1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Dismiss Notice
  3. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

4 To a Royal

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by juliack, Mar 9, 2008.

    Mar 9, 2008
  1. juliack

    juliack Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Retired
    Location:
    Canada
    I have played VP on and off today at my favorite MG casinos and I am absolutely amazed about how many 4 to a royal I received. I now believe it is part of the MG VP program. I play my local B&M quite often now and do quite well at VP, hitting many medium ( 3K to 6K ) wins with the occasional royal thrown in and very rarely do I see a 4 to a royal. I have never had a pat royal on multiplay online but received hundreds of 4 to a royal on multiplay few of which resulted in a royal. I have been watching the VP trends quite closely at both B&M and online to establish a pattern. Both are quite consistant in their own patterns but I find the online VP seems to go into a dead mode or a sort of tease mode after you hit. Not so with the B&M. Any thoughts ? Cheers
     
  2. Mar 9, 2008
  3. peteyweestro

    peteyweestro Senior Member

    Occupation:
    medical biller
    Location:
    So Cal...Antelope Valley
    sheez ia all my years gambling i never even had 4 to a royal,i had many 3 to a royal but no 4's :mad:
     
  4. Mar 9, 2008
  5. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    We both know the answer despite the online evangelists! Now, we just need to execute it in entirety ((that said, I have been slaughtered in BandM's also if not worse but regardless the variance varies moreso (less predictable) than the online takedown mode that constantly occurs and defies the math/statistics but can only be labeled continual "very bad luck" due to sample size)) or if you continue to enjoy and like the convenience of online as I, then limit your play. Assuming you know what I know (at least about BJ for me), I believe we have to take responsibility for our own actions, no reason to keep complaining imo! Cheers!!
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2008
    1 person likes this.
  6. Mar 9, 2008
  7. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    If MG are indeed partly "rigged" with a controlling "takedown mode", they will one day pay very dearly. This is because any such control is theoretically predictable, even if not accurately (like the weather). Predictions only need to achieve sufficient accuracy to lower the house edge enough (by the player lowering stakes to play through "takedown", and raising the later) for the player to have a small advantage.

    These games are incredibly complicated though, and I expect online casinos do not expect there to be sufficient predictability to be a risk to their business model; BUT, then again, we had that episode with MiniVegas who confiscated winnings from players who engaged in "illegitimate play" - ON SLOTS; and these players did not even TAKE THE BONUS:what:

    This action ALONE, even though they were "persuaded" to pay in the end, shows that there IS SOMETHING in this "conspiracy theory" about online software and it's "randomness" - or why would ANY casino group, let alone an ACCREDITED one, even THINK of trying this excuse and expecting it to work.
     
  8. Mar 9, 2008
  9. RobWin

    RobWin closed account

    Occupation:
    Who knows?
    Location:
    A Vault!
    Am I having Dj vu, or is it just my crazy thinking,,,wasn't there another thread just about the same thing that you started juliack about a week ago or so somewhere in here....:confused:
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. Mar 9, 2008
  11. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    You may think crazy Rob,lol, but you are correct Juliack has multiple threads/posts regarding this subject in the last couple weeks. Thus, the last sentence of my post so Juliack keeps this issue in proper perspective rather than an implied and/or expressed almost daily agenda!
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. Mar 9, 2008
  13. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    VWM, a few clarifications and more:
    1. I was not specifically refering to MG but various software platforms for the game of BJ only.
    2. BJ is not a complicated game and multiple software writers including one in gaming at least said fwiw, it would not be difficult to write a correlated program based on multiple situations.
    3.I prefer the word correlated for BJ versus rigged and conspiracy theory.
    4.Takedown mode was a figure of speech for various mathematical and statiscal anomalies(sp) that reoccur but the player will never be able to prove even if there might be such thing as a truly certified INDEPENDENT auditor and it/they audited for known stats/expectations specific to BJ rather than the meaningless type of audits PWC did. No clue what e-Cogra currently does but I can speculate but not here. Sample size will bail the software companies specifically where an individual has commisioned an audit. The exception if you had an occurence similiar in the software to where a coin is tossed 100 times and comes up 99 times heads. Practically all software platforms preserve the sample size bail out. If the HA on BJ is increased .5% from expectation by just a few needle in the haystack adjustments by any particular software company, it is vitually unprovable by any given individual under the "too small of a sample size" to make a conclusion of malfeasance and thus it is a fair game or so it is said. So who knows????
    5.This post is a response to a post for clarification purposes only as I have stated before my conclusion is that I am personally more comfortable with my heavy play at BandM's as TRUST better not be an issue!
    6.I need to proof this post,LOL;)
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2008
  14. Mar 9, 2008
  15. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    Yes. We need hard data. That's how Casino Bar, Netgaming.com and English Harbour got busted.

