Roulette on Microgaming rigged(?)

**NextToYou** · 7th December 2006, 08:39 PM

I have been playing on several microgaming casinos after software update to new "viper" software. I have run several tests on roulette autoplay feature on migrogaming casinos and I am more and more convinced that software can´t just be total random. These streaks like you can see in attached screenshot are just too usual - I see them everytime I decide to play roulette and usually more than one in just like thousand spins or so.

I know that some people on this board have similar experiences. I would really like someone to run long statistical tests on this game with autoplay and quickspin features on.

**soflat** · 7th December 2006, 09:07 PM

I don't know if it is rigged or if Roulette is naturally super streaky.

But I gave up trying to clear their bonuses with Roulette a long time ago because of the seemingly incredible streaks. Nowadays I just cash out and forfeit the bonus when I win anything.

**Rusty** · 7th December 2006, 09:22 PM

First microgaming casino I ever played I was super lucky on the slots and kept hitting big wins the trouble was that I kept going on roulette and playing 9 numbers, I simply couldnt hit.I went about 70 spins on one run hitting 1 number but all the other tries I had were similar.Since then I wont go near it.

**bpb** · 7th December 2006, 10:12 PM

Who cares?

Either the game is legit and you're going to lose on average $2.50 for every $100 wagered. Or the game is rigged and you're going to lose a few percentage points more.

Either way, your money is going down the toilet. Is it realy worthwhile to put a lot of effort into determining exactly how fast it's draining?

Exposing cheating software is worthwhile and all ... but Microgaming isn't exactly a new or obscure gaming platform. Nobody's shown any evidence that they're anything but legit.

If someone's is willing to play a negative expectation online game, that doesn't offer the social aspect or comps of comparable B&M play, then I would think that whether or not the game is rigged should be of little or no consequence to that person.

**NextToYou** · 7th December 2006, 10:26 PM

Originally Posted by bpb

Who cares?

Either the game is legit and you're going to lose on average $2.50 for every $100 wagered. Or the game is rigged and you're going to lose a few percentage points more.

Either way, your money is going down the toilet. Is it realy worthwhile to put a lot of effort into determining exactly how fast it's draining?

Exposing cheating software is worthwhile and all ... but Microgaming isn't exactly a new or obscure gaming platform. Nobody's shown any evidence that they're anything but legit.

If someone's is willing to play a negative expectation online game, that doesn't offer the social aspect or comps of comparable B&M play, then I would think that whether or not the game is rigged should be of little or no consequence to that person.

First of all, HA for French roulette is 1.35%, not 2.5% (or should be - if software is legit).

Secondly, clearing bonuses with FR is +EV situation - not flushing money down the drain. But because you seem such a noob, I forgive you for not knowing this.

Last but not least, your recent post history here looks nothing but trolling to several threads.

Let´s continue with real subject, shall we?

**vinylweatherman** · 7th December 2006, 11:26 PM

I have noticed perceived streakiness in many MG games. The problem is in proving that it is statistically significant as evidence of non-random game behaviour. While it is easy to show cases where such behaviour looks obvious, it is also possible to explain it away by using probability theory and showing that the event CAN happen, and that although rare, it has to happen sometime to someone.
The only way to mount an attack on such a proof is to design an experiment with enough of a sample size to show that the observed events have an extremely low probability of being pure chance. Secondly, the experiment has to be repeated and it be shown that this most unlikely event has happened yet again, and then again etc.
Designing experiments is not always easy. Looking at overall payout percentage, or even occurrences of individual numbers over a very large sample is not enough to disprove allegations of non-random behaviour. It is possible for roulette to be rigged to streak, but rigged in such a way that the long term outcome is that expected of a random game.
The idea would be to show that in the mid term, there are more biases than there should be if each result was completely independent.
Statistical correlation will be a good tool to look at (not easy, but can be done with software). This test looks for relationships between different variables. Choose two that should have no connection, and see if correlation between them exists.
For example, is a "2" more likely to be followed by a "13" than, say a "16" being followed by a "13". Using enough data, this should be a no. Such tests will show that the previous outcome has no bearing on the next (you might need to check many combinations).

I have run several experiments on various games looking for odd patterns. Sometimes, it looks like I have found something, but I find that on another attempt I cannot repeat the oddity. Some of the streaks have been truly remarkable in persistence. One in Vegas Strip level betting went on for 80,000 hands, and was very much in MY favour (for a change), to the tune of +800 betting units.

**EasyRhino** · 8th December 2006, 12:36 AM

Quickspin + autoplay is a recipe for a streaky mess.

I did about 13000 spins one time on black, and lost over 3 standard deviations. And I think that ridiculous winning streaks would be possible as well, but I haven't had anything really nuts happen to me.

My personal hunch is that quickspin + short time between spins just excercises the RNG in such a way that it doesn't perform very well.

**KasinoKing** · 8th December 2006, 01:07 AM

I think the original post proves MG is NOT rigged.
If you were going to rig a game, would you make it so obvious as to keep hitting the same number! (Unless of course, the player was betting on ALL the other 36 numbers!)

No casino NEEDS to rig Roulette - it has a pretty high HA, and in any case I'm sure Microgaming would be the last to do such a thing!

Their Blackjack on the other hand....

**goldeninternetc** · 8th December 2006, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by KasinoKing

No casino NEEDS to rig Roulette - it has a pretty high HA, and in any case I'm sure Microgaming would be the last to do such a thing!

Their Blackjack on the other hand....

To be caught is the end of those who do rig, am I correct?

And, how does it go from suspicion to action and by who then?

**Rettahs** · 8th December 2006, 02:35 PM

Originally Posted by EasyRhino

Quickspin + autoplay is a recipe for a streaky mess.

I did about 13000 spins one time on black, and lost over 3 standard deviations. And I think that ridiculous winning streaks would be possible as well, but I haven't had anything really nuts happen to me.

My personal hunch is that quickspin + short time between spins just excercises the RNG in such a way that it doesn't perform very well.

I doubt that quickspin affects the outcome in any way since any of the animation is just eye candy, the outcome is decided right after you click the spin button on the server side where no animation is running and it is already determined before the animation finishes on your end so I doubt that is affects the overall play of the game. Although, I like to think I do better if I click faster when playing slots lol.