Topic: 🌟🎲🌟 MoneyPot.com - page 10. (Read 119078 times)

This is worrying, but an easy way for MoneyPot to refute these allegations is to provide proof of solvency. Given how many people have access to the servers I think that would be very appropriate.

I saw that post as well. It is possible that he is just a troll, as it is as possible that he was telling the truth......it is hard to say which applies.

I just saw this message that have been deleted. I am very interested about these accusations. (I am working with him)

Investor Profit: -17,440,561.81 bits
im glad cause i cashed out my invest  yesterday when it  was at -2,000,000 , not a lot  of bits invested  . btw now its a good time for  invest, dat cant  be worst   logically  ...

Overall the current system would in most cases work pretty good for investors. Most casinos make way above 1 % or whatever there houseedge is. In that case there's still "only" the wagerbased percentage which goes to appowners and mp itself.
So if users will yolo biggest part goes to investors.

Thats why I'm not really a friend of capping the maxprofit, even tho I understand investors if they dont want to risk more.
The common case is that big bets end up in big losses.

I dont know how big the bankroll of AOB is, but he wanted to bet higher than the current possible maxbet.
He didnt do any increase bet if whatever happens. Which is pretty smart I guess.

Martingale doesnt work because there are no profits for the gamblers to be made by increasing the betsize to a ridiculous amount, just to win whatever size the startbet has.
Still this is the most played strategy. For this bets the houseedge or however it is distributed to investors etc doesnt matter much because the whales do only a few very big bets and either win or lose.

So what has happend is, way closer to the worst case scenario - where investors could possibly make nothing.

This can happen obviously... and yes its a big risk if a gambler is able to win the whole bankroll with one bet.
It's not expected to happen, but at this point it just needs to happen ONCE and people can try as often as they want or their bankroll allows them.

But it was possible already when ryan owned it no ?
Now someone would need to hit 20 btc for 20 or more times with a ridiculous increased houseedge.

Crypto-Games cant be compared at all to moneypot. There are no apps or something like that. It even seems to be the best deal for investors because the client seed is generated by Math.random. So the site can easiely cheat the users whenever it wants.

This is well known to the owners, because they used same for serverseed at the start, until someone tried to make bank with that knowledge.
So this isnt even provably fair at all, but a pretty good deal for investors.

Ofc this doesnt belong to this thread, but thought i should mention it (;

When attempting bankroll management it isn't the size of the bet that matters but the size of the potential profit per bet. The biggest payouts I've seen from moneypot have been "jackpot" style bets where the stake is tiny but the payout multiplier is huge (like over a million x). So it would be interesting to see a breakdown based on "target profit" rather than "amount staked".

Also, it doesn't matter what average bet is like, or that the majority of bets are aiming to win small amounts. What matters is the worst case scenario. That is, what kind of expected bankroll growth would investors see if an "angry whale" shows up and aims for the maximum profit over and over. That's the scenario you need to defend against.

I'm not attacking you. I don't know why you think I am. I hadn't realized until recently just how much commission the investors were paying, and so thought I would point it out in case anyone else was unaware of it. That's nothing against you or your site. It's just information.


When I said that it was "like" investors had only kept 15% of their profits or whatever I said, that was because it was true - at the time investors had paid around 85% of their profits back to you and the apps. I wasn't suggesting that taking 85% commission was your policy, just that that is what had happened at the time. As of right now it seems investors have paid well over 100% of their profit as commission:



[edit: made image smaller after receiving complaint about its size via pm]


That's interesting.

Again, just to be clear, the only change we had made during that time was having 20% of the house edge deducted as commission on every bet and the rest was kept the same.  Not saying that Ryan had set it up wrong, but we are just showing that we didn't do any crazy changes away from the system we were given.

The 'isn't even remotely accurate part' i disagree with.  

If you extrapolate our current data with 5000 / 73,755 Bitcoin wagered being over 66.66% of the max plus say an additional 1000 being added to it, with the rest being well under, do you still believe that investors would lose it all in the end also taking into account that the beginning ratio is likely to go down since even whales have a finite amount of bitcoin they can afford to lose before giving up?

I do see your point, that hypothetically if we had massive constant whale action liken to BetKing, our model wouldn't be the most efficient.  

However, we have been doing an average of 2.5 Million bets a day and 200 Bitcoin wagered with whale sessions happening maybe once every 3-5 days.  It is setup this way (like you explained earlier) to allow people to yolo, or martingale, or do a short angry tilt session.

To apply this and say that we are deliberately ignoring the bankroll management aspect and positioning investors in a bad situation is wrong.  We have shown that we are watching and willing to adjust as necessary.  

Lastly, I don't know why everyone needs to try and attack everyone else.  I see no reason to try and belittle our competition.  It's clear that we are trying to provide gamblers and investors alike a better experience the best way we can.  We are all established and want the same things.  We should be helping each other, but instead there's always personal attacks and subtle jabs.  All this bickering is not good for the industry on the whole.  There doesn't need to be a 'winner' for an argument.  The goal should be to find the best solutions.  Focus your negative efforts on sites that are purposely trying to deceive and steal from users.  For the rest of us, let's help each other.  I am personally sick of it and you guys should be too.  Seriously, please stop.

Perfect! thanks

No like wager size distribution - like what percentage is made up by whales, etc?

Any chance you can share what the actual distribution is?

There are some differences - Ryan ran MP on the kelly system, which is +EV and +Growth. The current team has used a variety of systems I think to determine their max bet, whether it be 1% of bankroll, or more, or 20BTC flat.

I believe Ryan has argued that this could be the primary reason for long-term bankroll decline

Reference 1
Reference 2

"..there is a possibility that we end up locking investments soon so that no new investments can be done and we will be looking to add in more private funds.."

Great idea^
App commissions are too high. MP commission can be reduced perhaps by 1/10 to 1/5 of what it currently is awarding MP for each bet placed, but mostly, the burden of imbalance rests on app owners, as far as I can appraise the problem.

They are getting a slice of the pie that is a bit too large vs. the investors who bear the gambling risk.

Now personally, if I owned MP, the bankroll would be private, I'm not someone who is for crowdfunded bankrolls, I think it's composed of people with exactly the same mentality as all those countless ones in gambling / "investing" subforums who hunt for "Ohh you say this HYIP is paying out so far right? Ok lemme invest" - pathetic ;/

^So, admittedly I am biased, I'm not exactly the most neutral opinion source re: MP's issues lol. And of course I'm a huge gambler.. I'll always be a player, never on the 'investor's' side of things. Nonetheless I hope this insight is of some use to MP in their difficult time.

Something to keep in mind - Ryan H. created MoneyPot and is the one who structured things as they are, designed the payout structures, and the DogeD/ACoin/Ranlo+[Devs] team merely inherited all of this from the sale last year.. It seems quite plausible they might have weighted & designed the payout %'s to each category of users differently had they created MP from scratch.

On the other hand, some of us care a lot, because it's a lot of real money invested in these sites

I agree with Dogedigital, too often are there people in threads that stir up trouble for other businesses just for some weird personal satisfaction. I think if you really had good intentions of trying to help others improve on their sites you'd send a private message to discuss. Doing this publicly Dooglus makes it look vindictive, and at this point why? There is no legitimate answer to that and I don't expect one, just perhaps consider the choices you make prior to posting on threads other than your own.

Have you ever notice most of us never post in your business thread? It's because we could frankly give 2 shits what you're doing with your sites.

Nice one.
I lost my hole rain from aob what else  .
But thats the game.


I wish good luck to mp and hope they can stay.
But the last few month was very hard for investors.
Allorborke / Nottardy only to name a few names from the year 2016.
But a new year is coming and we will see where the journey ends.

from allorbrokes rain iwas able to win about 300000 bits during the run i raind about 60000 bits thanks allorbroke

It was a great run allorbroke. Very entertaining show - congratulations!
MP: Havent noticed anything "fishy"