Topic: SafeDICE.com ★ Bitcoin Dice ★ Monero ★ 0.5% Edge ★ Fast Cashout ★ Since 2014 - page 199. (Read 275856 times)
December 03, 2014, 08:57:23 AM
As always, doog is extremely enthusiastic and skillful in spotting problems on gambling sites lol.
December 03, 2014, 08:25:36 AM
I had trouble with the 'target' payout multiplier not 'sticking' at 2x again today, but maybe I hadn't reloaded the site since you fixed it.
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
So it happened again. I set the payout to 2x, bet 0.01, had to double twice before I won, which took me over 0.5% house edge. Then when I hit 's' a few times to drop the stake back down, the payout didn't go back to 2:
Hey Doog, sorry again for the inconvenience, turns out we left this intermittent one. We just made a few changes that should fix this
December 03, 2014, 02:30:13 AM
I had trouble with the 'target' payout multiplier not 'sticking' at 2x again today, but maybe I hadn't reloaded the site since you fixed it.
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
So it happened again. I set the payout to 2x, bet 0.01, had to double twice before I won, which took me over 0.5% house edge. Then when I hit 's' a few times to drop the stake back down, the payout didn't go back to 2:
send an email to support no one cares for your constant shilling!!!
fucking obviousare you BBmmBB? Oh no you find a thread to troll over again....
December 03, 2014, 02:13:28 AM
I had trouble with the 'target' payout multiplier not 'sticking' at 2x again today, but maybe I hadn't reloaded the site since you fixed it.
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
So it happened again. I set the payout to 2x, bet 0.01, had to double twice before I won, which took me over 0.5% house edge. Then when I hit 's' a few times to drop the stake back down, the payout didn't go back to 2:
December 02, 2014, 08:03:14 PM
new game
December 02, 2014, 07:47:24 PM
OK, got bit confused here regarding commission/referral payments.
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
As I understand it:
* they take commission on every bet, of 10% of the house edge (and automatically invest it on their own account)
* they pay affiliates 10% of (the house edge or 1%, whichever is smaller) (and automatically invest it in the affiliate's account)
So for regular bets, with a house edge of 1% or less, they give 100% of the commission to the affiliate.
OK, cool. Thanks for replying.
Sounds like good deal for affiliates (maybe except for the fraction-of-satoshi-rounded-to-zero thing). Although, think it'd be better if op was getting his cut of the commission from every bet, creating more sustainable model etc.
@SafeDice, it's a long shot, but do you have any promo banners by any chance? Ideally 468*60px or similar. No worries if not.
The idea is to get more players, which indirectly will get us more commissions. It's quite experimental idea, but we're still optimistic about it.
Sure, this is our simple 468*60px banner: http://s26.postimg.org/byuvv5ceh/sd_banner_468x60.jpg
December 02, 2014, 06:59:00 PM
OK, got bit confused here regarding commission/referral payments.
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
As I understand it:
* they take commission on every bet, of 10% of the house edge (and automatically invest it on their own account)
* they pay affiliates 10% of (the house edge or 1%, whichever is smaller) (and automatically invest it in the affiliate's account)
So for regular bets, with a house edge of 1% or less, they give 100% of the commission to the affiliate.
OK, cool. Thanks for replying.
Sounds like good deal for affiliates (maybe except for the fraction-of-satoshi-rounded-to-zero thing). Although, think it'd be better if op was getting his cut of the commission from every bet, creating more sustainable model etc.
@SafeDice, it's a long shot, but do you have any promo banners by any chance? Ideally 468*60px or similar. No worries if not.
December 02, 2014, 05:43:38 PM
OK, got bit confused here regarding commission/referral payments.
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
As I understand it:
* they take commission on every bet, of 10% of the house edge (and automatically invest it on their own account)
* they pay affiliates 10% of (the house edge or 1%, whichever is smaller) (and automatically invest it in the affiliate's account)
So for regular bets, with a house edge of 1% or less, they give 100% of the commission to the affiliate.
December 02, 2014, 05:30:27 PM
OK, got bit confused here regarding commission/referral payments.
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
Long story short - is it the same (or similar) system PRCdice have? You take commission on every bet (win or lose) and share a % of that commission with referrer?
December 02, 2014, 05:13:14 PM
I had trouble with the 'target' payout multiplier not 'sticking' at 2x again today, but maybe I hadn't reloaded the site since you fixed it.
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
My profit is almost 1 BTC more than the global site profit (0.27 BTC) now:
It's hard to test without betting near the maximum bet, so it may be a while before I get to see it working for real...
My profit is almost 1 BTC more than the global site profit (0.27 BTC) now:
December 02, 2014, 10:44:28 AM
Rome was not built in a day ! 
u a wise guy? : toutology nice word >> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tout
u a wise guy? : toutology nice word >> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/toutSeek help.
I'm not going to read or respond to any more troll posts from BB, but see my response to his silly accusations.
lol you fell into the trap ... now you are going to make threats? Nice site btw ...i dare u to keep posting here LMFAO!!!
December 02, 2014, 10:33:24 AM
Rome was not built in a day ! u a wise guy? : toutology nice word >> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tout
u a wise guy? : toutology nice word >> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/toutSeek help.
I'm not going to read or respond to any more troll posts from BB, but see my response to his silly accusations.
December 02, 2014, 10:25:40 AM
[
Tautologies are tautological. What are you trying to say?
If you're suggesting that I created and am running a dice site with a bankroll of 26 BTC, you're very wrong.
Tautologies are tautological. What are you trying to say?
If you're suggesting that I created and am running a dice site with a bankroll of 26 BTC, you're very wrong.
Rome was not built in a day !
u a wise guy? : toutology nice word >> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tout December 02, 2014, 10:16:10 AM
My concern is that almost every bet is going to have a house edge of 1% or less, and most big players are going to make sure they have been referred by themselves or by a friend.
There aren't many thing we can do to fully prevent this. But basically we are against player who refer themselves, this is also the reason why we cap the referral fee to 0.1%. Hopefully a player who wager 1 BTC or more wouldn't mind to share 0.1% (0.001 BTC) for the site's growth.
If my explanations are right, everything seems to be ok.. But please let me know if you don't think so
I think you cleared everything up, thanks. I wasn't thinking about the commission being split between all the investors.
Maybe consider holding player balances to 1 or 2 extra decimal places. If I refer a play who makes a million bets of 1k satoshis each, the way things currently stand I get nothing at all for it. Each bet earns me 0.5 satoshis, which is rounded down to 0. If you added up all the half-satoshis, I'd end up with 500k satoshis, or 0.005 BTC.
Nobody minds losing half a satoshi, but losing a million half satoshis is a different matter.
Thanks for the comprehensive test Doog, good to know that everything works as expected.
Let us think about saving the extra decimal places, because of some technical concerns. Otherwise we'll state the rounding mechanism in the site's explanation.
December 02, 2014, 08:34:35 AM
If my explanations are right, everything seems to be ok.. But please let me know if you don't think so
I think you cleared everything up, thanks. I wasn't thinking about the commission being split between all the investors.
Maybe consider holding player balances to 1 or 2 extra decimal places. If I refer a play who makes a million bets of 1k satoshis each, the way things currently stand I get nothing at all for it. Each bet earns me 0.5 satoshis, which is rounded down to 0. If you added up all the half-satoshis, I'd end up with 500k satoshis, or 0.005 BTC.
Nobody minds losing half a satoshi, but losing a million half satoshis is a different matter.
December 02, 2014, 06:03:02 AM
Thank you so much for the comprehensive test Doog! Let me try to answer:
I just played about with this to see how it works. I made notes about what happened, and bolded the 4 things that seemed weird or wrong:
I referred myself, deposited 0.0099 on the new account ("Player-470"), and played a little.
At first I divested fully on my main account so I could see the effect of just the referral payments. I noticed that bets of 1k satoshis earned me nothing. 0.5% of 1k is 5 satoshis, and 10% of that is 0.5 satoshis. I made 10 separate bets of 1k satoshis on the referred account and earned nothing at all for them on the main account. I guess payments are rounded, rather than having the sub-satoshi payments build up.
Hmm, we thought it is simpler this way, hopefully people wouldn't mind with few satoshis being rounded down. If this can be an issue, we might add this to the explanation (ugh, this is our homework, to add more comprehensive information on our approach 
).
I made 4 bets of 2k satoshis and 3 bets of 4k satoshis. The main account earned a total of 10 satoshis for those bets, as expected. (4*2k + 3*4k = 20k; 0.5% of 20k is 100; 10% of 100 is 10). One thing that struck me as odd is that the affiliate payments were added to the main accounts 'invested' figure, not its balance. Even though the invested figure was zero and the balance wasn't. I would expect the affiliate payments to go into the balance, not the bankroll.
Yes, this is to ensure that the bankroll doesn't decrease every time someone place a bet... Is your expectation because it wasn't specified in detail? Or it is a necessity to put the fee in the balance? If the referrer believes in house edge, should he be more happier if the payment goes directly to the BR? 
Then I invested on the main account. I worked out how much I needed to invest to become exactly 10% of the site's bankroll, and invested that amount, to make the calculations easier. I was invested 2.47165911 BTC and the site bankroll was 24.71659104 BTC. I was "10.00000002% of the total site investment".
The referred account bet 2k satoshis and lost; 0.5% of 2k is 10 satoshis; the commission and affiliate payment should both be 1 satoshi, and the 10% investor should get 200 satoshis.
On the main account I see my investment change twice:
2.47165911 -> 2.47166110 -> 2.47166111
The first change adds 199 satoshis, the 2nd adds 1 satoshi. It seems the commission was taken off first, and the affiliate payment was added later.
Then the referred account bet 10k satoshis and lost again; commission and affiliate payments should be 5 satoshis, and 10% investor should get 1k satoshis.
This time I only see my investment change once:
2.47166111 -> 2.47167116
It has added on 1005 satoshis. That's 10% of the new site profit, and the affiliate payment. It looks like no commission was charged. That's probably a bug?
Those 5 satoshis commission is not taken from your account only, but directly from the bankroll and shared to all the investors. So if your investment is 10% or Bankroll and the commission is 5 satoshis, you might not get the effect. Your investment is actually not saved in form of "how many satoshis," but a highly precision fractional shares to the bankroll, so there's also a chance that the calculation miss by a fractional satoshi.
The referred account made one final bet of 20k satoshis and won 20k satoshis. Commission and affiliate payment should be 10 satoshis, the investor should lost 2k satoshis.
My investment changes once again:
2.47167116 -> 2.47165125
I have lost 1991 satoshis. I'm not sure why - I should have lost 2000. Maybe since I'm a fraction over 10% of the bankroll, the loss cost me 2001 satoshis, then the affiliate payment of 10 was added, and the commission was forgotten again? That would make 1991 total.
I think this was what happened: you lost 2000 as investor, you got 10 as referrer, and you lost 1 because the commission was shared among all the investors, and you own 10% of it.
If my explanations are right, everything seems to be ok.. But please let me know if you don't think so
What I'm wondering is when is the commission charged? I haven't noticed it going out of my investment each time someone bets, but maybe it does.
I just played about with this to see how it works. I made notes about what happened, and bolded the 4 things that seemed weird or wrong:
I referred myself, deposited 0.0099 on the new account ("Player-470"), and played a little.
At first I divested fully on my main account so I could see the effect of just the referral payments. I noticed that bets of 1k satoshis earned me nothing. 0.5% of 1k is 5 satoshis, and 10% of that is 0.5 satoshis. I made 10 separate bets of 1k satoshis on the referred account and earned nothing at all for them on the main account. I guess payments are rounded, rather than having the sub-satoshi payments build up.
).I made 4 bets of 2k satoshis and 3 bets of 4k satoshis. The main account earned a total of 10 satoshis for those bets, as expected. (4*2k + 3*4k = 20k; 0.5% of 20k is 100; 10% of 100 is 10). One thing that struck me as odd is that the affiliate payments were added to the main accounts 'invested' figure, not its balance. Even though the invested figure was zero and the balance wasn't. I would expect the affiliate payments to go into the balance, not the bankroll.
Then I invested on the main account. I worked out how much I needed to invest to become exactly 10% of the site's bankroll, and invested that amount, to make the calculations easier. I was invested 2.47165911 BTC and the site bankroll was 24.71659104 BTC. I was "10.00000002% of the total site investment".
The referred account bet 2k satoshis and lost; 0.5% of 2k is 10 satoshis; the commission and affiliate payment should both be 1 satoshi, and the 10% investor should get 200 satoshis.
On the main account I see my investment change twice:
2.47165911 -> 2.47166110 -> 2.47166111
The first change adds 199 satoshis, the 2nd adds 1 satoshi. It seems the commission was taken off first, and the affiliate payment was added later.
Then the referred account bet 10k satoshis and lost again; commission and affiliate payments should be 5 satoshis, and 10% investor should get 1k satoshis.
This time I only see my investment change once:
2.47166111 -> 2.47167116
It has added on 1005 satoshis. That's 10% of the new site profit, and the affiliate payment. It looks like no commission was charged. That's probably a bug?
Those 5 satoshis commission is not taken from your account only, but directly from the bankroll and shared to all the investors. So if your investment is 10% or Bankroll and the commission is 5 satoshis, you might not get the effect. Your investment is actually not saved in form of "how many satoshis," but a highly precision fractional shares to the bankroll, so there's also a chance that the calculation miss by a fractional satoshi.
The referred account made one final bet of 20k satoshis and won 20k satoshis. Commission and affiliate payment should be 10 satoshis, the investor should lost 2k satoshis.
My investment changes once again:
2.47167116 -> 2.47165125
I have lost 1991 satoshis. I'm not sure why - I should have lost 2000. Maybe since I'm a fraction over 10% of the bankroll, the loss cost me 2001 satoshis, then the affiliate payment of 10 was added, and the commission was forgotten again? That would make 1991 total.
I think this was what happened: you lost 2000 as investor, you got 10 as referrer, and you lost 1 because the commission was shared among all the investors, and you own 10% of it.
If my explanations are right, everything seems to be ok.. But please let me know if you don't think so
December 02, 2014, 05:15:27 AM
The 'target' payout thing isn't working properly still.
I set it to 2x, then bet 0.01, hit 'w' to double on loss, and had to go up to 0.08 or 0.16 before I won. The payout multiplier changed a little from 2x as I did so, because the house edge was going up. Then when I hit 'e' a couple of times to get back to the initial 0.01 bet, the payout multiplier didn't go back to 2x.
It's like the 2x payout target is remembered for a while, but if I get too far from the 0.5% edge it gets lost.
I set it to 2x, then bet 0.01, hit 'w' to double on loss, and had to go up to 0.08 or 0.16 before I won. The payout multiplier changed a little from 2x as I did so, because the house edge was going up. Then when I hit 'e' a couple of times to get back to the initial 0.01 bet, the payout multiplier didn't go back to 2x.
It's like the 2x payout target is remembered for a while, but if I get too far from the 0.5% edge it gets lost.
Sorry Doog, we'll check on this and try to fix in the next update.
December 02, 2014, 04:26:33 AM
Many (good) posts and reports to reply! Thank you guys 
I don't see how it could. The site was apparently always taking 10% of the house edge as commission, only now they have decided to give some of it to their affiliates. What they do with their commission is up to them, and doesn't affect the investors, since the investors were going to be paying it anyway.
What I'm wondering is when is the commission charged? I haven't noticed it going out of my investment each time someone bets, but maybe it does.
Yes, it doesn't affect current investors.
And yes, it is taken each time someone bets.
So I'll update my guess:
Is it right now?
100% correct!
Some examples:
house edge: 0.5%
commission: 0.05%
affiliate: 0.05%
house edge: 1%
commission: 0.1%
affiliate: 0.1%
house edge: 1.5%
commission: 0.15%
affiliate: 0.1%
house edge: 2%
commission: 0.2%
affiliate: 0.1%
house edge: 10%
commission: 1%
affiliate: 0.1%
My concern is that almost every bet is going to have a house edge of 1% or less, and most big players are going to make sure they have been referred by themselves or by a friend. So how does the house cover expenses when it is giving all its commission away to affiliates?
Edit: I notice profit and investment are both up this morning. Profit is positive for the first time in a while, and investment is over 25 BTC. Nice work.
Actually we are thinking of similar concern in the beginning. But we finally think this might be a good idea, especially with limitation on 1% H.E. calculation (to minimize loss when people referring themselves). This model rely that some player / whale will try to play on > 1% H.E., and not all players use referral system. This model succeeds if: number of high wager that comes from referred players is higher than the commission it takes to cover the referral fee. We might adjust the percentage in the future if this isn't working, but hopefully we don't have to.
Andd... Yes, the site is in profit... One of our loyal player made a few losing bets yesterday
Will the affiliate program affect current investors?
I don't see how it could. The site was apparently always taking 10% of the house edge as commission, only now they have decided to give some of it to their affiliates. What they do with their commission is up to them, and doesn't affect the investors, since the investors were going to be paying it anyway.
What I'm wondering is when is the commission charged? I haven't noticed it going out of my investment each time someone bets, but maybe it does.
Yes, it doesn't affect current investors.
And yes, it is taken each time someone bets.
We give all of the commission to the referrer up to 0.1% of wagered amount (it should be 0.1% instead of 0.01%).
So I'll update my guess:
Quote
We take 10% of (house_edge) of every bet directly from the bankroll as commission.
If the bet was made by a player who was referred, we take 10% of min(1%, house_edge) of the bet amount out of our commission and give it to the person who referred him.
In other words, your commission that you charge investors is 10% of (house edge)% of the amount wagered, rather than 10% of actual profit, and the referral fees you pay are the same as the commission for bets with a house edge of 1% or less, and less than the commission for bets with a higher house edge - so if every player has been referred and nobody ever plays with a house edge over 1%, the referral fees are exactly the same as the commission.
If the bet was made by a player who was referred, we take 10% of min(1%, house_edge) of the bet amount out of our commission and give it to the person who referred him.
In other words, your commission that you charge investors is 10% of (house edge)% of the amount wagered, rather than 10% of actual profit, and the referral fees you pay are the same as the commission for bets with a house edge of 1% or less, and less than the commission for bets with a higher house edge - so if every player has been referred and nobody ever plays with a house edge over 1%, the referral fees are exactly the same as the commission.
Is it right now?
100% correct!
Some examples:
house edge: 0.5%
commission: 0.05%
affiliate: 0.05%
house edge: 1%
commission: 0.1%
affiliate: 0.1%
house edge: 1.5%
commission: 0.15%
affiliate: 0.1%
house edge: 2%
commission: 0.2%
affiliate: 0.1%
house edge: 10%
commission: 1%
affiliate: 0.1%
My concern is that almost every bet is going to have a house edge of 1% or less, and most big players are going to make sure they have been referred by themselves or by a friend. So how does the house cover expenses when it is giving all its commission away to affiliates?
Edit: I notice profit and investment are both up this morning. Profit is positive for the first time in a while, and investment is over 25 BTC. Nice work.
Actually we are thinking of similar concern in the beginning. But we finally think this might be a good idea, especially with limitation on 1% H.E. calculation (to minimize loss when people referring themselves). This model rely that some player / whale will try to play on > 1% H.E., and not all players use referral system. This model succeeds if: number of high wager that comes from referred players is higher than the commission it takes to cover the referral fee. We might adjust the percentage in the future if this isn't working, but hopefully we don't have to.
Andd... Yes, the site is in profit... One of our loyal player made a few losing bets yesterday
December 02, 2014, 02:15:33 AM
Not sure what happened here!
martingaling i see... you said that was a losing strategy! lmfao
That hurts for sure.
December 02, 2014, 02:04:14 AM
martingaling i see... you said that was a losing strategy! lmfao
It is. So are all other dice strategies. I don't expect to win, I expect to lose eventually.
damb you must REALLY care ... obvious shill is obvious Lol
LolTautologies are tautological. What are you trying to say?
If you're suggesting that I created and am running a dice site with a bankroll of 26 BTC, you're very wrong.
Jump to: