Mathematical Proof that English Harbour is cheating

[suzecat]

Well, I am not going to diss the board....no way...just going to enjoy listening to the singing Munchkins (Ding!Dong!....).......

[thelawnet]

LMAO.

If that's correct, the circumstatial evidence is now completely overwhelming. It's far too much of a coincidence that they just happened to pull that game from their promos now it's had the fix removed. They only allowed JOB while the unbeatable fix was in. Now it's gone, they've pulled the game that no longer represents a guaranteed profit.

Everything now adds up to a deliberate fix.

Sorry, you are wrong. At one time they allowed all video poker games. Then they banned multiline video poker (last year). Then they banned Jacks or Better (before the rigged doubling starting). There is no correlation between them no longer offering Jacks or Better and the rigged video poker doubling.

Them no longer allowing Jacks or Better just meant that you could play a different video poker game, probably Tens or Better. I guess they stopped offering it for the obvious reason that Jacks or Better is less profitable.

It doesn't change the fact that they issued a false statement about their game being fair, even though the software had just been changed back from rigged to fair. That is the most damning thing, not to mention that it's pretty hard to see how this could have happened in the first place.

[Mousey]

I have read the entire thread... and parts of it more than once. I'm not a mathhead, don't know a darn thing about programming, or even understand how online casino software really works -- so the following few things are what really bothers me about this goof up (if the explanation is in the thread, forgive me and just point me to it)..

Who diddled with the software? The casino? The software provider? Did the 'glitch' affect only one casino or did it affect all OddsOn/Vegas Tech casinos? Perhaps it wasn't deliberate, but it proves that simple, standard game features can be made screwy and still appear to function normally whether by accident or design. If they can monkey with the DoubleUp, can't they also fiddle with the card deal and/or draw during game play?

Who executed the patch that repaired it? The software provider? or English Harbour?

As I play a lot of VP, this incident has really given me the creeps.

[dovmin]

thelawnet, It is true that multihand Videopoker is not allowed for a longer period BUT the 1 line jacks or better was banned during the NON RANDOM period.

The casino alleges that the Non Random started at the 13 of April, well I don't think so. Even if you believe the casino that it was a mistake, you don't have to believe them that it started at the 13 of April.


If the assumption is that everything was not a mistake then a player who plays other Videopoker might get a fair doubling because if he plays that game he is probably not a professional player.


There is one theory that going on between the webmaster that if they wanted to cheat they would do it in a mush less obvious way. The fact the NON RANDOM was so obvious is to their favor now. Well, maybe they knew that fact, maybe they knew that the bigger the lie is the better it is to cope with it once you get caught. You can always say it was a big mistake.

I have information with me that I can not disclose.

The information I have does not prove BUT it supports my theory. This is only a theory and of course there is a chance and even large odds that it was a mistake.

Look what happened with RTG, they had the bug in their blackjack only for players who play with coupons which means bonuses.

They sent an email that they found an error in the software that all splits were not paid and they returned the money.

I believed them, it is all about trust. For now I don't believe English harbour although I have no 100% proof that I am right

[spearmaster]

The casino alleges that the Non Random started at the 13 of April, well I don't think so. Even if you believe the casino that it was a mistake, you don't have to believe them that it started at the 13 of April.

First of all, the stats from April 1st were posted, and it is obvious that the ratio changed on April 13th.

Now you can always choose to believe that they manipulated those numbers just to make their claim correct - but you have missed the fact that anyone playing there would have noticed the same thing as thelawnet did if it had happened earlier. The numbers were so far off, and the odds so far against the player, that it would have been impossible not to notice that something was wrong.

So unless anyone has any results from before April 13th that indicate that the doubling game was seemingly abnormal, I would tend to think that we can accept the stats that were posted.

[suzecat]

Despite enduring enormous patience waiting for something (anything) from OddsOn(OddsOff?) to fully explain this "mistake," none has been proffered to my satisfaction. Hummmmm....There are simply too many casinos available on the internet for me to feel comfortable with this group. So life goes on.

[ergopro]

the stats from April 1st were posted, and it is obvious that the ratio changed on April 13th.

Sorry to ask again, but those stats that were posted, are they for the entire EH?

[Zoozie]

Who executed the patch that repaired it? The software provider? or English Harbour?

Only the software provider is capable of releasing new patches.

The issue was caused by a bug in the software staging release on the later part of the day April 13 and went unnotice.

If this is true then the software provider is responsible. A lot of people
are very angry at English Harbour right now, but they are actually innocents if this is true.

As a software developer I not believe it is due to a bug (a bug is an unintended malcfunction). The point it is that the 'new' code would look fundamentally different from the old 'symmetric' code.

I strongly believe it is due to a software configuration change which could be by mistake or deliberate. However this is actually not important as I will explain later.

English Harbour wrote the following to our beloved meister:

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. .

Now THIS is interesting. It is mathematically plain wrong. #wins/#losses will converge to 100% given a fair game. It is a realistic mistake for someone not used to mathematics. And the data posted by English Harbour EXCACTLY match this 50% ratio (1/3 wins and 2/3 looses)...

And given the casino had a parameter to configure for this ratio, just 1 number (the ratio) is the obvious way to make it. It would be stupid to have two % fields where you type 50% in one and 50% in the other.

But IF such a parameter exists in the software everyone would agree that it is 'not fair' software. The double up game with 5 cards is just an 'illusion' then.

Notice that the mathematically challenged person that did this configuration very likely did it by mistake (or he he was also stupid and greedy), but revealed a serious problem with the fairness of the software.

This is my theory.

Zoozie

[spearmaster]

Ergopro, as far as I know this is for EH only.

Zoozie - we all agreed that this statement was not only premature, but incorrect...

I think we are best off ignoring the first post which was clearly made in haste and poor judgement. The second post, plus the post by the Wizard, are more indicative of the situation and the resolution.

We are of course still waiting for a technical explanation, but it is the weekend, so let's see if something is forthcoming in the next day or two. And worse comes to worst, I and Meister are expecting to be meeting with EH senior management in Montreal the following week to try and get to the bottom of this issue.

Please rest assured that we have everyone's best interests in mind. And thank you for not trying to draw any more conclusions for the time being as they will not serve any real purpose nor will they affect the resolution that EH has proposed. One way or another there will be an answer for all this.

[tronk]

i wrote this before seeing spearmasters post above but i will leave it, as i would like to air my opinion

the evidence is all there. Its clear that the doubling JOB game was rigged. Its probably never going to be proven whether this was delibrate or not, but i think the majority of intelligent players will see what has taken place as damning evidence enough to put a black mark on english harbour, and possibly all odds-on casinos.
Two days after this issue was brought to public attention the problem vanished into thin air and everything was fine again. Under heavy scrutiny, and other than suspending play on JOB, this would most obviously be the expected result. Days later a premature response was made by EH that probably had the effect of further expasterating involved players suspicions.
I also find it hard to believe that moderators on this forum came up with things like "within the realm of possibility" (sarcastic?) after the chances of these results had been shown to be one in billions and billions.

Im not accusing them of delibratley cheating, as i see spearmaster has already warned about allegations. We however all hold our personal opinion but it seems we cannot express it here without facing suspension.

Most thanks to thelawnet for uncovering this and playing some kind of part -i believe- in keeping casinos in check. Thanks to this thread players have recieved compensation for playing in an unfair situation and EH have faced some kind of public accountability. Its depressing to hear this sort of thing can happen at online casinos, but it has been shown that in the past many times that seemingly random games can become by way of glitch or otherwise, altered to offer a non-random game in the houses favour.