I should probably let Dooglus speak for himself, but you perhaps misread what he wrote. He didn't say that investors make 15% of the EV, he's saying they have made of the EV. I don't see any error or misguidance in his statements.

Perhaps a better response would've been "Hey, our investors made 50% of what they should've. Yours only 30%"  or something. ( I <3 twisting statistics)


But anyway, I think perhaps the bigger concern is most people don't really understand the difference between "Expected Value" and "Expected Bankroll Growth" and just assume that if they're +EV they should expect the bankroll to grow, but the reality is if the bankroll is over leveraged that's not the case.

I'm not sure when MoneyPot switched from the kelly system, but some time after it did I warned of the risks and provided a simulator that showed how investors should expect to lose money. That was posted on April 18, where I recorded the investor profit at 101 BTC, and it's currently 62 BTC and have had substantial dilution in the mean time.

As much as I love to say I was right, it could also be attributed to other factors. But it's probably worth entertaining the possibility that running a bankroll at -BRG is a horrible idea.



That said, I have no problems with letting people do what ever they want (we're all consenting adults) but I suspect if the wording was a bit more clear: "By investing here you get 30% of the EV, but should expect to lose money over the long term if whales play on the site" it might result in less investment. Or maybe not, maybe the investors like to also passively gamble.