Microgaming VP doubling rigged

... My point of view

Is not that MG is making a casino software that cheats...

Only that if you want to provide a good product for you customer... this game is just awful.

It seems that the programmers were so lazy to make an efficient game, that they decided to leave everything on the double button...

What they said probably was: Baaah , why are we going to waste time writtiing tons of code for the double feature.. .lets just make it random from the first moment they click and thats it. Programming 4 cards?? come on.. too much work... lets have a cigarrete and chill..

Thats what I believe could have happened when they created Video Poker.. reason why it will be interesting to see how other Video Pokers from other softwares are programmed...
 
I have to agree with Mitch. It makes no difference, at least in the long run. In the short run it's as likely to help you as it is to hurt you.

That said, I am a little annoyed. Suppose the dealer's card is a King, and I pick a lower card. Then one of the other cards turns out to be an Ace, and I'm left kicking myself that I didn't pick that card. If I'd never have got the Ace anyway, then I'm beating myself up for nothing. I'm sorry, but if only for that reason it makes a difference to me.

For the record, I don't double up or even play VP very often. I have had experiences like the above, but it may not have been exactly like that, nor was it necessarily at a Microgaming casino.
 
mitch said:
My point is that in this instance of software design there is no difference whatsoever to the player.
You're confusing two things here. It's true it makes no difference to the expected return, but it'll completely transform the average player's perception of the game. Perhaps the perception shouldn't matter, but then no-one but a bonus hunter would gamble at an on-line casino if the perception was taken away.
mitch said:
However if you genuinely believe that MG have designed the software to operate in a fashion that somehow disadvantages the player then you should not play at MG casinos.
I don't think they're disadvantaging the player, but this is a common fallacy. Yep, if there's no bonus you'd be mad to play on casino software you didn't trust, but with bonuses it's worth playing anywhere as long as you've got a big enough edge to cover the software's quirks. Why else would anyone play at Chartwell casinos? ;)
 
Vesuvio said:
You're confusing two things here. It's true it makes no difference to the expected return, but it'll completely transform the average player's perception of the game. Perhaps the perception shouldn't matter, but then no-one but a bonus hunter would gamble at an on-line casino if the perception was taken away.

Exactly!!!!
 
mitch said:
There must be a lot of masochists in the world!

For all those who think MG have got an ulterior motive for designing their software like this, why are you playing at internet casinos?

If you genuinely believe that a huge operation like MG would deliberately cheat its players you would be an idiot to ever gamble online.

Software designers like to have elegant and quick solutions to problems.

This design is one such.

I repeat again it makes absolutely no difference to the player if a card is chosen randomly by the software or whether it randomly chooses 4 cards and the player makes another random selection from these 4. The only difference is that the software is slower and more complicated for the latter example. Because both selections are completely random there is no question of not being able to have huge winning (or losing! :eek: ) runs of 10 or more.

If anyone wants to dispute that obvious fact please supply the mathematical justification for the opinion.

If no one supplies such mathematical proof (and they wont!) or proof that they have psychic powers that enable them to see which one of the 4 cards they should choose, then players must believe that MG are cheating in some way. If so see the first 3 paragraphs!

Mitch


I think we're on two different pages here. Nobody that I know of is trying to prove it's rigged.
 
winbig said:
I think we're on two different pages here. Nobody that I know of is trying to prove it's rigged.

So what's the point of this thread? (have you seen the title!)

If it's to emphasise that internet play is not the same as real cards, what's the point, everybody knows that?

Designing the software to produce 4 cards is just an illusion, it's all down to ones and zeros anyway.

If the thread is to show that, presenting the game this way disadvantages the player in some way, well, it's just not correct I am afraid.

Mitch
 
Last edited:
mitch said:
So what's the point of this thread? (have you seen the title!)

If it's to emphasise that internet play is not the same as real cards, what's the point, everybody knows that?

Designing the software to produce 4 cards is just an illusion, it's all down to ones and zeros anyway.

If the thread is to show that, presenting the game this way disadvantages the player in some way, well, it's just not correct I am afraid.

Mitch

Damn.. So Black Jack, Craps, Roulette is all down to ones and zeros uh?

Having a deck of cards deal 1 face up and four facing down I am sure is not the most complicated algorithm on earth...

The point is customers' satisfaction. You are under the illusion that you have a chance of luck by picking a card to beat another, but is totally fixed at the moment you hit on the double option... why waste the customer´s time and just after hitting double upgrade the balance and go to the next hand...

If you are such a programming pro.. why those pros at MG didn´t check for their mistake before having a valued customer noticing before starting this thread.?
 
The Watchdog said:
The point is customers' satisfaction. You are under the illusion that you have a chance of luck by picking a card to beat another, but is totally fixed at the moment you hit on the double option... why waste the customer´s time and just after hitting double upgrade the balance and go to the next hand...


Couldn't have said it better myself.

Could you see B&M casinos doing this? They might as well get rid of their slots/VP machines, etc. They could just go up to the cashier and press a button which will tell them what they owe or what they win. Would save alot of time! (Which is what MG was trying to do, but got busted) :thumbsup:
 
The dealer has one card. I am dealt 4 cards. That implies a choice, one card of four. If I am not making a choice, 1 out of 4, then deal me only the one card that represents my win or loss (which was already decided when I hit the 'double up' button). It's the smoke and mirrors that bothers me.
 
I dont have any proves..

But I am pretty sure Video Poker on other softwares work different than in Microgaming... at least on Playtech.

I am very positive that the double feature in Playtech gives you the option of actually getting lucky when picking a card... Reason why so many people have gotten amazing hands on Playtech.

My prediction:

Playtech: You are actually choosing among 4 different cards when you double

Microgaming: What weve been talking about... Your destiny is set once you hit double...

Would like to hear some opinions of people who have played at Crypto
 
50/50

If it is still 2 random cards, rather than a 50/50 coin toss, then it does not hurt players, or change the variance. The only ones to suffer are the casinos!
As the cock-up over the displayed balance updating too soon, it has exposed that one player "myth" turns out to be true!
There has often been the feeling that at times the MG games seem stuck in a rut, and whatever decent hand the player gets, the dealer gets an even more extraordinary "fluke".
I find some sessions at BJ I actually get decent hands much of the time, but I constantly get a run of 20's pushed, a BJ pushed, then lose a few bad hands that were losers anyway (hard 15's etc), the problem is all the pushes instead of wins when I had the good hands. Long term, the payout is as it should be, but short term this constant bad run can bankrupt the deposit in no time.
I doubt that we will find any long term cheating, but I bet that soon we will find evidence that the software has been designed to streak for excitement value, perhaps by introducing short cuts that amplify the variance, and provide for positive feedback to keep a run going a bit longer than would be expected. The PWC analysis does not look for this, it works only on long term payback, and will not give any indication if any of these short cuts have been used elsewhere.

I have recently become puzzled as to how those new slots with 30 winlines still seem to manage the spells of 30 spins with absolutely nothing back, just like the 9 line ones. They are supposed to be low variance, and should not be giving such dry spells. It is making me wonder if these are also a case of the RNG determining the amount won and the software transmitting the appropriate stops to generate a win of that value. Oddly enough, this then looks like the even bets on roulette, where runs of 10 or so blacks or reds can happen as well as spells where they alternate. If the slots have 50% of stops producing any win, and 50% not, it looks like the win/not a win is running like a 50/50 coin toss, rather than separate RNs to calculate each reel's stop.
 
ok.. agree

But.. what I believe I have not been able to explain my self is the folowing...

Why if its a 2 card random pick, would they show you 4 freaking cards, then you pick one... and you see that if you had chosen the when next to the one you picked, you might have won...?? Thats "·$%&)/% UP!!

Basically if the dealer had an 8, and you chose a 4...and the system showed that next to your 4 was an ace you would think.. DAMN, I SHOULD HAD PICKED THE OTHER...

BUT IN MICROGAMING IT DOESN´T MATTER... BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE CHOSEN THE OTHER ONE, THE SAME FREAKING 4 HAD SHOWN AND THE ACE WOULD HAVE APPEARED NEXT TO IT...

For me is like an analogy for false advertisement...

My question again: Am I retarded or this is just not right?
 
Last edited:
The Watchdog said:
Basically if the dealer had an 8, and you chose a 4...and the system showed that next to your 4 was an ace you would think.. DAMN, I SHOULD HAD PICKED THE OTHER...
My question again: Am I retarded or this is just not right?

Watchdog

What you have said is right, but of course half the time you would get the ace no matter what card you chose!

You would then think "what a great picker I am".

That's what it is all about, an illusion that gives the player the correct odds and expectation. Indeed that is what all internet play is about. It represents real cards and real roulette wheels etc but it is all ones and zeros. As long as the programmers are delivering the correct expectation and realities of real physical play you should not worry.

Indeed internet casinos usually give you better odds than B&Ms overall, when you factor in bonuses, due to their low overheads.

Mitch
 
My God!!

mitch said:
Watchdog

What you have said is right, but of course half the time you would get the ace no matter what card you chose!

You would then think "what a great picker I am".

That's what it is all about, an illusion that gives the player the correct odds and expectation. Indeed that is what all internet play is about. It represents real cards and real roulette wheels etc but it is all ones and zeros. As long as the programmers are delivering the correct expectation and realities of real physical play you should not worry.

Indeed internet casinos usually give you better odds overall, when you factor in bonuses, due to their low overheads.

Mitch

Hell no!! That is exactly why this thread freaked me out.. That is not what internet gambling is about. At least not to me. Who the "&% needs illusions??
I do know about binary codes, which by the way is annoying me you bringging it up all the time.

And I do worry.. If Microgaming Casino´s Video Poker works this way it means that MG's programmes are a bunch of lazy guys who didn´t want to make an effort and provide more reallity and a better gaming experience to the player.

Micro´s interest is selling their software to Casino Operators... as long as they are happy, why would they change their code? But I am sure that when a Casino Operator is advertising "The Best and most real Gaming experience" they are relying on those programmers doing their job, which in this case.. .they are not!!!

You that talk so much about freaking zero´s and ones and programmers... Analyze this:

Is it possible for them to make a better product and program a more reliable RNG in order to deal 1 care facing up and 4 cards facing down in order for the player to pick one??

OF COURSE THEY CAN...

What it seems to me is that they stopped typing code up to the option where the customer chooses to double or not and let the RNG work this way up to this point. The next step, which is the screen and all the soap opera about picking the card is just to provide excitement.

For me, this is mediocre.

If the point is to provide the most realistic gaming experience, they are just not doing it.
 
MG

The big problem is that MG have exposed the existance of this doubling short cut through another programming error in the EZBonus balance display, without this, we would never have known about this.
The problem for MG is that they have misdescribed the game in their online help by implying the result is decided at the time the player picks a card, rather than at the point of clicking on "double". Now, the question is what else is not as described, and does it have an effect on the short term variance of a game even if not on the overall return.
I have noted something similar in Blackjack. When the player hits "stand", the balance updates before the dealer has drawn the cards. Clearly this is another short cut, but in this case the player has no further influence in the outcome. It shows that the server has responded with a string of dealer cards, and the end result, in a single transaction, and this is then displayed as a card by card event for the player. The short cut also exists in MH Video Poker, with the end result already available while the cards are still being revealed.
These all prove that MG is not playing the game we think it is, but one that still retains the correct house edge. Unfortunately, it is a bit like watching a recorded football match when some idiot has already revealed the final score to you, it is less interesting.

I am sure I mentioned in my original post on this quirk that MG had better fix this before we see something we ought not to, well, too late now MG :D
 
The Watchdog said:
If the point is to provide the most realistic gaming experience, they are just not doing it.

When you play the classic Millionaires Club slot and you get to the final wheel do you really believe that you have a one in ten chance of winning the jackpot as you would if this was a real physical wheel?

Mitch
 
I remember a while ago somebody posted in this forum some VP screens with up to 9-10 winning doubles in a row off of a single win. I don't remember exactly if it was RTG or Playtech but it was definately not MG. So could it be MG designed it's VP double feature in such way just to prevent this from happenning? What if they have some counter that allows only 4-5 max. Then it makes a huge difference and gives you an explanation why they implemented such shortcut. Of course I don't have any proof. It just a speculation on my part but on another hand noone can prove that this theory can't be true.
 
The reasons for my frustration, and for my efforts to exonerate MG are:
a) It is a witch hunt with very little merit. You're hurt only by the fact that they lied to you, not by the lie itself, and there was no malicousness intended on their part.
b) The continuing discussion is just reinforcing the irrational fears of many - countless people will find this thread, see the title, see people talking about 'predetermination' and the control of wins/losses, and assume that MG is a rigged provider. Most of these people will never sign up and post here so we'll never know what the majority are thinking. I'm sure this will feature high on Google ratings soon enough.
c) The spread of this fear is exactly what the US legislators want to aid them destroy the online gambling industry. By turning this non-issue into a big problem, we are helping them and hurting ourselves.

Believe me, if this was an actual case of rigging I would be vocal in denouncing it. But it's not, and I felt it was necessary to repeatedly point that fact out so that maybe the majority would understand what is actually happening.

It was a completely pointless, braindead decision for MG to make. I don't believe it was laziness - it would be just as easy to code it correctly - I imagine they did it to make it faster, to give it an edge over their competitors. This thread is proof of why that was a really, really stupid thing for them to do. Gamblers are suspicious and superstitious and MG should never have cut this corner.

But they did, and the most dangerous thing for us to do now is to make a huge fuss about it, and further spread the notion that all online gambling is suspicious and untrustworthy. I'm sure MG will now be fully aware of this cock-up and hopefully it has taught them a lesson - so you have achieved that. But I hope you understand why I think it important to ensure that people don't take this out of context or blow it into a major issue - all that can be achieved by that is to help anti-gambling legislation. You have little to gain and a lot to lose.
 
Why would Bryan lock the thread about English Harbour which dealt with a buggy double up that was cheating players?


Utterly rediculous. I guess locking the thread makes it go away. It was because of that thread that he slightly rogued them. Why lock such an important thread?
 
Wouldnt know

mitch said:
When you play the classic Millionaires Club slot and you get to the final wheel do you really believe that you have a one in ten chance of winning the jackpot as you would if this was a real physical wheel?

Mitch


I have never played at a Crypto Casino... I am not a Slots fan and even so, I am concerned why that jack pot has not being hit in so much time.

Never the less, that is not the issue here...

Do you have like 51% stock in MG by any chance??

I mean no harm to them, but damn, I just cant stop thinking how would I feel by being a VP player at MG...Even much more if like to double up
 
Good one

HateMG said:
I remember a while ago somebody posted in this forum some VP screens with up to 9-10 winning doubles in a row off of a single win. I don't remember exactly if it was RTG or Playtech but it was definately not MG. So could it be MG designed it's VP double feature in such way just to prevent this from happenning? What if they have some counter that allows only 4-5 max. Then it makes a huge difference and gives you an explanation why they implemented such shortcut. Of course I don't have any proof. It just a speculation on my part but on another hand noone can prove that this theory can't be true.


That will be a perfect explanation why several MG casinos allow Video poker as a valid game and why some major Playtech Casinos have it as an invalid game for WR on their bonuses
 
I honestly respect your opinion

TheBloke said:
The reasons for my frustration, and for my efforts to exonerate MG are:
a) It is a witch hunt with very little merit. You're hurt only by the fact that they lied to you, not by the lie itself, and there was no malicousness intended on their part.
b) The continuing discussion is just reinforcing the irrational fears of many - countless people will find this thread, see the title, see people talking about 'predetermination' and the control of wins/losses, and assume that MG is a rigged provider. Most of these people will never sign up and post here so we'll never know what the majority are thinking. I'm sure this will feature high on Google ratings soon enough.
c) The spread of this fear is exactly what the US legislators want to aid them destroy the online gambling industry. By turning this non-issue into a big problem, we are helping them and hurting ourselves.

Believe me, if this was an actual case of rigging I would be vocal in denouncing it. But it's not, and I felt it was necessary to repeatedly point that fact out so that maybe the majority would understand what is actually happening.

It was a completely pointless, braindead decision for MG to make. I don't believe it was laziness - it would be just as easy to code it correctly - I imagine they did it to make it faster, to give it an edge over their competitors. This thread is proof of why that was a really, really stupid thing for them to do. Gamblers are suspicious and superstitious and MG should never have cut this corner.

But they did, and the most dangerous thing for us to do now is to make a huge fuss about it, and further spread the notion that all online gambling is suspicious and untrustworthy. I'm sure MG will now be fully aware of this cock-up and hopefully it has taught them a lesson - so you have achieved that. But I hope you understand why I think it important to ensure that people don't take this out of context or blow it into a major issue - all that can be achieved by that is to help anti-gambling legislation. You have little to gain and a lot to lose.


I honestly respect your opinion and I am more than against banning online gambling...

However your point of view I dont share. Exactly stuff like this are the things that must change on online gambling in order for it to be a respected, trust worthy and decent business.

A lot of stuff must be changed like decent customer service, loyal and fast payments, etc. We can number thousands of things that can be changed, however your policy of keeping it down makes me sick.

I agree that is not rigged, but is not honest.

If people are affraid of things like this, they must be told. The online gambler should be educated on how to spot a honest business, know where and who to do business with and even more be sure that they are dealing with companies that are interested in providing the best service.

There are thousands of people out there who live from this industry and thousands like me who respect it and want nothing more than the best for it.
I dont think this should be taken in the wrong way for people to fear online gambling, but regardless what harm this issue can cause, WHAT THE HELL IS A MAJOR ONLINE GAMBLING SOFTWARE PROVIDER LETTING SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN??

If they suffer the consecuences of their mistakes.. good. As I have always thought: on the online gambling industry rules of nature apply. The strongest, wisest and most intelligent prevail... the others are left behind.

You have a good point and good intention, however silence is not the answer.
We all humans make mistakes and errors, but we can also solve them... simple as that
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top