By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales Discussion - Bet Challenge #4 Consecutive Growth (ends Jan 13)

         

What console had the most amount of consecutive weeks selling more than the previous week?

3DS 0 $0.00 0%
 
DS 1 $50.00 11.11%
 
NS 1 $50.00 11.11%
 
PS4 1 $100.00 11.11%
 
PSP 2 $239.00 22.22%
 
PSV 1 $100.00 11.11%
 
Wii 1 $62.52 11.11%
 
X360 2 $510.00 22.22%
 
 
Totals: 9 $1,111.52  
Game closed: 01/13/2021

Aww, the Vita was 3rd. So close yet so far.

Plus I don't think the payout system needs changing. I think it's better to have your winnings determined by how much you bet, rather than how much other people bet.

Consider a scenario with just 2 betters. A puts $1000 on option 1, B puts $10 on option 2. If A wins then they only gained $10 from a $1000 bet, way too much risk to be worth it. If B won however they'd win $1000 from a $10 bet, which is crazy!



Around the Network
Ka-pi96 said:

Aww, the Vita was 3rd. So close yet so far.

Plus I don't think the payout system needs changing. I think it's better to have your winnings determined by how much you bet, rather than how much other people bet.

Consider a scenario with just 2 betters. A puts $1000 on option 1, B puts $10 on option 2. If A wins then they only gained $10 from a $1000 bet, way too much risk to be worth it. If B won however they'd win $1000 from a $10 bet, which is crazy!

I don't think you can set how it should work in the forums.

On the other hand, this could be made a website feature similar to the prediction league. Might want to have a word with @TruckOSaurus or @trunkswd if you want to go that route @dmillos . I would sure welcome it if it would become a part of the website, something like our own trivia quiz.

Last edited by Bofferbrauer2 - 2 days ago

So I actually won!

Now I regret chickening out on the height of my bet.



Bofferbrauer2 said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Aww, the Vita was 3rd. So close yet so far.

Plus I don't think the payout system needs changing. I think it's better to have your winnings determined by how much you bet, rather than how much other people bet.

Consider a scenario with just 2 betters. A puts $1000 on option 1, B puts $10 on option 2. If A wins then they only gained $10 from a $1000 bet, way too much risk to be worth it. If B won however they'd win $1000 from a $10 bet, which is crazy!

I don't think you can set how it should work in the forums.

On the other hand, this could be made a website feature similar to the prediction league. Might want to have a word with @TruckOSaurus or @trunkswd if you want to go that route @dmillos . I would sure welcome it if it would become a part of the website, something like our own trivia quiz.

No, you can't. Which is why a change would be global and I'm saying that I prefer the current system.



Ka-pi96 said:

Aww, the Vita was 3rd. So close yet so far.

Plus I don't think the payout system needs changing. I think it's better to have your winnings determined by how much you bet, rather than how much other people bet.

Consider a scenario with just 2 betters. A puts $1000 on option 1, B puts $10 on option 2. If A wins then they only gained $10 from a $1000 bet, way too much risk to be worth it. If B won however they'd win $1000 from a $10 bet, which is crazy!

Hi @Ka-pi96 Your bet was  so close and honestly the logic behind it was really good. Unfortunately for you, the DS had a lucky break that allowed it to be #1. It is incredible because the DS sold 5.8M during its streak while the PSV sold .8M during the 10 weeks. 

If you are up to it, I would enjoy going back and forth on some ideas for the Betting System, this way we could analyze if there is a need of a proposal at all. But I feel that there could be some things to suggest. The best way is for us to discuss it and form a good proposal for them to review. Obviously every change is very time consuming so it would have to be worth it. Obviously anyone that read this is more than invited to join the discussion, as it would certainly help us get to better ideas.

I like your scenario and this are some of the positive things I see about it.

1) Discourage large Bets: The first thing that comes to mind, is that this betting system is more for fun, being able to win a little money here and there is good, I don't want anyone to go bankrupt by playing these challenges. So a system like I mentioned would really discourage large amounts because people would realize that the risk is not as good as the reward. So having everyone do smaller bets could be a positive thing.

2) Reward based on probability: In your scenario lets assume that the person bet 1000 because it seems like a sure bet, while the person that bet 10 was a bit optimistic. Let's say  the bet was who is going to sell more in 2021. Someone would easily bet 1000, while anyone betting on XS would feel like they are very likely going to lose their money. In this case, it is better to reward the Bold and crazy bets. If someone is willing to bet 10 on XS then it makes sense that the reward is high. Basically it rewards based on odds of winning. Just like in roulette, if you bet on color you get only double your money, but if you bet on a number you get 36 times what you bet. On the other hand, someone winning 500 from a sure bet doesn't seem so appropriate.

