1,
Length[betAmount]}];
Select[profits, (# >= 5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# <= -5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# < 5 10^8 && # > 0) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# >= -5 10^8 && # <= 0) &] // Length
Out[1286]= 7185
Out[1287]= 7209
Out[1288]= 13893
Out[1289]= 14688
So, he won 7185 and lost 7209 of his 5 BTC and greater bets.
In[1290]:=
profits =
Table[betAmount[[j]]* RotateRight[winOrLose, 2][[j]], {j, 1,
Length[betAmount]}];
Select[profits, (# >= 5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# <= -5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# < 5 10^8 && # > 0) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# >= -5 10^8 && # <= 0) &] // Length
Out[1291]= 10347
Out[1292]= 4047
Out[1293]= 10731
Out[1294]= 17653
Now, after shifting by 2, it says he would have won 10347 and only lost 4047 of his 5 BTC and greater bets.
What am I missing? Excel is telling me the same thing. Maybe there is a problem with the file...
Cheers,
Peter
In[1285]:=
profits =
Table[betAmount[[j]]* RotateRight[winOrLose, 0][[j]], {j, 1,
Length[betAmount]}];
Select[profits, (# >= 5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# <= -5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# < 5 10^8 && # > 0) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# >= -5 10^8 && # <= 0) &] // Length
Out[1286]= 7185
Out[1287]= 7209
Out[1288]= 13893
Out[1289]= 14688
So, he won 7185 and lost 7209 of his 5 BTC and greater bets.
In[1290]:=
profits =
Table[betAmount[[j]]* RotateRight[winOrLose, 2][[j]], {j, 1,
Length[betAmount]}];
Select[profits, (# >= 5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# <= -5 10^8) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# < 5 10^8 && # > 0) &] // Length
Select[profits, (# >= -5 10^8 && # <= 0) &] // Length
Out[1291]= 10347
Out[1292]= 4047
Out[1293]= 10731
Out[1294]= 17653
Now, after shifting by 2, it says he would have won 10347 and only lost 4047 of his 5 BTC and greater bets.
What am I missing? Excel is telling me the same thing. Maybe there is a problem with the file...
Cheers,
Peter
I don't know the probability of this happening but I know that your sample size is ridiculously small. You really only have 14354 bets? You can't conclude anything worthwhile from such a small sample.
I had been talking in the chat about increasing the house edge for bets with profit over 50 BTC (since none of the competition with a 1% edge allows bets that big anyway). This was obviously his way of 'showing me' that it won't help...
If he isn't cheating, it makes sense to increase the edge for big bets.If he is cheating, it still makes sense to do it, since other people might be playing here too.
I.e. regardless of nakowa, you should do it anyway.
It won't solve nakowa's problem, but it will be good for the site despite of him.
Dooglus, choose either 1% max profit or 0.5% max profit and let the math work. He will not stop playing so that means he will eventually lose everything.
Max profit at 75 btc is far too low in my opinion. The investors can divest if they want. No need to protect us, we know what we are getting ourselves into.
Max profit at 75 btc is far too low in my opinion. The investors can divest if they want. No need to protect us, we know what we are getting ourselves into.
I agree 100%
Just let math do its thing, nakowa won't stop.
dooglus is right, nakowa himself said he wants to play with low bets in order to show that it is not necessary to bet high to win. So even though it is a bit an "ad-hoc" move, it is agreed with the player.
Dooglus, choose either 1% max profit or 0.5% max profit and let the math work. He will not stop playing so that means he will eventually lose everything.
Max profit at 75 btc is far too low in my opinion. The investors can divest if they want. No need to protect us, we know what we are getting ourselves into.
Max profit at 75 btc is far too low in my opinion. The investors can divest if they want. No need to protect us, we know what we are getting ourselves into.
I have reduced the max profit to 0.25% of bankroll for now, to prevent, or at least slow, the ongoing bleeding of funds.
