Possible issue with BLR Tech casinos craps software

**binary128** · 24th November 2011, 01:59 AM

Originally Posted by Westland Bowl

It's ironic I discover this post with many things I've been saying for the past two years until after I gave an ultimatum post six weeks ago. I'm bored of my government auditing job. I now want to audit online casinos!!!

I know where to look for these hidden manipulations of game results.

Hey, WB. I hope you're well. If you've read the thread history (as I suspect you have):

The Wizard of Vegas Threads:

Initial Thread, Thread Poll, Follow-Up Thread

Warning Threads:

Wizard of Odds and Casinomeister

Sportsbook Review Threads:

Blunted Thread (Died out of the gate), Dead Thread (Died with a whimper), Active Thread (But on its way out)

(I keep making all of these link lists because I personally want to keep track of all of this stuff, and it is just spread all over the place.)

I'm mulling over a conclusion in my mind. As I mentioned in an earlier post, Sportsbook Casinos are kind of in a "nether region". Their Sportsbook parents are more interested in, and more involved with, the Sportsbook forums (SBR, theRx, etc.) However, the Sportsbook forums (Administrators as well as members) are not knowledgeable enough about the complexities of Casinos to properly understand, and thus deal with, any of their issues or problems.

For example, the currently active thread on SBR was started by Eliot Jacobson. All of the experienced members of Casinomeister immediately recognize Eliot, and respect what he has to say. (Agree or disagree, they still respect it.) However, SBR Lou promptly ran Eliot right out of that thread, basically calling him a "shill" trying to drum up auditing business.

This is NOT because SBR Lou is a "bad guy" or a "stupid guy" - SBR knows Sports, and the Sportsbook world, not Casinos and the Casino world. (What part of the Sportsbook world has anything to do with a RNG, or Theoretical RTP?)

So, I see a situation where we have an influential forum, respected by the Sportsbooks, and thus in a position to accomplish change when necessary for these "nether region" Casinos, BUT without the knowledge required to separate the "wheat from the chaff" (or the "Tin Foil Hats" from the Statisticians).

I don't know the solution - I do know that the solution lies within SBR (or theRx, etc.) and not on Casinomeister.

WB, as an experienced member of SBR, perhaps you might head on over there and see if you can keep this currently active thread from suffering the same fate as its predecessor - Death with a whimper.

I made a Post at the WOV which contains a key bit that I find the most frustrating:

"It is sad that the more reasonable SBR forum members ... consider it acceptable that proof specific to Legends is still required. IMO, at this point the onus should be on Legends to prove that their game is NOT rigged, rather than placing the further burden on volunteers to prove that it IS rigged."

Chris

**4 of a kind** · 27th November 2011, 06:16 PM

This issue and the thousands of others related to online gaming should be obvious to most by now are all a direct result of any gaming regulations, (if any even exist) not being enforced what so ever. Any regulation is meaningless in every form if there is no enforcement. Online gaming should be the number one example used today when someone wants to prove this theory and why regulation enforcement must be mandatory when any form of gambling is offered to the masses.

The uncertain fears and distrusts online gamers were always suspicious about are slowly becoming a reality today. Online gaming had the opportunity to evolve into a class act and mirror the likes of Vegas. Unfortunately, the industry made a bunch of bad and greedy decisions along the way and ended up instead, becoming what it is today.

We finally got a few high profile industry professionals directly involved with online gaming trying to help everyone that plays or wants to play online. Unfortunately, even they were lumped into motivation for personal gain. Like Binary128 pointed out the threads trying to point out this issue of operators deliberately gaffing the software for personal gain have “Died out of the gate” “Died with a whimper” or “On it’s way out”.

With the amount of endless proof after over a decade that online gaming, a multi billion dollar industry is still operating like the Wild West is amazing.

Just because the tiny group of members here that know where it’s presently safe to play online, doesn’t mean all the bullshit going on everywhere else is irrelevant. When you compare the amount of online gamblers to all the memberships here or anywhere else, it would be like trying to find a needle in a haystack. How much of the 10 to 20 billion dollars online gaming generates per year are the members here actually part of? It’s just not right if you want to play online today you need to belong to a club or run the risk of getting screwed.

There are presently over two thousand online casinos. When you compare that to the number of accredited casinos, one could only imagine what’s really going on out there.

Of course the expected posters will follow this post which by now is no surprise to anyone. Yet, the truth of the matter is people that are willing to accept and promote online gaming in its present form, are the same people that are preventing it from cleaning up.

Online gaming for everyone, everywhere (not just members here who are blessed with the ever changing accredited list) will never get rid of the criminal element and activities without regulation and enforcement.

I for one would rather pay taxes on winning years, then to have someone steal them.

**binary128** · 4th December 2011, 02:02 PM

Originally Posted by 4 of a kind

I for one would rather pay taxes on winning years, then to have someone steal them.

First, I agree with this statement. (Given the two options, it's kind of hard not to.)

Second, when faced with this BLR Tech fiasco it is impossible to not cry out "Something must be done!"

Because this is my business, my livelihood, I do a lot of thinking about it. In the spirit of "Be careful what you wish for", here's what I've got at the moment.

Bureaucracy carries the negative connotation of "red tape" (excessive procedural requirements). I don't believe this is intrinsically true - there are efficient bureaucracies.

However ...

(The following are opinions, but at my age they are well informed opinions.)

1. Bureaucracies limit creativity. Anything not covered by existing procedures must be approved and written into these procedures. The larger the bureaucracy, the more resistance. The "Creative Party" needs energy, commitment, time, more commitment, and (usually) lots of money. (JStrike (Strike::Sapphire), P.V. (PlayerVerify), BetVoyager, et. al might have something to add here.)

2. Bureaucracies limit competition, for the same reasons as above, but also because an objective of a procedural-based infrastructure is to "level the playing field".

3. Bureaucracies prefer to deal with other bureaucracies. ("I'll have my people call your people.")

4. Bureaucracies create monopolies - the ultimate level playing field.

Because Galewind is a small company, with limited resources and no political connections, I am concerned about what place we might have in this bureaucratic future. Obviously we'd have no problem with any "transparency requirements". However, I suspect that, regardless of our reputation, quality, integrity, transparency and all of that, we would have no place in that future, for the reasons enumerated above. (I agree - the loss of Galewind means nothing to the Players. But it means something to Galewind.)

Taxes are needed to pay for the cost of creating and maintaining a control system. However, I think it would be naive to assume that any taxes would be capped at this level. Legalized online gambling is not being pursued to implement a break-even control system for the players, but as a way for the Government to make money.

It's a fair conclusion that any and all taxes will be passed on to the Player. 4 of a kind - Given your experience with B&M Casino's, you have a greater insight into how this tax thing might work than I (taxes on wins, deductions on losses, and like that). However, unless the taxes on wins are significantly greater than the deductions on losses, then the income doesn't cover the expense, and where is the Government's profit?

Further, gambling would be lumped in with the other "sin taxes" of smoking and drinking. Anyone who smokes or drinks is well aware of the direction, and magnitude, that the tax rate on these products has gone in the past few years. Taxes on gambling may start at 5%, but it doesn't take a crystal ball to speculate that this will quickly double, triple or quadruple.

Galewind has a documented 26-month RTP (with rebate) of 98.6%. This RTP has remained more or less constant (+/- 0.2%) for 7 years, and would otherwise remain constant for another 7 years and beyond. (That is, Player losses have not doubled, tripled or quadrupled over this time.)

How much would our post-taxes Return to Player be affected by all of this? 93%? 88%? At what point is the RTP so bad that the only ones playing are those with a gambling problem?

The UIGEA has made things worse, just as Prohibition did in the 1920s. This was not its intent, but there can be little doubt that this is the result.

Again, in light of BLR Tech, and dozens of similar issues that have arisen over the past year(s), "Something must be done!"

Given the amount of money involved, and the fact that those parties with power have already got the political game in full motion, something will be done. Given that player interests would place a poor third behind profit and taxes, I'd hope that the future is better than the present, and the past.

**nisosbar** · 4th December 2011, 05:58 PM

Originally Posted by binary128

Further, gambling would be lumped in with the other "sin taxes" of smoking and drinking. Anyone who smokes or drinks is well aware of the direction, and magnitude, that the tax rate on these products has gone in the past few years. Taxes on gambling may start at 5%, but it doesn't take a crystal ball to speculate that this will quickly double, triple or quadruple.

Galewind has a documented 26-month RTP (with rebate) of 98.6%. This RTP has remained more or less constant (+/- 0.2%) for 7 years, and would otherwise remain constant for another 7 years and beyond. (That is, Player losses have not doubled, tripled or quadrupled over this time.)

How much would our post-taxes Return to Player be affected by all of this? 93%? 88%? At what point is the RTP so bad that the only ones playing are those with a gambling problem?

The problem with this line of reasoning is that online gambling is - and has been - legal in many Western countries. Yet, RTP has not suffered for that, as far as I know. How do you explain that, if you reason that bureaucracies inevitably interfere with relations between business and consumer? If anything, RTP is higher in casinos that cater to non-US players, i.e., those casinos which have been stamped with a state bureaucracy's approval.

**4 of a kind** · 5th December 2011, 01:12 PM

In response to Binary’s opinions stated in his post, I believe everything he touches on is a possible scenario of what online gaming with regulation and enforcement could possibly look like.

Online gaming regardless what it presently evolved into became so big that countries all around the world in one way or the other are now paying attention to it.

All the presently alleged regulatory bodies, software providers, casino owners, servers, are scattered all over the globe. I’m not even sure how regulation and especially enforcement could be implied efficiently today when considering how online gaming presently operates. All approved software would have to be tagged and sealed, data based, and monitored on a monthly base, along with endless data being shared between casinos, regulators, and tax enforcement.

Since the USA has efficiently and successfully regulated and taxed B & M’s while setting the example of fair play, it appears that they will also show how it would need to be done efficiently and successfully online.

Real online regulation obviously would narrow the field in a big way. I can’t see the need or the room for over 2,000 different online casinos fighting for the same audience, and all doing enough business in order to be able to give the players the same game there’re getting at B&M’s. I also think once the field is narrowed and all is said and done, the players might get even a better game online then land based since overhead would be significantly reduced when operating online compared to land based.

Like I’ve said in the past, tax issues resulting from winnings is always a welcome problem. Yet, I do see a problem with being able to maneuver while playing online, where every deposit, bet, and cash out will be documented. At land based big wins on slots and poker tournaments were always unavoidable. But big table wins were always avoidable, simply by cashing chips at different times at different windows, or having others help cash the chips out staying below 10k at a time.

Bottom line with regards to online regulation and enforcement, I don’t see much of a difference other then the players being 100% certain that their getting a fair game, and will be paid.

If Las Vegas and other mega gambling resorts where regulation and taxes are fully enforced and players are flocking to them daily, I can’t understand how it couldn’t be successful online. High roller table players might not be so interested, but for most of the gambling people there shouldn’t be any issues.

One thing for sure if it ever happens, forums like this would be looking more like the Wizard of Odds, where the majority of threads would revolve around strategies and gaming ideas.

**vinylweatherman** · 5th December 2011, 02:59 PM

The problem is that each country taxes the activity in a different way, and rather than cope with this, operators are going to want to continue the current system where players are responsible for reporting their wins for tax where appropriate.

At the very least, there would be a need for an internationally agreed format for all operators to record gaming transactions, so that players, regulators, and tax authorities have a common data stream which they can use to assess the correct amounts of tax due.

There will also be an argument over which government receives the revenue, the jurisdiction of regulation, or that where the player resides. Most countries would go for the latter, but this will leave the licensing jurisdictions with NOTHING in many cases, as almost all prohibit their own citizens from playing at casinos they regulate.

The level of tax will affect the overall RTP, so either games will be dropped to a lower RTP, or fewer promotions will be offered. Operators are still likely to locate in places where the overall burden of "overheads" is lowest.

Rather than the US model of taxing individual players, a better model would be to tax the operator, having them take the taxes at source. They could either be a small percentage on every bet, or a larger percentage of net profits. The UK model is either to tax profits, or have each bet taxed by the operator, as in the case of horse racing (not sure this is still how it's done, but this was how it was done when my dad placed bets).