PLAYTECH BJ

[RebelDearg]

Scarifice???

Read my previous post about 'counter strike'. I'm working on the theory that the software is designed to count reoccurring strategy based bets and adapt accordingly. So far I'm successful.

Basically, if the program is counting a particular bet and is designed to invoke a series of 'counter strike' commands when that count reaches a certain number, then you sacrifice a bet to confound the programs 'counter strike' number.

I don't know the way these are programmed, if I'm correct in this theory then its possible that the 'counter strike' number is reset to zero when a sacrifice is made.

As I said before.
Ever notice how a startegy suddenly stops working?

[mitch]

RebelDearg

Your "system" undoubtably involves altering the size of your bets and hoping the bigger ones win more often than probability. ( See my previous post for the theory)

Unless you can figure out conclusively why this is happening it's just one of the millions of other crap systems out there.

That's not to say that progression betting is a bad thing overall on internet gambling ( I think it is a good thing overall ) but I suspect our objectives and motives are not the same. I know I am still under the thumb of probability no matter what I do.

Mitch

[Slotmachine]

Basically, if the program is counting a particular bet and is designed to invoke a series of 'counter strike' commands when that count reaches a certain number, then you sacrifice a bet to confound the programs 'counter strike' number.

None of this makes any sense to me. Why would they program a sophisticated strategy-detecting program with such a weakness that it could be counfounded by some counter-strategy or sacrifice bets?? They could just as well program into it a feature that notices when the player is defeating the program (simply the program would notice that it's not winning) and then just toss in the odd blackjack for the dealer, or just a slightly better hand.

Anyway, you are saying that the program cheats, i.e. deals itself non-random cards when it "learns" the player's strategy. I mean, the program itself has no strategy beyond stand on 17 or whatever so it cannot alter its own strategy. Very simple.

Nobody answered the original question: What be the point of designing such complex cheating software when fair software already has a guaranteed house edge??

As for the question about why the casinos should deny winnings and such if the games are fair, it's pretty obvious: The house edge is so small that a skilled player will have an edge in a fair game if he uses bonuses, even small ones. That's why they need to exclude the advantage players from receiving winnings. (it's stupid, but then I'm all against sign-up bonuses anyway)

I don't think any of these theories make any sense whatsoever. Absolutely no offence meant ad hominem, it's just how I feel about the issue at hand.

Cheers,
SM

[RebelDearg]

None of this makes any sense to me. Why would they program a sophisticated strategy-detecting program with such a weakness that it could be counfounded by some counter-strategy or sacrifice bets?? They could just as well program into it a feature that notices when the player is defeating the program (simply the program would notice that it's not winning) and then just toss in the odd blackjack for the dealer, or just a slightly better hand.

Anyway, you are saying that the program cheats, i.e. deals itself non-random cards when it "learns" the player's strategy. I mean, the program itself has no strategy beyond stand on 17 or whatever so it cannot alter its own strategy. Very simple.

Nobody answered the original question: What be the point of designing such complex cheating software when fair software already has a guaranteed house edge??

As for the question about why the casinos should deny winnings and such if the games are fair, it's pretty obvious: The house edge is so small that a skilled player will have an edge in a fair game if he uses bonuses, even small ones. That's why they need to exclude the advantage players from receiving winnings. (it's stupid, but then I'm all against sign-up bonuses anyway)

I don't think any of these theories make any sense whatsoever. Absolutely no offence meant ad hominem, it's just how I feel about the issue at hand.

Cheers,
SM

For a start, I'm referring to Roulette only.
I'm just asking has anyone else, while playing Roulette only, noticed that various strategies worked at first and then, for no reason, completely fail.

I also don't want a barage of 'strategies don't work' posts as that is not what I'm asking. For me, comparing Land based casinos to internet casinos is like comparing football to ballet dancing.

I don't play startagies against probability, I play startagies against a series of codes that have been designed by a programmer. like all computer games, half life, metal gear solid, tomb raider, if you stick at them long enough you'll beat them, but, do not think of them as anything else but computer games. Playing age old strategies that were developed in land based casinos will not work.

I do not double my bets, this is too easily identified.
I do not stick to strategy, the people at playtech have easy access to all of them and can adapt design features to suit.

I'm just asking has anyone else seen the weakness that I think I've spotted, if I post it the person who works for playtech thats paid to peruse these site will see it and report it.