When I've found the best way of implementing higher house edge for higher risk bets I'll put it back to 1%.
This shouldn't affect nakowa's play, since he's playing within his self-imposed 50 BTC limit today anyway.
When I've found the best way of implementing higher house edge for higher risk bets I'll put it back to 1%.
This shouldn't affect nakowa's play, since he's playing within his self-imposed 50 BTC limit today anyway.
He did a few 80BTC bets just a few minutes ago...
20:29:20 (153338) -976. OK I surrender.
One minute later there's a pending deposit of 1000 BTC to the account.
He never surrenders.
Quote from: nakowa
I'm not a gambler as you might think
LOL
20:29:20 (153338) -976. OK I surrender.
One minute later there's a pending deposit of 1000 BTC to the account.
He never surrenders.
I have reduced the max profit to 0.25% of bankroll for now, to prevent, or at least slow, the ongoing bleeding of funds.
When I've found the best way of implementing higher house edge for higher risk bets I'll put it back to 1%.
This shouldn't affect nakowa's play, since he's playing within his self-imposed 50 BTC limit today anyway.
When I've found the best way of implementing higher house edge for higher risk bets I'll put it back to 1%.
This shouldn't affect nakowa's play, since he's playing within his self-imposed 50 BTC limit today anyway.
Dooglus, the last time he played big he was down 4000 then made it back and then some. So that means he goes down a lot. Eventually he will go down so far he will have no coins left.
How about just leaving everything as it is.
See what happens.
How about just leaving everything as it is.
See what happens.
Max profit is to low now!!!! Cant turn max profit down while profit is negativ!
That last line "donate for luck" is increasingly common. People selling 'karma' or just asking for 'rain'.
I've tried to allow everything in the chat except for blatant spamming or advertising of competitors.
Should I be stricter and disallow begging for donations? Racism? Drug talk? Where do you draw the line? I don't know!
I personally think that begging in the form of (rain/karma/donation/budda/african children/...) should be banned after one warning. Between the nakowa 300 spam bets and incessant begging, it's increasingly harder to follow the intricacies of nuanced, rational discourse, investor moaning, and the merits of sparklecoin.
20:29:20 (153338)
He just sent 1,000 BTC more to JD. This is goint to be interesting.
Shall we create a "NAKOWA degenerate gambling observer thread"?
Anyhow, this doesn't look like cheating at all to me.
EDIT: wow, max-bet dramatically lowered after nakowa lost 1,000BTC and sent another 1,000BTC to the site. That's going to piss him off for sure, and I personally do not believe its a wise decision. Just give him the chance to do its thing doog...
The begging in the chat is really rampant at times. It also doesn't help that people create new accounts with the same name as the most recent name Nakowa picked and offer free BTC, which prompts a ton of people to spam their BTC address.
Blocking messages that contain a BTC address would be effective, but there are also legit discussions that contain BTC addresses, so that might be a bit too extreme.
Blocking messages that contain a BTC address would be effective, but there are also legit discussions that contain BTC addresses, so that might be a bit too extreme.
One question: you have done thorough analysis of dice sites like SatoshiDice, you know math, does this looks like cheating to you? I didn't do such a thorough analysis, but what Nakowa is doing doesn't look like cheating to me, just variance.
At times I was sure SatoshiDice was being cheated. It turns out I just don't know how to tell. I've accused nakowa of cheating before and offended him by doing so. Not directly, but something along the lines of "The strategies you've outlined to me don't work, yet you continue to win every day. You must be cheating, right?"
I currently believe his success is the result of having a big enough bankroll to be able to keep playing until his random walk gets him where he wants to be, coupled with quite unusual luck.
