Runnin unlucky?

[mitch]

I'm happy to hear that you are doing so well, but lately you are the very small minority of us out here.

pacer

Of course he is in the minority. Otherwise casinos would not be in business.

The only way to win (statistically) regularly is to play with bonuses.

Other than that you need to be very lucky to win on anything like a regular basis.

If you are not lucky the expectation is that you will lose. Do not accuse casinos of cheating because they are taking your money that is the norm.

If you are not happy. :-

1. Play excusively with bonuses.

2. Do not play at all.

3. Open your own casino.

Only those 3 things will guarantee your happiness.

Mitch

[paul02085]

pacer

Of course he is in the minority. Otherwise casinos would not be in business.

The only way to win (statistically) regularly is to play with bonuses.

Other than that you need to be very lucky to win on anything like a regular basis.

If you are not lucky the expectation is that you will lose. Do not accuse casinos of cheating because they are taking your money that is the norm.

If you are not happy. :-

1. Play excusively with bonuses.

2. Do not play at all.

3. Open your own casino.

Only those 3 things will guarantee your happiness.

Mitch

#3 so true.

[arccos]

Arccos, they can change the payout percentages, and do. That is why casino X has a 94% payout and casino Y may have a 96% payout for example. If they were truly random, all casinos running MG would have the same percentage, all RTGs the same, etc. Your blanket statement that they are not rigged is pure speculation on your part. How do you know if they are or not?? As far as the legislation currently pending, the casinos are cutting their own throats right now by "tightening up" the games at a time when customer perception is very important (or should be) to them. They have soured me on an activity that I used to enjoy. Now, I really don't care if it is outlawed as I feel that I cannot win anyway. I'm happy to hear that you are doing so well, but lately you are the very small minority of us out here.

Actually, for legitimate licensed software, they cannot change payout percentages on any of the fair deal games, I.E. cards, dice, etc. That simply is not an option in the configuration of the software. Most of the larger software networks evaluate their games with accounting firms to make sure the payout percentages are correct, and many release their results to the public. In addition, the software makers would not risk the reputation of their dozens of licenses by allowing a single casino using their software to play with the odds. No speculation, it's a matter of logic and public record.

I know the casinos I play on have not done anything to me because of the stats I keep. In fact, if you have kept records, and found a casino you lost at in which you would be at or above the 95% probability, post it here and we can try to duplicate the results. I'm quite good with statistics, and would notice over a large number of bets (and the stats I keep) if I'm being "skimmed" on the games I play.

"Casino X has a 94% payout and casino Y may have a 96% payout for example." That means that X has more people playing low returns games (slots, for example), their non fair-deal games (slots) have a lower payout percentage, or the skilled games (BJ, Pontoon) are being played incorrectly by their players. A casino wants 100% of their players either on slots or playing skilled games incorrectly. That gets them the money that much quicker.

The legislation pending in the US is succeeding because the US is not getting taxes on out-of-county casinos, and the absurd argument of "protecting our citizens from themselves." The casinos themselves have nothing to do with it. I haven't heard any argument from legislators that the casinos are corrupt. In fact, if they do, they could have a slander allegation on their heads, since many European B&M casinos and even a couple US groups have Internet casinos. Whether they pay 99.99% or 20%, the legislation is going to succeed or fail based on who's voice is loudest, like always.

"I'm happy to hear that you are doing so well, but lately you are the very small minority of us out here." The winners are not vocal, the losers are. That's because the human mind is risk averse. And there are more losers. I don't report when I'm losing because I expect to. So you won't hear from the winners, especially on a watchdog forum.

The reason I'm so passionate about this is that it comes up on every single gambling forum I've ever been on. Whether it's casinos, poker rooms, or bingo, some people always think their being screwed. You aren't... you're just losing like everyone inevitably does.

[pacers31]

mitch, forget winning on a regular basis, I'm talking maybe once a year will I have any kind of meaningful win. I play regularly, meaning several times a week. The law of averages would seem to allow that I would have a better experience from time to time. Your second suggestion is the one I am probably going to pursue. I still want to know how all the casino apologists out there can prove their theory that the games are indeed not rigged or altered in any way. The simple, and apparently uncomfortable truth for some of you is that you really don't know whether they are or not. Some folks just want to believe. I'm not saying they are rigged, but please, don't pretend to know something that for the average player is unknowable. My point about not caring whether online gaming is banned or not is that when the customer always feels short changed they tend to go away anyway.

One more thing, can you or anyone out there explain why there are varying payout percentages for the same games software at different sites? Shouldn't it be uniform if indeed the software isn't being manipulated?? Why 95% at one MG for instance and 98% at another???? If the software is so pure, there should be no variance.

Maybe if I ever hit it big somewhere LOL!! I will open my own site! That appears to be the only way to win anyway.

[pacers31]

arccos, are you affiliated with any casino sites??

[arccos]

arccos, are you affiliated with any casino sites??

Am I shill? Not at all. I just play it all... Poker, BJ, Bingo, anything with a deal I like. I noticed you still haven't mentioned a single casino you feel is unfair. Why is that?

