Lessons learned from the Cipher thread

[The Dude]

The Cipher thread is closed - RIP, but I think it's important to note at least one thing that Simmo! mentioned in his closing statement:

There are a couple of potentially good lessons in all of this..in my opinion as follows:

1) Know the person you trust with your money, especially when they are not a multi-faceted business
2) Always get a legally binding business agreement in such a case
3) Why would you ever buy a gambling system? If it was truly successful, why would they want to sell it and risk it being busted?

Precisely - gambling systems are a bunch of crap. Snakeoil and BS. The only system that might work is counting cards at a live table - and who the hell wants to do that?

Buyer beware - if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. And of course, "a fool and his money are soon parted" are all applicable when dealing with gambling "systems".

You cannot predict chance - that's all there is to it.

 

[kengam]

I think I can safely assume that I falling from the list of most hated posters. I may be a pond scum sucking bonus whore, but I have never stolen anyone's money.

The industry is chock full of bad eggs and even thieving players. Do not trust anyone outside of your family with money. Do your due diligence, play where YOU feel safe playing and at the limits that YOU feel safe playing. Don't continue to feed money into a game or slot because you feel it is going to hit or that it is due.

The winning screenshots thread is most likely at least partially responsible for irresponsible gambling and ruining the financial livelihoods of many who have visited here. Bet with your head and not above it. The house has a mathematical edge on every game, so do not ever believe that there is a system that can beat it.

Play with bonuses and you may overcome the house edge by using the appropriate strategy. Never, ever waste your money on any kind of system.

 

[Pinababy69]

That's a good post Kengam, and sound advice. It's why I personally play only for enjoyment, and only with disposable income. I never look at gambling in any form as a money making venture, just entertainment.

Most hated posters? Nah.....you're like me, emotional.

 

[Random#rs]

Can I say one last word

I have known Cipher online (a little) and the BJ system he proclaims to beat the system with. I know what he's doing mathematically and it is a very rudimentary approach to Trend analysis. A mathematician would have a far more sophisticated approach. Random numbers is a rather arcane science within itself. Not defending what he's done, and not defending any efficiency in the system he has sold to many individuals (who in some cases claim it has worked) he has tried to construct a technique that works, and works well enough before the Casinos would deconstruct (or recognize) his analysis technique (they do monitor your betting practices) . I believe selling his system went defunct, when UIGEA and further related problems ensued; it is possible he then began to cannibalize his investors.

Because of the gross inefficiency and rudimentary technique of his system, a VERY Large betting spread is necessary; thus creating a potential for very fast wins and very fast losses on a large scale.

Using a far more sophisticated mathematical system, one could produce profits with a bet spread as low as a 2 to 1. I'm not trying to sell you a fact here, nor will I ever. I expect to be denounced for stating this and I won't contest anyone for doing so. I won't go up against another Mathematician on this issue.

I will not excuse what he has done to one or more of his investors; I believe it is reprehensible, and cannot be excused. I do recommend one thing however ... do not engage in any kind of implied innuendo to 'his demise'. I have known battle with the world and they can be very dangerous. Don't lend yourself to the possibility of this kind of resolution.

Let the Law deal with it.

enough said.....

 

[tristan727]

If Cipher was such a clever blackjack player, he would have used his system at Betfair casino....pays 2-1 on suited BJ, 100% return. I'll take gifts of $100, not $1k, for that info, ta.

 

[GrandMaster]

Do not trust anyone outside of your family with money.

Or not even your family. Just because they are related to you, it does not mean they are honest or competent.

I have known Cipher online (a little) and the BJ system he proclaims to beat the system with. I know what he's doing mathematically and it is a very rudimentary approach to Trend analysis. A mathematician would have a far more sophisticated approach. Random numbers is a rather arcane science within itself. Not defending what he's done, and not defending any efficiency in the system he has sold to many individuals (who in some cases claim it has worked) he has tried to construct a technique that works, and works well enough before the Casinos would deconstruct (or recognize) his analysis technique (they do monitor your betting practices) . I believe selling his system went defunct, when UIGEA and further related problems ensued; it is possible he then began to cannibalize his investors.

Because of the gross inefficiency and rudimentary technique of his system, a VERY Large betting spread is necessary; thus creating a potential for very fast wins and very fast losses on a large scale.

