Online Casinos - Casinomeister Logo Online Casinos - Casinomeister

Go Back   Casinomeister's Online Casino and Poker Forum > Blasts From the Past > Complaints

Notices

Complaints Complaints of interest or that had a riveting effect on the industry

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 3rd May 2006, 03:05 PM
Zoozie's Avatar
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,075
WTGs: 22
WTGd at 44 Times in 6 Posts
Thanks: 701
Thanked 1,207 Times in 383 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 6545
Rep Power: 54
Zoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casinomeister
This just in from English Harbour:
....await some feedback on an independent review from a 3rd party.
No need for that. Unless they also send him back in time. Utterly BS.

What is needed a complete software review so we can be sure they can not cheat even if they wanted to.
I would not be surprised if the software has this double (50%) parameter as a standard parameter that can be configured to whatever
they want and when they want. This parameter has to be somewhere in the software. Hardcoded or configurable? The problem is that very few casinos use the software and would know this. If this is the case it could be proven very fast just by viewing the configuration utilities for the software.

Zoozie

Last edited by Zoozie; 3rd May 2006 at 03:19 PM.
Old 3rd May 2006, 03:08 PM
Casinomeister's Avatar
Cheer Meister
 
Join Date: Jun 1998
Location: Here near my Bier, my dear.
Posts: 15,489
WTGs: 18
WTGd at 43 Times in 26 Posts
Thanks: 2,024
Thanked 7,088 Times in 2,476 Posts
Blog Entries: 3
Nominated 63 Times in 22 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 5
Reputation Points: 37150
Rep Power: 15
Casinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelawnet
...So not only are they cheating crooks, they are cheating lying crooks as well.
Please thelawnet - let's keep the derogatory comments to yourself. Thanks!
__________________
Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy
~Ben Franklin

Useful links: ~ Accredited Casinos ~ I-Gaming Representatives ~ Evil Section ~ My Wish List ~ Donate Now! ~
Mission Statement & Player Philosophy

Old 3rd May 2006, 03:18 PM
jetset's Avatar
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 11,034
WTGs: 34
WTGd at 10 Times in 5 Posts
Thanks: 1,342
Thanked 3,762 Times in 1,689 Posts
Nominated 44 Times in 13 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 3
Reputation Points: 20324
Rep Power: 192
jetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond reputejetset has a reputation beyond repute
Do I understand this response correctly? Are EH in effect saying that these horrific results garnered by several players was the equivalent of a bad streak, but that over a large enough sample the doubling feature would come out at 50/50?

How large a sample? That doesn't sound like a very good bet for gamblers expecting 50/50 odds to me.

I think that I'll wait to hear what the Wiz has to say about this.
__________________
jetset
Old 3rd May 2006, 03:28 PM
Simmo!'s Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Engerland
Posts: 7,542
WTGs: 2
WTGd at 87 Times in 9 Posts
Thanks: 1,178
Thanked 2,831 Times in 1,379 Posts
Nominated 7 Times in 4 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 15080
Rep Power: 15
Simmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond reputeSimmo! has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetset
I think that I'll wait to hear what the Wiz has to say about this.

Me too. The crux of the matter for me is: can the casino affect/alter/massage the odds on doubling, or is it a fixed standard across the softare at all licencees.
__________________

++++ The Big Casino List [MK II] ++++ Slotjunkies [MK II] ++++

Old 3rd May 2006, 03:29 PM
Zoozie's Avatar
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 1,075
WTGs: 22
WTGd at 44 Times in 6 Posts
Thanks: 701
Thanked 1,207 Times in 383 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 6545
Rep Power: 54
Zoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond reputeZoozie has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casinomeister
This just in from English Harbour:
In theory, the number of Wins versus the number of losses and (excluding ties) will converge to 50% over a sample set that is large enough. .
Actually #wins/#losses SHOULD converge to 100%!!!
What we saw was actually that it did converge to something 50%!



Zoozie
The Following User Says Thank You to Zoozie For This Useful Post:
erp1 (6th May 2006)
Old 3rd May 2006, 04:21 PM
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 985
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 129
Thanked 273 Times in 162 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 1519
Rep Power: 28
soflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant futuresoflat has a brilliant future
I WAS giving them the benefit of the doubt regarding the game - not that it was fair, but maybe they had a programming error or something.

But if they are going to cover it up, that would be dishonest. Not a trait gamblers look for in an online casino - trust is everything.

Several posters even suggested ways the operator could handle the situation.

