- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
Since the Delano account is still locked I guess they don't want to pay either? They could have done last week if they really wanted to.RTG_MMcMain said:
Last edited by a moderator:
RealTime Gaming and Caribbean 21
- Thread starter RTG_MMcMain
- Start date
-
- Tags
- realtime gaming
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2001
- Location
- London
LemmeSeeHere said:
Great point I must say.... Good thinking Batman.
As real as Microgaming have paid out more than that I believe regard errant licensees..
Not for you lemmesehere to argue against but instead a question, rhetorical as it may be, for RTG to answer themselves.
When regulation comes and it will come, you just don't wanna be RTG playing this lot down to the lordy folk who will be handing out licenses for big bucks.
If the UK drop the 40% tax the American firms will open casino's here and RTG may just be taboo by then. You know and i know they want to sell the software to the highest bidder 1 day and this is gonna play out all wrong for RTG then.
Mark my silly words lol.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Location
- Atlanta, GA
RTG_MMcMain said:
cipher said:
This question seems to be rhetorical or possibly derogatory, but I will answer it anyway in case it is sincere.
Since we already knew the technical criteria for disabling the account we saved our licensees the trouble of having to go through those steps themselves. The same is true for re-enabling the accounts.
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
RTG_MMcMain said:
In one word, does that mean that you actually tried to do something to assist the C-U-S-T-O-M-E-R.
YES or NO Mr. McMain. And if the answer is YES then why do the accounts remain closed?
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2004
- Location
- In a large woman's cleavage
cipher said:
I'm going to jump in here just 'cause I can.
I'm fairly certain after reading all the LENGTHY threads on this subject that RTG *is* servicing their customers, namely the casinos themselves. From my understanding the hierarchy works as such: Software developer -->Casino -->Player
By that logic the player is the customer of the casino and in turn the casino is a customer of RTG (or whatever SD).
Please correct me if I'm wrong. I'm not trying to be contrary here, just speaking my mind.
Clearly in these threads and by the statements of a senior executive in the company RTG has been factually established as being in direct and significant business relationship with Hampton, Delano and for that matter all the other casinos we are concerned with here - in other words, the ones that still owe the player money. The Montana red herring notwithstanding.
One would hope that this being the case Michael Staw and his team would be in a position and strongly motivated to bring some pressure to bear in getting the injustices so apparent here resolved.
And Delano's situation is deteriorating by the day. After the current RTG posts (and again I think MikeM has been remarkably frank here other than the ducking and diving on the royalities question) there is no longer any reason to withold payment, yet they continue to do so. Public patience is likely to run out shortly, and they will find themselves in an increasingly downward PR spiral imo.
Hampton seems mesmerised by the world of trouble they have created for themselves, but they too need to remove digit and set this matter to rights.
One would hope that this being the case Michael Staw and his team would be in a position and strongly motivated to bring some pressure to bear in getting the injustices so apparent here resolved.
And Delano's situation is deteriorating by the day. After the current RTG posts (and again I think MikeM has been remarkably frank here other than the ducking and diving on the royalities question) there is no longer any reason to withold payment, yet they continue to do so. Public patience is likely to run out shortly, and they will find themselves in an increasingly downward PR spiral imo.
Hampton seems mesmerised by the world of trouble they have created for themselves, but they too need to remove digit and set this matter to rights.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
I guess this means Delano didn't pay the Pirate an installment yesterday?
I wonder what excuse they have - and as always I'm interested in RTG's opinion on whatever excuse Delano has. It's pretty clear to everyone that there are no LEGIT reasons for not paying the Pirate.
Looks like RTG has a lot of "education" to do
I wonder what excuse they have - and as always I'm interested in RTG's opinion on whatever excuse Delano has. It's pretty clear to everyone that there are no LEGIT reasons for not paying the Pirate.
Looks like RTG has a lot of "education" to do
linda7
Non-Gambler
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2002
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY
To RTG_M McMain:
Mike McMain:
While other posters may find your appearance here as a responsible action on RTG's part, I don't. In my opinion, your posts have accomplished NOTHING.
From what I can see, you really have no authority regarding your licencees. This is obvious simply because you do not have the power to enforce Hampton, or Delanos to do what is right. Personally, I think you are trying to take advantage of a situation, where a customer is getting screwed, yet, you want to appear as the "good guy" by declaring that Pof21 did not do anything wrong.
