1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
  2. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by following.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Sister site to Casino Max launches

    Roaring 21 has just launched - sister casino to Casino Max, and they have a special promotion for you!! .They are in the Baptism by Fire - you can check them out here: Roaring 21 BBF and special promo.


    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice

Exclusive Afterlife: Inferno New Slot Comp - Win a Break in Florence & Other Prizes

To celebrate the launch, Casinomeister has teamed up with 3 casinos to run a competition where you can win a 3-day break* in Dante's stunningly beautiful birthplace of Florence in Italy (or a cash prize of £500) along with a number of smaller prizes for the best screenshots
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

Payout percentage in MG in the long run...

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by kimss, Sep 17, 2007.

?

What would the payout % be in + 250.000 spins?

  1. 90% or lower

    13 vote(s)
    35.1%
  2. 91%

    3 vote(s)
    8.1%
  3. 92%

    3 vote(s)
    8.1%
  4. 93%

    1 vote(s)
    2.7%
  5. 94%

    7 vote(s)
    18.9%
  6. 95%

    8 vote(s)
    21.6%
  7. 96% or higher

    2 vote(s)
    5.4%
Multiple votes are allowed.
    Sep 17, 2007
  1. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    It happends to be I have wasted alot of time with "practise-play" the last month(s), and I have buildt a huge dataset with playcheck data for the entire period. I have passed 239765 spins as we speak, most on maximum wager. So since funmode is identical with real mode, I thought I'd poll the payout percentage for you all. I will post the results when there are some votes for what you think, ;)
     
    3 people like this.
  2. Sep 17, 2007
  3. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    I'm guessing in the 80's :D

    Just a thought... if they were all max lines, could that be multiplied? i.e. 239765*number of lines = 3,596,475 if all were 15 line slots this is a large sample imo
     
  4. Sep 17, 2007
  5. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    Oh yes, it's a large sample - and it SHOULD satisfy the hardest people in here screaming for lucky streaks and rules of large numbers and chaos theory, :) It's a few 100 hours atleast of gameplay here, so yes - it has eaten some work time for sure, hehe.

    But no use in sticking with the data myself - after all it's no secret data, atleast I never saw an EULA or other small print stating that you are never to share playcheck data with other people. It will be fun to see what the poll will show in some days.

    At the moment the machine is spinning in auto-play for full machinery, :D Collecting data, collecting data... Ahhh... Sweet... If I could only gain what I have lost in this experiment I would at the moment be -1,817,071.96 richer... The sweet smell of money you could have lost!
     
  6. Sep 17, 2007
  7. saladfingers

    saladfingers Meister Member

    Occupation:
    Management
    Location:
    UK
    I've finally given up on MG. Too much money lost, too many unforgiving losing sprees. I've had some good, exciting wins there too, but they still don't compensate for the amount I've lost. The biggest problem is that losing runs like that are absolutely no fun, so the whole process isn't as addictive as the business model needs it to be. So I've found giving up on them and closing my accounts pretty easy. I've also given up on Inetbet for the same reason.

    3dice on the other hand - fun slots (though not enough of them), good payouts so far, excellent customer service... The test will be the payout percentage. Of course I don't expect to win in the long run, but if I get entertaining game play, some good wins and the chance of some big wins, I'll be a customer for ages. Long, barren tedious losing runs and I'm off...
     
  8. Sep 18, 2007
  9. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    Watching +250.000 spins you see alot, and I have seen some "strange" patterns, however it seems they shift after you get a 5 symbol win. A slot can be "hot" for a week, and over night it's another slot which is hot and the one which were hot is suddenly ice cold - it seems the rabbit hold is endless...

    So my experience with this experiment is bye bye online gaming aswell, I will not put money more in theese casinoes! You _DO_ win when you need to it seems, however nobody in here believes this. Most likely there will be a stat fanatic in here which will have a field day diving into the data.

    Having lost, surely, +50.000 in cold cash in this game I am not amused either! If I were you I'd probably stay away from 3dice aswell, since I have a feeling the "online community" shares their flaws. (Again, non existing flaws).

    And for all of those winning shots, there are a HUGE difference in wagering 0.09-0.9 bets and 9-250 bets! Surealy this has to do with the fact that you cant win anything on low wagering...

    Again - my personal opinions, hit me!
     
    1 person likes this.
  10. Sep 18, 2007
  11. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    thwackkkk:D
     
  12. Sep 18, 2007
  13. aka23

    aka23 Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Technical
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    I think the payout would be ~88.03% ;) . Seriously, 1 SD in % return over 250,000 spins should be Standard Deviation per spin / 5. With an SD per spin of 15 (may be reasonable for high variance slots) and a fixed bet size, the expected 2 SD range is 89-101%. Zoozie's simulator could probably give more precise information.
     
    2 people like this.
  14. Sep 18, 2007
  15. Zoozie

    Zoozie Ueber Meister CAG PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    Software Developer
    Location:
    Denmark
    This is damn accurate!
    I did 1000 simulations of:
    250000 spins on thunderstruck (freespins not counting as these 250000)

    Of these only 4 had payout a little over 100%. Highest was 1.0074301819113503
    The lowest payout was 0.9135081857338577
    But the avg payout% was 0.956 which a little higher than was expected, so it was a slightly 'lucky' simulation.

    The data with the payout from the 1000 simulations is included. And here are two histograms of the results with low and high interval resolution.
     
    14 people like this.
  16. Sep 18, 2007
  17. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    Great to see some interest in this, I should also add (in case this was misunderstood), my gameplay is in all the slots. So +250.000 spins all over the place in total. So some slots will have a high payout and some will have a lower. I'll prepare the results and also post the data tomorrow.

    Always nice to have something to look forward to, :)
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. Sep 18, 2007
  19. aka23

    aka23 Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Technical
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    Based on the simulation data, the SD per spin was about half of my guess. This is surprising to me since Wizard of Odds listed a greater degree of variance than this in a Reno 3-reel slot, as described at You must register/login in order to see the link. . It also seems that 250,000 spins is not enough to produce a good gaussian distribution, as the curve is still skewed a bit on the higher side due to some sims hitting rare high payouts.

    Based on this data, I expect you'd need ~2 million spins, to have a 95% chance of being +/- 1% of expected payout.
     
    1 person likes this.
  20. Sep 18, 2007
  21. Zoozie

    Zoozie Ueber Meister CAG PABnonaccred

    Occupation:
    Software Developer
    Location:
    Denmark
    I forgot to write I was playing the full 9 lines at Thunderstruck.
    If I played online 1 line the variance would be higher.
     
  22. Sep 18, 2007
  23. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    Would this work on an overall 2 million spins on different games or would you need 2 million spins on one particular game to be scientific sure?
     
  24. Sep 18, 2007
  25. aka23

    aka23 Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Technical
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    If playing a game with a large progressive jackpot, like Major Millions, then 2 million spins is not enough. If you are playing games that do not have a greater variance than Thunderstruck and using a constant bet size, then 2 million spins probably would be enough. The result would be the expected return with that fraction of play on each game, rather than the expected return for any one game.
     
  26. Sep 18, 2007
  27. vinylweatherman

    vinylweatherman You type well loads CAG MM

    Occupation:
    STILL At Leisure
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    To be a valid sample, it would have to be all on the same slot, at the same betsize. There are so many possible outcomes on the likes of Thunderstruck that even 2 Million spins might not be enough due to the rare and high hitting possibilities, such as 5 wilds in the free spins, or lesser, but still fantastic, the combo of 4 wilds + 5 wild hammers on a single spin within free spins. There is also the 5 scatter retrigger during free spins. These rare hits pay very well indeed, and if not properly represented in the sample would drag down the payout percentage.

    Rather than looking through all that playcheck data, you could just set autoplay to run 5000 spin sessions, and log the total won or lost each time. You could build up a database of 250,000 or even 2 million spins this way, and can keep adding to it.
    To see if these are patterns of hot or cold in time, you could do a set amount of these sessions each day, and see if there is any pattern (there shouldn't be).
    I have noticed times when scatters appear frequently, and then long spells where they hardly appear. There is a strong link between which spell the slot is in, and the frequency of bonus rounds. I also notice long spells where almost nothing is hit, followed by spells where alot of small hits keep me going, even without any bonus rounds.

    A simpler case might be to study a low variance slot, without free spins or bonuses, such as 5 reel drive, and then Double magic (to see if 3 reel slots are better or worse than 5 reel slots).
     
  28. Sep 18, 2007
  29. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    Man, so it's really useless since MG, RTG and all other software provieders and their proprietary software can never truly be busted unless someone - attached with a camera - comprises their property and analyzes the code line by line...

    Who has the possibility to do +2 million spins on one slot? And more interstingly, do it on lowest bet and then on highest bet? You also mention that 2 mill is probably to little, you would need maby 10 mill?

    This is suerly good news for everyone, but sadly it means that chaos and law of big numbers is the casino makers biggest friend... hrmf!

    If you remember, this is also why I asked in another thread - how many times would you need to see a pattern, to scientifically know it's infact a pattern - and not variance or whatever (I am not good with formulas and such, logistics and patterns however I work with).

    Anyways, just had to respond to what I found sadening comments on the amount of spins! It took weeks for 250.000 spins... I can't imagening doing 2 mill on every game...
     
  30. Sep 19, 2007
  31. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    Unless the Wiz data set was ~2mm*15 I already asked, and showed that the sample was over three million... or did I? hmm.
     
  32. Sep 19, 2007
  33. aka23

    aka23 Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Technical
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    I wrote 2 million spins for a 95% chance of being within 1% of expected payout. That doesn't mean you need to do 2 million spins to prove something is wrong. It just means with fewer spins the expected range of return will be larger. BAsed on Zoozie's simulation with 250,000 spins on Thunderstruck, there is a 95% chance of being within ~3% of the the expected payout. So there is about a 1 in 100,000 chance of the measured payout being 88% over 250,000 spins.
     
  34. Sep 19, 2007
  35. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    So this would mean:
    If the proprietary software would supress large wins, and give them when you need then instead (ladning on an overall ~95% payout), this would in practise be impossible to proove! I assume this, since the lack of the random jackpot win would need such an redicculous large dataset, and given chaos theory the jacpot just aswell mey hit 3 times in a row...

    From what I understand here, lojo, zoozie, aka23 and me would be able to develope the most succesful RNG in the world for the owner - and anyone could check it and not be able to find the cheating mechanism.

    This is really astonishing in my opinion, or should I say - depressing. However, totally besides the point of this thread so I will back off now. :)
     
  36. Sep 19, 2007
  37. lojo

    lojo Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Tradesman
    Location:
    USA
    Didn't mean to derail Kimss (and thanks for putting me in a class of intellect I don't hold a candle to:))
    Don't bow out, just try to state another way if you need to. How long of a run would we need to show what?
    Please remember the RNG and the program shouldn't be looked at in the same light.:)
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2007
  38. Sep 19, 2007
  39. kimss

    kimss Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Software developer
    Location:
    Norway
    Datafile is stored here in 14 days from now (17mb uncompressed):
    You must register/login in order to see the link.

    The results are in, and the payout are 92.55% in 250.000 spins.

    Attached are the payouts for the different games and wagers. Any stat fanatic will - by looking in segments of the stats from day to day - see some strange "artifacts". Also, for those interested - something strange happends after the "big" win in Glory of Rome which I am on the stage of a thesis on. I will need to reset this experiment and do 3 casinoes at a time to confirm(?) my findings. Anyways, enough of that. Time for me to pause this and do some real work, I do not get paid digging into statistics, :)
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page