A big +1 to this!!!
This is a great idea. I like investor-chooses-their-max-profit than I like the market for edge. I think the 1% edge is this website's defining feature and it would be a mistake to change it.
But by implementing investor-chosen max profit we would arrive at the "optimal" max profit per roll (the sum of everyone's personal max profit setting), in the sense that it is the consensus of all the investors. This may be more or less than 1%. In fact, it would be fascinating to watch it go up and down as whale(s) come in and out.
This is the first idea I've read that seems worthy enough to change the format of the site.
Problem with that idea is with a house edge constantly having wild swings, we will lose "regular" players. People don't want the house edge changing on them moment by moment
Good counterargument. What about creating free market for max bet? Let investors choose themselves? Doog wants 0.25% but I think 1% is much better. If investors can choose themselves problem solved.
Any strong counterarguments against that?
Let's keep things simple - complex systems lead to unintended consequences. Having a sliding scale house edge complicated enough without also have the bankroll percent sliding as well.