As an aside, what do we think about chat censorship? In particular the incessant begging:
Quote
03:21:38 *** percent (153338) [#138925114] bet 10 BTC at 49.5% and won 10 BTC ***
03:21:50 *** percent (153338) [#138925167] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:21:51 *** percent (153338) [#138925182] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and won 40 BTC ***
03:22:02 *** percent (153338) [#138925296] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:03 *** percent (153338) [#138925319] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:11 (90159) NAKOWA DON'T BE A PUSSY: GO BIG!!!
03:22:11 (149943) percent stopp
03:22:19 *** percent (153338) [#138925412] bet 30 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:19 (124162) shit have to leave, l love his show!
03:22:21 *** percent (153338) [#138925431] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:22 *** percent (153338) [#138925451] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:30 (146888) A little donate will bring you luck trust me ! [1Bb9Lx6j]
03:21:50 *** percent (153338) [#138925167] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:21:51 *** percent (153338) [#138925182] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and won 40 BTC ***
03:22:02 *** percent (153338) [#138925296] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:03 *** percent (153338) [#138925319] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:11 (90159)
03:22:11 (149943)
03:22:19 *** percent (153338) [#138925412] bet 30 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:19 (124162)
03:22:21 *** percent (153338) [#138925431] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:22 *** percent (153338) [#138925451] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:30 (146888)
That last line "donate for luck" is increasingly common. People selling 'karma' or just asking for 'rain'.
I've tried to allow everything in the chat except for blatant spamming or advertising of competitors.
Should I be stricter and disallow begging for donations? Racism? Drug talk? Where do you draw the line? I don't know!
I'd just ban those spamming.
And BTW, it seems that Nakowa is down 900BTC today, by betting "small" for his standards. It was an interesting show.
20:29:20 (153338)
One question: you have done thorough analysis of dice sites like SatoshiDice, you know math, does this looks like cheating to you? I didn't do such a thorough analysis, but what Nakowa is doing doesn't look like cheating to me, just variance.
At times I was sure SatoshiDice was being cheated. It turns out I just don't know how to tell. I've accused nakowa of cheating before and offended him by doing so. Not directly, but something along the lines of "The strategies you've outlined to me don't work, yet you continue to win every day. You must be cheating, right?"
I currently believe his success is the result of having a big enough bankroll to be able to keep playing until his random walk gets him where he wants to be, coupled with quite unusual luck.
As an aside, what do we think about chat censorship? In particular the incessant begging:
Quote
03:21:38 *** percent (153338) [#138925114] bet 10 BTC at 49.5% and won 10 BTC ***
03:21:50 *** percent (153338) [#138925167] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:21:51 *** percent (153338) [#138925182] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and won 40 BTC ***
03:22:02 *** percent (153338) [#138925296] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:03 *** percent (153338) [#138925319] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:11 (90159) NAKOWA DON'T BE A PUSSY: GO BIG!!!
03:22:11 (149943) percent stopp
03:22:19 *** percent (153338) [#138925412] bet 30 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:19 (124162) shit have to leave, l love his show!
03:22:21 *** percent (153338) [#138925431] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:22 *** percent (153338) [#138925451] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:30 (146888) A little donate will bring you luck trust me ! [1Bb9Lx6j]
03:21:50 *** percent (153338) [#138925167] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:21:51 *** percent (153338) [#138925182] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and won 40 BTC ***
03:22:02 *** percent (153338) [#138925296] bet 20 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:03 *** percent (153338) [#138925319] bet 40 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:11 (90159)
03:22:11 (149943)
03:22:19 *** percent (153338) [#138925412] bet 30 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:19 (124162)
03:22:21 *** percent (153338) [#138925431] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:22 *** percent (153338) [#138925451] bet 60 BTC at 49.5% and lost ***
03:22:30 (146888)
That last line "donate for luck" is increasingly common. People selling 'karma' or just asking for 'rain'.
I've tried to allow everything in the chat except for blatant spamming or advertising of competitors.
Should I be stricter and disallow begging for donations? Racism? Drug talk? Where do you draw the line? I don't know!
Jump to: