Mathematical Proof that English Harbour is cheating

Status
Not open for further replies.

henryVIII

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Location
UK
suzecat said:
IMO the effect of these events on EH's bottom line (which history suggests will not be made public) is a good result and one that is satisfactory. I can feel the dissent as I type and since we can't cyber draw/quarter or tar/feather, we are left to vote for/against EH with our feet -- same as any other software developer/provider.

I hope they didn't use the same auditors to 'publish' their bottom line that established there was no problem weeks after there most certainly was.

Sorry, I may have misunderstood you ... its late here ... apolgies if I did.

But, as i say, a casino caught with cheating software (on which we all agree surely) and who issues false audit claims (again, we all agree on that) rolls on .....

.
 
Last edited:

jetset

RIP Brian
Joined
Feb 22, 2001
Location
Earth
Slotster, have no fear - I take R-points seriously and have only used mine negatively once as opposed to positively three or four times! But I have been tempted on occasion LOL!

This EH issue has certainly polarised opinions and given rise to some emotional reactions here, but to my mind there have been many accusations and not a little negative speculation - mostly without the production of supporting evidence with which Spear or the Meister could work.

I have to say, one of the most impressive summaries of the situation is imo TheBloke's recent post, which dealt with the facts that are known and/or admitted.

Having known Spear for some time, I personally respect his expertise and integrity and have no reason to doubt that his assessment of the incident is correct, but I think we are all agreed that EH management could have handled this in a more professional manner. I have to say, too that I am personally disappointed in The Wizard's apparent withdrawal from the issue - I would really like to see his assessment recorded in this thread, too.

As TheBloke points out, there should be a price to pay by EH for at the very least it's ineptitude in making flawed software available. Unfortunately, the nature of the industry precludes any effective authority imposing some sort of penitence and much will hang on how EH is perceived by the playing and possibly affiliate communities after this debacle.

I have a feeling that the reaction of those audiences may, as Suzecat suggests, be the real and practical price EH pays.
 

henryVIII

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Location
UK
jetset said:
This EH issue has certainly polarised opinions and given rise to some emotional reactions here, but to my mind there have been many accusations and not a little negative speculation - mostly without the production of supporting evidence with which Spear or the Meister could work.

.

Would, for example, EH releasing past game logs help here.

Its pretty hard to prove anything when the accused witholds the "evidence".

Why would they want to not allow anyone to see past game results?

If they were innocent of any wrondoing, well, if it was my reputation on the line I would be bending over backwards. Not least out of respect for the player.

Unless i had a problem.

Hmmm ...

That said, some good points there jetset.
 

Scooter7

Meister Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Location
Toronto
suzecat said:
IMO the effect of these events on EH's bottom line (which history suggests will not be made public) is a good result and one that is satisfactory. I can feel the dissent as I type and since we can't cyber draw/quarter or tar/feather, we are left to vote for/against EH with our feet -- same as any other software developer/provider.


Exactly!

I don't think we're likely to see any additional evidence or statements on this subject. Calling for answers and documents isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

If you think that EH are unworthy of future business (I don't disagree), bump this post once every few days as negative advertising, put a notice on your website, anti-publicize them as it were. This thread alone has over 34,000 views-that's more than the 'Screenshots That Suck' thread!:thumbsup:

If the consumers can cause the equivalent of economic sanctions for misbehaviour, there's a lot less misbehavin' gonna happen:eek: :axeman2:
 

Linus

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Location
TX
jetset said:
Slotster, have no fear - I take R-points seriously and have only used mine negatively once as opposed to positively three or four times! But I have been tempted on occasion LOL!

This EH issue has certainly polarised opinions and given rise to some emotional reactions here, but to my mind there have been many accusations and not a little negative speculation - mostly without the production of supporting evidence with which Spear or the Meister could work.

If you think the issue is whether EH did it on purpose or not, there's really very little in the way of evidence anybody here could possibly produce. Absent subpoena powers, the only people who will ever know - for sure - what happened over at EH are the people at EH themselves.

I have to say, one of the most impressive summaries of the situation is imo TheBloke's recent post, which dealt with the facts that are known and/or admitted.

