Pages:
Author

Topic: Just-Dice.com : Invest in 1% House Edge Dice Game - page 62. (Read 435357 times)

legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1333
If you aren't into that sort of thing, you should invest in one of the other dice sites that scams their players by making it so that the house literally can never lose.

Except those kinds of sites generally don't need any investment...

You guys are here to take the risk so I don't have to - if there's no risk, why would I need you?  Wink
kgo
hero member
Activity: 548
Merit: 500
I would more tend to raise the 1% than lowering. Though im not so sure anymore since i read that 1% is the optimum for some reason.

Regarding the 1%... since i saw the charts i believe its seeable: http://bitcoinproject.net/just-dice-casino/just-dice-charts/profit-chart
See the second chart... it has the house advantage attached. So im pretty sure the profit is relatively consistent.

The profit looks consistent because the majority of bets are much smaller than the 1%. But during the Nakowa's bettings at 1% there was much variance and the chart was giving a completely different impression.

The max bet is actually 0.5% now.  This is a totally different number than the 1% house edge.  I believe it got dropped to 0.5% because of Nakowa's streak, but that was before my time following just-dice.
member
Activity: 99
Merit: 10
I would more tend to raise the 1% than lowering. Though im not so sure anymore since i read that 1% is the optimum for some reason.

Regarding the 1%... since i saw the charts i believe its seeable: http://bitcoinproject.net/just-dice-casino/just-dice-charts/profit-chart
See the second chart... it has the house advantage attached. So im pretty sure the profit is relatively consistent.

The profit looks consistent because the majority of bets are much smaller than the 1%. But during the Nakowa's bettings at 1% there was much variance and the chart was giving a completely different impression.
full member
Activity: 237
Merit: 100
Ideally, the percentage would rise and fall in response to "investment" vs. "bets".  As betting volume decreases, lower the percentage.  As investment falls, increase the take.  Determine the ideal ratio of bets to investment and float the rate to keep that ratio.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 1083
Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile
I would more tend to raise the 1% than lowering. Though im not so sure anymore since i read that 1% is the optimum for some reason.

Regarding the 1%... since i saw the charts i believe its seeable: http://bitcoinproject.net/just-dice-casino/just-dice-charts/profit-chart
See the second chart... it has the house advantage attached. So im pretty sure the profit is relatively consistent.
hero member
Activity: 609
Merit: 505

Comeon... i invested a week ago


Nice. Consider yourself lucky.

Quote
and since then i only saw my investment crawling below my invested amount. Now i saw the chart and it looks like the advantage is there seeing the actual investment. I doubted that before for obvious reasons.

just-dice returns are bursty. They are small and quiet for long stretches then have wild swings when whales show up.

Quote
It was hard to imagine that all the games happening in the last week didnt show the house advantage. But it was that way.

It seems you are looking for some sort of pattern in the returns that reflects what you think it should look like based on the house edge. The issue is, with such a low house edge, you really can't count on being able to "see" the house advantage. Furthermore, when a whale shows up, you can't even begin to see the house edge because it's negligible compared to the vol.

I realize I am being somewhat discouraging, but that's because you seem to have unrealistic expectations from just-dice. The returns from the last 24 hours will not keep up. Returns will often look negative and for long stretches. Some of the big investors were negative for *months*. That doesn't mean the math is wrong, it just means your expectations are wrong if you think this should not be possible.

Quote
And i found a debate about allowing investors to chose the risk of 1% to be changed. This settings wasnt implemented at the end?

Correct. If you want to reduce your risk, it's easy. Divest a portion of your invested amount, and hold the divested amount in cold storage. Voila, reduced risk, reduced return.

I suspect most of the pushing for this feature was from people who were simply overinvested and weren't comfortable with the resulting volatility.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 1083
Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile
Someone knows how save investments on that website are? The owner is trustworthy and known in person, website is security checked and so on? I mean the revenue looks a bit like ponzi's look though it might be explainable because of the players. On the other hand its hard for me imagine there are so many users believing they could win something there...
I would like to invest more but im not yet confident about it.

Here we go again. A small run of good returns = onset of the fair-weather investors.

If you're thinking of investing, you should be ready to lose a significant percentage (10%, 20%+) of your investment at times. It has happened in the past on just-dice, and it will probably happen again. Investing is almost a bad term for it. Being an "investor" is actually putting on a highly volatile, ever-so-slightly positive expectancy bet. If you aren't into that sort of thing, you should invest in one of the other dice sites that scams their players by making it so that the house literally can never lose.

Comeon... i invested a week ago and since then i only saw my investment crawling below my invested amount. Now i saw the chart and it looks like the advantage is there seeing the actual investment. I doubted that before for obvious reasons. It was hard to imagine that all the games happening in the last week didnt show the house advantage. But it was that way.

*lol* Such sites, where players are scammed, exist and investors can invest? Hard to imagine that investors wont be scammed at some point too then. Not to say about players that should stop playing there if they find out. Again hard to imagine that such site remains alive.