3) No extra money is created: With the current system, one bet can pay out more than what it took from all the bets, so the system basically creates new money in order to pay. If you simply split the pot, you will have a stable system that will recycle all the bets. This increases the odds of people not being able to Game the system by creating easy bets and always gaining 500. Not that anyone is trying to do that, but it just makes the game more stable.

These are just some of my first thoughts. What do you think? do you see any extra flaws in doing it this way?

Also some features that could be useful would be:

a) dynamic countdown of how many hours left in the bet. Right now if I chose that the bet closes on a certain day, it seems like as soon as it is that day eastern time it closes it. But I am not that sure if that is true. So instead of saying the end date, it could be a countdown that says how many days and hours are left.

b) Add the option to hide answers, this could help the people from simply copying what most people are saying.

c) In the case of my proposal, being able to see how are the odds of each bet (this contradicts a bit with the previous point). But it could be an option to encourage people to make bold predictions.

d) A table of most money earned each month could encourage people to make more bets.

These are just some random thoughts that I would appreciate anyone giving some feedback on. The more perspectives, the better.

Thanks everyone for playing these challenges, I am still trying to figure out what types of questions are more fun to ask. Right now it seems like the Monkey Island idea didn't work out so well, but I think that these number related challenges are more attractive.



Around the Network
dmillos said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Aww, the Vita was 3rd. So close yet so far.

Plus I don't think the payout system needs changing. I think it's better to have your winnings determined by how much you bet, rather than how much other people bet.

Consider a scenario with just 2 betters. A puts $1000 on option 1, B puts $10 on option 2. If A wins then they only gained $10 from a $1000 bet, way too much risk to be worth it. If B won however they'd win $1000 from a $10 bet, which is crazy!

Hi @Ka-pi96 Your bet was  so close and honestly the logic behind it was really good. Unfortunately for you, the DS had a lucky break that allowed it to be #1. It is incredible because the DS sold 5.8M during its streak while the PSV sold .8M during the 10 weeks. 

If you are up to it, I would enjoy going back and forth on some ideas for the Betting System, this way we could analyze if there is a need of a proposal at all. But I feel that there could be some things to suggest. The best way is for us to discuss it and form a good proposal for them to review. Obviously every change is very time consuming so it would have to be worth it. Obviously anyone that read this is more than invited to join the discussion, as it would certainly help us get to better ideas.

I like your scenario and this are some of the positive things I see about it.

1) Discourage large Bets: The first thing that comes to mind, is that this betting system is more for fun, being able to win a little money here and there is good, I don't want anyone to go bankrupt by playing these challenges. So a system like I mentioned would really discourage large amounts because people would realize that the risk is not as good as the reward. So having everyone do smaller bets could be a positive thing.

2) Reward based on probability: In your scenario lets assume that the person bet 1000 because it seems like a sure bet, while the person that bet 10 was a bit optimistic. Let's say  the bet was who is going to sell more in 2021. Someone would easily bet 1000, while anyone betting on XS would feel like they are very likely going to lose their money. In this case, it is better to reward the Bold and crazy bets. If someone is willing to bet 10 on XS then it makes sense that the reward is high. Basically it rewards based on odds of winning. Just like in roulette, if you bet on color you get only double your money, but if you bet on a number you get 36 times what you bet. On the other hand, someone winning 500 from a sure bet doesn't seem so appropriate.

3) No extra money is created: With the current system, one bet can pay out more than what it took from all the bets, so the system basically creates new money in order to pay. If you simply split the pot, you will have a stable system that will recycle all the bets. This increases the odds of people not being able to Game the system by creating easy bets and always gaining 500. Not that anyone is trying to do that, but it just makes the game more stable.

These are just some of my first thoughts. What do you think? do you see any extra flaws in doing it this way?

Also some features that could be useful would be:

a) dynamic countdown of how many hours left in the bet. Right now if I chose that the bet closes on a certain day, it seems like as soon as it is that day eastern time it closes it. But I am not that sure if that is true. So instead of saying the end date, it could be a countdown that says how many days and hours are left.

b) Add the option to hide answers, this could help the people from simply copying what most people are saying.

c) In the case of my proposal, being able to see how are the odds of each bet (this contradicts a bit with the previous point). But it could be an option to encourage people to make bold predictions.

d) A table of most money earned each month could encourage people to make more bets.

These are just some random thoughts that I would appreciate anyone giving some feedback on. The more perspectives, the better.

Thanks everyone for playing these challenges, I am still trying to figure out what types of questions are more fun to ask. Right now it seems like the Monkey Island idea didn't work out so well, but I think that these number related challenges are more attractive.

1. I don't think that's a good thing. Granted, I say this as one of the wealthier people here with $14k available, but winning little bits here and there isn't really that fun when you already have a lot. Being able to win larger amounts is definitely better.

2. I like the idea, but if you were going that route then the bet creator should be able to set the odds for each choice. If you were just giving out the total bets to the winner/s then it would be popularity based rather than probability. Plus in your scenario of somebody betting on the XS to sell the most, they'd win the exact same from a $1 bet as they would a $1000 bet, which definitely doesn't seem right.

3. I don't see the issue with that. There aren't many ways to get more $VG. I believe contributing to the database and bets are the only ways. So if one of those were to change to solely redistribution rather than creation of money it would severely limit the amount of money people could have. IMO if everybody has enough money that they're willing to make bets that they don't mind losing, that's better than people being reluctant to make bets because they don't have much money.

An hourly countdown would be great though. Hiding the bets would be fine, although if that were to happen I'd prefer if it only hid them until betting closed, after that it would be nice to see how much was bet on what still, that's interesting to see.



Ka-pi96 said:

1. I don't think that's a good thing. Granted, I say this as one of the wealthier people here with $14k available, but winning little bits here and there isn't really that fun when you already have a lot. Being able to win larger amounts is definitely better.

2. I like the idea, but if you were going that route then the bet creator should be able to set the odds for each choice. If you were just giving out the total bets to the winner/s then it would be popularity based rather than probability. Plus in your scenario of somebody betting on the XS to sell the most, they'd win the exact same from a $1 bet as they would a $1000 bet, which definitely doesn't seem right.

3. I don't see the issue with that. There aren't many ways to get more $VG. I believe contributing to the database and bets are the only ways. So if one of those were to change to solely redistribution rather than creation of money it would severely limit the amount of money people could have. IMO if everybody has enough money that they're willing to make bets that they don't mind losing, that's better than people being reluctant to make bets because they don't have much money.

An hourly countdown would be great though. Hiding the bets would be fine, although if that were to happen I'd prefer if it only hid them until betting closed, after that it would be nice to see how much was bet on what still, that's interesting to see.

Hi @Ka-pi96 thank you for your reply it has helped me view it from a different perspective. Here are some thoughts that come to mind with each answer:

1) Win more money: This really got me thinking that there are probably two reasons why the max $1000 limit is in place. To protect people from losing everything and to prevent people from winning too much with easy bets. The first one I thought it was important, but in the end, there will be more opportunities for people to earn VG$ from increasing their gamrPoints, so there is always a chance for them. The second one is one that I think that the Bet Pot system could help solve.

If people only win what is in the pot, then there is probably no reason to put any limit on how much you can bet. This opens up the possibility of much more money being in the pot and thus, the ability to earn a lot more VG$ from a single bet.

Not to mention that if you bet on the underdog you would win a lot more money, so whether you have a lot of $ or not, you can still win a lot more than the $500 max that is currently set.

2) Traditional Betting system in Horses: My proposal of doing it this way, is the way that Horses and games like Jai-Alai handle their bets. Odds are calculated in real time based on popularity, that is why the experts are able to see the situation and make value bets of items they feel are paying more than what they should. Having people be able to set the odds would open the door for an individual to be able to try and manipulate the system to win a lot of money. In my example, someone could say that the switch winning 2021 gives 1000 times what you bet, that would lead everyone to win a lot on a very simple bet.

3)Let people go broke: You made me change my mind on this one, there is really no need to babysit people from losing all their play money, it is just a game, so if they lose everything and feel bad, then the next VG$ they get, they will probably take more care of it. This would help the idea of removing the maximum bet.

4)I agree with you, once the bets are done, being able to see exactly how much was bet on each one is a good thing. This and the timer seem to be two solid ideas for the proposal.

5) I just wanted to throw another idea here about being able to add Badges based on the Betting system, some that come to mind are:

-Won your first Bet

-Lost when betting on the most popular answer

-Won when betting on the least popular answer

-Won more than double what you bet.



dmillos said:
Ka-pi96 said:

1. I don't think that's a good thing. Granted, I say this as one of the wealthier people here with $14k available, but winning little bits here and there isn't really that fun when you already have a lot. Being able to win larger amounts is definitely better.

2. I like the idea, but if you were going that route then the bet creator should be able to set the odds for each choice. If you were just giving out the total bets to the winner/s then it would be popularity based rather than probability. Plus in your scenario of somebody betting on the XS to sell the most, they'd win the exact same from a $1 bet as they would a $1000 bet, which definitely doesn't seem right.

3. I don't see the issue with that. There aren't many ways to get more $VG. I believe contributing to the database and bets are the only ways. So if one of those were to change to solely redistribution rather than creation of money it would severely limit the amount of money people could have. IMO if everybody has enough money that they're willing to make bets that they don't mind losing, that's better than people being reluctant to make bets because they don't have much money.

An hourly countdown would be great though. Hiding the bets would be fine, although if that were to happen I'd prefer if it only hid them until betting closed, after that it would be nice to see how much was bet on what still, that's interesting to see.

Hi @Ka-pi96 thank you for your reply it has helped me view it from a different perspective. Here are some thoughts that come to mind with each answer:

1) Win more money: This really got me thinking that there are probably two reasons why the max $1000 limit is in place. To protect people from losing everything and to prevent people from winning too much with easy bets. The first one I thought it was important, but in the end, there will be more opportunities for people to earn VG$ from increasing their gamrPoints, so there is always a chance for them. The second one is one that I think that the Bet Pot system could help solve.

If people only win what is in the pot, then there is probably no reason to put any limit on how much you can bet. This opens up the possibility of much more money being in the pot and thus, the ability to earn a lot more VG$ from a single bet.

Not to mention that if you bet on the underdog you would win a lot more money, so whether you have a lot of $ or not, you can still win a lot more than the $500 max that is currently set.

2) Traditional Betting system in Horses: My proposal of doing it this way, is the way that Horses and games like Jai-Alai handle their bets. Odds are calculated in real time based on popularity, that is why the experts are able to see the situation and make value bets of items they feel are paying more than what they should. Having people be able to set the odds would open the door for an individual to be able to try and manipulate the system to win a lot of money. In my example, someone could say that the switch winning 2021 gives 1000 times what you bet, that would lead everyone to win a lot on a very simple bet.

3)Let people go broke: You made me change my mind on this one, there is really no need to babysit people from losing all their play money, it is just a game, so if they lose everything and feel bad, then the next VG$ they get, they will probably take more care of it. This would help the idea of removing the maximum bet.

4)I agree with you, once the bets are done, being able to see exactly how much was bet on each one is a good thing. This and the timer seem to be two solid ideas for the proposal.

5) I just wanted to throw another idea here about being able to add Badges based on the Betting system, some that come to mind are:

-Won your first Bet

-Lost when betting on the most popular answer

-Won when betting on the least popular answer

-Won more than double what you bet.

1. Winning a lot more money would only be a possibility. It certainly wouldn't be a guarantee. It would depend entirely on how many people are participating and what their bets are. There may well be more scenarios in which you'd win less than those in which you'd win more actually. That said it's probably a moot point since it would either be a massively unfair system in which somebody betting $1 would win the same as somebody betting $1000, or it would be a massive pain in the arse to code so that it distributes money proportionally based on how much each winner bet, so I doubt it would be implemented.

Perhaps a better proposal would be to have the option of a raffle style bet as an alternative. So you can choose a regular bet, or one where the "bet" is a fixed amount so nobody is betting more or less than anybody else and then the winnings are split evenly between all winners.

2. I don't know too much about horse racing specifically, but odds aren't really based on popularity. They're based on what experts think their chances are given current form, conditions etc. They are adjusted based on popularity, but I'd argue that's much more to do with the house trying to limit how much they could lose and maximise their profits. Not really a concern here where the house isn't really a factor.

5. I'd love to see some betting badges for sure!



Ka-pi96 said:

1. Winning a lot more money would only be a possibility. It certainly wouldn't be a guarantee. It would depend entirely on how many people are participating and what their bets are. There may well be more scenarios in which you'd win less than those in which you'd win more actually. That said it's probably a moot point since it would either be a massively unfair system in which somebody betting $1 would win the same as somebody betting $1000, or it would be a massive pain in the arse to code so that it distributes money proportionally based on how much each winner bet, so I doubt it would be implemented.

Perhaps a better proposal would be to have the option of a raffle style bet as an alternative. So you can choose a regular bet, or one where the "bet" is a fixed amount so nobody is betting more or less than anybody else and then the winnings are split evenly between all winners.