Having known Spear for some time, I personally respect his expertise and integrity and have no reason to doubt that his assessment of the incident is correct, but I think we are all agreed that EH management could have handled this in a more professional manner.

I have to say, too that I am personally disappointed in The Wizard's apparent withdrawal from the issue - I would really like to see his assessment recorded in this thread, too.

A couple of years ago, when I first came across the Wizard's site, I was astonished by the vast amount of useful information he'd collected there. I was even more impressed reading about the cheating casinos he'd busted, and how he'd stood up to them - and even their "lawyers."

His response to this situation, in contrast, has been less than overwhelming.

As TheBloke points out, there should be a price to pay by EH for at the very least it's ineptitude in making flawed software available. Unfortunately, the nature of the industry precludes any effective authority imposing some sort of penitence and much will hang on how EH is perceived by the playing and possibly affiliate communities after this debacle.

What many players would like to see, in my view, and in the absence of any regulatory authority, is a kind of "referee," who can tell them which casinos are trustworthy, and which are not, and whose word carries weight.

Many players, fairly or unfairly, look to CM to fulfill that role.

I have a feeling that the reaction of those audiences may, as Suzecat suggests, be the real and practical price EH pays.
 

Scooter7

Meister Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Location
Toronto
Linus said:
What many players would like to see, in my view, and in the absence of any regulatory authority, is a kind of "referee," who can tell them which casinos are trustworthy, and which are not, and whose word carries weight.

It's nice to have an arbitrator to settle disputes, but the bigger long-term concern isn't separating the trustworthy from the 'not', it's having the clout to put the 'not trustworthy' casinos right out of business.
 

jetset

RIP Brian
Joined
Feb 22, 2001
Location
Earth
Whilst I agree that the power of concerted action through the fora is not easily ignored by operators, it is imo probably not sufficiently potent to put the medium to large guys "out of business." It can certainly make life less comfortable for them as they scramble around trying to top up with new blood in the shape of newbies coming online.

The *referee* aspect voiced by Linus is important, too. That is especially the case when emotive issues are under scrutiny, because an arbitrator with "the right stuff" will show a preparedness to view all sides of the problem no matter how personally unpopular that may make him or her.
 

Daffy

Experienced Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Location
Dallas,TX
kengam said:
I apologize to all the members of this forum for getting out of hand with some of these posts. I have issues with English Harbour/Odds ON and had been skeptical about their integrity after losing a lot of dough playing video poker and using the double up feature over the past few years. When my attention was first brought to this thread I was sure that the same was happening to TheLawnet as happened to me and my colleagues. This is what caused me to be angry and post with haste. I am sure that a full audit into this double up game over the past few years would reveal that the game was gaffed early on.

We played the double up extensively as a group and surely our stats alone would put a dent in the overall numbers at this game even if it wasn't happening to everyone. My group concluded that they had caught on to the practice of using double up for advantaged play. We thought it was likely that advantaged gamblers were being targeted directly and a fix was placed into the double up game. All our numbers as far as frequency of royals, 4oak, flush, etc were all within parameters of a fair and random game. Amazingly close to expectation in fact.

The double up stats were a different story altogether. Finding them in use of a gaffed double up game back in April should have been enough to warrant a full investigation and complete audit. I am not at liberty to provide the complete stats of my team. I shouldn't have to. Many of those involved have moved on and some are still very actively involved in advantaged gambling to not want to draw attention to theirselves. The amount lost in this venture was only a fraction of what some are earning today.

I have always respected Spearmaster. I do not think he handled this issue very well, however. I do not understand why he did not push for them to release numbers from year's past. He seemed to be on their defensive side from day one. In my opinion, he gave them a reason to be silent and also gave them a reason for not releasing more information as far as past history of the double up game. I do not think he meant to harm our chances at the truth, but it happened anyway IMO.

As far as reputation points, I do not care that I am in the negative. Spear and Bryan can take away 15 points each time as they have. I tend to think that only looks worse for them. We do not have this power.


Administrators and moderators (Simmo!, Spearmaster, Vortran, and Casinomeister) can give or take away 15 points.


*******************************************************
For this post...you are no longer in the negative...pointwise...

I've read most of this "bible"...and I have questions...

