Quote from: Timetwister on March 25, 2019, 11:06:20 AM

Quote from: leen93 on March 25, 2019, 02:05:12 AM

2 questions:

what's the point of on site VS off site
if you want to invest 3 BTC, why would you put 3 BTC in the on site VS 1 BTC in the on site and 2 BTC in the off site? you qre going to hqve the exact same earnings, with more risk, is there anything else different?
result of this: all the big/smart guys leverage max, if there is 1000 BTC in the on site, there is 2000 offsite and with the investment above you own .1%
if offsite didnt exist you would still own .1%. It complicates stuff but dont see any benefit. Except that the actual dilute fee becomes 6 instead of 2% (because everyone pretends to invest 3 times as much and pays 2% fee on 200% non-existing btc).

who is that 2 (or 6 however you see it) % fee going? distributed according to investors' onsite or total (on/off)site investment?

i like the site, but a lot of things are never mentioned clearly and that makes it kinda suspicious to me.

I don't like the onsite/offsite system much either, I'd prefer max possible winnings per round to be just Kelly*2. Anyway, if this system exists, I think it's sensible to use a lower leverage than 1:3, because that way, if a whale starts winning big, your bankroll expected growth may become negative. Kelly*2 would be 1:4/3 leverage if I remind correctly, way less than 1:3. That doesn't mean that it's the optimal leverage, as players are very rarely targetting the max profit and therefore casino earnings are way more stable than if players were going for the maximum prize all the time.

Dilution fees go to investors, including yourself. They are distributed based on what percentage of the bankroll you own.

The safest, and I think the most EV+ method of investing in the bustabit bankroll is by keeping nothing off-site so that your exposure is 1:1. Even is a whale event happens, he/she is pretty likely to get raped in the end, so you come out ahead. In practicality, however, the bustabit bankroll has been steadily increasing at an astonishing rate for several months, which means that a leveraged investment would have done very well.

Regretfully, my 2 BTC investment was liquidated during the KLITZ/FREE-JBAY5 fiasco, but is was a calculated gamble and I lost. If I do invest again, it'll be 1:2 instead of 1:5, which is what I think I did at the time.

Anyway, it's good that the option exists. People with a higher risk tolerance such as myself can choose to abuse the off-site system, and people with a safer risk profile can decide to ignore it.