Playtech woes

[555YY]

First of all, I would like to say that i am not a bad-beat whiner. In span of one month i have lost 2.5K at omni, 1.9K at Peach, 2K at 32Red, 3K at CON, 1k at Captain Cook/Lasseters etc etc... I chalk most of that up to bad luck as I'm a pretty aggressive gambler, of course I also win a fair amount...

Only Big losses I have suffered that strike me odd are at Playtech Sites. I would like to say that overall I'm still a net winner from the All the Playtech sites combined.

But the last couple session I have had at several (semi) reputable playtech sites strikes me as beyond ridiculous. Now after all the hoopla here regarding playtech bj and bj switch, I decide to play some other tables games for a while. So I begin to play some big bets on european roulette. Of course I suffered a major losing streak, 4K+ in one week in my own deposited money and 7-8K in total amount wagered (deposit+ sticky bonus).

The REALLY ODD thing is that I was playing mostly even-money bets (18/37) and if I placed 3 big bets on black it would come out red, and of placed it on red then it's vice-versa. What was also odd is that I DID NOT WIN even ONE of those big bets!

But at that point I wasn't ready to pass judgement as it can still be variance, and also b/c i neglected to take any screenshots.

So late last week I decided to redeposit at another pretty reputable playtech casino in that same casino group. This time I decided to clamp down and placed NINE big bets (500$) each on an even money bet on the collective numbers 1-18.

Here are the screenshots for my NINE CONSECUTVE BIG-BETS ON AN EVEN MONEY (18/37) BET. Again I bet on the number 1-18 ALL NINE TIMES

 

[555YY]

now i realize the chance of that happening is (18/37)^9 or 1 in 655. But that coupled with the fact that I lost such a large amount in the EXACT SAME manner does not not induce optimism in Playtech's rng generator

 

[555YY]

gee.. i wonder what a cipher strand of the results would look like ...

 

[cipher]

gee.. i wonder what a cipher strand of the results would look like ...

Hi ezc3m:

That CIPHER strand would look like 9 red blocks in a row. What a shame.

 

[nafanny29]

My first experiance of playtech today (via acropolis) looked just as bad. My worst ever run of losing hands, my worst ever run of losing doubles, my worst ever total win/lose hands. I cant believe crockfords of all places runs this cr@p. Very disapointed indeed.

One bitten, twice never again

 

[Clayman]

The REALLY ODD thing is that I was playing mostly even-money bets (18/37) and if I placed 3 big bets on black it would come out red, and of placed it on red then it's vice-versa. What was also odd is that I DID NOT WIN even ONE of those big bets!
But at that point I wasn't ready to pass judgement as it can still be variance,

Man that is painful to look at. I'd say I know how you feel but, being a small better, I can only imagine.
I do respect your constraint in leaping to conclusions after suffering through such a losing streak with such large bets. Not many would, I dare say. But if, like you say, you add another 6? or so such losses from your other session, you are really up there in +4 SD territory whether you are betting $5 or $500 which is where I begin to draw the line.
And how weird is it that you have the same # repeated twice in your first 8 results?
Don't the logs even tell you where you had your bet placed?

Anyway good luck vs the Vikes on Sun.

 

[555YY]

Man that is painful to look at. I'd say I know how you feel but, being a small better, I can only imagine.
I do respect your constraint in leaping to conclusions after suffering through such a losing streak with such large bets. Not many would, I dare say. But if, like you say, you add another 6? or so such losses from your other session, you are really up there in +4 SD territory whether you are betting $5 or $500 which is where I begin to draw the line.
And how weird is it that you have the same # repeated twice in your first 8 results?
Don't the logs even tell you where you had your bet placed?

Anyway good luck vs the Vikes on Sun.

thanks for the kind words my good man, and as long as moss keeps his pants on i think we're in good shape.

i absolutely concur with your stat analysis, what is weird is if you play roulette long enough you see those (ball landing in same slots etc..) weird trends emerging.

i wish i had more analytical stats but playtech is notorious for not keeping good logs of play and also i'm kinda running low on confidence with playtech here and also funds

I asked the wizard to take a look into this but so far he seems reluctant to do so. I am trying to figure out some additonal ways to collect some more playtech roulette logs on big bets.

but these trends certainly seems alarming....

i'll keep you posted though, maybe after i get my hands on some additional logs we can go over the math together?

 

[Clayman]

thanks for the kind words my good man, and as long as moss keeps his pants on i think we're in good shape.
i absolutely concur with your stat analysis, what is weird is if you play roulette long enough you see those (ball landing in same slots etc..) weird trends emerging.
i wish i had more analytical stats but playtech is notorious for not keeping good logs of play and also i'm kinda running low on confidence with playtech here and also funds
I asked the wizard to take a look into this but so far he seems reluctant to do so. I am trying to figure out some additonal ways to collect some more playtech roulette logs on big bets.
but these trends certainly seems alarming....
i'll keep you posted though, maybe after i get my hands on some additional logs we can go over the math together?

Hopefully he can afford his $5000 fine on his $5000000 salary. Even you might win an occasional high bet at Playtech with a bankroll like that. Or not.
I know someone posted a while back, I think at WOL, that he played the same number 1000 times at double-zero roulette and it only hit 6 times. Odds of this or fewer 1 in 563,175. Can't remember the software though. Maybe someone else can.
Perhaps the Wiz is reluctant due to the small sample size since all he can do is assume the software is blind to the amount bet which isn't exactly the point in your case.
In your case the question is whether the software is random with big bets out. So far, it doesn't exactly seem so.
I think if we play together at $500/hand, you betting high numbers and me betting low, we will know our answer when zero comes up 9 times in a row
It does seem difficult to get Playtech logs. One wonders if that is by design or accident. But I have received some BJ logs from players after they requested (several times) same from Playtech.
I offer again to analyze any Playtech BJ logs that players may have. My only stipulation is that I can include the results publicly with other logs.
Should you get any roulette logs of course we can try to figure those out. I'll find someone who knows what they are doing.

See you in Jacksonville

 

[chuchu59]

This is fishy,losing nine even bets of $500 in a row. The playtech software must have issued a command ie 'clean em up' on all bets of $500 or more. Cant they just let you win one or 2 hands to make you feel better.

 

[ScurvyDog]

Sorry to hear about the loss, but I think the needle to puncture your Playtech conspiracy theory is right there in your own post. Events that have a 1 in 655 chance of occuring happen millions of times, each and every day.

Is there any reason you're playing roulette for bets that big? You mention sticky bonuses but you also mention losing 2.5K in a month at Omni, which only offers the $100 loyalty monthly bonus.

It sounds like you like to gamble and bet big. Given those conditions, you're going to rarely encounter results like you did. Would it have been noteworthy if you had been betting $5 on an even money bet on the collective numbers 1-18 at roulette and lost nine consecutive bets? Would you have posted about it?

I know it sucks and I feel your pain, but it's called gambling for a reason, and your results aren't that insanely out of whack for someone who gambles.

More importantly, if Playtech wanted to rig its software to recognize and react to large bets, don't you think they'd be smart about it, and set up a progression where you lose two bets, win one, lose two bets, win two bets, lose three bets, etc? Why in the world would someone develop rigged software that was so blatantly rigged? That argument falls into the same category that paranoid people trot out to say that blackjack/blackjack switch is rigged on certain sites, because there's sometimes a slight pause when the next card is dealt. Umm, no, I imagine they'd be a little more savvy if they were going to rig the deck.

 

[555YY]

Sorry to hear about the loss, but I think the needle to puncture your Playtech conspiracy theory is right there in your own post. Events that have a 1 in 655 chance of occuring happen millions of times, each and every day.

Is there any reason you're playing roulette for bets that big? You mention sticky bonuses but you also mention losing 2.5K in a month at Omni, which only offers the $100 loyalty monthly bonus.

It sounds like you like to gamble and bet big. Given those conditions, you're going to rarely encounter results like you did. Would it have been noteworthy if you had been betting $5 on an even money bet on the collective numbers 1-18 at roulette and lost nine consecutive bets? Would you have posted about it?

I know it sucks and I feel your pain, but it's called gambling for a reason, and your results aren't that insanely out of whack for someone who gambles.

More importantly, if Playtech wanted to rig its software to recognize and react to large bets, don't you think they'd be smart about it, and set up a progression where you lose two bets, win one, lose two bets, win two bets, lose three bets, etc? Why in the world would someone develop rigged software that was so blatantly rigged? That argument falls into the same category that paranoid people trot out to say that blackjack/blackjack switch is rigged on certain sites, because there's sometimes a slight pause when the next card is dealt. Umm, no, I imagine they'd be a little more savvy if they were going to rig the deck.

i think you need to take a closer to my posts and what other have said before replying

1.) i never outright accused playtec of cheating, clayman even commented me on my restraint, i just said it was suspicious

2.) you said it yourself you're a small-time bonus/advantage player, i hate to sound like a jackass but i don't see how you can "feel my pain"

3.) i know the math, i wrote the post; what was the point of pointing it out again? as clayman indicated, my point isn't that all the small bets run like this, but the larger bets. go ahead and post valid evidence otherwise and i'll immediatelly issue an outright apology to playtec. (ie: place 500$ large bet 200 times on european roulette and let us know the statistical results, i would love to have a copy of that log for my edification anyways)

 

[ScurvyDog]

Let me review your posts then, and see what I missed.

In span of one month i have lost 2.5K at omni, 1.9K at Peach, 2K at 32Red, 3K at CON, 1k at Captain Cook/Lasseters etc etc...

Ouch. That's -$10,400 in just one month. I hear Gamber's Anonymous (Link Removed (Old/Invalid) ) has a program that might be helpful.

I chalk most of that up to bad luck as I'm a pretty aggressive gambler, of course I also win a fair amount...

Okay, cool. So you're not a complete loser.

Only Big losses I have suffered that strike me odd are at Playtech Sites. I would like to say that overall I'm still a net winner from the All the Playtech sites combined.

Okay, cool, Playtech is +EV for you.

But the last couple session I have had at several (semi) reputable playtech sites strikes me as beyond ridiculous. Now after all the hoopla here regarding playtech bj and bj switch, I decide to play some other tables games for a while. So I begin to play some big bets on european roulette. Of course I suffered a major losing streak, 4K+ in one week in my own deposited money and 7-8K in total amount wagered (deposit+ sticky bonus).

Again, I hear Gambler's Anonymous has a fine program. You just dropped 4K+ in one week on roulette. Let's not ignore the fact that you're playing roulette, which is idiotic given the other games available with a lower HA. And you're playing it with 4K+ of your own money.

The REALLY ODD thing is that I was playing mostly even-money bets (18/37) and if I placed 3 big bets on black it would come out red, and of placed it on red then it's vice-versa. What was also odd is that I DID NOT WIN even ONE of those big bets!

But at that point I wasn't ready to pass judgement as it can still be variance, and also b/c i neglected to take any screenshots.

So late last week I decided to redeposit at another pretty reputable playtech casino in that same casino group. This time I decided to clamp down and placed NINE big bets (500$) each on an even money bet on the collective numbers 1-18.

Here are the screenshots for my NINE CONSECUTVE BIG-BETS ON AN EVEN MONEY (18/37) BET. Again I bet on the number 1-18 ALL NINE TIMES

So in addition to the +4K you lost playing roulette before, you deposited at another Playtech site, and proceeded to lose another $4,500? Playing roulette again?

Okay, after depositing yet again at another site, you had a bad run in which you lost nine consecutive bets at roulette. Okay.

Umm, what else am I missing? There's nothing "beyond ridiculous" about your results. They aren't even suspicious. They're slightly unusual but that's about it. The bet size is irrelevant. Do you track every consecutive winning streak you have? Do you track every streak, winning or losing? No, you just focus on the time when you piss away a ton of cash making huge bets.

1.) i never outright accused playtec of cheating, clayman even commented me on my restraint, i just said it was suspicious

Umm, okay. You think losing 9 consecutive big bets is suspicious but you aren't claiming that Playtech is rigged. Okay.

2.) you said it yourself you're a small-time bonus/advantage player, i hate to sound like a jackass but i don't see how you can "feel my pain"

I'll give you that one. I don't know what it's like to piss away $8,500 in a week or two playing roulette. You're absolutely right. Well played.

3.) i know the math, i wrote the post; what was the point of pointing it out again? as clayman indicated, my point isn't that all the small bets run like this, but the larger bets. go ahead and post valid evidence otherwise and i'll immediatelly issue an outright apology to playtec. (ie: place 500$ large bet 200 times on european roulette and let us know the statistical results, i would love to have a copy of that log for my edification anyways)

Okay, so now you think that Playtech software is rigged so that the game is normal on small bets, but that you lose every large bet you make? But I thought you were just suspicious and weren't claiming that the software is rigged? Huh.

These "Oh my God Playtech is Suspicious/Rigged" threads do no one any good. At the very least, it makes you look like a paranoid loser. At the very best, it scares off players who might otherwise profit from casinos that use Playtech software and offer bonuses that make playing +EV.

Why would any online casino ever rig any game when players like you exist in the world? Why would they rig it in such a transparent, obvious fashion (e.g. any large bet over a certain size the player always loses)?

Playtech software isn't rigged. Take off the tin foil hat and face the fact that betting $500 a pop on roulette is the problem. If you're determined to piss your money away, play a game with a smaller HA. Better yet, just donate it to the Red Cross or some other charitable organization.

Believe it or not, I truly do feel sorry for you. In every sense of the word. But chunking stones at Playtech and crying isn't the solution to your problem.

 

[555YY]

congratulations, you won my "sore loser of a debate for the year" post, are you really that bitter that you need to result to personal insults on an anonymous board on the internet?

not only that, but you needed a page and a half to do it.

repeat this to yourself 3 times in a mirror: "i have self-esteem for myself and can face constructive criticisms..... i am not a girl"

as for my losses, it's not a big deal considering i built up 30K in 1.5 months from casinos and poker, i would be interested in hearing your winning ways and stories. i didn't document my wins here as they're not have no relations to the topic of the post, i only posted my losses b/c i don't want to sound like i'm ragging on playtech b/c of a large loss...

bring a clue next time, and not a paintball-gun

 

[The Dude]

Okay ScurvyDog and ezc3m - let's be mellow. There is no need for any animosity and sarcasm here. ezc3m brought up some valid points (screenshots), and they deserve acknowledgement. So what? he bets a lot. You don't know what his bank roll is, or personal situation, so there's no need to start referring someone to GA.

Time for a chill pill.

 

[vgyhnji]

ezc3m

Sh one t happens - This happened to me earlier today at InterCasino.

Game: Blackjack
Starting at [2005/01/13 12:04:16] and lasting for 0:02:11
Start balance: 102.79

Hand # 1
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 100.79 GBP
Hand # 2
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 98.79 GBP
Hand # 3
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 96.79 GBP
Hand # 4
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 94.79 GBP
Hand # 5
Your bet was: 2 GBP
Your response: DOUBLE DOWN
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 90.79 GBP
Hand # 6
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 88.79 GBP
Hand # 7
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 86.79 GBP
Hand # 8
Your bet was: 2 GBP
Your cards: 10 Clubs, Ace Hearts (BLACKJACK)
The result was: You won 3.00 GBP
Your new balance: 89.79 GBP

At this point the casino locked up so a few minutes later I re-entered and it carried on again..

Starting at [2005/01/13 12:07:28] and lasting for 1:59:23
Start balance: 89.79

Hand # 1
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 87.79 GBP
Hand # 2
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 85.79 GBP
Hand # 3
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 83.79 GBP
Hand # 4
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 81.79 GBP
Hand # 5
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 79.79 GBP
Hand # 6
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: push
Your new balance: 79.79 GBP
Hand # 7
Your bet was: 2 GBP
The result was: dealer won
Your new balance: 77.79 GBP
Hand # 8
Your bet was: 2 GBP
Your response: DOUBLE DOWN
The result was: You won 4.00 GBP
Your new balance: 81.79 GBP

So from a cold start I lost 7 hands before my first win, then a further six. Sure , if I had been staking at 500 per hand I'd be well miffed and venting my frustration at Inter/Wagerlogic I guess. However this set of results could have come anywhere in my sessions with Inter as a whole. It happened to me with minimum stakes, no different to you with higher stakes and on another software.

Entire session results as follows:

Total hands with a result (ie:excl pushes) = 564
Won = 278 = 49.29%
Lost = 286 = 50.71%
Doubles & Splits won 41 from 69 = 59.42%
Longest consecutive wins = 8
Longest consecutive losses = 9

Overall a 'fair' game.

 

[paul02085]

"I know someone posted a while back, I think at WOL, that he played the same number 1000 times at double-zero roulette and it only hit 6 times. Odds of this or fewer 1 in 563,175. Can't remember the software though. Maybe someone else can."


Clayman, it was Lasseter:

"Lasseter's is one of the casino's i have banned from my playing list.
Lost 4.000 $ at roulette with 5$ bet on one and the same number. I made about 1.000 spins and had 6 hits with my number."

 

[mitch]

ezc3m

I posted this betting session on another thread.


My longest losing streak was 17.

However, here is the most freakish session of blackjack I ever played.

Session Bets W P L

3 - 13 11 - -
45 - 61 - - 16 ( during an overall run of W1 P1 L 22 )
83 - 89 7 - -
90 - 98 - - 9
115 - 127 - 1 12
128 - 135 8 - -
151 - 163 13 - -
165 - 170 6 - -
178 - 191 1 1 12
219 - 228 1 1 8
240 - 255 - 3 13
260 - 276 2 1 14
284 - 296 13 - -
314 - 320 7 - -
324 - 330 - - 7
371 - 378 - - 8
382 - 391 10 - -
454 - 462 1 - 8
469 - 483 - 1 14
492 - 500 9 - -
515 - 526 11 1 -
537 - 544 8 - -
572 - 582 - 2 9
583 - 591 9 - -

Is that freaky or what? Look how close these streaks, are a number actually connect!

I did end up 20 units overall assuming flat bets.

This session was at Crockfords so I have little doubt the software is fair but these streaks could make you believe in the 'dark side'

A lot of these streaks far exceed the runs you experienced but if you place enough bets you are going to see them eventually.

Make no mistake if the software produced results like this all the time a positive progression system player would take the casino down hard. A negative progression system player on the other hand would be ruined.

Casinos don't need to risk players locking on to their 'patterns', they make money on every dollar bet. It's called the house edge with good reason. Thats why they can afford to give money away on bonuses.

Internet casinos transfer money away from 'true' gamblers to themselves and to bonus hunters and thats the deal I'm afraid.

Mitch

 

[Clayman]

Clayman, it was Lasseter:
"Lasseter's is one of the casino's i have banned from my playing list.
Lost 4.000 $ at roulette with 5$ bet on one and the same number. I made about 1.000 spins and had 6 hits with my number."

Thanks Paul.
If true, what a horrible run. Sure makes one wonder though. Lasseter's wouldn't be the first suspect as regulated as they are.
Roulette is too weird for me which explains why my wife loves it. I was with her when she once picked the red/black bet correctly 9 times in a row in Detroit.
Set a very bad example since now she thinks it's an ATM machine.

 

[vgyhnji]

Set a very bad example since now she thinks it's an ATM machine.



Clayman, - I split my sides when I read this - just like my wife, are they related?

 

[Freudian]

ezc3m - I am not going to moralize about your gambling. It isn't very productive on the internet. However, I am going to give you some advice. Find a real B&M casino. They love guys who like to bet big and I think you will enjoy it more (mostly because you eliminate the nagging feeling that everything may not be kosher) and I think you have more control over it since it takes some effort to go there And the feeling of being at a real roulette table beats sitting in front of a computer monitor.

 

[chalupa]

However, I am going to give you some advice. Find a real B&M casino.

I heartily concur. When I see some of the stakes that some routinely gamble online it blows my mind (I recall a BJ screenshot where a guy had something like $10K bet at once on multiple hands).

If you are willing to give a real casino this kind of action you will be treated like a king -- win or lose. Which is a lot better than just sitting there looking at a screen with a sick feeling in your stomach.

Good luck.