RealTime Gaming and Caribbean 21

[portia]

Mr McMain :

Please inquire and post what is preventing RTG from issuing Pc21 his own play logs?

Is it Hamptons and Delano's that is preventing RTG from acting on Pc21's (reasonable) request?

Look forward to your usual forthright response

Portia

 

[dominique]

Montana, SA is described in Angelciti's filings with the SEC.

Hmmm, welcometourcasino, quepasacasino, these are connected to the nostalgia casinos.

And there is Urlaubcasino - has been an enigma to me so far.

Thank you Mary.

 

[GrandMaster]

And there is Urlaubcasino - has been an enigma to me so far.

Urlaub=holiday in German.

 

[sirius]

I'm amazed people are not seeing through this. RTG don't back up their own licensee Why do you think this is?

They don't even handle player disputes a lot of the time. They created safebet to start with which was a fake watchdog site casinos paid for (which is now gone). I've never heard of one player having his safebet dispute resolved in favour of the player. 'Fully Licensed and Insured' was a phrase on RTG casino sites. There is no insurance. They have a disputes website which now doesn't always respond to complainants.

It seems RTG is side tracking the issue here. The issue is their software is very possibly flawed and they can't admit it. I have asked Pirate a while ago to list the casinos and his deposits/winnings totals at each since he started playing Caribbean 21 in them. You could then calculate the overall probability of the results.

According to what's been put out so far, it impression is that Pirate has usually won at all these casinos. I told him he would have to release this information to show that his wins were within a reasonable probabilty and not trillions to one.

In CasinoMeister's last newsletter, the CasinoMeister mentions he thinks that something is up with all the wins so the Pirate obviously hasn't told him of many losses.

I noticed there is a long list at bet2gamble that has probably been posted here, of all his wins. He has played a very large number of RTG casinos. It gives no details of deposits/winnings totals.

 

[sirius]

Pirate claims to have lost $500,000 in 2003 (I was told just now in a PM and he told me he bet I wouldn't post it). His point was that RTG already checked into this but I am not sure RTG would admit to any flaw in the software.

Only the caribbean 21 gameplay is relevant and I would like to know the details I have already asked (below is a quote from a message to him):

Why don't you show everyone the amount of money you deposited and cashed out (including balances at the casino - locked or not) AT EACH CASINO since you started playing Caribbean21 at them.

 

[Casinomeister]

Urlaub=holiday in German.

Dominique is German

I think she meant the concept of the casino.

Bryan

 

[sirius]

I wrote this a couple of messages ago but I didn't mean 'wins' (see below). It was a list of RTG casinos he played at and most of them didn't give details of wins/losses (only that the accounts are locked). The list is a couple of pages back on this thread too.

I noticed there is a long list at bet2gamble that has probably been posted here, of all his wins. He has played a very large number of RTG casinos. It gives no details of deposits/winnings totals.

 

[sirius]

Pirate PM'd me with this:

OK One last time. This has already been done several times and each time the results have been within reason. But this is old news.

I don't think these results have been given. I know about Hamptons- and that the win was from a $1000 deposit. I also know about Delano Casino - that the $70k win was supposedly from a $400 deposit. This information about Delano was only given in the thread at my forum though, after I asked him. So from these two results only, it looks extremely unlikely to happen by chance, but the point is I haven't heard the rest of the story about the overall results at the other casinos.

We need to have these figures for each casino to find out whether the overall result is within reason.

 

[caruso]

Sirius, why do you keep harping on about the need to prove the "statistical reasonability" of the win? I don't see any casinos at which I've had statistically staggering losses (like Gambling Federation) offering to void my play and return my deposit. Why is it appropriate for the player to have to "prove" that his win is "statistically reasonable"? RTG have already stated that there is NOTHING untoward about the game - what the heck more is there to prove?

$500 - $5000 table; deposit 1K, wager $500 hands up to 3K (+4 units); wager 1K hands up to 10 K (+7 units); wager 5K hands up to 30K (+4 units). Get the limit upped to 10K and switch to 10K hands up to 1.3 mill (+127 units).

The above scenario equals 142 winning units.

I've won more than that at RTGs in the past. Maybe I should return the money to the casino now, since my win is "statistically unreasonable".

This is a very silly line to be taking.

 

[sirius]

The main point is RTG can't be trusted with this (you think they would admit to a flaw in their software?) and only RTG and the player have these results.

The win at Hampton isn't unreasonable but it is when combined with the Delano result. We need the other results too to back up the RTG claim that the software wasn't flawed.

To estimate conservatively the odds of whether his results are reasonable we need to at least know the wins : deposits ratio at each casino for the time period he was playing the caribbean 21 game there.

I told Pirate we need to know this and he agreed and said this:

ME: You have to know the results at each casino to find out whether the overall result is within reason.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes, you do. The vendor as well as myself have this data and this determination has already been made.

 

[sirius]

Approximate Ratios (see above):

Hamptons 1300:1
Delanos 175:1

This is just on the information given so far, which might not even be that accurate. Each of those ratios are fine on their own, just very lucky. What about the losses and wins at the other casinos? If those were the only two casinos he played this game at and the ratios are accurate for his play history in that game, then the probability is at least hundreds of thousands to one of winning like that and more accurately probably in the millions.

Together with the other results, which haven't been given, you can easily check whether the wins are possible, but at the moment we don't know. Most of the other ratios should be much lower if nothing went on but we don't have the information.

 

[caruso]

"The win at Hampton isn't unreasonable but it is when combined with the Delano result."

Huh????

The Delano result is much more "achieveable". Scenario:

Dep $400; wager $200 hands up to 1K (3 units); wager $500 hands up to 3K (4 units); wager 1K hands up to 10 K (7 units); wager 5K hands up to 70K (12 units).

That's a grand total of +22 units, without even going up to those famous 10K hands.

That's an overall grand total of +164 units, combining the above scenarios.

If you think winning 164 units (following my example) is "statistically unreasonable" you need to gain some experience of the software in question before making these ill-informed statements.

 

[portia]

Sirius , i must disagree with your conclusions.

Beware of getting in over your head by trying to prop up your arguments on your knowledge of the probability and statistics of gaming.

Other players have also experienced wins greater than 130 max bets in an evenings play at RTG - though not at near 10k max bet level.

You insist on the improbability of such wins, to point of making a coverup at RTG about a flaw in their SW. Seem to be an otherwise sensible bloke, who is grasping at straws. Why?

It may be that you have been infected with "gaming portalitus".

Although it usually attacks only marginalizd bonus hunters who have been embittered by missing out on the big wins of others. See others gains as evidence of a conspiracy against them. A persecution complex that isolates the poor bonus hunter from other gamblers and inevitably leads to the opening of a gaming portal. From which the victim can preach to the ignorant and wrap himself in the delusions of a self righteous know-it-all.

Have you ever lashed out at others in the past, accusing them of a conspiracy against you, when there have been large wins that you, for whatever reason, did not participate in?

Would you say that is highly improbable as well?

Indeed!

But i always find myself in agreement with something in your posts : The release of the players logs would be most instructive.

Will you join me in asking why they have not been released?

Who is preventing there being released?

And most telling - What would be the motive of someone not allowing their release.

 

[sirius]

"The win at Hampton isn't unreasonable but it is when combined with the Delano result."

Huh????

The Delano result is much more "achieveable". Scenario:

Dep $400; wager $200 hands up to 1K (3 units); wager $500 hands up to 3K (4 units); wager 1K hands up to 10 K (7 units); wager 5K hands up to 70K (12 units).

That's a grand total of +22 units, without even going up to those famous 10K hands.

That's an overall grand total of +164 units, combining the above scenarios.

If you think winning 164 units (following my example) is "statistically unreasonable" you need to gain some experience of the software in question before making these ill-informed statements.

That would be less than half a percent chance. The number of bet units isn't very relevant. I'm assuming unlimited bet sizes because I'm being conservative and just using the ratios to estimate the probabilty. It was probably much less likely than half a percent though, depending on how he played.

The Delano result is not spectacular but we need to know the total deposits (as far as I know $400 was the only deposit) and wins for each of the casinos to know whether his results overall were reasonable (I've given more details of what I mean before).

From just those two results, it is pushing the millions to one but when the other results are released we will know for sure whether it was reasonable or not. For now, we don't know and for some reason the player doesn't want to share the information.

 

[sirius]

Sirius , i must disagree with your conclusions.

Beware of getting in over your head by trying to prop up your arguments on your knowledge of the probability and statistics of gaming.

Other players have also experienced wins greater than 130 max bets in an evenings play at RTG - though not at near 10k max bet level.

You insist on the improbability of such wins, to point of making a coverup at RTG about a flaw in their SW. Seem to be an otherwise sensible bloke, who is grasping at straws. Why?

It may be that you have been infected with "gaming portalitus".

Although it usually attacks only marginalizd bonus hunters who have been embittered by missing out on the big wins of others. See others gains as evidence of a conspiracy against them. A persecution complex that isolates the poor bonus hunter from other gamblers and inevitably leads to the opening of a gaming portal. From which the victim can preach to the ignorant and wrap himself in the delusions of a self righteous know-it-all.

Have you ever lashed out at others in the past, accusing them of a conspiracy against you, when there have been large wins that you, for whatever reason, did not participate in?

Would you say that is highly improbable as well?

Indeed!

But i always find myself in agreement with something in your posts : The release of the players logs would be most instructive.

Will you join me in asking why they have not been released?

Who is preventing there being released?

And most telling - What would be the motive of someone not allowing their release.

The bet size and number of bets wasn't considered in the probability estimates (it would only make the probabilities worse because I just assumed unlimited bet sizes). We need to know the other results though if we are to know confidently that RTG don't have a flaw in their software that allowed the wins.

I'm not saying any particular result is unreasonable. Of course they weren't unreasonable but you must realise that if you get a 1 in 1000 result at one casino and get the same result at the very next, then that turns into a 1 in a million probabity. Very few people know whether the overall result is possible without exploiting a flaw in the software. RTG and the player do.

I don't think I'll comment much on the fatbonus.com reference! I got myself banned because I tried standing up for most of the board who were being mislead by a few of the 'founders'. I remember one thread on the famous casino-on-net roulette promo where they were basically saying the roulette was rigged and not to do the promotion just before the casino gave a away $4 million worth of bonuses in the promotion (RainMan should remember cos he won about 100k). The casino manager was very reasonable though with the winners and paid them even when they were obviously linked to other accounts.

 

[mary]

Phoenician now has C21, so I downloaded and am seeing how the game behaves for me.

In two hours of play using the Wizard's BS and a strict Martingale I've taken $1k to $5k. The $200 maximum bet limit is a problem I have that the Pirate didn't, so I'm not likely to get to $1.3million; I'll be happy if I can get over 130 units of $25.

I have the additional impediment that I won't have my account refreshed with players' club cashback.

Since it was the casino(s) claim that the win was impossbile, it's telling to me that they have not backed that up with math. Supposedly, they are the professionals in this area.

Sirius, Portia, I respect the contributions both of you have made. Can I ask you to pull back a bit and not get too personal with each other?

 

[portia]

Right. online hug from Portia to Sirius.

 

[cipher]

Note to self

Right. online hug from Portia to Sirius.

Don't ever get on the bad side of Portia. Good morning Sunshine.

Cipher

 

[caruso]

Nothing wrong in questioning the motivation behind a rather bizarre sideline currently being taken. It didn't seem at all personal, just pertinent and pithy (escuse excessive assonance).

 

[hhcfreebie]

I don't think these results have been given. I know about Hamptons- and that the win was from a $1000 deposit. I also know about Delano Casino - that the $70k win was supposedly from a $400 deposit. This information about Delano was only given in the thread at my forum though, after I asked him. So from these two results only, it looks extremely unlikely to happen by chance, but the point is I haven't heard the rest of the story about the overall results at the other casinos.

We need to have these figures for each casino to find out whether the overall result is within reason.

