And with a bigger investment pool
site 30,131.83240351
Topic: Just-Dice.com : now with added CLAMs : Play or Invest - page 205. (Read 454769 times)
Back up.
And with a bigger investment pool
site 30,131.83240351
And with a bigger investment pool
site 30,131.83240351
dooglus is on it and it will be up soon.
Deb
Deb
There was more than $2,100,000 of Bitcoin in there at current prices.
Hoping it comes back up soon.
Hoping it comes back up soon.
Just-dice, Just-died. Waiting for doog to make it revive.
it's all about trust!
Figures, Doog closes the site and moves to Panama the day after I invest a few BTC.
But seriously, down here too.
But seriously, down here too.
FML
I was jsut about to bet my 1BTC ... Site down T_T Go figure
I was jsut about to bet my 1BTC ... Site down T_T Go figure
Site down? I can't connect it now.
Site down? Struggling to get on from here
There are actually only 989999 choices to bet on.
Speaking of which, I'm not having much luck connecting to Just-Dice.com using socket.io-client.
Anyone got something working?
Anyone got something working?
Stunna, you made this site very easy to bot. Everyone here is talking about Bots and martingale bets. 
I can't imagine it bothering dooglus, if you know what I mean...
AFAIK, Doog got a lot of profit because of martingale bots too!
Most bots results a loss in final if the user just wants more. And, most people want ALL in terms of Gambling.Doog would be liking these bots
Stunna, you made this site very easy to bot. Everyone here is talking about Bots and martingale bets.
I can't imagine it bothering dooglus, if you know what I mean...
Stunna, you made this site very easy to bot. Everyone here is talking about Bots and martingale bets.
I believe , if you think the game is rigged and you are bound to lose no matter what , than just invest , by that logic people will lose and you will win.
If you believe its fair , just play and win
Just-Dice has 3 huge advantages to the other dice programs out there:
1. You can choose your own odds - not just 5 or 10 or 20 choices, there is an infinite # of choices
2. It goes further than other dice sites to show it is fair
3. It does not clutter up the blockchain with dust since the BTC are deposited into an account and withdrawn at will
The big disadvantage is that you have to trust the site with your BTC. With Satoshi and the other dice programs, you only trust them with the amount you send for each individual bet. On Just-Dice, you need to trust everything deposited.
Still, overall, I prefer this to Satoshi and the other dice programs. Plus, it is nice that when you are not gambling, you could earn a little interest on your funds by "investing" them. Though, I actually have lost a bit investing so I guess the house does not always win!
1. You can choose your own odds - not just 5 or 10 or 20 choices, there is an infinite # of choices
2. It goes further than other dice sites to show it is fair
3. It does not clutter up the blockchain with dust since the BTC are deposited into an account and withdrawn at will
The big disadvantage is that you have to trust the site with your BTC. With Satoshi and the other dice programs, you only trust them with the amount you send for each individual bet. On Just-Dice, you need to trust everything deposited.
Still, overall, I prefer this to Satoshi and the other dice programs. Plus, it is nice that when you are not gambling, you could earn a little interest on your funds by "investing" them. Though, I actually have lost a bit investing so I guess the house does not always win!
In practice, small martingale style bets are better because they introduce scenarios where less BTC is bet and reduce the loss from house edge. The starting and target BTC amounts are irrelevant.
Aren't both of them (starting and target BTC) important? Only because the starting BTC amount determines how big or small your martingale initial bets. The target BTC determines how many bets or how long you keep up the strategy, and the higher the target, the higher the risk of losing it all to a large number of consecutive losses.
Now, if you could predict when you are about to lose and either bet small or bet zero (JD allows you to be zero) then you may be on to something.
As it is, you can't predict the rolls, but you can apply statistical analysis and probabilities that you might know when to bet big, or when to bet small (or zero).
In other words, you don't use textbook martingale; you modify it so that you win more often, and you lose less. It's still possible to lose everything, so you can't do an infinite martingale, as it is possible to have 100 consecutive losses at 98% chance to win (however unlikely or improbable that is.)
I suppose I used the wrong wording. Starting and ending BTC amounts determine the size of your bets and the multiplier you need to pick for a martingale "chain" -- I only meant that the concept held in general with any starting BTC and target goal.
In practice, small martingale style bets are better because they introduce scenarios where less BTC is bet and reduce the loss from house edge. The starting and target BTC amounts are irrelevant.
Aren't both of them (starting and target BTC) important? Only because the starting BTC amount determines how big or small your martingale initial bets. The target BTC determines how many bets or how long you keep up the strategy, and the higher the target, the higher the risk of losing it all to a large number of consecutive losses.
Now, if you could predict when you are about to lose and either bet small or bet zero (JD allows you to be zero) then you may be on to something.
As it is, you can't predict the rolls, but you can apply statistical analysis and probabilities that you might know when to bet big, or when to bet small (or zero).
In other words, you don't use textbook martingale; you modify it so that you win more often, and you lose less. It's still possible to lose everything, so you can't do an infinite martingale, as it is possible to have 100 consecutive losses at 98% chance to win (however unlikely or improbable that is.)
Hmm. It seems martingaling is better only if your aiming to less than double your initial balance.
I'm willing to bet you're wrong on that too if you like?
The optimal strategy for going from X btc to Y btc is the one that minimizes the amount wagered. In the previous example of 3BTC -> 4BTC, the martingale of 1BTC -> 2BTC is better because 49.5% of the time only 1BTC is being wagered. We can do even better by betting less at a smaller winrate -- consider for example the following martingale of 3 bets:
0.58740084 BTC at 2.70241438x (36.6339%) -> if we lose 0.93244059BTC at the same rate -> if we lose 1.48015697BTC at this rate.
The expected values of each strategy:
1 bet -- (3btc @ 1.3333333x) -- 0.7425 success rate, EV = 2.97 BTC (-0.03)
2 bets -- (1btc, 2btc) --0.744975 success rate, EV = 2.9799 BTC (-0.0201)
3 bets -- (pattern above) -- 7455684 success rate, EV = 2.9823 BTC (-0.0177)
In theory, if BTC were infinitely divisible, one could start at an infinitesimal amount at "near-infinite" odds and apply this martingale to eliminate the house edge and obtain an EV of 3BTC.
In practice, small martingale style bets are better because they introduce scenarios where less BTC is bet and reduce the loss from house edge. The starting and target BTC amounts are irrelevant.
Poor Vinka
Jump to: