Topic: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game - page 144. (Read 435358 times)

Yes, but if he bets lower amounts, like 20B, and he consistently wins in an unlikely fashion (for example he wagers 20000 and wins other 20000), then we could really think he compromised the server.

I think that'd be a good start, considering that this huge hit is caused by a combination of:

a) one single player gambling with a bankroll orders of magnitude bigger than the average player's
b) a high max bet
c) a low house edge

I'm quite sure you've analyzed this thoroughly and I 100% trust you, and my own analysis tells me this doesn't looks like cheating, its just a big but perfectly possible variance caused by the circumstances stated above.

I've lost 25% of my investment so far but I don't care, I'm stating the obvious here but all the investments come with a risk. You created an excellent and innovative product and you are doing an excellent job, full support from my side, I'm with you and JD for the long run. Math is on our side

This is really interesting to follow, but I don't feel bad for the people who invested. I mean, you know that his could happen. You know that a whale could eat up all the profit in no time.

Dooglus, I admire how you react on the situation. You payout every time and I think that is worth a compliment. I know for sure that many other sites would just shutdown / block people like him to prevent those huge losses.

It changes completely all the time.  I expect it's a Tor IP or some proxy or other and useless for identifying him.

Yeah - very good point.  If he's betting based on certain past actions then shifting WOULD give ridiculous looking results.  And that would in no way be evidence of chearing - in fact the opposite if anything.

If you can break down his behaviour into rules then in theory at least you could check to see whether it was just luck or he'd somehow spotted a real pattern (meaning the seeding system is broken).  That would mean running loads of tests where you ran the betting rules against a long series of bets from multiple sets of seeds.

Following on from my last post.  If he waits for 2 small bets where the first wins and the 2nd loses, then bets big, then shifting by 1 will result in the big bet losing, while shifting by 2 will result in it winning.

This would give exactly the results Peter is seeing.

I wouldn't post a customer's IP.

Or even better, the house edge could move based not on 50 btc and up, but rather as a function of % of invested.

So:
1% house edge max bet up to 0.1% bankroll
1.5% house edge max bet up to 0.3% bankroll
1.8% house edge max bet up to 0.5% bankroll
2% house edge max bet over 0.5% bankroll.

He has said before that "the most common sequence of wins and losses is WLWLWL" or words to that effect.

If he bets small, waiting for a win followed by a loss, and then bets big, expecting a win next, he'll be right about half the time.

If you shift his big bets back two steps then he'll be right every time (since the two bets before the big one were W and L) - the big bet will land on the first observed W rather than the third hoped-for W.

Surely that explains your observed result doesn't it?  Or were you shifting in the opposite direction?

Maybe the house edge could move (logaritmic/linear/whatever) with the bet size (from e.g. 50 BTC up)

@Peter and all

I will give my 2 cents in simple words. And please excuse my english. I am not a maths expert like a few of You. But I am experienced in gambling matters and cheats. I have to admit not that much regarding online gaming and Provably Fair.  I will just give examples what could be possible IMHO

I understood that there is a 100% Provably fair option but it would delay any gambling action by so much that a dice, roulette, black jack, etc gambler would not touch and waste his time. A gambler wants the action.

This is telling me that JD is not Provably fair. @Dabs said JD is Provably fair for the gambler but not for the operator and investors. knowing this and if some one decided to cheat on JD he can only cheat the operator and investors. The gambler is secured and is fighting the 1% house edge. So at the end the gambler will lose his 1% of his turnover.

Lets start with the whale. the whale is a solo con artist and has info about the seeds. And is actually handling his betting style according his opinion in a smart way. I would say no. if he knows the outcome in advance he could make his betting pattern much healthier and much more unsuspicious.  Here we dont know how smart he is and if it is an ego trip.  But if I take Peter's point that he is betting high after 2 small bets(dont know if it is true), this would tell me that he knows the outcome and this would need a 2nd person to be involved and they decided to go for this way of pattern. That would mean that the seeds are made to give out this pattern 2 small bets and 1 big bet. He also can allow himself to lose by purpose big bets so people will think he is just a lucky gambler.

lets take the operator. He could be the victim if the whale like I mentioned above is a solo con artist and he knows how to get the seeds. Chances are slim IMHO. The operator could partner with the whale and that would be much easier to do.

Now lets take the Investors. To be fair to all participants I would say that there is a possibility that one or more of the investors are also involved and partnering with the whale and the operator. But I would say and my opinions that the Investors are the “VICTIMS” in any case, If the operator is involved or not.

If the operator is interested I could post my idea how to test it to find out if some cheat is happening. To minimize the damage it would be important to find out where or who is the cheat here and close it so at least the investors will not lose all. IMHO the whale will not give back any of the BTC he has already. In contrary he will take more and more as long he is allowed to gamble. In all casinos on the earth he would be banned long ago. To let him go on playing is a mistake as long the cheat is not discovered.

sure we could go on and on, like some mentioned before that maybe amazon insider could be involved and so on. the main pint to make a decision is if it is a con action or a lucky guy.

IMHO he is not a lucky guy

I think increasing the house edge for larger bets is a good idea, or lower the site max bet.

Edit: raising HE as the bets get bigger is actually a good idea. We can still be competitive with Satoshi dice and Lets dice too.

He was just back for a few bets.  Here's a log:


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...

Appreciate the additional analysis and graph, perhaps I will look at the data myself.  Even if the shift 1 and shift 2 calculations are correct, I suspect that this has more to do about his betting strategy (sizing), although it is unclear without looking at the data how that could affect more than 1 way of shifting.

Maybe more in near future.

-5432B

Haha. Well one thing's for sure, a whale winning lots of money is creating huge amounts of interesting discussion and I find it all very interesting.

Well, I do sort of feel like a detective in an up-and-coming Hollywood thriller based around bitcoin, proveably-fair gambling, silk road, and the mysterious whales of the BTC underworld.  Leaving the trail to prove that he could have taken it all would be a nice plot twist, don't you think? 

But, no, I actually think it is more likely that either the nakowa2.txt file is bad, or that I did something wrong (in both Mathematica and Excel).

If the nakowa2.txt file and my crunching is correct, what is the probability of 10347 successful bets and 4047 unsuccessful ones (looking at the 5 BTC and over bets after the shift [yeah, I know this is not completely fair but it shows how astronomically impossible the "cherry picking" argument is])?

In[1305]:=
n! / (k! (n - k)!) * p^k (1 - p)^(n - k) /. {n -> 10347 + 4047, k -> 10347, p -> 0.495}

Out[1305]= 4.79205803137647*10^-650

So more likely to brute force a private key.

Time for bed....

Just to get this straight, Peter you believe that Nakowa is leaving a trail to prove that he could have taken all the money and knows the server seed?