I read many posts of dooglus now but still i dont know if he is an anonymous entity in the forum or if he is known.

And i found a debate about allowing investors to chose the risk of 1% to be changed. This settings wasnt implemented at the end?
hero member
Activity: 609
Merit: 505
Someone knows how save investments on that website are? The owner is trustworthy and known in person, website is security checked and so on? I mean the revenue looks a bit like ponzi's look though it might be explainable because of the players. On the other hand its hard for me imagine there are so many users believing they could win something there...
I would like to invest more but im not yet confident about it.

Here we go again. A small run of good returns = onset of the fair-weather investors.

If you're thinking of investing, you should be ready to lose a significant percentage (10%, 20%+) of your investment at times. It has happened in the past on just-dice, and it will probably happen again. Investing is almost a bad term for it. Being an "investor" is actually putting on a highly volatile, ever-so-slightly positive expectancy bet. If you aren't into that sort of thing, you should invest in one of the other dice sites that scams their players by making it so that the house literally can never lose.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 1083
Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile
Someone knows how save investments on that website are? The owner is trustworthy and known in person, website is security checked and so on? I mean the revenue looks a bit like ponzi's look though it might be explainable because of the players. On the other hand its hard for me imagine there are so many users believing they could win something there...
I would like to invest more but im not yet confident about it.
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 1083
Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

niiiice Cheesy

I divested a while ago, but right now, whoever is still in, can look at a sweet ~6% profit just from nakowa's latest streak by the looks of it.

*lol* Youre right... finally something that looks like a house advantage... couldnt believe it till now since i always was crawling below my investment.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1007

niiiice Cheesy

I divested a while ago, but right now, whoever is still in, can look at a sweet ~6% profit just from nakowa's latest streak by the looks of it.
legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1018
where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

I guess that was Nakowa divesting his coins to gamble them all.

Holden your seatbelts, gents.



nakowa didn´t have invested 32k coins with just-dice... according to the blogposts of dooglus (or rather his girlfriend) the
biggest investor had around 12k coins invested. so more than one big investor has left "the ship" Smiley



Thats right, nakowa has divested his 12k coins and probably he will gamble them all - he's already down 2.3k
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
Bitstamp trader
where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

I guess that was Nakowa divesting his coins to gamble them all.

Holden your seatbelts, gents.



nakowa didn´t have invested 32k coins with just-dice... according to the blogposts of dooglus (or rather his girlfriend) the
biggest investor had around 12k coins invested. so more than one big investor has left "the ship" Smiley

legendary
Activity: 1148
Merit: 1018
where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

I guess that was Nakowa divesting his coins to gamble them all.

Holden your seatbelts, gents.

member
Activity: 167
Merit: 10
- low or negative profit
Do you mean the actual profits? I was worried about wagered per day. It has halved less in the last days.
legendary
Activity: 3472
Merit: 1722
where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

There can be a few reasons:

- low or negative profit during the term that someone held bitcoins on just-dice
- increase in BTC and altcoin prices, people wanting to invest elsewhere or not comfortable in keeping too much money at one place
- Christmas
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1007
where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?

Can't speak for everyone of course, but for me the decision to take out my investment mainly had to do with a more volatile market (i.e. a price that breaks out of the straight up trend once in a while). Since my goal is to increase my btc total, I believe I can make more profit on the market right now than by lending my coins to j-d. Plus, the fact that profits aren't exactly looking pretty right now doesn't help either :/
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
Bitstamp trader
where did all the invested BTC go?
Investment was around 60k coins I think and
now it´s just 32k coins?

Just due to the recent bad run of the house? Or are
there other possible explanations?
sr. member
Activity: 337
Merit: 252
Regarding the paradox where a martingale strategy is both better and no better at the same time, I think the answer lies in a trade off between expected value and variance. In one case the bet size is fixed and in the other case the bet size is a random variable. The latter thus has a higher variance.

I was sloppy and need to correct myself again Roll Eyes The variance is of course smaller for the martingale, which is bad news for the player. The player has a negative ev and therefore needs a high variance to have any chance at all. The martingale strategy is therefore as safe for the house as single bets because even though the edge is smaller, the probability of losing much is also smaller.
member
Activity: 99
Merit: 10
1) Big time gamblers like Phil Ivey often get kicked out of establishments for "beating the house". They know that with the right minimum and maximum bet limits that they can walk away winners, and they do.

2) While the Martingale system is a for sure loser on paper things get much more cloudy when you allow 1 satoshi bets and virtually no maximums. There's no way you haven't looked into this and I'm sure the conclusion is "but they'll be winning dust" which may be true but the right person could put a real hurt on a casino with this kind of spread and such favorable odds even if it were 25 cents at a time.

Past experience with successful gamblers in JD (Nakowa for example) has shown that the most effective strategy is just tossing a coin at 50% odds and betting the maximum each time. No trace of strategy there.
Pages:
Jump to: