Author Topic: Comparison to ChanceCoin  (Read 2306 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline AdamBLevine

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • Let's Talk Bitcoin!
Comparison to ChanceCoin
« on: May 24, 2014, 02:31:39 pm »
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.
Email me at [email protected]

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #1 on: May 24, 2014, 02:49:25 pm »
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.

Thanks, very interesting, and I was quite unaware of it. Looking into it now.
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline bytemaster

Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #2 on: May 24, 2014, 03:18:29 pm »
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.

Chance coin uses the bitcoin blockchain and a trusted data feed for the random numbers. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #3 on: May 24, 2014, 03:38:19 pm »
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.

Chance coin uses the bitcoin blockchain and a trusted data feed for the random numbers.

I'm quite impressed with what they've done there and also quite disillusioned that's it's not doing well in the marketplace.
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline HackFisher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 883
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #4 on: May 24, 2014, 03:42:49 pm »
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.

Chance coin uses the bitcoin blockchain and a trusted data feed for the random numbers.

Yes, their payout accounting is interesting, no need to use coinbase to payout jackpot. The dice rule in Bitshare Lotto are using similar approach..
« Last Edit: May 24, 2014, 03:48:30 pm by HackFisher »
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline liondani

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3715
  • Inch by inch, play by play
    • View Profile
    • My detailed info
  • BitShares: liondani
  • GitHub: liondani
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #5 on: May 24, 2014, 03:50:33 pm »
I'm quite impressed with what they've done there and also quite disillusioned that's it's not doing well in the marketplace.

They lack on design and marketing I guess. Look the website, why to spend time there. Would you visit it again as a player?

Offline super3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #6 on: May 25, 2014, 11:38:50 pm »
I'm quite impressed with what they've done there and also quite disillusioned that's it's not doing well in the marketplace.

They lack on design and marketing I guess. Look the website, why to spend time there. Would you visit it again as a player?
+5%. Just compare it to any other successful Bitcoin betting website.

Offline cass

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4311
  • /(┬.┬)\
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #7 on: May 26, 2014, 06:39:22 am »
I'm quite impressed with what they've done there and also quite disillusioned that's it's not doing well in the marketplace.

They lack on design and marketing I guess. Look the website, why to spend time there. Would you visit it again as a player?
+5%. Just compare it to any other successful Bitcoin betting website.

yup standard bootstrap theme ... but guess they have just started...
design could be improved over time when funds are collected ...


█║▌║║█  - - -  The quieter you become, the more you are able to hear  - - -  █║▌║║█

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #8 on: May 26, 2014, 11:08:36 am »
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.

One problem ChanceCoin will have is high transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain.

Average transaction cost is 30 to 40 cents at the moment -
https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction

You can certainly pay less, but then you may have to wait longer for your transaction to be included. I expect the situation to get worse over time, not better. I believe in a world of multiple competing blockchains, and the Bitcoin blockchain is not where you want to be long term for microtransactions (or even millitransactions).

I don't mean to bash them - it's impressive what they've done, but I'm seeing a few problems with it on closer inspection (this one may be structural) and areas where LottoShares can be competitive.
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #9 on: May 26, 2014, 11:41:36 am »
How similar is this to CHA?  http://chancecoin.com/  They have a 1% rake and launched recently.

One problem ChanceCoin will have is high transaction fees on the Bitcoin blockchain.

Average transaction cost is 30 to 40 cents at the moment -
https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction

You can certainly pay less, but then you may have to wait longer for your transaction to be included. I expect the situation to get worse over time, not better. I believe in a world of multiple competing blockchains, and the Bitcoin blockchain is not where you want to be long term for microtransactions (or even millitransactions).

I don't mean to bash them - it's impressive what they've done, but I'm seeing a few problems with it on closer inspection (this one may be structural) and areas where LottoShares can be competitive.
Quote
https://blockchain.info/charts/cost-per-transaction
The shitty site doesnt allow me to see it in the english version. With me it says Costs per tx given in USD. That would be 38 USD per tx atm. Do you see something different? Either the graph is ussposed to show the tx fees and they messed s.t. up or takes the dilution into account and is about correct.

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2014, 12:00:46 pm »
The shitty site doesnt allow me to see it in the english version. With me it says Costs per tx given in USD. That would be 38 USD per tx atm. Do you see something different? Either the graph is ussposed to show the tx fees and they messed s.t. up or takes the dilution into account and is about correct.

Yes, something amiss there alright. I assumed the error was that it was based in cents, not dollars. But looking at recent blocks, number of transactions and total transaction fees . . . it's more like a 10 cent average per transaction. Still high though, and I expect it to get a lot higher.
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline santaclause102

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2486
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #11 on: May 26, 2014, 12:14:47 pm »
The shitty site doesnt allow me to see it in the english version. With me it says Costs per tx given in USD. That would be 38 USD per tx atm. Do you see something different? Either the graph is ussposed to show the tx fees and they messed s.t. up or takes the dilution into account and is about correct.

Yes, something amiss there alright. I assumed the error was that it was based in cents, not dollars. But looking at recent blocks, number of transactions and total transaction fees . . . it's more like a 10 cent average per transaction. Still high though, and I expect it to get a lot higher.

