# I've a BTG/Bonanza Randomness Theory

#### deleted-user-20240310

##### Dormant account
MM
1. INTRO:

Have you ever been on a run on Bonanza, where you just don't seem to hit anything - regardless of the unbelievable 117 000 possible megaways? Have you gone trough thousands of spins without getting a bonus? What if I was to say, you are playing against a predefined REELSET, not a random reelset generated by 1-7 reels with 10 (+1) possible symbols. The reason for writing this post, is the constant claims by casino representatives when doubting the games true randomness. Some comments found on the web on quick lookup:

'Every online slot uses a random number generator (RNG) to determine the outcome of each spin. This ensures that the results are completely random every time; each spin has the same chance of winning as the next and is not influenced by past results.'

(taken from accredited, LeoVegas owned site: 21.co.uk). You can also ask ANY casino if every spin has the same chance of winning as the next and is not influenced by past results and the answer will be same.

On this post, I will proof this comment is wrong. Thus, online casinos are lying.

The following tactic may apply to other games aswell, but I only studied Bonanza as I have reading Bonanza thread on casinomeister.com (as I have had all the same experiences as other players complaining about this game).

2. HONEST WAY TO CREATE A MEGAWAYS GAME:

On this section, I will try to explain how an honest, truly random megaways game should be created (and all the players seem to think they work this way). The game has following reels:

- 6 reels, with 2-7 symbols in total.
- possibly an additional wheel on top with 4 symbols in total (as in Bonanza).

So, the amount of possible combinations should be HUGE (beyond my math skills). Basically, only the standard block reels would take 60 different results:

- 9,9 | 9,9,9 | 9,9,9,9 | 9,9,9,9,9 | 9,9,9,9,9,9 | 9,9,9,9,9,9,9 on single reel
- 10,10 | 10,10,10 | 10,10,10,10 | 10,10,10,10,10 | 10,10,10,10,10,10 | 10,10,10,10,10,10,10 on single reel
- J,J | J,J,J | J,J,J,J | J,J,J,J,J | J,J,J,J,J | J,J,J,J,J,J | J,J,J,J,J,J,J on single reel
...
etc. We have all seen these blocking reels.

We could simply create such game with RNG, randomizing the amount of 'blocks' per each reel -> randomizing the symbol to fill this 'block'. At this point, it doesn't matter if the results are 'weighed', for instance a chance to get a diamond on single block could be 1/1000 000. But, by creating a megaways game like this would result in every possible win combination, no matter how unlikely it is. the RTP could be controlled with the 'weighing', eg. change to get full row of diamonds would be nonexistent. This doesn't even take to account the possible, additional wheel or reactions.

Bonanza, however doesn't work like this. The game has a VERY limited set of reels, proven in next section:

3. BONANZA (BTG) WAY TO CREATE A MEGAWAYS GAME

First of all, the RNG is tested and verified. RNG itself, is a complex code to generate a random number. I don't have doubts the RNG is random, however what is important is WHAT IS DONE WITH THE NUMBER.

Bonanza uses predefined reelSETS of maximum 200 variations. So, each block on each reel is NOT randomized, but each reelSET is randomized. For example:
- a reel of two 9s get a number 27
- a reel of two 10s get a number 28
- a reel with 2 diamonds, 3 red gems and 2 Js get a number 29
...
etc. So, there truly isn't a chance in getting any possible win combination EVER. I will prove this in the next section. This might be legal still (honest and moral, not so sure) as the RTP is controlled this way. HOWEVER the big problem comes with the predefined reelsets. As we are told by casinos:

'every spin has the same chance of winning as the next and is not influenced by past results.'

Bonanza proves this wrong, as the reelsets stay the same for at least hundreds of spins at a time. Imagine a situation, when you get a set of predefined reels that have no winning combinations? Or, as frequently discussed on Bonanza thread, a reelset without the infamous 'D'. Would you then say 'each spin has the same chance of winning...' when you don't have a chance to get free spins until the reelset is changed? Imagine playing for hours with 10e bet without a chance in winning, which could cause serious damage to a person's life.

When are the reelsets changed? I am not sure (long pauses on play or technical error springs to mind), but as you can see, online casinos are blatantly lying about a chance to win on each spin.

4. PROOF / YOU CAN TEST THIS YOURSELF

I strongly urge everyone to test this, and also gather data as it will not be long, before Bonanza and other games will get a new 'update' Here is how to proof this:

- open Bonanza on Firefox -browser
- press F12 -button to open the developer tools
- on the toolset, click ACCESSIBILITY
- just on top of the Filter output, click XHR
- press SPIN on Bonanza

as you can see, every spin returns OPTIONS and POST -variable.

- Open the POST -variable by clicking the arrow besides it.
- select RESPONSE

when you copy the response, it looks like this:

there are some variables here, but the ones we are interested in are:

RS=21|15|89|148|100|163|

this is the reelset. as you can see, there are 6 numbers all telling us the randomized 'representation' of the reelset. If the game was made as I explained on section 2, there would be a LOT more variables. But as there are 6 numbers, the whole reelset is predefined. As I said, this might still be legal, BUT, when you examine the rounds further, you can see the SAME reelset is in place for A LOT of spins. I tested this yesterday, and focused on the two 9s block on first reel. I played for forty minutes, and the NUMBER was the same (meaning reelset hadn't changed in 40 minutes).

RS=36|149|26|123|109|42| = 3 9s reel (36)
RS=36|87|92|67|53|75|&TW= 3 9s reel (36 first, approx 40 minutes later)

here is some other data I collected when testing for two hours straight:

first session
RS=15|75|71|117|25|133| = 6 kings reel (15)
RS=36|134|28|60|137|99| = 7 9s reel (36)
RS=144|105|84|106|146| = 6 queens reel (144)
RS=18|87|122|46|153|129 = 3 kings reel (18)
RS=39|66|22|117|156|69 = 4 9s reel (39)
RS=84|140|155|50|140|86 = 5 queens reel (84)
RS=38|54|66|17|173|22| = 3 9s reel (38)
RS=29|36|91|0|141|2| = 7 queens reel (29)
RS=38|112|40|137|136|147| = 3 9s reel (38)

second session:
RS=25|80|19|93|11|75| = 3 9s reel (25)
RS=78|86|61|102|158|72| = 3 kings reel (102)
RS=39|96|67|87|61|41| = 3 9s reel (39)
RS=63|150|64|17|27|23| = 3 kings reel (17)
RS=19|128|89|12|63|64| = 3 kings reel (19)
RS=19|124|49|12|109|105| = 3 kings reel (19)
RS=88|20|115|17|125|66| = 3 kings reel (17)
RS=25|103|26|68|149|103| = 3 9s reel (25)

third
RS=65|149|34|72|146|167| = 3 9s reel (72)
RS=38|17|104|122|63|25| = 3 9s reel (38)
RS=36|149|26|123|109|42| = 3 9s reel (36)
RS=109|139|37|76|53|92| = 3 9s reel (76)
RS=104|106|130|122|75|99| = 3 9s reel (99, last)
RS=167|49|1|76|107|131| = 3 9s reel (76 fourth)
RS=36|87|92|67|53|75|&TW= 3 9s reel (36 first, approx 40 minutes later)

The representations change on different reels. WORST CASE SCENARIO would be that several numbers on the POOL of 200 was assigned to same reels (I didn't think to test this).

You should all test this yourself to see. As I said, I don't know when or if the reelset change during one session, but as the two 9s on first reel within proofs, the reelset wasn't changed for at least 40 minutes. Totalling two hours of testing (thousands of spins), there were no number above 200. This means the possible reelsets per reel are limited to 200. You will see the winning combinations are WAY MORE impossible to hit than you would've believed with 'possible 117000 megaways'

5. OTHER OBSERVATIONS

- As I said, I don't know when the reelsets are changed. They might be changed on:
- only on game restart
- technical 'error' (unexplained)
- how many times have you gotten ERROR after hot streaks? Be on alert for this, as this would be ILLEGAL if the reelsets are changed between a good run by made-up-error!
- long pauses
- this data proofs the existance of hot/cold streaks. There are plenty of posts on Bonanza thread discussing about:
- no wins at all (most common)
- no GOLDs (second most common)
- two or three GOLDs in quick succession (the reels contain GOLDs and max. 200 possible variables obviously create more free spins)
- several 117 000 MW in quick succession (same as before)
- But what if the reelsets are profitable?
- might happen. I, myself have gotten some good runs (800xbet being the max win ever). However, that doesn't undo the FACT that every spin doesn't have equal chance in winning which should be the case.
- I don't have the access to backend code (thus haven't done anything illegal by hacking to their server). I am only using tools provided for everyone by browser.
- So, I don't have any proof of compensation or if the reelsets are calculated differently for different players/bet sizes

6. CONCLUSION

The way Bonanza is built, is to make it seem HUGE wins were possible. This data proofs that is not the case as every combination is not possible. I don't know if this is illegal or not (highly immoral in my opinion). However, which is Illegal is the fact that online casinos CLAIM every spin has an equal chance of winning. As I said before, imagine playing for hours on 10e bet - looking for that one big win. However, if the predetermined reelsets don't even offer you a chance for this, you might lose A LOT (and the casinos would keep lying to you).

7. PS

The reason I am posting this on this forum is because everything EVERY casino HELPDESK says is straight from providers. When asked for PROOF about the games randomness (eg. who reads the source code of the games), they tend to go quiet (and possibly even close your account accusing you of gambling addiction). MGA even said the games are ENTERTAINMENT when complaining about different game.

Also, If Bonanza is created like this, what is there to proof other games (Megaways and others) don't have something shady going on?

8. PPS

Anyone can prove me wrong (BTG, any casino REP, MGA). I mean PROOF, not empty promises. I still don't know the names of any testing agencies (as everyone has blatantly refused to tell me), but I wonder how this game has gone trought their bulletproof testing (I guess they only follow the RTP).

Last edited by a moderator:
lol, saw the eye bleed and was going to tag the exact same 2 people

Old Attachment (Invalid)

I'll be right here.

I still don't know the names of any testing agencies

Here is a list of approved test houses for UK jurisdiction. I imagine some of these are global offering testing for others.

Approved test houses (as of 1 October 2020)
 Test House (Trading Name) Website address Remote Technical Standards Categories of gaming machines Requirements for bingo and casino equipment BMM Testlabs (South Africa) yes all categories (except cat B3a and compensated versions) no BMM Spain Testlabs SL yes all categories yes eGaming Compliance Services Limited t/a eCOGRA yes none no Gaming Associates Europe Ltd yes none no Gaming Laboratories International, LLC yes all categories yes GLI Europe BV GLI Austria GmbH GLI Africa (Pty) Limited GLI UK Gaming Limited iTech Global Pty Limited (iTech Labs) yes none no QALab Pty Ltd yes all categories (excluding compensated gaming machines) no Quinel Ltd yes none no Slovenian Institute of Quality and Metrology t/a SIQ Ljubljana yes all categories no Trisigma B.V. yes all categories yes

As for different reel sets being used I thought that was fairly standard in the make up of these games. Not common knowledge of course but read it in the 'ask anything' thread.

I guess you have a point as if so, then each spin does not have the same chance of winning but overall for the complete product maybe it does across the board, hence the description.

Edit: Imported pertinent info instead of redirecting to other site

2nd Edit: Removed weblinks directing to other sites phew, this forum lark is complicated.