If there is no hose edge at all, or there is no table limit. The chance of turning 1400 into 1370k is about 1 in 979. With house edge and table limit in play, chance of winning so much is very unlikely.
I had my doubt at the beginning, then cipher posted (I hope he doesn't mind)

Breakaway paid $40,000.
Phoenician paid $20,000.
Prism paid $30,000. Not collected / played back
Virtual paid $30,000. $25,000 Not collected / played back
Delano paid $14,000 / $17,000 and then they stopped making payments.

Cipher

This player did loose a lot of money back to the casino. From his post, I can see a classic high roller who'd only boast his win and cover his loose. Only RTG and pirate's legal team would know how much he won and lost during his advanture. Those invisible loose would make his winning much more likely.
Finally, RTG come forward and stated their software is totally random and flawless.
When I add up all the facts, I see a normal gambler you see everyday in vegas that won big and got screwed by casinos, nothing else.

 

[lamornababe]

This player did loose a lot of money back to the casino



oooooh can people please stop spelling lose as loose they are completely different things -


Sorry ,but its been bugging me for a while

 

[cipher]

If there is no hose edge at all, or there is no table limit. The chance of turning 1400 into 1370k is about 1 in 979. With house edge and table limit in play, chance of winning so much is very unlikely.
I had my doubt at the beginning, then cipher posted (I hope he doesn't mind)

This player did loose a lot of money back to the casino. From his post, I can see a classic high roller who'd only boast his win and cover his loose. Only RTG and pirate's legal team would know how much he won and lost during his advanture. Those invisible loose would make his winning much more likely.
Finally, RTG come forward and stated their software is totally random and flawless.
When I add up all the facts, I see a normal gambler you see everyday in vegas that won big and got screwed by casinos, nothing else.

As everyone on this forum knows. One of the last posts (if not the last post) that Pirate made was made directly to REALTIME GAMING and for them (RTG) to release all of the log data files incident to Pirates play.

Since that time, additional requests have been made of REALTIME GAMING and they (RTG) have consistently refused to release that information.

This is not a difficult thing for REALTIME GAMING to do, as I've personally made requests for my own "log data files" directly to REALTIME GAMING and they (RTG investigations) had them to me in less than 48 hours.

 

[portia]

Am disappointed that Mr. McMain has not been able to respond to my question, earlier in the thread, about the what, who, and why of the failure to release the players logs.

Maybe he will get a minute to respond tomorrow?

As it stands the their silence and inactivity on this issue speaks volumes. There must be kernals of truth to be uncovered in those play logs.

Why have they not been released?

Who is preventing their release?

What is their motivation for not releasing them?

 

[kengam]

Sirius said:

"From just those two results, it is pushing the millions to one but when the other results are released we will know for sure whether it was reasonable or not. For now, we don't know and for some reason the player doesn't want to share the information"


keep in mind that the Pirate won 1.3 million dollars. The chance of that happening are supposed to be pushing "millions to one". When you first heard of this big win, weren't you thinking to yourself, "WOW, what are the odds of that? It must be astronomical." So to use your guestimates and say that it is highly unlikely seems to me to be the way it should be. It SHOULD and WOULD be highly unlikely to win 1.3 million playing 10k hands. Proving this means nothing.

 

[islandmaan]

A point of clarification

I think it is important for all to know that RTG business model is completly differnent then say Microgaming or Cryptologic and it is because of their business model this issue has come to be.

For example if this was a cryptologic casino the cash processing would be handled by Wagerlogic and only wagerlogic. The individual licensees cannot raise the wagering amounts (which was just one of the many mistakes by Hamptons). Secondly if the player is owed money or if the licensee goes out of business the player is covered because the licensee does not hold the cash but wager logic does. This is why these two software companies can take care of the players because they control the cash.

Regarding the royalties it goes to say that RTG generates the majority of their funds from these royalties. I would imagine in a situation like this where a big win takes place, RTG would not have any royalties deducted but would most likely not get any royalties from the licensee.

If the royalties are at 20% to the software company and this licensee pays the player it would be a hit of $260,000 in lost revenue to the software company, that is not a small amount.

A little off topic but it is important to know all the players who will be financially affected by this mess.

Brian