If you take the dilution into account you have about 28USD/tx (25btc/400tx) but this is probably not what they mean...

Offline CLains

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2605
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: clains
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #12 on: May 27, 2014, 01:19:54 am »
Just goes to show how important frontend will be. Most coins go up on technical hype, and then later get money to grow themselves a nice face.

Offline donkeypong

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2329
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #13 on: May 27, 2014, 01:30:04 am »

I'm quite impressed with what they've done there and also quite disillusioned that's it's not doing well in the marketplace.

I think this is a good lesson for Bitshares as well. "If we build it, they will come" may well be true and Bitshares X may be special enough that it gets plenty of use from people inside the crypto community. But I think the potential markets for some DAC products may not overlap that much with the crypto community. Each DAC will have a back end of programmers/investors/boosters, but probably also needs a front end user interface and product that really appeals to the right market segment.

That is why I shake my head every time this community rejects an idea to increase and improve the marketing. Hopefully, we won't need a lot of it, but we must be prepared to sell the heck out of these DACs when they come out.

Offline Stan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2904
  • You need to think BIGGER, Pinky...
    • View Profile
    • Cryptonomex
  • BitShares: Stan
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #14 on: May 27, 2014, 01:52:11 am »

I'm quite impressed with what they've done there and also quite disillusioned that's it's not doing well in the marketplace.

I think this is a good lesson for Bitshares as well. "If we build it, they will come" may well be true and Bitshares X may be special enough that it gets plenty of use from people inside the crypto community. But I think the potential markets for some DAC products may not overlap that much with the crypto community. Each DAC will have a back end of programmers/investors/boosters, but probably also needs a front end user interface and product that really appeals to the right market segment.

That is why I shake my head every time this community rejects an idea to increase and improve the marketing. Hopefully, we won't need a lot of it, but we must be prepared to sell the heck out of these DACs when they come out.

BitShares Music is a great example of a team that is paying attention to the front-end, branding for the target audience and leveraging the expertise of people who know the existing industry.
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract of any kind.   These are merely my opinions which I reserve the right to change at any time.

Offline BldSwtTrs

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 220
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #15 on: May 27, 2014, 07:06:40 pm »
I stumble upon that on Reddit, it may be relevant to the discussion: http://bitcoin-betting-guide.com/james-cannings-blog/0-house-edge-provably-fair-and-trustless-gambling/

Offline vlight

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
  • BitShares: vlight
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #16 on: July 06, 2014, 11:43:28 am »
CHA devs are considering making negative house edge. So as a DAC it will be operating at loss. Not sure if this is a good or bad thing.  :-\

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=528023.msg7694263#msg7694263

Offline bytemaster

Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #17 on: July 06, 2014, 01:47:17 pm »
CHA devs are considering making negative house edge. So as a DAC it will be operating at loss. Not sure if this is a good or bad thing.  :-\

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=528023.msg7694263#msg7694263

I think it makes perfect sense to drive use and is a promotional item.   Certainly a win in the short term and likely to get the coin into the hands of those most interested in gambling.  Get them hooked, then change the house odds on them down the road after wide spread adoption.
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline FreeTrade

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #18 on: July 06, 2014, 03:54:29 pm »
CHA devs are considering making negative house edge. So as a DAC it will be operating at loss. Not sure if this is a good or bad thing.  :-\

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=528023.msg7694263#msg7694263

Hmm - I think it would be very encouraging for bot writers :)

The aim is new customer acquisition - but how do you tell a new customer's first bet from a bot's one millionth bet?
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

Offline Empirical1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 884
    • View Profile
Re: Comparison to ChanceCoin
« Reply #19 on: July 06, 2014, 07:36:23 pm »
CHA devs are considering making negative house edge. So as a DAC it will be operating at loss. Not sure if this is a good or bad thing.  :-\

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=528023.msg7694263#msg7694263

I think it makes perfect sense to drive use and is a promotional item.   Certainly a win in the short term and likely to get the coin into the hands of those most interested in gambling.  Get them hooked, then change the house odds on them down the road after wide spread adoption.

Negative house edge seems like a bad idea, I just asked them this question, but maybe I'm not thinking clearly

Quote
How often can you make a bet in your system?

If you gave me a 2% edge, I'd make $1000 bets expecting to make $20 on average per bet. If I could make a bet every 15 seconds, I'd be making $80 a minute on average from you guys.  Over the course of just 1 Day, I'd be expected to take $115 000 out of your coin, in exchange for only putting in a meagre $1-20K of my own money into your coin at the beginning to bankroll it, depending on how I fared with variance (with 2% odds in my favour, 100k bankroll and $1000 bets then http://www.albionresearch.com/kelly/default.php)

Is the above right?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=528023.msg7706522#msg7706522

He replied

Quote
We would have a limit to prevent this (probably a maximum total wagered with negative edge per block or per 100 blocks). The point is to encourage gambling, not to let someone take down the house.

So I guess if it's possible to implement limits, it's fine. It will certainly work for marketing. Perhaps a low maximum bet and some proof that you're not a bot.
« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 09:46:31 pm by Empirical1 »