Rushmore removed from the Accredited Section

**Casinomeister** · 7th June 2010, 11:45 AM

As some of you may recall, there was a rather big issue last year when the Rushmore casino group was hit up by a number of fraudulent players. Most of these were players with stolen/faked IDs and mostly resided in Europe.

The casino hired private detectives to ascertain whether or not these players were legit - some of this was explained here:
http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...tml#post286024

Unfortunately, there was a dolphin in the tuna net - Embalu. His situation was compounded by the fact that he had two other accounts accessed via his computer here in this forum (typical of multiple account fraud). That did not help his case at all.

The bottom line is that the casino provided convincing evidence that he had given them false information about his address - which was backed up by their investigation.

Embalu was persistent and was able to have his information verified by a Hungarian detective - but who was stone walled by the casino as well. I was contacted in May to have another look at this, which I agreed to consider, but unfortunately I was in Montreal at the time - and immediately after that trip I was in Florida for two weeks. This was solved without our intervention by a number of others who took up his cause - kudos for them.

Embalu had never PABd - he just came up on the fraud report. The skeptic in me did not give him a fair "hear me out." My apologies to Embalu - his account is fully reinstated.

On the other hand, it appears that investigation was conducted haphazardly, and that there was no room for players to challenge their findings. From a player's perspective, this is an unfair business practice. It is also unbecoming of an Accredited Casino. There have been several issues in the past concerning the Rushmore group, and that's about it for me. They have been removed from the Accredited section.

**darkpixie** · 7th June 2010, 05:36 PM

Good Stuff... This makes tackling the bizarre Randoms irrelevant and the entire thing can be put to bed!

**Nifty29** · 8th June 2010, 03:27 AM

Originally Posted by darkpixie

Good Stuff... This makes tackling the bizarre Randoms irrelevant and the entire thing can be put to bed!

Of course, the two issues are inextricably linked...

Bryan has taken this step as a result of unfair practices relating to player indentification and verification...and it isnt the first time they have been shown to be unprofessional in this regard.

Can you point out the part in Bryans' statement that talks about rigging RJs and fudging figures and 'inventing' jackpot winners?

It was only a matter of time before someone drew that incredibly long bow.

(Note to Bryan - sorry for derail - just wanted to clarify why this happened and seperate it from the other discussion/s)

**darkpixie** · 8th June 2010, 04:17 AM

Nifty, off your high horse... All I meant was that as this group is no longer accredited, its neither here nor there as far as I am concerned, they can do what they want with their randoms.. I'm just glad that no further sign ups from this site will occur (as I find this is the BEST watchdog site out there and ultimately most players land here and stick around, that is if they can take the constant beatings from the other members for having an opinion)

**jod5413** · 8th June 2010, 07:03 AM

It takes a "big man" to admit to being wrong. WTG Bryan! I am happy that Embalu and his problem was finally settled.

I am tickled that Embalu got his just reward. He never lost his cool, just stayed calm and rational throughout his posting at different forums. Kudos do go to a few select people. Steve Russo, who was brought on board by a poster at GIA, Caruso, who is known to be a "pitbull" when something does not seem right to him, Mojo, GIA moderator. There are a few others that also helped Embalu in proving he did nothing wrong.

This shows me that there are, in fact, checks and balances to keep any gambler from wrong doings by any casino or group.

**lots0** · 8th June 2010, 08:29 PM

I believe that Embalu's case is one where reasonable people can disagree.

Fact is Embalu admittedly gave the casino false info, for whatever reason, when he opened his account. After that all bets are off, at least imo. I know others disagree with me and I respect their opinions. I just hope they respect my opinion in return.

**vinylweatherman** · 8th June 2010, 10:17 PM

Originally Posted by darkpixie

Nifty, off your high horse... All I meant was that as this group is no longer accredited, its neither here nor there as far as I am concerned, they can do what they want with their randoms.. I'm just glad that no further sign ups from this site will occur (as I find this is the BEST watchdog site out there and ultimately most players land here and stick around, that is if they can take the constant beatings from the other members for having an opinion)

The issue is by no means dead. The question remains as to why Rushmore seem to have such a "strange" variant of the RTG software platform that allows RJs to reach the levels of network progressives. Changing the seed from 1000 to 5000 does NOT explain much. Adding 4000 to the seed should merely mean the average RJ pays out 4000 more than those seeded at 1000, after all, the odds per $ wagered of triggering one has not changed (has it?).

The very high RJs reported look very much like there is a "blocking" process which supresses the normal RJ triggering process, allowing huge pots to build in some cases.

I recall something similarly odd with MGS and Mega Moolah, where for a couple of weeks the mini and minor jackpots were regularly in the THOUSANDS, and I hardly ever saw one triggered. MGS have NEVER explained this, but this was clearly a case of "blocking" of the trigger mechanism. Whilst it may have been a technical error, I also think it was possible that MGS were trialling a new configuration so as to make the smaller jackpots more meaningful to players. Rushmore may have tinkered with the RJ mechanisms beyond raising the seed to 5000 in order to make the RJs far more meaningful. Grouping slots together into RJ pools raises the speed the pool grows, but should NOT alter the average trigger value, since it is supposed to be a set chance per $ bet.

Sometimes, removal from the accredited section prompts the casino to address the issues, and reapply. Unfortunately, Rushmore has ALREADY gone through this cycle once, and it seems things have been allowed to lapse since their subsequent reinstatement.

**maphesto** · 8th June 2010, 11:00 PM

Originally Posted by vinylweatherman

The issue is by no means dead. The question remains as to why Rushmore seem to have such a "strange" variant of the RTG software platform that allows RJs to reach the levels of network progressives. Changing the seed from 1000 to 5000 does NOT explain much. Adding 4000 to the seed should merely mean the average RJ pays out 4000 more than those seeded at 1000, after all, the odds per $ wagered of triggering one has not changed (has it?).

Yes it has according to Dogboy!. I don't want to derail this thread since there are two different issues but read this!

**kavaman** · 8th June 2010, 11:22 PM

I have to agree, that the casino did not investigate the matter properly, but i also have to say that the verification process for every casino is basicly the same as it is with rushmore. (There is room for error).

I don't mean to sound offensive, but is this the only reason behind the demotion to non accredited?

**darkpixie** · 9th June 2010, 12:33 AM

@vinylweatherman
I do agree to a certain extent, this issue is still wide open. But speaking for myself for the purposes of this forum as it is no longer 'recommending' this casino for me continuing to expose them is akin to flogging a dead horse, basically the means no longer justify the ends for me. If someone would like to pick up the torch they are free to do so. Like you said, the JP's get HUGE, and secondary to that and more importantly they get hit MORE OFTEN then any of us have seen at other RTG's, which is opposite to the way dogboy explained the seeding concept. Lower seed, better chance to hit, Higher seed harder to hit.