Using a far more sophisticated mathematical system, one could produce profits with a bet spread as low as a 2 to 1. I'm not trying to sell you a fact here, nor will I ever. I expect to be denounced for stating this and I won't contest anyone for doing so. I won't go up against another Mathematician on this issue.

Warning: I am a mathematician.

If the random number generator is good, then no system will work against it, no trend analysis, no large spread, nothing. A number of casinos have their RNGs tested by reputable organisations such as TST, I trust these RNGs to have the correct distribution and to be unpredictable.

 

[mitch]

If the random number generator is good, then no system will work against, no trend analysis, no large spread, nothing. .

Absolutely spot on GM. This statement shoud be a Sticky and required reading for all new members.

And if the RNG was no good then Internet Casinos would never make money. The software writers and their family and friends would have it all!

Mitch

 

[Slotster!]

I've learned that if you look like that Cipher/Bruce chap does - do not under any circumstances post a picture of yourself on your website... It looks like Homer in the episode of the Simpsons where he gains a load of weight so he can work from home and starts wearing that floral dress thing. Scary.

On a serious note, although I've not really given it much thought to be honest, I've always in the back of my mind kind of considered the 'cipher' poster to be straight up and doing what's right for people... I've no doubt agreed with him in the past on stuff... How wrong can you be?

I forget there are people in the world like this sometimes, and it's sad when you're reminded.

 

[Stanford]

Solid post Gamemaster

If the random number generator is good, then no system will work against it, no trend analysis, no large spread, nothing. A number of casinos have their RNGs tested by reputable organisations such as TST, I trust these RNGs to have the correct distribution and to be unpredictable.

Unpredictable indeed. To amplify your point, Cipher seeing trends in 30 hands is silly. Before Cipher gets rid of them, you goes should download the Videos of him playing the system and claiming to do just that. At one point he bets large and then passes up the double. I downloaded it just to show people what a $1,000 will buy. The videos are labeled as a "carepackage for Blackjackinfo.com". At one point, he explains why Michael Shackleford doesn't understand - worth the price of admission right there.

Stanford.

 

[Random#rs]

OK Grandmaster..... I know you are a Mathematician.

I concede to all the credit you are due - (empirical science/mathematics); all will substantiate your statement. I will not take up the gauntlet with you; I am all too familiar with mathematics to argue a point I cannot proof, for you.

"correct distribution and to be unpredictable."

All I can say is: "correct distribution" YES "unpredictable" NO

I am sorry if this is offensive, I respect your opinion as a Mathematician. My contradiction to your position is worthy of being thrashed and challenged by any Mathematician. I would have myself as well............

As I said I expect to be denounced by taking an unorthodox position on this matter of the predictability of RNG>Game results. I don't mind. I've done worse as far as sticking my neck in the noose.

On a side note: let me stress that I'm not trying to sell, or recommend anyone buy any Betting system from anyone, for any amount of money. My references to the predictability of a random game have nothing to do with the Cipher system or any other supposed system being purported to make you money. Stay away from them!

 

[Stanford]

deleted by poster

 

[Stanford]

I don't believe you

All I can say is: "correct distribution" YES "unpredictable" NO

[/B]

I don't buy it. Particularly, when in the first post you claim an association with Cipher and then don't state the obvious fraud. Instead you say it is a rudimentary trend analysis. It isn't.

Random numbers are not all that arcane. From Norm Whattenberger at QFIT,

"For any artifacts of an RNG to result in any discernable patterns in a large-scale casino operation would require monumentally poor programming. But, even if the RNG was completely predicatable, his methodology is nonsense. The patterns he is looking for would not be caused by the worst of RNGs. Also, his statement that different casinos from the same group exhibit different patterns is goofy. Casinos don't run the software. The software for hundreds of casinos operates on huge servers run by the software companies. In addition, if someone had a way to beat an online casino consistently, they would quickly bar him. The concept of using a casino like an ATM is preposterous."

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

That doesn't mean there can't be an exploitable glitch. But when there is, it won't be something vague - you will be able to estimate the effect. Years ago, one brand of casino blackjack offered late surrender. But they programmed it wrong.

