Quote from: shadypepe on May 27, 2014, 09:48:53 PM

Quote from: TwinWinNerD on May 27, 2014, 06:51:20 PM

Quote from: shadypepe on May 27, 2014, 06:48:53 PM

Quote from: TwinWinNerD on May 27, 2014, 06:43:05 PM

Quote from: shadypepe on May 27, 2014, 06:22:04 PM

Alright, per definition can you not have a betting system without either p2p interaction or central authority. The question here is how far should CHA go, if the limit is p2p interaction then obviously you can't go far beyond dice games or roulette. The interesting part of the gambling world is in interaction with other players, though. So I'd say why not introduce interaction (at a later point probably, first things first)

There is already a coin/system that does that. And basically all people that invested in this coin don't want to trust somebody. The whole appeal of this coin is that noone can cheat here.

Lets look at it another way. Why is BTC so awesome? Nobody can manipulate the total number of coins. Same goes for CHA.

Now we introduce your sportsbet manager that sets the "fair" odds. What happens if he goes rouge or makes a big mistake? Like he creates 500000 new coins by accident (fat finger)?
This isn't all to unrealistic... Mistakes happen all the time.

I'd rather see a fork with those features, than see that implemented into CHA. CHA should focus on all the casino games that are out there. Slots, roulette, blackjack, dice, and many more...

A market is as fair as it gets, I'm not in favour of a sportsbet manager. I mean I think we're at a dead end here, I think you're excluding a lot of gambling by excluding interactions with other players (such as one of the most popular casino games, namely poker), but if you don't think so I can't change that and I see your point.

Don't get me wrong, we can add a p2p layer ontop of CHA where players can bet against EACH OTHER. Just not against the house, thats all Im saying!

Cool would be a system like this: People place their bets, if more than say 50 bets for one event are placed, the odds could be determined (let's say 20:30, so 2:3) so then the whole thing is resolved via chancecoins usual system (coins are created for the winners, destroyed for the losers)
That would bring P2P and CHA's original concept together. Only problem is abuse, one guy places all the 50 bets, and there are no "arbitrageurs" who bet against him. Don't know if that's killing the idea or if one could protect against this.

The system must be 100% un-exploitable and trust-less. So the only way would be a system like betfair or http://bitbet.us/. Those systems are pretty solid and can be implemented easily. CHA could introduce "rake", a fee that would be deducted from the payout of the winner. This way the other CHA holder would profit from the bets made on CHA network.