Mathematical Proof that English Harbour is cheating

[spearmaster]

Welcome to Casinomeister, Slash!

Technically, yes - I have a full time job which requires me to work 7 days a week - with another 7 hours a day doing work for both that job as well as doing online-gambling related work.

Right now, though, I am attending the Global Interactive Gaming Show and Expo in Montreal, with Casinomeister and Jetset also present. This week is full of meeting people from the industry, other colleagues who run websites, and even players who have taken the time to come out here to meet up with us.

This afternoon I am on the eCOGRA panel discussion about player protection - guess who's going to represent the players LOL... I invite any of you out there who are in Montreal attending the GIGSE to come and see us - and see if I really am interested in protecting the player or just paying lip service - you can judge for yourselves in a live forum

Thanks for your kind words, they are much appreciated.

[kengam]

So I read on the other forum that English Harbour has stated that a incomplete bonus round was causing the bug in the double up game. That is total horse crap. Are you going to tell us that you buy this excuse Spearmaster? I would like to hear a word or two from Bryan about this.

As far as I am concerned, Odds On, English Harbour, and any webmaster who advertises for them should be blacklisted. Anyone else who defends them has already lost trust and integrity in other forum circles. I am disappointed in The Wiz for falling into their trap and protecting his auditing bisiness which must be pretty lucrative. This whole affair smells bad. Everyone involved in it that weren't cheated themselves should be ashamed.

[spearmaster]

Kengam -

I have the code here. I have analyzed it and determined that it is definitely buggy, since certain variables are missing. But the key bug is not even a full line of code - it is a change in a reference to a particular object.

And, to be honest, I would be skeptical as well if I did not have the code in front of me.

Anyhow, I'm not going to debate the issue of belief - you can determine that for yourself when I'm done. I know that many of you want to believe that you've been cheated - and that many of you believe I've been bought, as well as the Wiz - and you're entitled to your opinion.

Whether I deny it or not you're not going to believe me - so you guys might as well stop reading because you've already made up your minds. Why waste your time posting in these threads?

For the record (whether you believe it or not) I have not received any compensation of any sort from anyone for my work - not even a Mountain Dew. I will, however, be meeting with EH management tomorrow for lunch, along with CasinoMeister. It ain't going to be wine and cheese, more likely it will be lunch in a hotel restaurant in full view of tens if not hundreds of other participants at GIGSE.

Full disclosure - whether you believe it or not. If I manage to get in touch with PinaBaby before she leaves Montreal I will gladly show her everything as well - whether it makes any difference or not I have no idea. And anyone else who is here in the area can feel free to let me know and I will be glad to show them too.

[kengam]

I have my own facts. My mind was made up long before April. Spearmaster you keep telling us that you have the code and it looks like the error is not one of malice. You have yet to give us your analysis of this code. You have only agreed with The Wiz's assessment as if you were waiting for it before you could give your own. I do not find you to be a qualifying person to analyze this code. You keep telling us that you are awaiting other information. You said earlier in this thread that you have a hunch of what the problem might have been. This was before you even had the code. Can you enlighten us as to what this hunch was?

If the game was broken in April that should be reason enough to audit this game over the past few years. I could provide you with my logs, but surely they would dispute their validity. I cannot provide you with the numbers from other players for reasons stated earlier. The only way for them to prove that this was a two week mistake is to release their numbers from the past 3 years. If they truly believed the game has always been fair then releasing these numbers would be a good thing for them.

It is not too early to pass judgement on Odds On and English Harbour. We have enough evidence that they were cheating in April. You do not get a second chance in this biz. I am sorry to hear that you are going to side with the casino on this bogus excuse. You have always been one of the good guys in the industry. This certainly changes things

[spearmaster]

As I said before - produce some data to establish your claim - otherwise stop crying wolf. My objective is to address the issue that came up last month, and I have no reason to expand this investigation otherwise.

The information I am waiting for is a mathematical analysis, since I am not qualified to do that type of research.

[kengam]

crying wolf? Do you know the story? In the story there never was a wolf when that boy kept saying there was. In this the wolf was exposed in April so your statement doesn't make much sense does it?


The only public statement from English Harbour thus far was the one where they claimed the software was working fine and that the numbers would even out. Why on Earth would they not come and explain theirselves now? Do they really need you to defend them? Your stance on this is sickening. I really would like to hear Bryan's take on all this.

[spearmaster]

By wolf I am referring to your alleged claim that the game was fixed in the past. There is no wolf - you have not produced any evidence whatsoever that there was a wolf. No tracks. No fur. No nothing at all.

I am studying the wolf that appeared in April - and that is what I intend to confine my research to. I am sorry that you do not believe that I don't have any ulterior motives - but I knew that when I started the research and I'm not about to stop now.

Please in future confine yourself to the issue that occurred in April, or produce some evidence that the problem may have existed before that time.

[kengam]

I do not think you have ulterior motives. I just think you have chosen to side with proven cheats. Crying wolf would mean that a wolf was never found, yet it was found in April so you might want to stop using that reference as it is making you look idiotic.

Why should I have to stick to April's events? This thread is about English Harbour and the relevance of them being caught cheating. Past history is definitely pertinent here. Stop treating posters as if we do not have a voice.

[spearmaster]

All people have a voice here. However, when making a claim, I think it's natural to expect the person making the claim to produce some facts. Since the only facts I have here are from this period in April, that is the only thing I can reasonably test against.

Using the theory that you can test results going back three years - an arbitrary number, I might add - and without any evidence being produced, one could easily extend that to include all games at any time ever produced by a manufacturer who has had a game malfunction.

This is simply not reasonable nor practical. If you have the evidence for the period in question, produce it and we'll test it. Simple as that.

And before you go labeling operations proven cheats, realize that we are trying to establish the source of the problem and in the context that you are using, you leave no possibility for something which is entirely possible - the fact that a mistake was made.

This is no different to a casino labeling a player a bonus fraudster on the evidence that this person once entered a piece of information incorrectly during registration. It *is* possible that the person made a typo. It is even possible that the person typed in an old address or phone number out of sheer habit (hell, I do that, I know). And it is entirely possible that the person simply had a brain fart and entered the street number of his/her old house with the name of the street of his/her new house. Or, of course, the person deliberately did so and really is a bonus fraudster.

Should we automatically condemn a player based on this error, intentional or not?

You can't have it both ways. It is simply ridiculous to believe that casino software manufacturers are infallible and bulletproof and thus if a problem occurs they have maliciously cheated you.

I've gotta run. I've started on the explanation but I haven't made much progress because I am in here having to deal with these posts. Hopefully I will get this finished today but at this rate, and given my commitments, it is highly unllikely.

[two_card]

Originally Posted by spearmaster

I have the code here. I have analyzed it and determined that it is definitely buggy, since certain variables are missing. But the key bug is not even a full line of code - it is a change in a reference to a particular object. .

I am a programmer and having difficulty understanding how this program would even function at all given the Spearmaster's post.

What language is the code written in ??

I can not believe a company like Odds-On is this incompetent.

A double-up routine is very simple in almost any language.
And the testing is also very easy to verify.

I would suggest that whomever is doing this investigation interview the programmer. They are either terrible programmers or doing their master's bidding. And I lean towards the "terrible programmers". Easy to write a routine that is almost undectable and give the house a 5% edge.