Where Blinko Blast Points Actually Land
The real shape of the blast-point distribution, derived from the formula rather than sampled.
The distribution is not uniform, and that is the whole point
A common first assumption is that the blast point is drawn evenly between its floor and its cap — that a round is as likely to end at 60 degrees as at 6. It is not, and if it were, the game would be a very different and much more expensive one.
The blast point comes out of a single formula applied to a uniform random draw, published in full on the fairness page. Write the draw as u, a number between 0 and 1. The blast point in degrees is 1.85 + 0.95 / (1 − u), clamped to a floor of 2.80 and a cap of 100.00.
That division by (1 − u) is what shapes everything. When u is small the term is close to 0.95 and the blast point sits near its floor. The result only becomes large when u lands very close to 1, which happens rarely. The distribution has a heavy tail and a crowded left edge.
The numbers
Because the formula is deterministic and the draw is uniform, the distribution can be computed exactly rather than estimated from play. These figures are not measured from a sample of rounds; they follow from the arithmetic.
Half of all rounds end below 3.75 degrees. The mean is 7.21 degrees, which is nearly twice the median — the signature of a distribution dragged rightward by rare long rounds.
About 17% of rounds end below 3.00 degrees. Roughly 70% end below 5.00. Around 88% end below 10.00, and about 95% end below 20.00. Fewer than one round in a hundred — 0.97% — survives long enough to reach the 100.00 cap.
The floor is 2.80 degrees, so no round ends earlier than that. The cap is 100.00, and rounds that would have gone further are held there.
Reading the shape correctly
The gap between the median and the mean is the most informative thing here. If someone tells you the average round runs to 7.21 degrees, that is true and it is also misleading, because most rounds do not get close. The average is inflated by the small minority that run long.
This is why a player's impression of the game and the statistics of the game tend to disagree. A long round is memorable. Seventy short ones are not. Ask someone who has played a few hundred rounds where they usually end and they will overestimate, because they are recalling the tail.
It is also why a round that ends at 2.93 degrees is not evidence of anything being wrong. That is the common case. Roughly one round in six ends below 3.00, and a player who sits down for an evening will see a great many of them.
What the distribution does not tell you
It does not tell you where the next round will end. Each round draws independently, and knowing that 70% of rounds end below 5.00 degrees does not make the next one more or less likely to do so. The distribution describes the population, not the sequence.
In particular, a run of short rounds does not make a long one due. The draw has no memory of what came before it, and the formula is applied fresh to a new value each time.
It also says nothing about who loses. The blast point determines when the charge detonates; who is holding it at that moment is a matter of how the two of you played. The distribution is the same for both players in every round.
Checking this yourself
Everything above follows from one line of arithmetic, and you do not have to take it on trust. Take the formula from the algorithm, feed it a large number of evenly spaced values between 0 and 1, and the figures fall out. Any language with floating-point arithmetic will do.
The reason this can be published at all is that the formula is fixed and disclosed. A game that would not tell you its distribution is asking you to accept a claim about fairness with nothing behind it. The blast-point formula, the floor, the cap and the constant are all stated, and each individual round can be verified separately after it settles.