Mathematical Proof that English Harbour is cheating

[caruso]

I also recall the Playcheck-style logs from when I last played OddsOn.

All players who participated should now email in requests for copies of their play logs. For the most part the play was very brief, so these should be easily provided.

 

[Linus]

I believe this fatal damage to reputation will prove much more expensive to them in the long term than the money they made from their unfair doubling game (although of course nobody knows how much that is - it could be substatnial).

There's no reason to think doubling was the only fixed game at English Harbour.

How long would it take to show Royal flushes weren't being dealt fairly?

I'm guessing you'd go broke long before you could determine it.

 

[wizard]

I'm on the case

Yesterday, May 2, I was made aware of the issue possible irregularities in the doubling feature of Odds On software. Let me assure you that the Odds On management and myself are taking this very seriously. As soon as possible I plan to conduct an analysis of all double or nothing bets made since January 1. If necessary, Odds On will hire a third party to conduct the same study. Until we have had a chance to review the log files we can neither confirm nor deny the accusations.

I will say now that indeed I have auditing most of the Odds On casinos, including the English Harbour. Also, I agree with the original post that the probability of 84 or fewer wins in 235 resolved bets is 1 in 135929.

 

[Flavio4321]

just a question, is the user "wizard", michael shackelford aka "the wizard of odds"?

 

[spearmaster]

My apologies, I guess the Wiz is still on the job At least now we know that a proper review will take place by one or more parties.

I would suggest that until this has taken place, members of the forum kindly refrain from any accusations or insinuations as to what happened.

Flavio - yes, that's the Wizard of Odds.

 

[gfkostas]

My apologies, I guess the Wiz is still on the job At least now we know that a proper review will take place by one or more parties.

I would suggest that until this has taken place, members of the forum kindly refrain from any accusations or insinuations as to what happened.

Though it might be already late for an investigation if they have 'fixed' their game back to normal should that be possible.

 

[JohnGalt]

Though it might be already late for an investigation if they have 'fixed' their game back to normal should that be possible.

He's retroactively checking all the doubling since January 1. He should be able to tell if they've altered the logs by comparing the results on this site against the results they've recorded, if that becomes necessary (He might have to collect some usernames to do this but hopefully it won't come to that).

 

[thelawnet]

Yesterday, May 2, I was made aware of the issue possible irregularities in the doubling feature of Odds On software. Let me assure you that the Odds On management and myself are taking this very seriously. As soon as possible I plan to conduct an analysis of all double or nothing bets made since January 1. If necessary, Odds On will hire a third party to conduct the same study. Until we have had a chance to review the log files we can neither confirm nor deny the accusations.

I guess in the event that the software was at one time fair, you will be able to identify when it stopped being fair by analysing data from each day (and depending on the amount of data that you actually have), as although it is clear that the software was behaving unfairly for a period on and before April 30 2006, it was not necessarily unfair on say January 1: otherwise it might have been noticed then. I think it reasonable to assume that this has been going on for a few weeks but not necessarily months.

I'm also interested that the Hot Pepper and Fire and Ice casinos, outside of the EH group of casinos, althought not as thoroughly tested as EH, did not appear to have aberrant (and indeed abhorrent) doubling results.

I am somewhat surprised at English Harbour's early statement about the results being consistent with a fair game as it is quite clear that the game was not fair (not withstanding that results indicate that they clearly changed the game early on 1 May, although their carefully worded statement did not explicitly denied that they had not) , and that statement is now looking premature with analysis to be conducted here.

 

[thelawnet]

Lawnet, you should contact the Wizard of Odds with your results. If he agrees, this problem will get more attention.

Cheating by Odds On does not surprise me.

And yes, if the double down feature is not 50/50, the game is cheating.

I did email him on 29/04

 

[caruso]

It's extremely important that the figures are not just grouped together from some distant date. I doubt the gaff was in place on January 1st since, as already noted, it'd have been picked up on most likely. Assuming it was in place no earlier than (say) early April, those earlier fair results will dilute the the effect of the cheating results, with the extent dependent on how recently the gaff was put in place.

In order for this not to happen, the results need to be looked at on a daily basis at least.

Even then, there is still risk of diluting the effect, since we don't know how the gaff was set up - overall, individual accounts or whatever.

The Casino Bar experiment was conducted over less hands, if I recall correctly, and the probability was MUCH, much less - I think somewhere in the trillions. As such, I'm curious to know exactly why these results, far worse in terms of probability, are not immediate evidence of rigging, where the Casino Bar experiment results were. The only difference is that the Casino Bar test was set up in the correct manner, whereas here we're selectively looking backwards at data which fits the contention. Other than that, the results here are far, far worse than anything Casino Bar ever did.

 

[caruso]

The only difference is that the Casino Bar test was set up in the correct manner, whereas here we're selectively looking backwards at data which fits the contention.

My mistake. The initial test was specifically set up to test the hypothesis, and as such followed exactly the correct protocol for statistical analysis - and the exact same protocol as the Casino Bar experiment.

 

[Aindreas_Daoc]

I tried looking just now, but couldn't find a history log. Live chat said that there is no play-check type feature, but that you can request play history directly from them.

Edit: I just requested the logs via e-mail. However, it is unclear whether they even record play money games. The support person terminated chat before I had a chance to ask.

Update: EH apparently does not log play money hands. I recieved my game logs from the time I tested the VP doubling, but none of the play money games were included.

 

[Simmo!]

Update: EH apparently does not log play money hands. I recieved my game logs from the time I tested the VP doubling, but none of the play money games were included.

Thats pretty standard across the industry as far as I am aware but anyway AD.

 

[thelawnet]

I was suspicious of the fairness of the doubling on English Harbour's video poker. So I deposited and carefully recorded data for over an hour, doubling after every win, except I collected any large wins, and recording for each double the result, win, lose or push.

I played until I lost all my money (playing 4 line, single coin, recording wins, losses and ties on the doubling game (I did not record the video poker itself - I was only concerned with the double).

According to my data, it is 99.999% certain that English Harbour is not offering a fair doubling game in their Tens or Better video poker game.

Although nothing is completely certain, 99.999% would be good enough to convict a man and sentence him to death, so I think it is good enough for any reasonable person in the world to be satisfied that English Harbour is a cheating casino.

Here are my results:
84 wins
151 losses
19 ties

English Harbour sent me the logs.

My tally was very accurate except that I missed one of the losses. This makes things slightly worse for English Harbour.

The exact results were 19 ties, 84 wins, 152 losses.

I attach the results in CSV format.

As it seems that English Harbour have full logs and are handing them over, this looks very bad for them.

 

[dirk_dangerous]

English Harbour sent me the logs.

My tally was very accurate except that I missed one of the losses. This makes things slightly worse for English Harbour.

The exact results were 19 ties, 84 wins, 152 losses.

I attach the results in CSV format.

As it seems that English Harbour have full logs and are handing them over, this looks very bad for them.

Sounds like Odds-On threw the "cheat switch" and then turned it back to fair.

I expect the usual "oh there was a software mistake" excuse.

Frankly, I will always declare every Odds-on casino as cheaters. The evidence is already here IMO.

CM and the rest of you portal owners; you really should drop all Odds-On casinos without any delay.

 

[jeremiahsjohnso]

At least they are handing the logs over. This should end any possibility of a cover up assuming the Wizard gets access to the same files (or at least, the doubles records).

The next question: what does the casino do once the fix is proven (by the Wizard)?

 

[spearmaster]

I repeat again - insinuations and accusations should be avoided for the time being. Although the first time was a request, this time it's a warning - until such time as we hear from the auditing parties, no more speculation of this sort, otherwise you will be speculating on vacation.

The fact that logs are being handed over to players should indicate some sincerity, for crying out loud. What program do you know will damn themselves like that if they were trying to hide the problem?

 

[Linus]

They're our logs of our own play - which have already been recorded here. How does turning them over damn them?

Wouldn't refusing to turn them over be an admission of guilt?

 

[Casinomeister]

...CM and the rest of you portal owners; you really should drop all Odds-On casinos without any delay.

This was done yesterday. There were two Oddson casinos in Casinomeister's accreditted section (Fire and Ice, Hotpepper). They'll be placed back there if or when I feel comfortable with the results and resolution from this thread.

 

[dovmin]

I want to share my thoery of what happened with the English harbour group let me know what you all think.


Theory number one, I got response from my mathematician friend and he had to say and he is right. The chance of that kind of result happening is possible but the chance that this kind of result is happening exactly when this guy tested them is zero.

They absolutely cheated, you might say it was not deliberately but I doubt it.

Theory number 2: I see in their terms and condition that many games are excluded for bonuses.

I bet that many bonus whoring players came there and use the doubling figure to maximize their winnings building their balance up and only then play the games which carry a high house edge.

The casino understood they need to fix their doubling figure to eliminate that and that what he did.

I played there and I can say that according to my feeling only no calculations two games are rigged there.

One, their Roulette and second the doubling at any Videopoker.

I remember casino bar response to the Wizard of odds issue, I remember they mentioned the fact there is a lot of bonus abuse in the industry and this is very hard to manage a casino anyway. Casinobar implied that of the line that they cheated to overcome the bonus abusers and I believe this is the reason a casino want to cheat.

They don't need to cheat in order to win without bonuses.

They need the cheating figure to cope with the chargebacker and Bonus abuser.

 

[spearmaster]

They're our logs of our own play - which have already been recorded here. How does turning them over damn them?

Wouldn't refusing to turn them over be an admission of guilt?

Not turning them over would be very dubious at best.

Turning them over would "damn them" if they had intended to cheat players. What I'm trying to point out is that perhaps they are trying to be upfront and provide you with what you should be entitled to in the first place.

So if they give you the logs - knowing that the data in there may indeed expose an issue - then this is tantamount to acknowledging that there may be problems and that they will work with you to address them.

 

[spearmaster]

Dovmin - again, while I don't disagree with you - I have already asked twice that no more insinuations or accusations be thrown for the time being.

This is a final warning to everyone. Talk all you like but do NOT make any more accusations or insinuations because there are a number of parties already working on the issue. "Non-random" is okay. "Cheating" or "deliberate" is not.

 

[thelawnet]

I want to share my thoery of what happened with the English harbour group let me know what you all think.


Theory number one, I got response from my mathematician friend and he had to say and he is right. The chance of that kind of result happening is possible but the chance that this kind of result is happening exactly when this guy tested them is zero.

They absolutely cheated, you might say it was not deliberately but I doubt it.

Theory number 2: I see in their terms and condition that many games are excluded for bonuses.

I bet that many bonus whoring players came there and use the doubling figure to maximize their winnings building their balance up and only then play the games which carry a high house edge.

The casino understood they need to fix their doubling figure to eliminate that and that what he did.

I played there and I can say that according to my feeling only no calculations two games are rigged there.

One, their Roulette and second the doubling at any Videopoker.

I remember casino bar response to the Wizard of odds issue, I remember they mentioned the fact there is a lot of bonus abuse in the industry and this is very hard to manage a casino anyway. Casinobar implied that of the line that they cheated to overcome the bonus abusers and I believe this is the reason a casino want to cheat.

They don't need to cheat in order to win without bonuses.

They need the cheating figure to cope with the chargebacker and Bonus abuser.

I am not sure about the roulette. You present nothing to back this up, not even anecdotal 'evidence'.

However it does make some sense if you perceive that many players are making money from your bonus to attacke the game those players (whose business you do not want) will play. In that sense if I were operating a casino and wanted to attack the nonprofitable bonus players (given that other players are profitable because all casino games will offer a casino edge), I would fix the odds the game perceived most attractive by such players. As the expected loss on a video poker double is zero, this game is likely to be preferred by bonus-oriented players.

It is difficult to see how this has happened. It is clear that the game was not behaving fairly, and that the chance the game was fair is basically zero. The fact is that it appears the game suddenly now is playing fair where it wasn't before while the casino have said that the results were fair, even though that is statistically essentially impossible. I think there is only one conclusion that can be drawn from this evident change and early denial; the problem is for EH with logs available and being analysed, I believe that it will be extremely difficult for them to reconcile evidence showing bad odds changing to fair odds with the initial statement that effectively denied that they had changed anything

 

[MarcyW]

I want to share my thoery of what happened with the English harbour group let me know what you all think.


Theory number one, I got response from my mathematician friend and he had to say and he is right. The chance of that kind of result happening is possible but the chance that this kind of result is happening exactly when this guy tested them is zero.

They absolutely cheated, you might say it was not deliberately but I doubt it.

Theory number 2: I see in their terms and condition that many games are excluded for bonuses.

I bet that many bonus whoring players came there and use the doubling figure to maximize their winnings building their balance up and only then play the games which carry a high house edge.

The casino understood they need to fix their doubling figure to eliminate that and that what he did.

I played there and I can say that according to my feeling only no calculations two games are rigged there.

One, their Roulette and second the doubling at any Videopoker.

I remember casino bar response to the Wizard of odds issue, I remember they mentioned the fact there is a lot of bonus abuse in the industry and this is very hard to manage a casino anyway. Casinobar implied that of the line that they cheated to overcome the bonus abusers and I believe this is the reason a casino want to cheat.

They don't need to cheat in order to win without bonuses.

They need the cheating figure to cope with the chargebacker and Bonus abuser.

Unreal. A casino gives a bonus then needs to cheat so players can't win? Wow, I spit out my coffee on the keyboard I laughed so hard.

 

[Casinomeister]

Unreal. A casino gives a bonus then needs to cheat so players can't win? Wow, I spit out my coffee on the keyboard I laughed so hard.

Spearmaster gave a warning against making any more comments such as this. Account suspended one week.