The dealer would check for a blackjack. The graphics would show the hand removing the wager if the dealer had a natural - but the chip count would increase. Yep - if the dealer had a BJ and the player surrendered he got the whole bet returned. Not only that, the casino offered 5 card charlie and 6 card charlie promotions. And Neteller Bonuses.

They fixed it of course. If they hadn't, I wouldn't be telling you about it. Which gets back to Casinomeister's original point. If someone can spin gold out of straw, don't expect him to lend you the spinning wheel.

Stanford.

 

[slotchik]

That's a good post Kengam, and sound advice. It's why I personally play only for enjoyment, and only with disposable income. I never look at gambling in any form as a money making venture, just entertainment.

I TOTALLY AGREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[aodat2]

Just in case you guys didn't hear this or know this. There's someone else that came up on the OPU saying that he too was scammed $12.35k by Cipher. It was way back in 2005 but he's been too shy to come out and also had hopes that Cipher would eventually pay him.

Gosh... what a Con Man this Cipher is. And yet we all think that he's good.

Yes I do admit that he has helped people in the past to get back their money from Casinos and etc. But I guess it's all with an alterior motive. Oh well... at least we all know now. Just beware and learn 1 BIG important thing.

Although someone may look good online, it does not necessarily mean that he's a good guy deep down within. Or in other words, "Know Who You Are Dealing With Before Giving People Money".

 

[mikepipe]

OK Grandmaster..... I know you are a Mathematician.

I concede to all the credit you are due - (empirical science/mathematics); all will substantiate your statement. I will not take up the gauntlet with you; I am all too familiar with mathematics to argue a point I cannot proof, for you.

"correct distribution and to be unpredictable."

All I can say is: "correct distribution" YES "unpredictable" NO

I am sorry if this is offensive, I respect your opinion as a Mathematician. My contradiction to your position is worthy of being thrashed and challenged by any Mathematician. I would have myself as well............

As I said I expect to be denounced by taking an unorthodox position on this matter of the predictability of RNG>Game results. I don't mind. I've done worse as far as sticking my neck in the noose.

On a side note: let me stress that I'm not trying to sell, or recommend anyone buy any Betting system from anyone, for any amount of money. My references to the predictability of a random game have nothing to do with the Cipher system or any other supposed system being purported to make you money. Stay away from them!

So what?
Is it superstition or the "must believe to read the slot" of a gambler, who does not want to accept that a good RNG is simply unpredictable?
(i know some of these gamblers, and one wrote THIS very post )

 

[lojo]

So what?
Is it superstition or the "must believe to read the slot" of a gambler, who does not want to accept that a good RNG is simply unpredictable?
(i know some of these gamblers, and one wrote THIS very post )

I'll take that challenge, "a good RNG is simply unpredictable" on a good night
On another night it is just superstition.

We've all thrown money after money? I have. I'd rather look at a mandelbrot (sp) set and play that way than follow a system. One night its Julia, the next second its... But numbers do not roll out into infinity in anything like 'good karma' or assured returns, they just roll.

But wouldn't that be the end all and get all? A little sygil magic, pick out the numerology, make the cash flow.. and then... what?

WHAT!?!

Go hug my baby, afford to travel, shower the people I love with love and everyone else too. Because I could afford to. I'm all full of love and money... yeah, money is love and love is money if you know what I mean, people who believe in money are the.... oops

Results, good and bad come in clumps. In the market you can sell short, on the craps table you can sit in the shadows. But a winner is a winner when all is said and done. And a loser is a loser. And as many have said here before ANY gamble is a negative expectation, with hopes for great rewards (variance notwithstanding)

yeah, I will do esp flashcards on three symbols and tell you what is going to come up next, (so can you) but I can't do it for very long, and it will never pay out in the long run.

But I'll take a rng challenge, if properly prepared and I can use Canadian research teams..sure.

 

[aka23]

If you know the algorithm used in the pseudorandom number generator, then predicting the next value in the sequence is a practical task. If you do not know the algorithm, then the outcome of a good PRNG should appear to be random. Predicting outcomes is theoretically possible, but would be extremely complex... for general purposes it would be nearly impossible. With casinos, we generally do not know how the PRNG is applied. If there are non-random elements, then it may be possible to predict outcomes. If outcomes are purely based on the PRNG, then it will not be possible to predict outcomes.