[Kosop]

Ok, I am not understanding this I guess. What most seem to be saying, and correct me if I am wrong, is that you are going to lose. You do not have any chance whatsoever of winning. If you keep playing, regardless of luck, angels on your shoulders, whatever, that the software, by design, will not allow you to win. Am I reading that correctly?

The software, whichever kind, has a built in mechanism that will not allow it to payout more than it takes in. So, at what point does the software itself determine what is coming in versus what must go out? If it uses this type of logic, which seems to be suggested, then if one player is winning, another must be losing. If one player making very large wagers is winning, than many players making smaller wagers must inevitably lose.

I am not pointing my finger at the online casinos, well, not completely. I go to Vegas every year and lose every year. I go there with the expecatation of losing but having a good time while doing it ( free drinks go a long way baby! ). In my opinion, completely uninformed, there should really be two pools of players. Thems that wager over a certain amount per play, and thems that wager under a certain amount. It would give us low rollers a chance to play for a bit on our meager bankrolls without having to cover the winnings of the jackpot hitters.

Again, I am sure I am misunderstanding everything posted here anyway. If we are all guaranteed to lose, why would we ever play anyway?

[pacers31]

Because they are on the accredited list, and I don't want to get kicked off the site as I do find it interesting. You must be one of the lucky winners then. Wait until you are in my shoes and can't win ever. We'll see how "fair" you think these places are then. I really believe that it is the software that is suspect. I think that maybe the casino entities are real nervous about the potential US ban and are sucking up as much revenue as they can before the well runs dry. Just my opinion, but it is as good as any other. i.e; "the games aren't rigged". I have sought out Bryans comment on the state of the gaming universe with all the turmoil these days, but so far haven't seen any such postings. I wasn't accusing you of being a shill, you just speak like one. That or someone who just won a jackpot and has a warm feeling for the games because of it. Either way, no hard feelings, just commenting.

[arccos]

Ok, I am not understanding this I guess. What most seem to be saying, and correct me if I am wrong, is that you are going to lose. You do not have any chance whatsoever of winning. If you keep playing, regardless of luck, angels on your shoulders, whatever, that the software, by design, will not allow you to win. Am I reading that correctly?

Not quite. The GAMES, by design, will not allow you to win long term. For each hand of blackjack you play at the casino's rules, you will lose .25%-1% on average. If you win 100 hands in a row, keep playing, and if you play long enough, you will give it back. Whether its on a computer or with a deck of cards, you will lose long term.

The software, whichever kind, has a built in mechanism that will not allow it to payout more than it takes in. So, at what point does the software itself determine what is coming in versus what must go out? If it uses this type of logic, which seems to be suggested, then if one player is winning, another must be losing. If one player making very large wagers is winning, than many players making smaller wagers must inevitably lose.

An individual can win and cashout. I do regularly. So do other players. The Wizard of Odds has more details on casinos and how they make money if you want to know. The casinos doesn't care if you win or lose, because in agregate, they will make money. The game has a house edge. They don't need to adjust the odds on a player or group of players because they are already in their favor.

Think of it this way. If we played a dice game where I give you one coin for each 1 or 2, and you give me one coin for any 3, 4, 5, or 6, I wouldn't need "fixed" dice to win long term. That's what the game is at the casino. It's not fixed dice, it's the rules of the game.

I am not pointing my finger at the online casinos, well, not completely. I go to Vegas every year and lose every year. I go there with the expecatation of losing but having a good time while doing it ( free drinks go a long way baby! ). In my opinion, completely uninformed, there should really be two pools of players. Thems that wager over a certain amount per play, and thems that wager under a certain amount. It would give us low rollers a chance to play for a bit on our meager bankrolls without having to cover the winnings of the jackpot hitters.

Again, I am sure I am misunderstanding everything posted here anyway. If we are all guaranteed to lose, why would we ever play anyway?

They don't adjust the odds to balance the books.

You said it exactly: "...But having a good time doing it." Vegas or online, it's the same game. It's entertainment. If you assume you're going to lose, you can have a good time doing it. Then if you walk away break even or up, even better!

[arccos]

Because they are on the accredited list, and I don't want to get kicked off the site as I do find it interesting. You must be one of the lucky winners then. Wait until you are in my shoes and can't win ever. We'll see how "fair" you think these places are then. I really believe that it is the software that is suspect. I think that maybe the casino entities are real nervous about the potential US ban and are sucking up as much revenue as they can before the well runs dry. Just my opinion, but it is as good as any other. i.e; "the games aren't rigged". I have sought out Bryans comment on the state of the gaming universe with all the turmoil these days, but so far haven't seen any such postings. I wasn't accusing you of being a shill, you just speak like one. That or someone who just won a jackpot and has a warm feeling for the games because of it. Either way, no hard feelings, just commenting.

If there's one thing I've seen about Bryan, it's that he seems to be fair. If you have a question about one of his accredited casinos, he won't have a issue with you posting a possible problem with it. Accredited doesn't mean untouchable. :-)

Besides, most of his accredited are ones I haven't played on yet, so I can test your ideas.

Edit: Although, it probably won't make you feel any better if I say I get better results. But if I find the same as you, it could be something. Also post the game... mine is almost always BJ, but I'll play the video poker if the odds are ok. Any game you list I'll at least be able to give you the house edge for. :-)