Last edited:
Mod edit : Title changed from '
PROVEN: Bonanza has NO chance of winning on each spin regardless of previous spins. Thus, online casinos are lying.

to

I've a BTG/Bonanza Randomness Theory (for simplicity and clarity)
...it can always be changed back if needs must after discussion

'

Last edited:
Just to clarify: I don't know if this type of game design is legal or not. If it is legal, it is legal (though, it should be clarified on game rules that the reels are predefined for x period of time). What I do have a problem with is the fact that I highlighted on red (each spin has an equal chance in winning).

Imagine a session, when you are stuck with reelset providing max 2xbet for eg. an hour (very unlikely but apparently possible). Play with 10e bet, and you might end up losing A LOT without a chance in winning. Casinos would STILL say you had bad luck and every spin has an equal chance in winning (which hasn't been the case for the duration of the session).

Casinos are always asking for proof that the games are not random. Well, as no one can play 'billions of spins' on any game (let alone gather that data), this is the only proof available to players.

Mod edit : Title changed from '
PROVEN: Bonanza has NO chance of winning on each spin regardless of previous spins. Thus, online casinos are lying.

to

I've a BTG/Bonanza Randomness Theory (for simplicity and clarity)
...it can always be changed back if needs must after discussion

'

Ok, let's start with the huge flaw in this... the RNG returns a reel stop position for each reel. So if you see 99, it will stop at position 99. It really is that simple...

So what you have actually done in trying to prove its rigged is a) not understood how games actually work, b) proven that its random and c) proven that when it returns 99, it always stops at the same position.

So you've done the opposite of proving its rigged.

Anyway, games can (and do) use multiple sets of reel bands (I don't know if bonanza does, but it might do).

At the start of each spin in the base game, the chance of using each set of reels must be constant and then once it has picked a set, the chance of each stop position on that set must also be constant. Note that that does NOT mean that every stop position has to have the same chance of being picked.

Sorry OP, but your post doesn't prove anything... I get that you don't really understand slot maths, and that's not your fault, but you can't claim something as proven when you don't really understand what subject matter.

I should also add that there is absolutely no requirement legally (or morally in my opinion) for every single possible win to appear fully stacked on every reel. I.e it does not have to be possible (and it would make no mathematical sense) to be able to get 117696 (or whatever the max ways is) way wins of every symbol. It would just be too expensive.

Just to clarify: I don't know if this type of game design is legal or not. If it is legal, it is legal (though, it should be clarified on game rules that the reels are predefined for x period of time). What I do have a problem with is the fact that I highlighted on red (each spin has an equal chance in winning).

Imagine a session, when you are stuck with reelset providing max 2xbet for eg. an hour (very unlikely but apparently possible). Play with 10e bet, and you might end up losing A LOT without a chance in winning. Casinos would STILL say you had bad luck and every spin has an equal chance in winning (which hasn't been the case for the duration of the session).

Casinos are always asking for proof that the games are not random. Well, as no one can play 'billions of spins' on any game (let alone gather that data), this is the only proof available to players.

I don't even know what you mean by "stuck on a reel set"... your data shows reeul stop positions, not reel sets.

BTW you also forgot to mention other important variables, like RB which is likely the stop position of the top sideways reel.

Also, only @Big Time Gaming really know what all those numbers mean, so you positing that the numbers you mention are the only important ones is disingenuous.

Last edited:
Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

Old Attachment (Invalid)

Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

Old Attachment (Invalid)
We should change the thread to "Player proves game is legit whilst trying to disprove it..."

Oh well, it was fun while it lasted.

Old Attachment (Invalid)

Didnt even finish my popcorn......

To be fair though until you know you just dont know.

Repetitive for us regulars and for Trance but i recall myself being dumb to the workings and having lost of questions.

Didnt even finish my popcorn......

To be fair though until you know you just dont know.

Repetitive for us regulars and for Trance but i recall myself being dumb to the workings and having lost of questions.

it is ever, and always, a learning curve

Didnt even finish my popcorn......

To be fair though until you know you just dont know.

Repetitive for us regulars and for Trance but i recall myself being dumb to the workings and having lost of questions.

I immediately understood exactly where the op had gone wrong.
I could easily have explained it like Trance did, but since i know he likes to flex, and im a very humble person i let him do it.

But i totally understood everything...

Ok, let's start with the huge flaw in this... the RNG returns a reel stop position for each reel. So if you see 99, it will stop at position 99. It really is that simple...

So what you have actually done in trying to prove its rigged is a) not understood how games actually work, b) proven that its random and c) proven that when it returns 99, it always stops at the same position.

So you've done the opposite of proving its rigged.

Anyway, games can (and do) use multiple sets of reel bands (I don't know if bonanza does, but it might do).

At the start of each spin in the base game, the chance of using each set of reels must be constant and then once it has picked a set, the chance of each stop position on that set must also be constant. Note that that does NOT mean that every stop position has to have the same chance of being picked.

Sorry OP, but your post doesn't prove anything... I get that you don't really understand slot maths, and that's not your fault, but you can't claim something as proven when you don't really understand what subject matter.

--

As a player, there is no chance in knowing how the games actually work without studying the matter.. only constant losing sessions

So, the reel only has maximum of 200 positions to land and the reels are predefined? That would make sense, though the 200 positions to land quite often include 1-7 of the same kind (eg. J / J / J / J / J / J /J). But I guess this is probable when only 200 positions are available (over a long period of time).

In the response:

I guess SF 4;3;3;2;5;2 then means the amount of blocks per reel. I might have to test if this is the case.

The real question then becomes:

- are the reelsets predefined or do they change (are they the same in every session)?
- If they do change, how often? If the reelsets aren't predefined, then I think my original complaint holds: If the reelsets change eg. on reload, there still isn't an equal chance in every spin in winning.

What I mean with this is:

- if the reelsets are randomly decided (200 different symbols per reel strip, weighed by their probability) -> if I get unlucky at the time the reelset is defined, then will the reelset change on every spin or not? If not, then I don't have equal chance in every spin as I've been told.

(comment to At the start of each spin in the base game, the chance of using each set of reels must be constant and then once it has picked a set, the chance of each stop position on that set must also be constant. Note that that does NOT mean that every stop position has to have the same chance of being picked. )

I guess scatters don't belong in the reelsets, but are added separately?

If this is infact how the game works, I stand corrected!

Last edited:
Also, The thread title can be changed permanently but I would like to maintain this thread as probably A LOT of players think that the game works like I explained in section 2.

After thinking about this a bit further: even though the fact that the number indicates reel position and not 'predefined reelset', it doesn't change my original complaint. It enhances chances of winning combination (200 long reel which lands on position X and 1-7 of these blocks are visible). However, this DOESN'T change the fact that if the reelsets are not changed every spin, then every spin doesn't have an equal chance of winning. eg:

The first reelset is set to 200 of the same symbol (very unlikely, but basically possible). If this reelset is stuck for any amount of spins (eg. an hour), would you say I have equal chance in winning on every spin? (@trancemonkey , any opinion on this?)

As I said on my original post, the position of two 9s was the same after 40 minutes of play. How probable this is if the reelset was changed between the spins?

--

As a player, there is no chance in knowing how the games actually work without studying the matter.. only constant losing sessions

So, the reel only has maximum of 200 positions to land and the reels are predefined? That would make sense, though the 200 positions to land quite often include 1-7 of the same kind (eg. J / J / J / J / J / J /J). But I guess this is probable when only 200 positions are available (over a long period of time).

In the response:

I guess SF 4;3;3;2;5;2 then means the amount of blocks per reel. I might have to test if this is the case.

The real question then becomes:

- are the reelsets predefined or do they change (are they the same in every session)?
- If they do change, how often? If the reelsets aren't predefined, then I think my original complaint holds: If the reelsets change eg. on reload, there still isn't an equal chance in every spin in winning.