Continuing with this trend of thought, what did you hope to achieve by posting at all? You stated that you were going to have Pof21's accounts re-opened. Then, when questioned as to why Delanos account is still closed, you responded with "well, only the casino's that WANTED to open his account did re-open the account of Pof21". My concern is this. If you are UNABLE to extract noble operating procedures from your licenees, namely Delanos and Hampton, then what exactly are you capable of doing? Where is your concern for this player who won a truckload of money honestly? Is RTG going to accept this kind of behavior from their operative casinos? If so, then your coming to this forum was not only a waste of time, but a declaration that RTG does not care about its players. On this note, I strongly suggest that everyone BOYCOTT ALL RTG casinos. After all, one day it could be one of us who becomes the newly screwed player.
Mike McMain:
While other posters may find your appearance here as a responsible action on RTG's part, I don't. In my opinion, your posts have accomplished NOTHING.
From what I can see, you really have no authority regarding your licencees. This is obvious simply because you do not have the power to enforce Hampton, or Delanos to do what is right. Personally, I think you are trying to take advantage of a situation, where a customer is getting screwed, yet, you want to appear as the "good guy" by declaring that Pof21 did not do anything wrong.
Continuing with this trend of thought, what did you hope to achieve by posting at all? You stated that you were going to have Pof21's accounts re-opened. Then, when questioned as to why Delanos account is still closed, you responded with "well, only the casino's that WANTED to open his account did re-open the account of Pof21". My concern is this. If you are UNABLE to extract noble operating procedures from your licenees, namely Delanos and Hampton, then what exactly are you capable of doing? Where is your concern for this player who won a truckload of money honestly? Is RTG going to accept this kind of behavior from their operative casinos? If so, then your coming to this forum was not only a waste of time, but a declaration that RTG does not care about its players. On this note, I strongly suggest that everyone BOYCOTT ALL RTG casinos. After all, one day it could be one of us who becomes the newly screwed player.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2003
- Location
- Home, sweet home
Here you go, Linda. Very good and clear point here. I am agree with you at this one.
WHY most of RTG'S Casino have a lot problems or issue? Maybe it's RTG'S problem at first, the bad judgement, poor policy and NO support or descipline on their casino. Who knows??? It's all about MONEY, I think personally.
WHY most of RTG'S Casino have a lot problems or issue? Maybe it's RTG'S problem at first, the bad judgement, poor policy and NO support or descipline on their casino. Who knows??? It's all about MONEY, I think personally.
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
bewitch said:
Now that's what I call "bring forces to bear" LINDA7 and BEWITCH the tag team duo. Have a good one.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2003
- Location
- Home, sweet home
LOL~ Cipher. You have to explain to me. Can't find it at my dictionary. I guess Linda and I are bing too tough here? This whole thing is very crazy and hard to judge. But I think RTG is trying to "clean" themselves but they need to do more than this. There are NO support or any protection to their players. They will ban the palyer at all RTG casino under convienace if there is something wrong, but they will NOT re-open (not even help) after everything is clean. It will depend on the casino itself. How inconvienace this is to the player.
Even I think INetbet and Phonicien are good casinos and have a good reputation so far. But the other bad ones are bring them down a lot.... And it bring the fears and questions a lot of players...
Have a nice one to everyone.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
Mr. McMain - how come Delano doesn't pay? Ok - perhaps they don't want him as a player even with the new tablelimits - but that shouldn't prevent them from paying him. Right?
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2004
- Location
- Atlanta, GA
cipher said:
As someone has pointed out we differ in the use of the word "customer". To us that word means Licensee (our customer) to you that word means the player. I apologize for the confusion.
Our efforts to assist any player are made through the licensee on that licensee's behalf. We are taking steps to that effect every day for this particular player. I know this is another answer you just don't like, but I don't have any other way to say it than that. Maybe if I wasn't a geek it would be easier for me to do all this...
linda7 said:
I know there is very little appreciation for what I am trying to do here and I understand everyone's frustration. Your concern is for the player because you yourselves are players. You think that RealTime Gaming's concern is only for the licensee. That is wrong. We know that in order for our licensee's to be successful they have to manage their player relationships successfully. When these types of issues come up we work hard to resolve them. You might feel we are doing nothing but that is only because I cannot answer some of the questions you are asking. You think these answers are key to the solution but they really have nothing to do with the solution.
The best approach to solving a problem between two parties is to help them come to an understanding, not force one or the other to do something they feel is wrong.
linda7 said:
What makes you say that? Obviously we have the authority to determine if a license should be renewed or not. Our software will not function unless a valid license agreement is in place. We don't wave this as a big stick just like you wouldn't expect your boss to threaten you with being fired every time you had a disagreement. Who was it that coined the phrase "Cooler heads will prevail"?
You are all looking for easy answers to very complex questions. Both sides of this disagreement have made mistakes. Anyone reading through the threads can see that. You think that because you don't get a one word answer that we are doing nothing.
I posted my initial statement in an attempt to come to the player community with the definitive information we have. I didn't want to patronize you with conjecture, promises or verbal assurances. I wanted to state what we found, how we found it and what we were doing.
As new information comes to light, I will post here. Silence doesn't always equal avoidance.
I don't think there is much else I can say on this thread. I have already been pushed off-topic anyway and I don't want Casinomeister banning me because I didn't abide by the rules of the forum
.When I have more information on other topics, I will start threads along those lines. If any of you have other questions feel free to start a new thread and I will do the best I can to answer you.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
In case you missed my post right before yours:
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2003
Not too change the subject ......but, RTG software is not random. I detect and exploit patterns in 3 of the card games (including carribean stud). I have proven this beyond a doubt to myself and many friends. Pirate did not need a robot, he simply created a sound betting pattern based on the pattern of this so called "random" game (besides the fact, the man has balls of steel). I am so confident that RTG tri-card poker is anything other than random I would be literally willing to bet my life on it. Look at all the money pirate had into different RTG casinos. He knows what hes doing. RTG only wishes he had a robot.
GrandMaster
Dormant account
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Location
- UK
Are you willing to share your play logs so that they can be subjected to rigorous analysis?
linda7
Non-Gambler
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2002
- Location
- Brooklyn, NY
RTG....ugh!!!!!
Hi everyone:
I first must say hi to Bewitch and Cipher. You both are such good friends and always bring happiness to my life.
Perhaps, I have read Mike McCain's posts wrong, but did he not appear here and say that:
a. No bugs were found in the software on which Pof21 was playing;
b. There was no evidence of a "robot" being used;
c. The mouse mapping proved to be total nonsense.
Now, if I am right, would this not clear Pof21 of any wrongdoing? If so, is he not entitled to the money he won? McCain, gave some explanation about RTG making sure that his licensees have valid licenses. Is this where RTG's involvement in this issue ends? If so, then it is obvious that RTG ALLOWS their licensees to pay at their own discretion, as long as RTG get their Royaties of course. This being said, tell me why would anyone want to gamble with you? It is hard enough to win as it is....then you have to sweat and see if you are lucky enough to get paid. No one, in their right frame of mind, would take a shot with RTG.
I hope I am wrong, but I have an eerie feeling that Hampton is going to close their doors, along with Delanos. Then they do not have to pay and will simply re-open under another casino name. This is why RTG casinos are extremely volatile. If I am proved to be right McCain, and Hampton and Delanos do in fact close their doors, its your ASS thats on the line. The reason: YOU DID NOTHING TO PROTECT THIS PLAYER!!!!!!! Live with that.
Hi everyone:
I first must say hi to Bewitch and Cipher. You both are such good friends and always bring happiness to my life.
Perhaps, I have read Mike McCain's posts wrong, but did he not appear here and say that:
a. No bugs were found in the software on which Pof21 was playing;
b. There was no evidence of a "robot" being used;
c. The mouse mapping proved to be total nonsense.
Now, if I am right, would this not clear Pof21 of any wrongdoing? If so, is he not entitled to the money he won? McCain, gave some explanation about RTG making sure that his licensees have valid licenses. Is this where RTG's involvement in this issue ends? If so, then it is obvious that RTG ALLOWS their licensees to pay at their own discretion, as long as RTG get their Royaties of course. This being said, tell me why would anyone want to gamble with you? It is hard enough to win as it is....then you have to sweat and see if you are lucky enough to get paid. No one, in their right frame of mind, would take a shot with RTG.
I hope I am wrong, but I have an eerie feeling that Hampton is going to close their doors, along with Delanos. Then they do not have to pay and will simply re-open under another casino name. This is why RTG casinos are extremely volatile. If I am proved to be right McCain, and Hampton and Delanos do in fact close their doors, its your ASS thats on the line. The reason: YOU DID NOTHING TO PROTECT THIS PLAYER!!!!!!! Live with that.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2001
- Location
- Heaven
In this particular thread, regarding this particular issue, it most certainly equals avoidance. Let's be realistic here - we are not idiots nor are we blind.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2001
Linda - you're right about a), b) and c). When recording the Pirate Hampton had no reason what so ever to believe a robot was involved. Other than he had won of course.