 

[Random#rs]

I don't buy it.

I know. Most online players don't. As I posted, I'm not trying to sell anything.

Particularly, when in the first post you claim an association with Cipher and then don't state the obvious fraud. Instead you say it is a rudimentary trend analysis. It isn't.

I exchanged a few emails with Cipher in 2005 about something we both observed playing at Casino-on-Net. He did offer me the use of the Cipher strand system, but I didn't need it; it was too elementary. It is a form of visual pattern trend analysis, with no mathematics involved and very short ranged. I believe a session was 40 hands. A number of people used it and claimed they had good results; it was useless to me.

"For any artifacts of an RNG to result in any discernible patterns in a large-scale casino operation would require monumentally poor programming. But, even if the RNG was completely predictable, his methodology is nonsense. The patterns he is looking for would not be caused by the worst of RNGs. Also, his statement that different casinos from the same group exhibit different patterns is goofy. Casinos don't run the software. The software for hundreds of casinos operates on huge servers run by the software companies. In addition, if someone had a way to beat an online casino consistently, they would quickly bar him. The concept of using a casino like an ATM is preposterous."

In general I would agree. Although, some visual patterns do repeat.

that doesn't mean there can't be an exploitable glitch.
They fixed it of course. If they hadn't, I wouldn't be telling you about it. Which gets back to Casinomeister's original point. If someone can spin gold out of straw, don't expect him to lend you the spinning wheel.
Stanford.

I emphatically agree. I never did understand why Cipher was so active in lending the spinning wheel. Fraud? ... maybe. To sell something he thought would be more profitable than using the wheel himself exclusively? Perhaps. A mix of both and more? Maybe that too.
I can't say, I don't know the man. We never discussed any systems or strategies, just a few emails in 2005.

 

[lojo]

If you know the algorithm used in the pseudorandom number generator, then predicting the next value in the sequence is a practical task. If you do not know the algorithm, then the outcome of a good PRNG should appear to be random. Predicting outcomes is theoretically possible, but would be extremely complex... for general purposes it would be nearly impossible. With casinos, we generally do not know how the PRNG is applied. If there are non-random elements, then it may be possible to predict outcomes. If outcomes are purely based on the PRNG, then it will not be possible to predict outcomes.

By PRNG I assume you mean the 'relationship' between the program and the rng. If there is a relationship it is NOT a random number. And if that is 'how' some online casinos deliver .98 then it is rigged. boof

rng is rng - program is program. they have nothing to do with each other in the games I play (ed)

I have studied more than 1,000,000 logged Mg games. it IS random to the best of my knowledge.

please don't confuse the tracked (1/124) *30 with reality. that is only probabilty rearing its head, that will happen. In clumps, long or short. There is no system to take advantage in the long run, though i wish you the best if you do that in a controlled way.

The math tells me that there is something bigger than pi to deal with, but I WILL take the rng challenge

 

[aka23]

By PRNG I assume you mean the 'relationship' between the program and the rng.

PNRG stands for pseudo-random number generator. I listed this phrase in the first sentence of my post and assumed you'd get the connection between the acronym. A RNG requires a natural event assumed to be random. A PRNG is an algorithmic computation, such as the type used in online gambling software.

The math tells me that there is something bigger than pi to deal with, but I WILL take the rng challenge

Bigger than pi? Pi is 3.14... . Or do you mean longer than pi... an irrational number with an infinite decimal expansion? That's not accurate either. A PRNG repeats itself after finishing a cycle. A good PRNG has an extremely long cycle that might repeat itself after 1.84 x 10^19 values. A basic PRNG has a shorter cycle and might repeat itself after 65536 values.

 

[lojo]

PNRG stands for pseudo-random number generator. I listed this phrase in the first sentence of my post and assumed you'd get the connection between the acronym. A RNG requires a natural event assumed to be random. A PRNG is an algorithmic computation, such as the type used in online gambling software.


Bigger than pi? Pi is 3.14... . Or do you mean longer than pi... an irrational number with an infinite decimal expansion? That's not accurate either. A PRNG repeats itself after finishing a cycle. A good PRNG has an extremely long cycle that might repeat itself after 1.84 x 10^19 values. A basic PRNG has a shorter cycle and might repeat itself after 65536 values.