All I am willing to say is this...again
'Computers do not undestand sacrifice.
This sentence will make sense to you if you know what I'm referring to.

[mitch]

rebel

Look at the posts of Cipher who was a long time contributor to this forum ( he is currently banned but posts on other forums).

Cipher had the same theory as you and devoloped software to take advantage of it.

Frankly I consider it a load of old tosh. Why risk your whole business if it came out that you were cheating? Casinos have the advantage and can just sit back and watch the money come in from the house edge.

How could all the software programmers be kept silent, have they assassinated them? Also if the software is non random how could they prevent these very same programmers from taking them to the cleaners?

Don't get locked into the idea that you can beat the house edge by betting different amounts in some pattern, believe me you can't and you can lose a lot of money finding this out for yourself. You can beat the Casino but only by the obvious method.

Mitch

[Westland Bowl]

Cipher's software is basically for blackjack, not roulette, but nevertheless it is based on seeing patterns (which suggests non-randomness) that develop in a session. I've used it successfully.

[RebelDearg]

rebel

Look at the posts of Cipher who was a long time contributor to this forum ( he is currently banned but posts on other forums).

Cipher had the same theory as you and devoloped software to take advantage of it.

Frankly I consider it a load of old tosh. Why risk your whole business if it came out that you were cheating? Casinos have the advantage and can just sit back and watch the money come in from the house edge.

How could all the software programmers be kept silent, have they assassinated them? Also if the software is non random how could they prevent these very same programmers from taking them to the cleaners?

Don't get locked into the idea that you can beat the house edge by betting different amounts in some pattern, believe me you can't and you can lose a lot of money finding this out for yourself. You can beat the Casino but only by the obvious method.

Mitch

Its working for me.
I can make 10 units in 12 minutes, after I have made my target I leave and go to another playtech casino and do the same thing, at the end of the week I make my withdrawl. I do not double bets, I always use 1 unit no matter what and I have a loss that I have never reached.
As I've said, and I can't emphasis this enough, this software keeps a record of your strategies, therefore you next bet should be predetermined by your previous bet, it doesn't matter where the ball has landed as each spin is independent. Track your bets, not the ball, and you'll win. After a while you'll start to see it too. ...and remember, Computers do not understand sacrifice.

[Slotmachine]

I also don't want a barage of 'strategies don't work' posts as that is not what I'm asking.

Since you quoted my post specifically I'll just point out that my post wasn't a "strategies don't work" post, and you didn't start this thread. I was specifically responding to your theories - but if it's only those in agreement with you that you want to post here, that's fine too. My view is just that the pursuit is futile, because it would make no sense for the software manufacturers to rig the games, therefore the games are random, and even if they weren't, they would not succumb to these confounding plays, sacrifice or not. But prove me wrong and I'll be happy to change my thinking.

But please, not another roulette strategy..

Anyway there have been no reports of any succesful programs or strategies anywhere that beat online roulette or blackjack, and I suspect there never will be.

Cheers,
SM

[caruso]

My view is just that the pursuit is futile, because it would make no sense for the software manufacturers to rig the games...

It may make no sense, but that hasn't stopped casinos from rigging their games:

http://wizardofodds.com/casinos/casinobar.html

Don't assume that because they don't have to, they don't. They do - because they can.

Of course, the Casino Bar gaff could not be taken advantage of, and it was a very specific fix. The "intelligent software" suggestion is unsubstantiated conjecture, like all other betting systems.

[bpb]

Cipher's software is basically for blackjack, not roulette, but nevertheless it is based on seeing patterns (which suggests non-randomness) that develop in a session. I've used it successfully.

No, you haven't. Trust me. Any positive result you've seen using anyone's "system" is nothing but variance.

Anyone who belives in any kind of system for turning a series of negative expectation wagers into an overall positive expectation should see if their local community college has a course dealing with probability and statistics. The few hundred you spend on such a course will pale in comparison to what you can lose if you don't educate yourself.


And there certainly have been and will be online casinos that rig their games. But they are not going to do so by creating some complex neural net that is analyzing and countering your betting patterns. And though you'd like to believe that you are smart enough to detect and defeat their nefarious scheme with your brilliant counter-strategy of insane betting patterns ... you are just living in a fantasy.