Heroes Casino - Blackjack issues, slow-pay

[maxd]

If Heroes announces that their blackjack has been faulty then isn't there a case of refunding monies to all players who have lost playing that faulty game?

Not that simple really. They're saying the RNG wasn't random enough, not that the games were broken. It's like saying that the VP was paying out a little too much or there was a bit too many blacks showing up in the Roulette. The game is not broken, just that it could play better. It's all part of the 'funk' in the funkiness of RNGs.

[Jufo]

Not that simple really. They're saying the RNG wasn't random enough, not that the games were broken. It's like saying that the VP was paying out a little too much or there was a bit too many blacks showing up in the Roulette. The game is not broken, just that it could play better. It's all part of the 'funk' in the funkiness of RNGs.

I do get the reasoning, but what if I had made large wagers on red at roulette and later it was discovered that because of 'funkiness' or RNG too many blacks were dealt? So 'funky' RNG could put some players at unfair disadvantage. If Heroes' stand is that all Westland's wagers are void then the the wagers of other (losing) players should be void as well.

[winbig]

I do get the reasoning, but what if I had made large wagers on red at roulette and later it was discovered that because of 'funkiness' or RNG too many blacks were dealt? So 'funky' RNG could put some players at unfair disadvantage. If Heroes' stand is that all Westland's wagers are void then the the wagers of other (losing) players should be void as well.

Ultimately, it's up to Heroes to prove that the RNG is indeed not up to par, and go from there. If Heroes indeed has proof of this, then the logical course of action would be to pay WB his winnings, sever their contract with the software provider and then take them to court to get WB and other player's BJ winnings paid back to them. If you'll remember, this is exactly what UB did when it was found that their software provider included a backdoor when they released their software.

But, this is the way I see it:

Either Heroes simply does not want to pay such a big win off of a small deposit, or are very under-funded..

Seeing as how the software provider is the one paying WB and not Heroes only makes Heroes' "faulty RNG" claim even less believable.

[aka23]

Not quite how it stands. Heroes is saying:
(a) the software was snarfed, and
(b) the player was using a system, and
(c) it was the snarfed software that allowed the player to win, so
(d) we're not paying the player because of (a) + (b) + (c), and besides
(e) we're getting rid of the snarfed software and moving on to something else.

Galewinds is saying:
(a) we're no longer licensing our software to Heroes, and
(b) we're paying the guy that played and won.

You pick which version of events sounds plausible to you.

I will say this though: who's accepting responsibility here and who is passing the buck with both hands?

The two positions aren't completely contradictory.

I think that Heroes believes the player won because he used a system, and understands that this is only possible with a non-random game. However, I doubt the game really is non-random. Instead I think the player made large bets and got lucky. If you make increasingly large bets, sometimes you win big and sometimes you lose big. If I had the player logs, I could tell the chance of that size of a win occurring in a random distribution, and whether the results are within normal variance.

If it really is possible to gain a large edge by tracking wins & losses and the casino permits up to $20k bets on BJ, then why didn't it take so long for Heroes to see this kind of result... particularly since the first post in this thread quotes a review from Cipher? Also note that there are other casinos using the software, such as Pinnacle. If the software can be beaten with a basic system (and a fix has not been issued), then I'd expect to hear about some wins and/or issues at other casinos.

[winbig]

and don't forget that WB had just as many big losses as he did wins, so that just backs up the fact that there's nothing wrong with the software.

[maxd]

The two positions aren't completely contradictory.

I never said they were. I just told you the situation and let you pick who you want to trust.

... 'funky' RNG could put some players at unfair disadvantage.

By definition (almost) all RNGs are funky because it is very very difficult to make a 'perfect' RNG ... it's just how much funkiness you want to accept as reasonable ... and whose decision is that? I guarantee you that you won't be getting an email from Heroes saying "oopsy, we had a funky RNG, so sorry, here's your deposits back."

[Eliot Jacobson]

Greetings.

Galewind Software hired Certified Fair Gambling (CFG) in February of this year to certify its products. As an independent auditing agency, the task of CFG is to run suites of statistical tests to investigate bias in any form in the games offered by online Internet casinos, and in the absense of identifiable bias, to issue fairness certifications to software providers for online Internet casinos.

CFG’s first project on behalf of Galewind Software was Keno. Altogether close to 20 statistical tests were run on this game. Because of the quantity of data produced, Keno is an excellent resource for fairness testing. On March 6, 2009, CFG issued a “Casino Game Certification Report” to Galewind Software that reads in part:

“Audits were conducted on a variety of subsets of the balls dropped in each round. Additional audits were performed on the correlation of balls between rounds and on the overall distribution of balls. In each case it was determined that the subset was within a statistcally normal range. We conclude that the game of Keno offered by Galewind Software Corporation is a fair and accurate reproduction of live play.”

CFG ran an exhaustive RTP report covering every game (including blackjack) for log files provided. In every case, the RTP for each casino game was statistically normal. This report was delivered to Galewind Software on April 7, 2009. Blackjack showed a small house edge; the return was typical of results that are expected for blackjack over large sample sizes. The “Casino Payout Report” reads in part:

“In our opinion, these log files fairly and accurately represent the actual and total play for the stated period. We conclude that the payout percetages are correctly calculated based on the actual amounts wagered and winnings paid.”

The next project Galewind Software requested was an audit of their Random Number Generator (RNG). It is not normally the case that a software maker would provide their proprietary source code. Galewind provided complete documentation to CFG summarizing the type of RNG they use, how they seed it, how it is implemented in their code, code fragments, and several other specifics that are not normally disclosed. This information, together with a signficant sample of data, allowed CFG to issue a letter of “RNG Certification” to Galewind Software. This letter, dated April 8, 2009, reads in part:

“In the opinion of Certified Fair Gambling, Galewind Software is correctly implementing … (undisclosed name of RNG)… in the creation of its RNG, is protecting and safeguarding the outcomes of its RNG, and is fairly using its RNG in the creation of all casino game products.”

The CFG certification of Galewind Software's RNG was separately reviewed by a gaming professional from a major Las Vegas based slot machine manufacturer and a U.S. Army expert on Cryptography.

After certifying their RNG, CFG was asked to audit blackjack. CFG has audited blackjack many times, including the blackjack offered several online casinos that have a presence on CM. CFG ran its standard suite of tests, as well as some additional tests by specific request of Galewind Software.

The blackjack log files provided to CFG were comprehensive and exhaustive. CFG completed the audit of blackjack on April 9, 2009. There were no statistically abnormal results and there was no indication that the software was performing abnormally. Galewind Software blackjack behaves like ordinary blackjack offered in a brick and mortar (B&M) casino. Based on these results, CFG certified the game of blackjack offered by Galewind Software.

Galewind Software used the statistical information CFG provided, as well as other resources undisclosed to CFG, in reaching their conclusions on how to settle the [Westland Bowl]/Heroes matter.

Subsequently, Heroes casino made the public statement that:

“The only way that these pattern recognition software would work is if there is either a weak RNG or some other part of the software was faulty.”

In the opinion of CFG, Galewind Software offers a fair and properly functioning product that shows no bias. The RNG is not weak and the software is not faulty.

In the opinion of CFG, the Player (Timothy *******) got lucky.

All auditing certificates as well as the use of CFG services are considered proprietary. The proprietary information included in this document was reproduced with the explicit written permission of Galewind Software.

Please note, CFG does not certify the fairness or integrity of those who license or run online casinos. CFG only certifies that the software is fair and that the games behave in every respect like those offered in B&M casinos. It is up to watch dog sites like this to take the next step.

--Eliot Jacobson, Ph.D.

[maxd]

FYI, latest word is that WB has received his cheque, but he's got a long wait for it to clear.

Galewind!

[jetset]

No response from Gale Winds to our request for their input on this, but I take Eliot's post as the answer to the Heroes Casino allegation that the software was dud.

Thanks, Eliot

[jetset]

Just coming back to this after some reflection on Eliot's post.

These tests all took place from February/March 2009 onwards.

The RNG certification dates from earlier this month.

To be fair on this, one has to ask what was the position with Gale Wind software prior to that?