Resolved Heroes Casino - Blackjack issues, slow-pay

[RobWin]

Originally Posted by binary128

Hello. My name is Chris Colby. I am the President of Galewind Softare Corp.

We have been following this thread for some time now. We decided to refrain from commenting until our action that directly affected Westland Bowl was completely resolved. (Our apologies to "jetset": we did receive your email.)

Now that the GSC check to Westland Bowl has cleared his account, I feel that this is the appropriate time to make a closing statement of sorts and perhaps dispel some of the speculative conclusions which have understandably built up over the past few weeks.

First, I would like to thank Westland Bowl for a statement he made in the very first post of this thread: "This is about the fairest blackjack I've ever played and feels closer to real life Las Vegas tables."

I would also like to thank Eliot Jacobson for his post describing the extensive tests which he performed on the GSC gaming system. His independence provided a level of confidence which any GSC statements could never have achieved.

I would also like to thank "maxd" for adding several very insightful posts to this thread.

And finally, I would like to thank the contributing members of this thread who published positive comments on how GSC has handled this situation. Reading between the lines of incomplete data can be a tricky thing.

I think it is part of human nature for people to analyze any available data, however limited, in order to reach some sort of interim conclusion. The preliminary conclusions of some people become a part of the available data for other people, and their inclusion in subsequent analysis may cause things to go off the path. The interim conclusion which most concerns me is that GSC made some sort of "back room deal" regarding an acknowledgement of defective software, and that this is why GSC, rather than Heroes Casino, paid Westland Bowl.

On this point I wish to be perfectly clear: GSC did not make any "back room deals" regarding an acknowledgement of defective software. To borrow from a previous post, our software is not now, nor has it ever been, "snarfed". We chose to pay Westland Bowl because Heroes Casino had not. Our analysis, and the analysis of several others, concluded that WB won “fair and square”. Someone needed to pay him, and we felt that we had an ultimate responsibility that transcended the filters of any legal obligations.

Heroes Casino made the following statements:

1. ".. our previous provider had faulty software that allowed people to use pattern software to cheat the casino."

2. "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."

We feel that the data provided by Eliot Jacobson, as well as his closing statement: "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." definitively addresses this issue.

Regarding other statements made by Heroes Casino:

1. "Since the provider failed to open their source code up to testing by a company called TST ...".

In actual fact, when Heroes Casino made this request we immediately replied that we would provide our source code, and our full support, to TSTGlobal for their analysis. After doing so, we did not hear from Heroes Casino again on this matter.

2. ".. they were forced to also pay Tim ****** for the full amount he won in the casino."

At no moment in time were we forced to do anything. The decisions to pay Westland Bowl and to disable the Galewind product at Heroes Casino were made by GSC. We were notified, through CasinoMeister, of the seriousness of this problem on April 15th, made our decisions on April 16th, and executed those decisions on April 17th. These decisions addressed two objectives: 1.) deal with the immediate problem, and 2.) deal with the potential for future problems.

Referring to post #189 from "maxd", the final equation for this situation does have more than one variable. An accurate value for many of these variables can be found in statements made throughout this thread. I hope that this post completes the data necessary to run the calculation. Ultimately, each of you will want to draw your own conclusion.

In closing, I'd like to say that all of us at Galewind Software Corp. are very proud of our product, and we stand behind it 100%. Our people and our software enjoy the respect of such industry participants as Michael Shackleford (the Wizard of Odds), Eliot Jacobson (of Certified Fair Gambling), and Stacy Friedman (of Olympian Gaming). I hope that our actions regarding this issue will remove any concerns about our company which this situation may have created.

Regards, best wishes, and may Lady Luck smile down upon all of you.

Chris Colby

Postscript: Please do not think me rude if I do not respond to any questions which may arise from this post. I think that CasinoMeister has properly identified this thread as resolved, and I for one would just like to move on.

binary128, I personally think it's great of you to take the time to come in here and make a statement regarding this issue. The only problem I could possible see regarding your statement "potential for future problems" would be related to how close you screen your next licensee/casino provider. That would be my main concern regarding playing at any of the casino licensee's that offer your software. Would you like to further elaborate on that aspect of your business model, how and what process you vet and screen your licensee's?? Thanks

[jetset]

Chris Colby's post for me highlighted the extremes of an integrity-driven company doing the right thing by the player vs. the integrity-challenged style of operator who resorts to all and any means to avoid paying out a major win.

So from me personally - Kudos, Colby (even if you did ignore my email - and I can now understand why)

I would hope to see more of this sort of professional approach in the industry, but I sadly must say it is the exception rather than the rule.

Galewinds' report opens an interesting window into just how questionable the conduct at Heroes Casino was, and I hope that other software providers reading this thread on Google or directly will make a careful note of how the Heroes people approached this player dispute by trying to hand off the blame to its software provider.

For all we know, Galewinds may be contemplating legal action against the Heroes management....I hope so.

[Dominka]

Originally Posted by binary128

Hello. My name is Chris Colby. I am the President of Galewind Softare Corp.

You are also one awesome guy!!

What a great post and a stand-up thing to do!


D

[jetset]

Still no sign of the new Heroes casino software - I wonder if they're having a little difficulty finding a software provider that is prepared to work with them

[Slotster!]

Only just caught up on this thread, apologies for lateness.

Just wanted to say absolute kudos to the software provider for pulling the plug so promptly on the operator; superb bit of work.

What a great example to set. Can you imagine if some of the shoddier clip-joints scattered around the internet knew that they would be literally completely cut off if they started messing people about? You can't rip anyone off if you've got no software/games/processing to rip them off with... I wish RTG employed the same sort of moral stance to licensing -- as opposed to players having to rely on the few-and-far-between legitimate operators

Finally - Westland Bowl, you have the patience of the most patient of patient saints, who has just won gold in the patience competition at the patience olympics... In Patience Ville, Patient Land, Patience (Arizona)... Incredible.

[jetset]

Another week's gone by...and Heroes has still not re-launched with new software. Something's not adding up properly here imo.

[winbig]

Originally Posted by jetset

Another week's gone by...and Heroes has still not re-launched with new software. Something's not adding up properly here imo.

I have a feeling that they're on a shoestring budget and no reputable casino software provider will give them a license...Maybe they'll end up with Playtech. It's quite possible that they didn't even have the 5 figures readily available to pay WB, and stalled as long as they could before Bryan and GaleWind were brought in...

[maxd]

Stuff on the Thanks bug has been moved: info on the 4 billion 'Thanks' issue.

[thelawnet]

Originally Posted by binary128

First, I would like to thank Westland Bowl for a statement he made in the very first post of this thread: "This is about the fairest blackjack I've ever played and feels closer to real life Las Vegas tables."

I actually find this statement rather objectionable. 'Fairness' in blackjack usually means 'I won'. There's a post earlier in this thread from a player who lost, having been inspired by the OP's win. He said he thought the blackjack sucked.

That's the inherent nature of gambling. I've had $1 left in my account, doubled it up to $1024 [on video poker], been happy, yesterday I played €200, bet €25/hand lost every single hand. Was that unfair? No, it was normal randomness.

It is pretty much impossible for a player to state whether or not casino software is fair simply from normal play. You can play many thousands of hands and have nowhere near enough evidence to say whether things are fair or not.

One complaint I read recently, when investigated in fact determined that the player had a lifetime return above expectation (but within normal bonuds), but due to playing high stakes, he had experienced a couple of large losses causing him (without statistical justification) to decide the casino was rigged.

While I believe that your software is almost certainly fair (and incidentally I find the kind of vulnerability alleged by the casino in this case - namely that there was a discernible pattern in wins and losses - implausible, even given an imperfect RNG, due to the limited testing that the player could have conducted before embarking on his wagering, and the way that blackjack is liable to be modeled internally, not as a series of wins and losses, but as random numbers representing cards in a deck), the problem with accepting as evidence statements by players that the software 'feels' 'fair' is that you should logically also accept the opposite - similarly unqualified statements that the software is unfair.

[Kenny Lingus]

Originally Posted by jetset

Still no sign of the new Heroes casino software - I wonder if they're having a little difficulty finding a software provider that is prepared to work with them

Originally Posted by winbig

I have a feeling that they're on a shoestring budget and no reputable casino software provider will give them a license...

Well, there's always RTG....