Kengam would like EH double-up feature investigated back to circa1999 so he and his bonus buds might recoup some losses...is that correct???

If so...is that for every kind of VP double-up or did ya'll keep losing and losing and losing to one game in particular???

I'm not much of a mathematician...when I lose for awhile I change games...or casinos. (I'd have never caught that "glitch".):notworthy :notworthy :notworthy

The Wizard is truly the WIZARD...with all the new software and updates that has been introduced over the years...I'm wondering how many program errors he has detected??? He's a very smart guy...must be more than a few. Surely, all the players affected those other times were justly compensated just like this time...right???

I never played at EH, when they opened there was a misunderstanding about free signup money concerning my friends at another board...I never bothered.

The 120% is damage control...who is overseeing payment to the players...the casino??? What steps are being taken to monitor the software in the future??? Any???

Spear, as always, you ARE the man!!!:thumbsup: Thanks for your patience, integrity, and humor...I trust your judgement that this was a unintentional blunder. (I hardly ever double.)

the dUck
 

kengam

Dormant account
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
Daffy said:
*******************************************************
For this post...you are no longer in the negative...pointwise...

I've read most of this "bible"...and I have questions...

Kengam would like EH double-up feature investigated back to circa1999 so he and his bonus buds might recoup some losses...is that correct???

If so...is that for every kind of VP double-up or did ya'll keep losing and losing and losing to one game in particular???


The Wizard is truly the WIZARD...with all the new software and updates that has been introduced over the years...I'm wondering how many program errors he has detected??? He's a very smart guy...must be more than a few. Surely, all the players affected those other times were justly compensated just like this time...right???

the dUck


I appreciate your attempt to get me back in the positive as far as R-points. The rating points system here is very biased though, so I do not take it seriously. The 2 people who have disagreed with me can easily make or break anyone's reputation point status. That has already been the case and it has happened to others in the past. Our disagreement should have no impact on reputation whatsoever.

I am not looking to recoop any losses from the double up game. I never expected the casino to produce any self damning evidence. Would I take it if they offered? Sure, but I am not holding my breath and that is not the point of my involvement in this thread.

You are giving the Wizard way to much credit in this case. His site has been very useful to many over the years, but he has neglected to share the details of any audits. He has been issuing an audit seal which is nothing more than meaningless. He is in the position to gather more information concerning the double up game from years past, but he has not chosen to do so. He has been silent at the expense of the players. So be it. He gets paid from English Harbour and not us.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
kengam said:
I appreciate your attempt to get me back in the positive as far as R-points. The rating points system here is very biased though, so I do not take it seriously. The 2 people who have disagreed with me can easily make or break anyone's reputation point status. That has already been the case and it has happened to others in the past. Our disagreement should have no impact on reputation whatsoever. .
It ain't biased in the least. It's there for anyone in the forum to use. Some people use it - some don't bother. There are quite a few people who have more rep power than I do. You had some people who agreed with you who have more rep power than me. Quit posting erroneous crap.

kengam said:
You are giving the Wizard way to much credit in this case. His site has been very useful to many over the years, but he has neglected to share the details of any audits. He has been issuing an audit seal which is nothing more than meaningless. He is in the position to gather more information concerning the double up game from years past, but he has not chosen to do so. He has been silent at the expense of the players. So be it. He gets paid from English Harbour and not us.
He is not auditing their software anymore. Perhaps that's why he hasn't bothered getting involved lately.
 

kengam

Dormant account
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
His meaningless seal is still posted on the site. Only when you click on it do you see this:

This casino has been audited for return percentage and fairness by an independent third party gaming expert, Mr. Michael Shackleford A.S.A., who's Gaming Audit practice was located in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Michael has decided to leave the auditing practice. The seal attests to his continuous certification over a four-year period. We believe strongly in fair gaming and are looking into other auditing services as an independent overseer of our casinos. Meanwhile Michael has agreed to let us use his seal to attest to our fairness during his tenure until a suitable replacement can be found.
 

soflat

Experienced Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Location
Florida
Mr Shackleford said he was auditing game fairness right up to the unfair double up incident. If he quit recently, that is kind of unfortunate, but the seal really means nothing anyways if he is not going to thoroughly check game fairness by going back thru the logs.

From the Wizard of Odds site:

As a professional mathematician, one of the services I provide is evaluation of the logs of online casinos to ensure fair play, though I stopped taking new clients for this service a few years ago. One of my existing clients is Odds On, which provides the software for English Harbour casino among others.

He went on to say:

Although both English Harbor and myself believe that April 13 to May 2 was the only period affected we will be scrutinizing earlier logs to make sure, and will be monitoring future play closely.

If he is not going to check earlier logs, then the seal means nothing. It is just something EH is buying.
 

Linus

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 26, 2005
Location
TX
Scooter7 said:
It's nice to have an arbitrator to settle disputes, but the bigger long-term concern isn't separating the trustworthy from the 'not', it's having the clout to put the 'not trustworthy' casinos right out of business.

The only real power consumers have over casinos lies in deciding which casinos deserve our business, and our deposits, and which do not.

Ultimately we have to accept the responsibility of educating ourselves, and each other, about which casinos are trustworthy.

Until or unless we do, casinos will not have an economic incentive to respect the rights of players.
 

henryVIII

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Location
UK
I think Michael shacklefords claim to "audit" casinos is flawed from the outset.

As a qualified accountant I do know that an audit does not involve simply looking at results (the equivalent of just counting the cash in a till in a shop). You need to examine the systems for weaknesses (which in the shop example, would be stock control procedures, recording of creditors and debtors consistently, etc).

Without checking the systmes and controls procedures it is the equivalent of a fire department giving a certificate for fire safety based on the fact they havent seen any fires in the recent past.

It can often take a fire to expose all the weaknesses and lopholes that have existed all along. (in this case the casino being caught redhanded).

I cant comment on him personally and perhaps he made it clear that he was just checking percentages or whatever it was he did. I dont know. But he clearly did not do sufficient systems or control checks.

However, it does not look good that he quit just when this thing unfolded. This is usually the time a company's auditor earns his corn.

Will he even finish the past checks he said he needed to do?
 

henryVIII

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Location
UK
Intersting reading and Id need to reflect on it personally.

However, can you clarify one thing?

With regard to their initial statement you say "Unfortunately, they based this by looking at the wrong files."

Its the first time I have heard this. I dont think this has ever been made public knowledge before.

Which files did they look at?
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
They looked at the wrong section of data - this was explained earlier in this thread. This is why they made the initial statement that they did.
 

Vesuvio

Dormant account
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Location
UK
Thanks, Bryan :thumbsup: That's exactly the sort of statement this situation's been crying out for.

1. Vegas Technology never followed up on this. Players have no assurance that this will never ever happen again, and this incident has damaged player trust since all they can do is speculate on what really happened.
Exactly - it could also be added that we have no assurance the same thing didn't also happen in the past.

They relied on me, Ted Loh, and whomever to be the bearers of their message. This is not our job. There has been nothing but speculation concerning this whole episode and it was unfair to allow people like myself, Ted Loh, Michael Shackelford, and anyone else for that matter, to take the heat for their screw-up and explanations.
Spot on again.

3. Their auditing service, albeit a good one, audits the gameplay weeks after the play has occurred. This flaw was uploaded and was detected by players. This is inexcusable. It would not have been detected until weeks later by Michael Shackelford who was conducting his "Certified Fair Gaming" report for their seal.
I'd be curious to know if that's true about the audit. I'd assume that a standard casino audit (whether by PWC or Michael Shackelford) just looks at payout percentages for games (over different time periods). Such an audit probably wouldn't spot this "fault" in doubling as it wouldn't impact on the overall VP payout that dramatically. I don't know, though, so if anyone has any actual info on the way casinos are audited it'd be great to see it.
 

kengam

Dormant account
Joined
Sep 3, 2003
Kudos Bryan. I am happy that you have done the right thing. Highly not recommended is rogue enough for me.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
 

elscrabinda

Full Member
PABnoaccred
PABnorogue
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Location
Oxford
Perfect summing up of the Grand Prive issue as well. Because a casino is alllowed to do something does not mean it is the right thing to do.

Well done Bryan!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top