2. I don't know too much about horse racing specifically, but odds aren't really based on popularity. They're based on what experts think their chances are given current form, conditions etc. They are adjusted based on popularity, but I'd argue that's much more to do with the house trying to limit how much they could lose and maximise their profits. Not really a concern here where the house isn't really a factor.

5. I'd love to see some betting badges for sure!

Awesome ideas @Ka-pi96 Thank you.

1) This first point it is important to discuss because I feel I haven't explained it yet. if two people bet on the same thing, and one bet $1 and the other $100 they would get back different amounts of money. Just like there is right now, there would be a multiplier. The only difference with my proposal is that the multiplier is dynamic. Instead of always being 1.5x it would be based on how much money was on the pot vs how much was bet on the winning answer.

Here is an example from a bet from @Mnementh :

Let's say that the correct answer is 15-17.5M. This means that 3 people won.

The multiplier would be calculated like this (totalPot/WinningBet) (7,914.69/1,446) = 5.47.

This means that if one of the three winners bet $100, then they would get payed $547

While if someone else placed only a $10 bet, they would win $54.7.

So the programming is basically just making the multiplier adjust based on who won, the rest of the system would stay exactly the same.

2) What I enjoy about the horse racing system is that the house doesn't care who wins. Like I mentioned before, in horse racing, the winners divide the total Pot (minus the house cut). The way the house makes money is that they take a percentage of the pot, lets say they take 10% of the pot and then distribute  the rest amongst the winners by using the Dynamic multiplier. So in this system the house is only motivated by trying to have more people bet, they don't care who wins the money. odds of each horse is calculated the same way I showed the dynamic multiplier. That is why when you go to a race you will see the odds changing every few seconds.

3) You mentioned the raffle system, I think this is another type of system we can think about and maybe it could be the best proposal. What I like about it is that it would prevent people from gaming the system. It will also pay better for people that make bold predictions rather than the safe bets. The only difference really with my proposal is that there would probably be a lot less money in the pot, thus making it harder for someone to make a lot of money. The good thing about the open amounts is that someone like you could beef up the pot for everyone else. Making it a lot more attractive for others to join.

Thank you very much for the discussion, it is great to organize ideas and compare thoughts.



dmillos said:

Awesome ideas @Ka-pi96 Thank you.

1) This first point it is important to discuss because I feel I haven't explained it yet. if two people bet on the same thing, and one bet $1 and the other $100 they would get back different amounts of money. Just like there is right now, there would be a multiplier. The only difference with my proposal is that the multiplier is dynamic. Instead of always being 1.5x it would be based on how much money was on the pot vs how much was bet on the winning answer.

Here is an example from a bet from @Mnementh :

Let's say that the correct answer is 15-17.5M. This means that 3 people won.

The multiplier would be calculated like this (totalPot/WinningBet) (7,914.69/1,446) = 5.47.

This means that if one of the three winners bet $100, then they would get payed $547

While if someone else placed only a $10 bet, they would win $54.7.

So the programming is basically just making the multiplier adjust based on who won, the rest of the system would stay exactly the same.

2) What I enjoy about the horse racing system is that the house doesn't care who wins. Like I mentioned before, in horse racing, the winners divide the total Pot (minus the house cut). The way the house makes money is that they take a percentage of the pot, lets say they take 10% of the pot and then distribute  the rest amongst the winners by using the Dynamic multiplier. So in this system the house is only motivated by trying to have more people bet, they don't care who wins the money. odds of each horse is calculated the same way I showed the dynamic multiplier. That is why when you go to a race you will see the odds changing every few seconds.

3) You mentioned the raffle system, I think this is another type of system we can think about and maybe it could be the best proposal. What I like about it is that it would prevent people from gaming the system. It will also pay better for people that make bold predictions rather than the safe bets. The only difference really with my proposal is that there would probably be a lot less money in the pot, thus making it harder for someone to make a lot of money. The good thing about the open amounts is that someone like you could beef up the pot for everyone else. Making it a lot more attractive for others to join.

Thank you very much for the discussion, it is great to organize ideas and compare thoughts.

2. Sounds like you're talking about a pool type betting? Except one where they can choose which one they bet on, rather than it being randomly assigned.

The horse racing bets that I know of are just regular bets. ie. you bet against the house. If you win then they pay out based on the odds they offered on that horse, if you lose then they keep your money for themselves.

I've only done an accumlator or two when it comes to horse racing though, just on the off chance I end being one of those folk that wins £1,000,000 from £1

And yeah, 'twas a good discussion.