We now need to know if/why this software is riggable by the operator.
Old 3rd May 2006, 04:41 PM
Banned User - repetitive violations of posting rule 1.6
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: England
Posts: 1,674
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 0
Thanked 141 Times in 64 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 0
Rep Power: 0
caruso seems to be zero at this point
I have to admit, it could've been a "glitch" until this response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thelawnet
The worst possible choice for them. It's proof that they were cheating deliberately - they could have claimed a software error accidentaly added, but no they deny that the game was unfair and add some bullshit about the distrinution converging on 50% over time
Exactly. If it were a genuine "glitch" they would know about it, been able to explain it and then take the necessary remedial action. What they've done is denied it. This was a terrible mistake because the denial is pointless. These results could never, NEVER result from a fair game. They have failed to grasp this here:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Casinomeister
In theory, the number of Wins versus the number of losses and (excluding ties) will converge to 50% over a sample set that is large enough. Should small sample sets be used to measure this metric, then results will vary as seems to be the case tracing through this thread.
Incorrect. You do not need a large sample to prove this. The size required is dependent on the conjecture being tested. Ten hands is enough to prove cheating / non-randomness if those ten hands are, for example, ten consecutive blackjacks, or ten fully blank draws on 10-line video poker.

English Harbour simply do not understand this, and think they can wing on the limited sample size.

Regarding "crooks" and "cheaters": I suppose it's down to your interpretation. I sell you a Ferrari, at a Ferrari price, without telling you it has a Skoda engine. Does that make me a cheat / crook?

'Fraid it does.
Old 3rd May 2006, 04:53 PM
Casinomeister's Avatar
Cheer Meister
 
Join Date: Jun 1998
Location: Here near my Bier, my dear.
Posts: 15,489
WTGs: 18
WTGd at 43 Times in 26 Posts
Thanks: 2,024
Thanked 7,088 Times in 2,476 Posts
Blog Entries: 3
Nominated 63 Times in 22 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 5
Reputation Points: 37150
Rep Power: 15
Casinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond reputeCasinomeister has a reputation beyond repute
Originally Posted by Casinomeister
In theory, the number of Wins versus the number of losses and (excluding ties) will converge to 50% over a sample set that is large enough. Should small sample sets be used to measure this metric, then results will vary as seems to be the case tracing through this thread.


Just for the record, I didn't say that. This was a communication given to me by the casino.

Back to the use of language, if you want to keep this thread on track then lose the baggage.
__________________
Beer is living proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy
~Ben Franklin

Useful links: ~ Accredited Casinos ~ I-Gaming Representatives ~ Evil Section ~ My Wish List ~ Donate Now! ~
Mission Statement & Player Philosophy

Old 3rd May 2006, 07:13 PM
spearmaster's Avatar
Meister Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Heaven
Posts: 5,822
WTGs: 1
WTGd at 3 Times in 1 Post
Thanks: 401
Thanked 1,013 Times in 506 Posts
Nominated 9 Times in 5 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 1
Reputation Points: 6137
Rep Power: 95
spearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond reputespearmaster has a reputation beyond repute
That was a pretty poor explanation from EH management. These "theoretically deterministic varying chances" just don't add up... pun fully intended.
Old 3rd May 2006, 07:52 PM
tencardcharlie's Avatar
It's the easter bunny!
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: The playboy mansion.
Posts: 330
WTGs: 0
WTGd at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanks: 39
Thanked 114 Times in 80 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Reputation Points: 647
Rep Power: 22
tencardcharlie is a splendid one to beholdtencardcharlie is a splendid one to beholdtencardcharlie is a splendid one to beholdtencardcharlie is a splendid one to beholdtencardcharlie is a splendid one to beholdtencardcharlie is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by spearmaster
"theoretically deterministic varying chances"
Yes, what the heck does that mean?

Sounds like some jibrish from a roulette system manual.
 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
English Harbour Expands Executive Team Casinomeister Casino Industry Discussion 0 22nd December 2004 06:07 PM


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
© All Rights Reserved, 1998-2009


  Casinomeister is proud to present the following quality portals
Online Slots Guide | Online Casinos | GoneGambling | Online Casino Reviews | Wizard of Odds | Games and Casino | Online Poker Rooms | BetOnCharity | Online Slots | Online Casino Reviews

Legal Statements and Privacy Policy
Casinomeister.com does not intend for any of the information contained on this website to be used for illegal purposes. You must ensure you meet all age and other regulatory requirements before entering a casino or placing a wager. Online gambling is illegal in many jurisdictions and users should consult legal counsel regarding the legal status of online gambling and gaming in their jurisdictions. The information in this site is for news and entertainment purposes only. Casinomeister.com is an independent directory and information service not affiliated with any casino. Links to third party websites on Casinomeister.com are provided solely for informative/educational purposes. If you use these links, you leave this Website.

Inactive Reminders By Mished.co.uk