How can we improve Transformer games?

Require DietBet10 participants to pay at least HALF the total amount up front.

By the fifth round, there could technically be NO pot at all, if only the winners are left in the game. People drop out as they become discouraged, sometimes, rather than dig in and keep trying. Not only would the "half-the-amount" commitment encourage people to continue trying, and be more likely to succeed, it would ALSO more properly reward those who do.

189 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Anonymous shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    15 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • SusieSusie commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Disagree! It shouldn't be that way the goal is weighloss and that is a reward ! And at least getting your own money back.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I think the idea is meant to promote deeper commitment, and higher reward, and isn't meant to be mean-spirited. I can see how some folks might find it so, though I don't. I think we'll let the votes it gets (or doesn't get) play out to see how folks take it, and whether they believe it would ADD to the game, overall.

      • Beverly HBeverly H commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        The reason the number of players dropped so drastically from 2200 to 650 in the last round is that Round5 has a requirement that you must be down 6% in order to qualify for Round6. Apparently there were a large number of players who either didn't submit a 5th round weigh-out or they did and did not meet the 6%. The remaining players who qualified were the 650 and would likely be final winners. It may have seemed like only winners left because those who didn't lose the 6% didn't drop out, they were disqualified from being winners. Sounds like anyone who won, more than doubled their original bet AND lost weight. I would not be in favor of this suggestion although I have paid for my DB10's upfront.

      • schraderschrader commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I definitely disagree with this approach. It limits who will pay in. Also, it seems foolish to "count on" proceeds before wading in. This isn't a bank account it's a weight reduction system. The prime benefit is losing weight. That's good enough. As a benefit you can earn a small amount of cash. Increasing pay outs will increase the amount of cheaters.

        As they used to say, "Don't count your chickens until they hatch!"

      • David Joseph PostDavid Joseph Post commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        As someone just starting I agree with the dissenters, this is a horrible idea and is really just about greed. The point of DietBet is to lose weight, if you make money along the way that's good but it isn't going to have me stop using this site just because I won but had a small payback because others dropped out.

        As virtually everyone has pointed out the dropouts have already paid into the final pot anyway, just a little less than was initially thought. This idea should be closed.

      • Gmail David ValentineGmail David Valentine commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Dietbet is attractive because it's simple. There are other sites, but they have more complex rules and games.

        Simple works for now. Even now people can't read the rules, and figure out that $25 gets split. so that $16 you won in round 1, is less that the $25 you put in for the month, but more than the $12.50 you put in the months pot.

        The could go more complex, and do some splits
        * 1) 40, 5,5,5,5, 40
        2) 40, 5,5,5, 45
        3) 40, 5,5, 55
        4) 40, 5, 55
        5) 40, 60
        6) 100

        but as noted above, people can read the rules now.

      • jhostmanjhostman commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yeaaaah... if that were the case, you *definitely* would have smaller pots all around, because a lot of us (myself included) wouldn't be able to participate.

      • William HoarWilliam Hoar commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I don't understand your reasoning. Every month anybody sticks around they contribute to the pot. People who bail contributed to the both the month pots they were around for, and the final pot which they didn't split any of. If you got 60% to stay in the game instead of 50% of folks, if at least 50% of those who stick around win, then you have even less money to split. Ideally you'd want EVERYONE to drop out and you'd be a huge winner. The fewer the people that stick around the more of THEIR money you keep in the final pot. You would earn more it is true if everyone paid at least half up front, but if that scared away everyone but the most dedicated the pot would be smaller and the amount of winners might be high enough to cancel out the benefit.

        They already try to convince people to pay less by paying it all up front. I did that, and so far I'm looking like I'll win round 6 if i maintain my weight.

        So....seems to me you either entice the weak willed and uncertain to play the first few months and keep their money in the rounds they keep trying AND what they contributed to round 6, or you scare all them off and probably only have workaholic and dedicated folks making EVERY pot smaller because so many win each round. A small round 5 pot, no profit, would be the price you paid for large pots on the backs of those who failed earlier in the game.

      • amy!amy! commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Where did it project what your winnings would be? I'm in 3 DB10s and I've been following all the Transformers VERY closely and I've never seen a final winnings projection. In a perfect world, everyone makes their goal and all you "win" is exactly what you paid into it. They show you what the pot is, but the size of the pot actually doesn't matter at all, it's the percentage of people who win a round that determines what the share of the pot is, no matter how many people are playing. The November game lost less than 10% of the original participants in Rounds 1-5. That's better than some of the games that have come after you (the Dec game has already lost more than 10% and Round 5 hasn't ended yet). People drop out for all sorts of reasons, but the drop outs aren't significantly affecting your payout.

        If people had to pre-pay a larger chunk, you'd probably get fewer people playing overall, or more committed people, so a larger number of winners and a smaller payout as well. I'm sorry you're really upset about losing 10% of your starting weight and winning more than $200.

      • tonyatonya commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        If dietbet would clearly explain the guarantee a bit better for the db10... which is that even if they miss other rounds they can still get their money back if they reach 10% by the end (not the pot- just their money back)... I think less people would drop out. They would just continue on in hopes to get to the 10% even though they would not get extra, they would work toward getting their money back.

      • William HoarWilliam Hoar commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        They already make it 16% cheaper if you pay up front as opposed to pay monthly. I paid up front because of that, and because I want to be fully committed to this.

        As others have said half of the 25 dollar fee per round goes towards the final pot, and if you scared 50% of the participants away who would have felt more comfortable with a smaller initial investment to see if they liked the site that would DECREASE the size of the final pot. Furthermore, someone who was low income CAN'T pay 75 dollars up front because they have other pressing bills. 25 dollars a month though is something that a lot of people would be able to squeeze out of their budget if they cut out daily coffees or eating out a few times a week.

      • Toby DelrahimToby Delrahim commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        This seems unnecessary to me. The people that drop out are already contributing half their winnings each round to the final pot. Making it harder to sign up would just get you fewer people willing to join the game to start with. We are all about the final result, not the winnings in the pot for a particular round. The goal is not to keep loser's money in the game, it is to make more people meet their goals. If you need more winnings, you should join another game that overlaps with your later rounds.

      • J SJ S commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        I'm not a fan of this idea. Participants who drop will still have paid into the final pot, so the "winners" are more than fairly rewarded at the end of the game. Over a six month bet, there are likely to be folks who get discouraged as well as folks who have legitimate reasons to drop out. Still, even with close to 10% attrition in the Nov-May game, we still have a substantial number of folks staying with it.

        Keeping the games positive seems a better way to keep people in the game rather than shaming/further penalizing those who need to drop. Those who have to leave have already left money behind.

      • Anonymous commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

        Yeah! This would ensure that the pot for that last round is commensurate with the 6-month effort people put in! The "half-the-amount" required to pay in should be set aside for the last round's pot, since half the pot is set aside for the last round, anyway, in the current rules.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base