    It has been amply demonstrated that most casino managers have no clue about the mathematics of gambling. I am sure you can find statements by casino managers that martingaling can turn a negative expectation game for the player into a positive expectation one or that betting small eliminates the house edge and similar rubbish.

    A lot of casinos seem to operate on the principle that the promotions are designed to get the players to deposit, and if they manage to win obeying the rules, then the casino will find some excuse not to pay them. Therefore flatbetting is abuse, martingaling is abuse, betting small is abuse, betting big is abuse.


    What do you mean by correlated? Independent random variable are uncorrelated. If, for example, the outcomes of two consecutive hands blackjack are supposed to be independent, but they are not, then the game is rigged. Regarding the issue of sample size, the necessary sample size is proportional to the reciprocal of the square of deviation you want to detect. A change of 0.1% in the house edge could be detected in a few millions of hands which could be obtained by a groups of players gathering data together. A change of 0.01% would require hundreds of millions of hands, which is beyond amateurs, I think. If you know what you are looking for, there may be better ways of detecting the discrepancies requiring a smaller sample size.
     
  16. Mar 9, 2008
  17. Slotster!

    Slotster! I predict a riot. CAG

    Occupation:
    al Hazard
    Location:
    Location, Location!
    Interestingly, I can't find anything anwhere that states Microgaming software is truly random. I can find things about payout percentages, and that 'free' play is the same as real play - but nothing to confirm it's based around random numbers.

    It's a long shot, but if any friendly, regular MG casino forum members would like to chip in on this?..
     
  18. Mar 9, 2008
  19. RobWin

    RobWin closed account

    Occupation:
    Who knows?
    Location:
    A Vault!
    Slotster, hasn't The Wizard of Odds, "Michael Shackleford" made statements somewhere about this IIRC...:confused:
     
  20. Mar 9, 2008
  21. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    We are talking two totally different situations as usual...for one you are talking groups and I was talking about an individual (where applicable)....no need to discuss what is self explanatory and a play on semantics!!!...Cheers mate!!!
     
  22. Mar 9, 2008
  23. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    Well respected man but until Bodog gets out of his pocket, I will reserve all judgement on MS-rumor and nothing more so leave this at rumor there may be a problem with the MS/Bodog relationship...maybe MS has seen the light!!.....GM do you know anything about this, not sure but I heard you and MS were tight???
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2008
    1 person likes this.
  24. Mar 9, 2008
  25. GrandMaster

    GrandMaster Ueber Meister CAG

    Occupation:
    Mathematician by day, online gambler by night.
    Location:
    UK
    What's your problem with collecting data from different players, unless you feel that the games are fair for most users and only certain players are selected for the rigged games?
     
  26. Mar 9, 2008
  27. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    No problem with that at all as long as one can logistically do and assure the data has not been tampered with, you know the old cooking the books (at least an individual can video there own play and reference for accuracy against log files), I do not want to go into detail in fairness to all parties but on the audit I commissioned there were 3 parties including moi,the auditor,and the casino. Exclude moi and one of the other 2 parties basically accused the other of tampering with the log files. FTR, in the end I do not think the accusation was an issue but it caused major problems and discension between the 2 parties. Do you see my point? I would not know about other players as I have only accumalated stats on my own play and that is what my basis relies upon which brings us full circle as I do not have enough data for a professional to conclude malfeasance. As I have stated I know after the audit process what is best for me and lets respectively leave it at that as there is no reason to continually rehash!
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2008
  28. Mar 9, 2008
  29. Slotster!