What I mean with this is:

- if the reelsets are randomly decided (200 different symbols per reel strip, weighed by their probability) -> if I get unlucky at the time the reelset is defined, then will the reelset change on every spin or not? If not, then I don't have equal chance in every spin as I've been told.

(comment to At the start of each spin in the base game, the chance of using each set of reels must be constant and then once it has picked a set, the chance of each stop position on that set must also be constant. Note that that does NOT mean that every stop position has to have the same chance of being picked. )

I guess scatters don't belong in the reelsets, but are added separately?

If this is infact how the game works, I stand corrected!

To answer your questions to the best of my understanding and knowledge:

1. Yes of course reel sets are predefined, otherwise they could not be verified
2. Yes, SF is likely the number of symbols per reel
3. There HAS to be the same chance of every outcome in every base game spin otherwise the game is non-compliant (games with persistence don't necessarily do this because the persistence changes the odds, but still every reel outcome position must have a constant chance)
4. Scatters will almost certainly be in the reel sets and on the reel bands - though it would be possible to "inject" them on to the reel bands, as long as the chance is constant per spin. Also, in most jurisdictions, this would have to be stated in the game rules. My guess is they are on the reel bands.
5. I have no idea what your comment means that starts "if i get unlucky at the time..." - this doesn't' make sense. A reel set is defined by the mathematician and once the game is published, they can't change "on the fly". On every single spin, a random decision MUST be made to determine all possible outcomes, whether this is decided from multiple sets of reels, the reel position for each reel, the number of symbols to display, or whatever.

TM

Last edited:
After thinking about this a bit further: even though the fact that the number indicates reel position and not 'predefined reelset', it doesn't change my original complaint. It enhances chances of winning combination (200 long reel which lands on position X and 1-7 of these blocks are visible). However, this DOESN'T change the fact that if the reelsets are not changed every spin, then every spin doesn't have an equal chance of winning. eg:

The first reelset is set to 200 of the same symbol (very unlikely, but basically possible). If this reelset is stuck for any amount of spins (eg. an hour), would you say I have equal chance in winning on every spin? (@trancemonkey , any opinion on this?)

As I said on my original post, the position of two 9s was the same after 40 minutes of play. How probable this is if the reelset was changed between the spins?

The bit in bold makes no sense whatsoever - why would reel positions change?

If i define a reel as:

1. 9
2. 9
3. J
4. K
5. 10
6. GOLD
7. K

The if the RNG picks 4, it will display a K at the top left position and then a 10 and GOLD below it (assuming 3 positions on a reel). These positions CAN NOT change. It doens't matter whether you play it for an hour, a month, or 10 years, position 4 will always display a K. The RNG just randomises the position displayed, as it should.

The reel band is fixed. The fact you see the same symbols at the same reel position is 100% proof of nothing more than position 44 has two 9's at it.

One the test ALL test houses do in my experience is that they force a specific number (sometimes force a seed) in to the RNG to make sure that the same outcome happens if the same number occurs to prove that the game does exactly the same thing with the same random number. For example, if you set a mersenne twister RNG to have a specific seed, you will get the same sequence of numbers - this way you can test to see if a game is doing what it should, because the sequence of games should always be the same if you start with the same seed.

Obviously under normal usage, you never use the same seed, and the seed is randomised from something that makes it impossible to guess / work out / know.

After thinking about this a bit further: even though the fact that the number indicates reel position and not 'predefined reelset', it doesn't change my original complaint. It enhances chances of winning combination (200 long reel which lands on position X and 1-7 of these blocks are visible). However, this DOESN'T change the fact that if the reelsets are not changed every spin, then every spin doesn't have an equal chance of winning. eg:

The first reelset is set to 200 of the same symbol (very unlikely, but basically possible). If this reelset is stuck for any amount of spins (eg. an hour), would you say I have equal chance in winning on every spin? (@trancemonkey , any opinion on this?)