And yes - you could be afraid that RTG will dump Hampton or Hampton will dump RTG. Hampton (and perhaps Delano) will end up like another Futurebet shithole. RTG will wash their hands and tell how sorry they are, but since it's and exlicensee there isn't really more they can do. So all the education was wasted
And yes - you could be afraid that RTG will dump Hampton or Hampton will dump RTG. Hampton (and perhaps Delano) will end up like another Futurebet shithole. RTG will wash their hands and tell how sorry they are, but since it's and exlicensee there isn't really more they can do. So all the education was wasted
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2000
Montana, SA is described in Angelciti's filings with the SEC.
Angelciti's SEC filings said:
aceinhole21
Dormant account
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2004
- Location
- Canada
RTG_MMcMain said:
Hey everyone, I think McMain has been very professional regarding this manner (no I am not shilling for RTG). Pirate finally shutup so he must have found a lawyer
. I read McMains comment to mean there is a chance Hamptons could lose their license over this. This would probably be the most appropriate resolution to this, although Pirate still remains empty handed . I think players should band together and push for Hampton's license to be revoked. this would also make RTG seem a LITTLE more responsible then they've been about their licensees (how many MG casinos go under or stiff players?) RTG has the worst rep as far as their licensees and maybe this is the kick they need to do something about it.There's nothing wrong with RTG pulling the carpet from under rogue licensees as long as they subsequently FOOT THE BILL for the licensees' debts - as Microgaming did with Goodfellas and OddsOn seem to be in the process of doing with 40+.
If Hampton folds and RTG does NOT honour its debts the RTG player-base is going to take an almighty hit - to the tune of more than 1.4 million dollars.
If Hampton folds and RTG does NOT honour its debts the RTG player-base is going to take an almighty hit - to the tune of more than 1.4 million dollars.
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
caruso said:
LESSON TO DELANO and HAMPTON CASINOS, THIS IS HOW IT'S DONE.
The largest online progressive jackpot recorded in Indonesian history was won by InterCasino.com (www.InterCasino.com) player 'Dicdinata', who won a 1,510,876,928 Indonesian Rupiahs ($178,802) MEGA-jackpot on progressive Multi-Player Caribbean Poker from his home in Jakarta.
"We have always had strong players from Asia," says an excited InterCasino.com casino manager Ryan Hartley, "I'm honored, but not surprised, that we have broken the record for paying the largest-ever jackpot in Indonesia. We have made a concerted effort to make InterCasino.com available to people from all over the globe, and I am happy that our efforts are being reflected in our winners," he continued.
Don't tell me that the PIRATE is on the loose in Indonesia.
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
cipher said:
Well according to the Casinomeister it doesn't look like the DELANO CASINO places a whole lot of stock in the opinions that have been offered by our Mr. McMain and/or Realtime Gaming for that matter. As they (DELANO CASINO) according to the Casinomeister are now refusing to pay the Pirate based upon Pirate's purported use of a robot. Which is literally translated as we (DELANO CASINO) have not got the money to pay Pirate so we are going to try to drag this out through litigation.
Caution, if you are any kind of a player at HAMPTON or DELANO casinos and you fall for the old payment plan routine from these clowns on any payout. You're definitley looking to get screwed without a kiss.
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
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
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
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2003
- Location
- The Boonies
mary said:
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
Dormant account
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Location
- UK
Urlaub=holiday in German.dominique said:
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.
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.
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):
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):
- Joined
- Jun 30, 1998
- Location
- Bierland
GrandMaster said:
Dominique is German
I think she meant the concept of the casino.
Bryan
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.
Pirate PM'd me with this:
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.
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.
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.
$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.
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:
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:
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.
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.
"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.
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.
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
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.
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.
caruso said:
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.
portia said:
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.
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2000
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?
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?
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
Right. online hug from Portia to Sirius.
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
Note to self
Don't ever get on the bad side of Portia. Good morning Sunshine.
Cipher
portia said:
Don't ever get on the bad side of Portia. Good morning Sunshine.
Cipher
hhcfreebie
Dormant account
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2003
- Location
- USA
sirius said:
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.cipher said:
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.
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2004
- Location
- England
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
oooooh can people please stop spelling lose as loose they are completely different things -
Sorry ,but its been bugging me for a while
cipher
Banned member - being a jerk
- Joined
- May 15, 2002
- Location
- Visalia, California
hhcfreebie said:
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.
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
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?
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?
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.
"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.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2002
- Location
- Willemstad
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
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
Similar threads