Thanks for pointing that out, i was on a tear

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Funny how laurentian has dropped persinger pages tonight, as well as wiki... hmmm

So, back to the challenge, it would seem my canadian team has gone underground. But I can do it on my own. I will challenge any random number generator and predict a loss!!!

C'mon. I never wore a koren helmet, I never predicted the superbowl (And I'm not messing with you, I'm making a point)

random number generators are like the man who fell to earth or the boy who ate his dog. unless you are marylinmanson, and claim to to know that god is a number that no-one can count to, then it is ALL bull sh*t.
Otherwise, lets get to crackin

I don't want any data challenges (overwhelm the server)
But i do hereby solemny assert that I can predict a RNG.

But of course i will have to have grapes popped into my mouth and my toes nibbled on by fish.

Didn't mean to doubt your math, mine is just maybe different. And why bother, its just money.

 

[GrandMaster]

I will come up with a suitable challenge for those who claim to be able to predict random number.

 

[gerilege]

I'm not a mathematician, only a Computer Scientist

First we have to differentiate between the pure RNG and the algorithm. The RNG produces values in an interval. The algorithm uses this source value somehow to produce a final value. I will use "RNG" to denote the source, and "algorithm" to denote the code snippet which uses the result of the "RNG". The final requirement is:
The final value (outcome produced by the algorithm) shall be fair (evenly distributed) and independent (previous outcome does not influence future outcome).

The fact is known since J. Neumann; nevertheless I think it's still quite amazing to realize for the first time that the RNG need not to be necessarily fair so that the algorithm produce fair and independent final results. The stronger requirement is that the RNG should be independent. It's not very complicated to construct an evenly-distributed and independent outcome using results from an unfair, but independent RNG as a source, assuming we know exactly how the RNG is biased. But if the RNG is not independent, then we can't completely fix it with an algorithm.

Unfortunately Pseudo-RNGs might be fair, but not independent (as it is deterministically calculated with a computer) unless the RNG source includes some physical random elements (radioactive isotopes, cursor movements, timing of clicks, etc.). So in theory it is impossible to prove that the result of an algorithm is independent (although it might be evenly-distributed) unless you can prove that the RNG is independent. What we can do is to test the RNG/algorithm, and examine whether it behaves the same way as real random sequences. I think if an RNG passes these tests, it would be very hard to find a short-term pattern in it, even there's an extremely long cycle in the RNG. If the RNG is "good", and the cycle is big enough, than to decrypt this cycle you would need a series of very good (later proven) hypothesizes (or insider facts) regarding the bias in the RNG and/or algorithm. It is not something what a couple of NASA/CIA mathematicians could not do, but it would be almost impossible with a PC.

The human brain is extremely good in pattern-matching. So good, that a human being often sees patterns where there's no pattern at all. The nature and the world around us are full of natural, but random patterns, take fractals for example. Furthermore these patterns are more likely and frequent than most people would think. Let's take the birthday problem for example: how many people do you think it takes to make it more likely that two people have their birthday on the same day than not? Only 23.

But I know how it feels when you run into one of those winning/losing “patterns”.

 

[pangloss]

The winning screenshots thread is most likely at least partially responsible for irresponsible gambling and ruining the financial livelihoods of many who have visited here. /QUOTE]



Yes and I couldn't agree more. It is a bit rich for those who created, participated and are responsible for the enduring nature of that reprehensible thread to now get on the "woe is Cipher" band wagon.

If ever there was a thread that deserved to locked, buried, nuked and utterly and totally destroyed it is that one. Yet it remains - bigger, brighter and bolder than ever. Almost as indestructible as membership of the accredited Casino list.


...

 

[Simmo!]

Although I agree that that thread will undoubtedly affect people, it's true to say that any "positive" gambling thread could be construed as incitement to over-stretch oneself. And for every positive thread there's a negative thread. It's a gambling forum - it's natural that people would want to share their good experiences as much as they do their bad and there is also some very good advice round here on controlling the gambling habit if people choose to take notice. That thread has very little to do with fraud or even one's opinions on it to be honest.