As I said on my original post, the position of two 9s was the same after 40 minutes of play. How probable this is if the reelset was changed between the spins?

I'm not trying to be an arse here, but before you post things that claim "PROOF", please at least first research exactly how slot maths works before you do so, as otherwise you are just blindly guessing.

Thanks again for the replies @trancemonkey ! Are you completely and absolutely sure the reelsets are fixed on Bonanza (not changed between sessions or in-play)? There are 10 symbols in this game (+ SCATTER if it is set on reel strips). As i said, there are max 200 reel positions, which means the reel is 200 symbols long. If the reels are fixed, this can be tested with whole lot of playing, keeping tabs of the appearing symbols and placing them on reels.

We have all seen block reels so we know they exist (eg a 7 9s on first reel blocking other wins) . If I would count the basic five symbols in blocks of 7 that would already take 35 symbol positions from the reel of 200. I just tested a couple of spins on Bonanza, focusing on reel 1:

- 9 K DIAMOND
- G A DIAMOND BLUE 9 DIAMOND
- 10 GREEN GREEN GREEN
- Q GREEN 9 GREEN RED
- BLUE QUEEN DIAMOND QUEEN KING
- Q K K A BLUE
- K GREEN J
- A A GREEN J BLUE
- A DIAMOND J
- A DIAMOND
- Q A DIAMOND K
... etc.

Wouldn't 200 positions be WAY too low? (especially if you calculate reels like Q GREEN 9 GREEN RED)

Sorry if my questions are stupid

I'm not trying to be an arse here, but before you post things that claim "PROOF", please at least first research exactly how slot maths works before you do so, as otherwise you are just blindly guessing.

Like I said, thread title can be changed (as I believe it already has been changed).

As I said before, all casinos have declined my requests to proof the randomness of games (or refused to tell me the name of the testing agencies so I could contact them). So, could you please tell me how I can do research on how slot maths work? Isn't there a saying, don't believe everything you read online? All the proof any player have are their own sessions + forums (eg. bonanza forum with 900 pages complaining about same things I did).

Thanks again for the replies @trancemonkey ! Are you completely and absolutely sure the reelsets are fixed on Bonanza (not changed between sessions or in-play)? There are 10 symbols in this game (+ SCATTER if it is set on reel strips). As i said, there are max 200 reel positions, which means the reel is 200 symbols long. If the reels are fixed, this can be tested with whole lot of playing, keeping tabs of the appearing symbols and placing them on reels.

We have all seen block reels so we know they exist (eg a 7 9s on first reel blocking other wins) . If I would count the basic five symbols in blocks of 7 that would already take 35 symbol positions from the reel of 200. I just tested a couple of spins on Bonanza, focusing on reel 1:

- 9 K DIAMOND
- G A DIAMOND BLUE 9 DIAMOND
- 10 GREEN GREEN GREEN
- Q GREEN 9 GREEN RED
- BLUE QUEEN DIAMOND QUEEN KING
- Q K K A BLUE
- K GREEN J
- A A GREEN J BLUE
- A DIAMOND J
- A DIAMOND
- Q A DIAMOND K
... etc.

Wouldn't 200 positions be WAY too low? (especially if you calculate reels like Q GREEN 9 GREEN RED)

Sorry if my questions are stupid

it is entirely possible that they have crammed everything in to 200 positions. It's also more likely that they have multiple sets of reel bands:

Set 1 (85% chance):
1. 9
2. 9
3. J
4. K
5. 10
6. GOLD
7. K

Set 2 (15% chance):
1. Q
2. Q
3. 9
4. 10
5. K
6. K
7. 9

At the start of a spin, the game would decide whether to use set 1 or set 2 (based on a chance) and then would pick reel positions for that set of reels.

This is a) legal and b) very common

Replies
134
Views
12K
Replies
215
Views
14K
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
15
Views
726