More eCOGRA Seals Awarded

[jetset]

Another inaccurate and pointlessly provocative comment at the close of that post. Caruso is predictable if nothing else.

This is yet another of the spoiling posts he has committed himself to making every time the eCOGRA name comes up.

Let's cut to the chase here.

Despite the fact that they are at the quality end of the casino scale and are not often the source of player complaints, we have a number of casinos who want to distinguish themselves from less reputable operations by offering a genuinely more controlled, superior and safer gambling environment to the players.

eCOGRA is launched as an independent third party vehicle to help them do this by setting player-friendly rules and making sure they abide by them. Following research, it decides to use independent, third party inspection bodies like PwC, which in addition to inspection and monitoring services analyses every gaming transaction through proprietary software to assess overall gaming fairness.

Some 17 other aspects of player-sensitive regulation are covered too (it's not simply a dispute resolution service as Caruso would have you believe in his attempts to belittle eCOGRA).

If you think PwC is "just an accounting firm" as one poster has suggested, it should be understood that it is an international multi-disciplined business services group employing over 50 000 professionals worldwide. Unlike Enron etc it has an impeccable reputation which it is averse to putting at risk under any circumstances.

Despite a bad industry history with player protection predecessors, most players and industry people take a cynical view but are open minded enough to be prepared to let eCOGRA show what it can do in an industry currently bereft of effective regulation.

Not so Caruso and a few others who have made it their business to consistently scorn and belittle the considerable effort and cost involved. This is mainly on the grounds that the proprietary Total Gaming Transaction Review testing process used by PwC for some years is not verified by some other unspecified body.

Will this ongoing spoiling play give players a reliable indication of where they can expect as routine fair games, efficient service, timeous payouts...and an organisation that they can turn to if they don't get these advantages?

Of course not.

Have they suggested any constructive and practical alternative regulatory system to the eCOGRA initiative?

No.

Have they had the grace to recognise that eCOGRA staff have already assisted in disputes, with positive results?

Judging by this latest post, no.

[caruso]

Jetset, your constant, repetitive use of these pejorative adjectives is tiresome. All my posts are factual and measured - you can't extend me that same courtesy for some reason. It doesn't matter how much you keep churning them out, any unbiased reader will appreciate the validity of my comments. Secretive, unverified and unverifiable software "results analysis" is worth no more than the paper they're printed on. They are figures. They are nothing else.

Yes, Ecogra will be a valuable dispute resolution service. And apparently this has already been tested and proved - all to the good.

No, their claim to "regulate" and "approve" the actual SOFTWARE is by definition valueless until they publish the results along with all relevant details of the collection process by way of proving the authenticity of the figures. This is nothing to ask - they have the information. So, let's have it. No? Why? Do they not see the enormous value of providing this evidence and PROVING the validity of their TGTR process? "Prove" Micogaming fair? Good grief, the scope is limitless. Safe, guarenteed online gambling. Manna from heaven for the industry.

So why nothing? May I speculate that the reason may be that they canNOT provide evidence which does not exist, because in fact all they do is accept numbers on faith from Microgaming, alla PWC? Or even that there are NO actual tests performed? What is there to persuade me otherwise?

Maybe the numbers are genuine. Maybe the tests are valid.

"Maybe" is meaningless.

You can continue to churn out the "pointless" "provocative" "closed-minded" "scorn" "belittle" ad infinitum comments in the hope of persuading somebody who doesn't actually read them. That's your priviledge. While my objections - and the same objections of practically ALL other informed players who have chosen to comment - remain valid, I will UNHESITATINGLY repeat them, as you UNHESITATINGLY insult me.

[jetset]

"Yes, Ecogra will be a valuable dispute resolution service. And apparently this has already been tested and proved - all to the good."

Just about the only positive thing (as usual) I see in your response is this, which was presumably wrung from you by my critical comment regarding your lack of grace.

You persistently ignore the scope of eCOGRA regulations in constant attempts to denigrate this body at any cost.

I will equally energetically attack your negative speculation on eCOGRA for as long as you maliciously attempt to damage a genuine movement forward that is of benefit to all involved in this industry other than the shysters.

Your posts are neither factual or measured imo. Do you seriously think that an organisation like PwC would "May I speculate that the reason may be that they canNOT provide evidence which does not exist, because in fact all they do is accept numbers on faith from Microgaming, alla PWC? Or even that there are NO actual tests performed? What is there to persuade me otherwise?"

We're talking about an internationally respected group of considerable reputation and gravitas here, and they presumably have their own reasons for not divulging the analytical processes involved in their proprietary system.

Perhaps you should devote some of your time to seeking answers from them directly instead of using your unspecified verification issue with the TGTR in attempts to discourage support for eCOGRA.

It is just as well that others do not have your totally negative attitude that insists on trying to destroy one of the most promising player protection initiatives in years without making any constructive move forward yourself.

[dave_r]

I see nothing negative in Caruso's posts.

After sending numerous emails to PWC in regards to TGTR, I know that I am deliberately being kept in the dark.

Thier contractual agreement with MGS and other software developers prevents them from telling me the process.

So why should I trust them, Jetset?

WHY?

As for Ecogra, there is nothing INDEPENDENT about them. How can they make guarantees of fairness without disclosing thier methodology? The truth is they can't.

[dominique]

You guys can argue this until the cows come home - but nobody will know for sure for a couple of years.

Being on such opposite ends of the spectrum of opinions, some people will have to eat their words at some point.

I am happy to see any attempt this industry makes to self regulate. Lessons are learned and progress is made. I like to see positive action, not just the pointing out of faults. For that reason, I am going to support eCOGRA.

[jetset]

Dave, you have become one of the most prominent naysayers in the industry unless it concerns the discredited OCA, a fine idea badly handled and now languishing. It's my guess that your misguided attacks on eCOGRA (and btw you are absolutely wrong on that independent issue) stem from your other well known agendas.

It is clear that you are not even prepared to consider letting this strongly funded and well structured organisation show what it can do for the players and the industry, and that you will remain a sideline sniper offering little that is constructive.

When eCOGRA does pprove itself, and I am confident that it will I hope you will be as keen to praise as you have thus far been to disparage.

[rowmare]

1. If Ecogra disclosed their methodology, it would be open to abuse and fraud by unscrupulous casino operators.

2. Caruso, you aren't making sense to me. For one thing, how is the fact that "Ecogra casinos are solid" a problem?

3. I Agree with Dominique when she said, "I am happy to see any attempt this industry makes to self regulate. Lessons are learned and progress is made. I like to see positive action, not just the pointing out of faults. For that reason, I am going to support eCOGRA."

A look at the independent bodies who have put their names on Ecogra gives me hope that eCOGRA will be a great asset to all of us. I will support it myself until there's reason to do otherwise.

Also, this statement, "Do they not see the enormous value of providing this evidence and PROVING the validity of their TGTR process? "Prove" Micogaming fair? ...", is contradictory. If you don't know why, then you don't know enough to have any opinion in this matter.

[GrandMaster]

1. If Ecogra disclosed their methodology, it would be open to abuse and fraud by unscrupulous casino operators.

Why? If the method is robust, it cannot be manipulated even if you know how it works. The security of the system lies in its design. For example, the cryptographic protocols used in ATMs or in e-commerce are publicly available, they have been scrutinised by experts. You can also have a go at trying to crack them.

At the moment we are supposed to trust TGTR because we are told to do so. This is just not good enough.

[jen]

I won 1,840 euros on free, no deposit, money one of the approved casino sent me, cashed out by wire and kept waiting for the wire to reach my bank account for 1.5 months. My queries were largely ignored by the casino.

I filed a complaint with eCogra . Three day after my complaint I got a response from the casino and got the funds exactly one week after the complaint submission.

[dave_r]

eCogra was the brainstorm idea of Microgaming founder Martin Moshal. He made the decision to form a coalition between himself and CON. This is the real truth. The truth everyone is so afraid to say.

Ecogra and its agenda is 70% controlled by Moshal himself.
Andrew Beveridge is simply one of his puppets.

The smart Casinomeister members already know this.

Only Microgaming casinos have thus far received the prestigious eCogra seal of approval. And yet Jetset continues on with his mumbo-jumbo of calling eCogra "independent".

39 MGS powered casinos have been approved.
NO CASINOS from any other software developer have yet been approved.

A TRUELY INDEPENDENT WATCHDOG would show that its not biased by approving a few casinos from different developers (at the beginning) , rather than 23 from one developer and than another 16 from the SAME developer.

As far as player protection goes, eCogra is a great thing. The fact that Jen got paid immediately speaks volumes about eCogra's ability to resolve player disputes. I applaude that.

But it still doesn't prove the software is honest, or that TGTR is effective.

I'm sure that other software developers will eventually get approved, and that thier casinos will eventually be added to the list. However, expect these other companies to be very skeptical of eCogra's so-called "independence", since they are afraid that after the in-house inspection is completed, Beveridge will pass on thier trade secrets directly to Moshal.

And noone wants that competition to be even a half step ahead of them.

Moshal is an excellent chess player.

"Random number generators work in the following fashion:
1. Take a range of fractions (usually between 0 -1) and run the random function on the range.
2. Then apply this fraction to the actual range of numbers that you are interested in (e.g. in a card game with 4 decks the probability of each card coming up decreases by a factor of 4)
3. What you can do to influence the outcome is to weight the outcome based upon some other event by also applying a variable to the function you create that generates the outcome.

If you want it to be truly random you can weight the values based upon some value, which is infinitesimal such as the current server time down to microseconds.

By the same token you can also pass a blank variable, which will register as a NULL value, and then at any point in time to weight the outcome values upwards or downwards, you can then pass a non-null variable and this will then skew the outcome of the randomness.

Basically this is how the Random Number Generator (RNG) works:

1. Client software connects to the port on the Gamingserver.
2. Client software requests a game that player wants.
3. Player requests to be dealt or to spin
Client software connects to gaming server and asks for a random number to be generated on a specific port.
4. Based upon the weighting of the RNG the result will come back as within probability or skewed.
5. On the MGS Gaming server the following parameters are passed to the RND: game, game type, time (hh:mm:ss:ss.sss) and client parameters request # etc. The MGS Gaming server RNG service can be weighted according to a variable that is usually left blank.
6. Request result is then recorded and sent back to the client."