Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thelawnet
The explanation from EH is clearly unsound. They claim that there was a bug in the software that was fixed by an automatic update, and previously denied that there was anything wrong with their software.
There is no such thing as an 'automatic' update. Computer code does not write itself, and cannot fix itself either. The code can only have been changed knowingly, and the fact that it was changed almost immediately after te problem was posted here is evidence that they were aware that the code was not fair; despite this they released a statement claiming that the game was fair, even after they had just changed the code that was rigged against the playe .
Although not ideal, it is not the end of the world for a casino to have a software 'problem' that they fix and compensate the player, but having denied that there was a probem having stealth fixed it just before claiming that with a sufficiently large sample the game would be fair, before it became clear that this explanation would not wash, is very difficult for them. Why change your software from biased to fair, and then deny that anything was wrong, pretending that nothing has been changed?
They used the honest mistake defence, which was their best option, but only after dishonestly first changing their software and then telling the world that it was fair, a claim they knew was false because they had just changed it. This fatally undermines their latest statement.
And let's not forget the question of why the game came to be rigged. They claim this was an accident. Given the circumstances it seems a duty that they provide a fuller explanation as to how this 'accidentally' came to pass. WHat was the code check in that led to it supposed to have done? They must give a more plausible explanation, although following the initial denial and sly change, things don't look too good for them.
Regarding the detail of the analysis, isnthis just for the English Harbour casino, or for all casinos? Does it include Hot Pepper and Fire and Ice which appeared tobe fair? How was it that these casinos played fair but EH did not?
|
I also think that there is MUCH more to this than we yet know.
One thing about this is that the double up is pretty straighfowward isnt it? 4 cards are dealt face down and you pick one and the program examines it, turns it over and you either win or lose. To misprogram that by accident I would think is impossable. You would have thought if it was a genuine error the program would either be letting you win every double up or none.
And another thing, was the software (when it was faulty
) picking lower cards from the available player choices to lose to the dealers card, or was it selecting a higher dealers card than average. I forgot to look at that when I ran my 200 doubles.
Anyway im not convinced it was an error at the moment, I cant see how it could have possably been given that the cards should be all random. I smell a rat.