Mathematical Proof that English Harbour is cheating

[Zoozie]

I also hope that I and all the other cheated players are refunded our losses.

I think we all know how likely this is... And also quite impossible to do fair.
Some might have lost anyway and we need to know when the cheat mode was
activated. Since they now have gotten rid of the evidence (given that there actually was cheating involved) it will be hard to prove anything.

I have little faith in the software and I believe Oddson should make a statement which could be one of the following.

1) It is impossible to configurate/manipulate the software! (which brings us nowhere really, but it is important anyway that we get this garantie.)
2) Some cheating might have been possible but was done by English Harbour only and they will try fix this 'flaw' in the software.

If I had a casino and wanted to cheat this way, I think I would only change this configuration for short
time intervals (few hours). Would make it damn hard to prove.

Players need to have 100% confidence in the software!

Zoozie

[nafanny29]

Well this situation proves that casinos can manipulate the software at will.

I still say most casinos wouldnt ever cheat but the power of the dollar can corrupt the most honest of folks.

I wonder how many other games at English Harbour are tweaked in the houses favour. All of them proberly.

[thelawnet]

I think we all know how likely this is... And also quite impossible to do fair.

Who cares whether it is fair or not? Anyone who doubled and lost needs to be refunded. Whether it is fair is something they should have thought about before they started cheating people.

I doubt they would be able to negate all the results of all people's doubles, so failing that just refund the losses. Online casinos must not be allowed to behave in a criminal manner, get caught doing it, change things around, say 'everything is ok, and by the way don't worry about the thousands of dollars we made cheating people, they aren't getting a penny, but please come back to play soon.'

[Zoozie]

Who cares whether it is fair or not? Anyone who doubled and lost needs to be refunded. Whether it is fair is something they should have thought about before they started cheating people.

I really agree with you, but I am also realistic. I got cheated myself maybe... that is the problem.

Zoozie

[tronk]

win - 18 / lose - 9 / draw -1

I didnt bother carrying on as it seems obvious from the last few results that the problems been fixed. It also is obvious that the video poker JOB provided an UNFAIR game between satuarday and monday morning. English Harbour will have been alerted to this thread straight away, no doubt fixing the glitch with upmost haste.

At the least a statement needs to be be made by EH and the s/w provider. Just because its fair now, doesnt mean it always was.

As someone metioned yeah maybe they can alter the payout's for short (and profitable no doubt) sessions. The end of the month would be the perfect time. But who knows? until a reason is provided they are suspect in my book, and the other casinos runnig odds on will thereby be guilty by association.

[Aindreas_Daoc]

Good thing a lot of forum members got their data in. I imagine if only one or two people did, EH could easily "fix" the "problem", and claim nothing ever happened.

Now I'm waiting on the official response. Will they own up to it? Or was it just a software error?

In either case will people who doubled during the period where the software was cheating get any sort of compensation? Will they even be honest about how long the flaw was present?

The flaw could have been there for months before TLN brought it up here, will they admit the actual period, and will they compensate players who played during that whole time? Or just the past 3-4 days?

We will see, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the casino will choose a course of action that puts their bottomline ahead of their integrity.

[Linus]

The bottom line is that if you're playing online, you're betting on a hope and a prayer. I'm guessing there will be little or no recourse for anyone who's been cheated by English Harbour. No money will be paid back, and the casino will go on like nothing happened.

If you like to gamble, you're better off at a land-based casino. You might lose money at MGM or Harrah's, but at least you don't have to worry about being cheated.

[GrandMaster]

I was suspicious of the fairness of the doubling on English Harbour's video poker. So I deposited and carefully recorded data for over an hour, doubling after every win, except I collected any large wins, and recording for each double the result, win, lose or push.

I played until I lost all my money (playing 4 line, single coin, recording wins, losses and ties on the doubling game (I did not record the video poker itself - I was only concerned with the double).

According to my data, it is 99.999% certain that English Harbour is not offering a fair doubling game in their Tens or Better video poker game.

Although nothing is completely certain, 99.999% would be good enough to convict a man and sentence him to death, so I think it is good enough for any reasonable person in the world to be satisfied that English Harbour is a cheating casino.

Here are my results:
84 wins
151 losses
19 ties

Ignoring the ties (which push and therefore have no effect), there should be an equal number of wins and losses on the doubling game.

As you can see from 84 wins vs 151 losses, there were not: the results were hugely skewed in English Harbour's favour.

By use of the binomial theorem in Excel, =binomdist(84,84+151,.5,true), it appears that the chance of only 84 wins out of 235 trials with a fair (50/50) game is only 0.0000074.

Accordingly I recommend you AVOID this casino and the others in its group, as although I did not find any problems with the other games, I did not feel inclined to test, and a cheating casino is a cheating casino, so if they are cheating here, they could be cheating anywhere else.

I would use the chi square test. These data give a chi square value of 19.95 with 2 degrees of freedom. The probability of a chi square value being at least this much is about 0.000047 or 1/21500. This could just be bad luck, but then we have the next sample.

Out of curiosity I tried this just now, using play money mode, doubling 1 line tens or better.

My results: 25 W, 65 L, 10 T. 100 tries total.

In my opinion, this is not a fair doubling game. Someone ought to contact Michael Shackleford (Wizard of Odds) and get his opinion.

Edit: Could other forum members give this a try too? The more trials there is, the more accurate the picture we get. Furthermore, we'll have more documented records. I did the above in less than 30 mins. Just use play money, and record your VP doubling results.

Chi square value 20.06, probability 1/22700. This is not looking good for English Harbour. If we combine the samples, the chi square value is 37.77, probability 1/159000000.

Actually my analysis was spot on, it was not basically spot on.

The binomial distribution is the distribution of n trials of a 2-valued event with probability p.

The result you have used is the normal approximation to the binomial distribution. The only reason to use the normal distribution for this is if it is inconvenient to use the binomial distribution (which it is not if Excel calculates it for you). The binomial distribution is exact.

As you say, it does not make much difference, but the binomial distribution is the better one to use here.

This is totally correct.

[Linus]

I suppose English Harbour has three options -

1.) Ignore it, and pretend nothing happened.

2.) Claim it was a software error.

3.) Claim the results here are bogus, and their games have always been fair.

Anyone wanna lay odds?

[Macgyver]

I suppose English Harbour has three options -

1.) Ignore it, and pretend nothing happened.

2.) Claim it was a software error.

3.) Claim the results here are bogus, and their games have always been fair.

Anyone wanna lay odds?

If I lay odds, win the bet and then double ... can I get my money back if I lose the double?

(insert lame attempt at humor here)