mannie2009
Dormant account
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2009
- Location
- Northern Ireland
very wise, very nice. but he had tons of grey hair before he was 30! Was always kinda nerdy too...
So far I have escaped both
very wise, very nice. but he had tons of grey hair before he was 30! Was always kinda nerdy too...
Well no, it's not the truth - just your personal opinion.Do not trust ONLINE CASINOS BOYCOTT them and stop them from taking ya money, I am sure these threads will be removed because it is the truth
Good day
JHV,
I take your point about the fallacy of believing that just because they are wealthy it doesn't mean that they aren't greedy, but we aren't talking about individuals here. I find it hard to believe that large, reputable companies such as William Hill and Ladrokes are doing what this software engineer suggests.
.
I think these companies might not know about this. Why should they? The software provider creates the software; IF the software provider really did put some rigging elements into the software, why should they tell the casino operators?
One of my theories is that since the software providers depend on the casinos for their earnings, they might include some "safeguards" in the software. Otherwise they might dread the day, on which a player hits MAX button on a slot (perhaps even by accident) and get 5 wilds or so... And ruins the casino.
So, to make the business run smoothly, it would be best for the casinos and the software provider IMO, if the casino games COMPLIED WITH THE EXPECTED HOUSE EDGE but also if the software made sure THERE IS NO GREAT VARIANCE FROM THE EXPECTED HOUSE EDGE to safeguard the casinos from huge random wins that could destroy the casino.
In this way, nothing can be detected by the audits as I suppose are done now.
Mind you, it is only a theory, I am not accusing anyone BUT Kimss data and experience seem to support this - if I understand it correctly, he basically says that with the increase of bet, the chance of winning decreases - and IMO this might be to safeguard the casino from huge wins (I apologise for repeating myself ).
So in response to another poster, I would say: Yes, the slots are a licence to print money; but there is still an element of risk there. So the software providers might be tempted to remove that risk, IMO...
in roulette it does not matter what you bet when the machine enters its cheat mode it will go opposite what you have bet on i.e red or blck and that is why you can get a run of 30 blacks on the trot when u r betting red.
IMO most of the "cheating" at online casinos happens in the way they handle player withdrawal requests, not in the software itself.
Long periods with money sitting in accounts, playable or reversable. Free money that makes it impossible for you to withdraw having taken more bonuses than deposits. "Processor problems", false bonus abuse claims, impossible ID requests and the ilk.
I'll bet that for every PAB that reaches Maxd, there are 10, 15 or 20 players that just give up on getting their money and play it back. Not all online players belong to CM.
Since all B&M slot players are most familiar with losing without leaving the casino with any funds, it can be a long time before you even know you are dealing with a rogue.
This is not to say that casinos do not change payout percentages without informing players. But even with lower payouts, I believe the major players (and some of the minor ones) offer a random game. Weighted reels can be random. Pseudorandom NG are random enough for me. True RNGs come in a variety of forms, radioactive decay only being one of them. Some true RNGs have very pronounced and extended lulls.
If you believe otherwise, it is a wise decision for you not to gamble online, or in fact gamble at all.
Very easilyIs it really technical possible that software can scan the table in less than a few seconds, and detect what color you bet on?
a casino can be dishonest enough to use delay tactics on withdrawals.....
Do not trust ONLINE CASINOS BOYCOTT them and stop them from taking ya money, I am sure these threads will be removed because it is the truth
Good day
I think these companies might not know about this. Why should they? The software provider creates the software; IF the software provider really did put some rigging elements into the software, why should they tell the casino operators?
One of my theories is that since the software providers depend on the casinos for their earnings, they might include some "safeguards" in the software. Otherwise they might dread the day, on which a player hits MAX button on a slot (perhaps even by accident) and get 5 wilds or so... And ruins the casino.
So, to make the business run smoothly, it would be best for the casinos and the software provider IMO, if the casino games COMPLIED WITH THE EXPECTED HOUSE EDGE but also if the software made sure THERE IS NO GREAT VARIANCE FROM THE EXPECTED HOUSE EDGE to safeguard the casinos from huge random wins that could destroy the casino.
In this way, nothing can be detected by the audits as I suppose are done now.
Mind you, it is only a theory, I am not accusing anyone BUT Kimss data and experience seem to support this - if I understand it correctly, he basically says that with the increase of bet, the chance of winning decreases - and IMO this might be to safeguard the casino from huge wins (I apologise for repeating myself ).
Completely agree with you.
We see only the results of the audit.
However, what is meant by the audit?
Audit of code or just payouts?
How can we check if it is possible to change the results after the bets are placed, do the results of the game depend on the size of bets.
Here is a simple example, if manipulation is possible, the casino will allow you to win with small bets and the player will lose more often with high bets, because under such conditions, the risks of casinos are significantly reduced.
Therefore, we cannot verify the fact of independence of the results from the size of the bet.
In this case, the casino will have payouts for auditors according to the rules of games.
Therefore, we cannot verify the fact of independence of the results from the size of the bet.
I don't understand it completely but I trust another well-established member of CM forum who explained it the other day and his conclusion was that casino with this mechanism CANNOT CHEAT.
I promote well over 100 casinos and I don't know ANY who provide this level of information to their affiliates.I'm not 100% sure how affiliates work but i think they get all the results from their players from sign ups. If this is true and how it works, i would like to hear from affiliates if they have results that don't look right for a casino over many many hands.
So why don't all the big software providers make an end to the speculations and don't introduce randomness control, too???!!!
Wouldn't randomness control have some of the same problems? If I understand it correctly (and I'm not sure I do), then the payouts couldn't be controlled, as the spin for slots was generated before the bet, but the code could still be tampered with, for lower percentages, no?