    Slotster! I predict a riot. CAG

    Occupation:
    al Hazard
    Location:
    Location, Location!
    I meant information from Microgaming or its licencees, as opposed to third party opinion...

    Thinking about it, wouldn't you want to promote this as a positive point with your software? I'm sure others o.
     
    2 people like this.
  30. Mar 9, 2008
  31. RobWin

    RobWin closed account

    Occupation:
    Who knows?
    Location:
    A Vault!
    Nash, I'm trying to find my " 3D Glasses " :eek2: so I can read your post man...have you saw them...JK !! :lolup::lolup::lolup:
     
    3 people like this.
  32. Mar 9, 2008
  33. NASHVEGAS

    NASHVEGAS Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,

    Occupation:
    LOL
    Location:
    MERS
    3 Dice has your glasses:D
     
    3 people like this.
  34. Mar 9, 2008
  35. heatherad

    heatherad Senior Member

    Occupation:
    counsellor
    Location:
    Canada
    Haha, too funny! :D

    LOL, good one!!! :lolup:
     
    2 people like this.
  36. Mar 9, 2008
  37. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I was referring to VP as "complicated". Juliack seemed to have a very lucky run with RF after RF seemingly on a daily basis. This has now been replaced by a similar anomaly of 4 to a Royal but never the Royal. Strangely, I too have had this experience with MG, as I had a long spell of getting RF after RF, about 1 a week it seemed. This died, and I hit far fewer RF's, but then last year I had 5 Rams on THunderstruck a DOZEN times within a couple of 100K of spins, almost 12x expectation. This "streak" too ended.

    As for "random", and "plays the same in fun mode as real" - well, just try playing "Treasure Ireland", and it is CLEARLY "percentage controlled", and exhibits "takedown" modes in between the flurry of nudges and feature entries.

    I suspect that more than one MG operator is breaking into a sweat now that a UK based "Fruitie Pro" is taking apart the 7 "AWP" offerings in MG casinos. Fun Mode has enabled me to establish the full "cycle" for Treasure Ireland, however, just like the Crypto Marvel slots, real mode does NOT seem the same as "fun mode". I suspect that "fun mode" is an individual percentage-controlled Fruit Machine, as if in your house, but "real play" is like one in a pub, where it could have been played before you start, and previous players either won, or filled it up for you. This is a pretty accurate "Fruit Machine" model, and MG appear to have excelled themselves, however, they may suffer from the same problems that have afflicted the UK Fruit Machine industry, mainly due to their laziness in fully testing games prior to release, something that seems to afflict MG as well, shown by the many game "recalls" that have needed corrective updates.

    If anyone gets busted for "illegitimate play" on MG "Fruit Machines", we will have our "proof" that their slots (or at least some of them), can be beaten.

    Every time I see this refuted by the statement that the games are random, and cannot be beaten, we have the problem of the MiniVegas "illegitimate play on slots without a bonus" issue. They were pretty determined to keep to their position, even ignoring attempts from Bryan to mediate at first, before they eventually had to pay out after eCogra looked into the cases that involved merely their "illegitimate play", rather than fraud or "bonus abuse".

    We DID have Cipher a while back, who claimed to be able to beat online Blackjack, but was eventually exposed as a fraud - a damn clever one at that as he managed to keep the story going long enough to rake in significant amounts of "investment" into his system before it all went pear-shaped.

    If my play on Treasure Ireland in fun mode is close to real mode behaviour, I should be able to predict the liklihood of making a profit within around 3 feature board entries played to "lose". By returning to the game periodically, I can see if the state changes between visits, which would indicate the "pot" to be shared over all players at the casino. I have already determined that the "pot" is NOT shared over the whole of MG, as if this were the case the game would exhibit a similar "mood" wherever played. I cannot play at more than ONE account at any casino, so cannot show that the "pot" is shared, rather than individual (which would be pretty pointless, as a player could NEVER WIN OVERALL whatever "luck" they had).
     
    3 people like this.
  38. Mar 9, 2008
  39. Slotster!

    Slotster! I predict a riot. CAG

    Occupation:
    al Hazard
    Location:
    Location, Location!
    No, but a collaborator(s) could play the exact same slot at the exact same casino at the exact same time...
     

Share This Page