Good to see more people taking the red pill!
Very nice of you mentioning the parking of games, this is a very fun way of playing however you see some strange patterns emerging doing this. I for one also used to do this as my woman just as yours didn't have time for the spins infront of the bonus game,
I also like the 50 spins pr game.
I did it even simpler most times, as you may go for something as simple as 15 spins pr game on say $5, before you loose 1K you will get some 500/750 wins you be sure, however the total amount will slowly decrease in increments of 100 from a 1000 starting point.
I'm done online anyway, I removed all software so I do not care anymore.
What I do crae about, is that this is not that dangerous really. If I dtop after a win, and let another player fill the incrementing loosing streaks I could in theory jump back in on the good win. Well - this works in B&M casinos, but online it all looks like you are playing against your own account - rendering it hopeless and impossible to win. The only way you can win is by loosing. Depending on your previous gameplay and how your numbers turns out, you may need to loose 3K for each win cycle. This would mean, in my experience that is, you loose 3K - then start winning up to say 2.5K and all over again.
Sometimes theese cycles gets ajousted, say you could win 2 cycles in one win, however you would need 6K in losses to recover again. Bottom line you are not able to win.
However some people are winning, well not some, one person, KK in particular. It does seem that this system just aswell as B&G machines favour lower wagers. This is easy to understand since most people wager low, and when they win they can tell all their friends. If one person lose his head he will most likely loose far more than KK ever won the last 6 months anyways. I believe the lower wagers are set to pay out in average what the higher doesnt, atleast that makes 100%.
In basic this is the system, you shall have a maximum of 95% payout. If having to low payout over a calculated amount of betting units you will get a winning streak, bonus games are heavily calculated and controlled from your global payout. This means you will not be able to have many good wins over a shot period of time, it will suddenly flat out since you cannot win to much. Also it means if you loose, you won't be able to loose for to long since you cannot have to low payout. (Like if you loose 2-5K in a night, next day usually starts with great wins!, this is interesting since they usually dont!)
We could make the system more production stable, by adding a few more layers of randomness. We could say that the balancing system (Which by the way sequences numbers from a true RNG, no problem, however we build good normal and bad sequences for when we need them) will stand for 80% of the gameplay, 10% will be used for gambles and 10% will be for accual randomness.
What this means in a programmers eyes is atleast 3 things,
- For each $100 into the game $80 should be delivered back into a 95% tweaked game which ensures the player gets winning streaks (however the pitfall of ensuring winning streaks from low payout is ensuring loosing streaks since you got winning streaks, fuzzy logic working the way it should).
- $10 is saved away into gambling pots (which come in three sizes for each denomination, small/medium/large).
- The last $10 from the profit is infact real randomness, that you might accually be able to win by random, this could be great wins.
What this means is:
If can get a great win, this is possible due to point 3. Also to achieve 95% payout you need to gamble, unless you will loose out in point 2. The house however is indeed already guaranteed far more than a 5% edge depending on point 2.
The problem is that point 1 kicks in and kindof destroys the game for everyone, since a great win from point 3 will be costly since the balancing kicks in from point 1-
You could add more factors into the mix, and the more data you require to devide the different mechanics the more random it will look. If the system gets predictable in a certain way, you could always add more layers.
The system is however predictable, however it's predictable in a way you never retrieve more than you deposited.
As I said, it's easy to win 3K if you are willing to deposit 4K, and it is easy to spot a losing sequence of spins and when it starts turning. You can switch game to what you like and cash in the win (which will not be enough that is!).
Hope you keep your deposits low my friend, since atleast this way we are able to win - however not much, and its no fun playing either since you need to sit and look at teeny weeny spins and who really cares for that? Casino geeks? I for one do not want that, I want to be able to once a while deposit 1K and wager it and feel I have a fair chance of winning!
By the way I hope this does not turn into a witch hunt on 32Red because although I do not play there from reading various posts they are as good a MG casino as your are likely to find.
Indeed, blame game does not work here since the system is what we are talking about. If the operator has any say we do not know, however path's comments indeed shows some knowledge I suppose we were not supposed to know!
If it's an obvious change that "everyone" sees, then some supporting numerical data would be helpful. This will confirm that the results truly are abnormal and are not just normal variance due to a relatively low number of spins on a high variance game.
What games are you playing yourself would be a better question. Given your superior (no pun intended here!) mathematical knowledge if you are wagering high you should easy experience the same yourself.
Yo mate! Always love to read your comments. I don't have much to add on them since for me you are preaching to the converted!
....
Anyways, just couldn't keep myself from adding some thoughts here. I would love for a weekend in London sometime having a few beers with some of you people, I am sure we would have lot's to talk about! However - as mentioned in earlier threads - my online "career" is terminated!
but then agan maybe i just need a new hobby huh
Have a good night!
Is that thunderstruck? I haven't played that one much but I do remember one time I did play, I did pretty good. Gee, thank god we have each other to lean on eh?
