[Resolved] Casino Club - robot or no bot?

[Rusty]

From the Rep;

c. Of the 14 hr. long session, only that the last ~7 hrs. are the suspicious ones, where the player both refines his strategy and begins his [fraudulent] winning streak

Surely you mean where the "bot" refines its strategy?

Obviously such a bold statement means you will be able to point out exactly what this strategy was.
Would you please do so as it appears none of the forum members have this ability and it would help your case greatly.

If you fail to do so then the obvious conclusion would be that your game is beatable because it uses algorithms to manipulate results and the player/bot gained knowledge of this.

All the Casino's "evidence" so far that a bot was used can all be challenged and explained away very easily.

I think if there is no reason and no advantage for a bot to be used in this situation that surely suggests it is more unlikely a bot was used?
I see that as good circumstantial evidence and better than the contrary evidence supplied by the Casino thus far.
After all that is all we have to go on, the weight of circumstantial evidence, so I can not agree it is a moot point.

We have Two issues here and I think they both need definitive answers.

What evidence of bot play is sufficient for a Casino to confiscate winnings?

Why does the Casino consider its Blackjack game to be beatable?
(If the Casino does not believe its game is beatable then how can a winning strategy be employed?)

 

[Przecinek]

So again Przecinek, unless you've got something constructive to add you might be better off saying a lot less than you have been, because your track record so far is to be talking a lot of shit.

Well, If this is how you feel about it then I guess I'll say no more. I though I have something to say on the topic of "Bot or not bot" question. I think that OP is innocent, some people think he's not, other's haven't made up their minds yet.

My apologies if you feel/felt offended Max.

 

[Kodi]

Dear All,

Casino Club has absolutely no issue with players winning at our Casino, and as I have said previoussly, we pay out close to 100K/day in player winnings.
As a public company, we have no interest in negative pubblicity or in witholding player wins.

We are pleased when players choose Casino Club as their online venue and we infact celebrate thier winnings not only by executing immediate payouts (within 24 hrs, and one fo the fastest online), but also by rewarding our big winners with gifts and the like.

Our only issue is with fraudulent players and, in our eyes, this case is a clear example.
I understand that most of the participants of this thread disagree, and it is their (your) prerogative, however we are certain of our conclusion, which in this case is final.

Can You tell me how You are dealing with players accused of bot usage? I give You example:

Player X sign up for you casino, he made 4 session...
1. he deposited 100 and get bonus which he play and lost
2. he deposit 200, no bonus, he lose it all
3. he deposit 400 and get bonus, and he used a BOT now. He lose 50 from his own money and then withdraw
4. one month later he deposit 200 get bonus and he won 10'000 He dont use bot now.

What you do now?

I know story that is almost same as my example, and CC void winnings, close account and dont even give deposits back. IMHO - its unfair and breaks CC terms and conditions!

 

[LaHutti]

Dear All,

Casino Club has absolutely no issue with players winning at our Casino, and as I have said previoussly, we pay out close to 100K/day in player winnings.
As a public company, we have no interest in negative pubblicity or in witholding player wins.

We are pleased when players choose Casino Club as their online venue and we infact celebrate thier winnings not only by executing immediate payouts (within 24 hrs, and one fo the fastest online), but also by rewarding our big winners with gifts and the like.

Our only issue is with fraudulent players and, in our eyes, this case is a clear example.
I understand that most of the participants of this thread disagree, and it is their (your) prerogative, however we are certain of our conclusion, which in this case is final.

Apparently it is not as clear to the majority of players, as it is to you (the casino). Now since it's so clear to you, why on earth don't you (the casino) come out, and tell the players, of whom at least some are visitors to your establishment, what excactly makes it so clear to you. Apparently there must be some differency in the way you see this, and the way the players (your costumers fer gods sake) see it. We can only base our views on what we've seen presented, and as it has been made more than clear by numerous players, we just don't see it !
I fear that in not providing the, to you, so clear evidence, a lot of players will make the decision not to visit your casino again, if they know their winnings could "clearly" be confiscated at your will...and in this case that could be just as "final" as your decision to confiscate this players winnings.

 

[steinhaug]

Why you keep analyzing such logs with your eyes I do not understand, I hope you use analyzing software or atleast write your own "bots" to do so.

regarding the breaks, I just pulled down the data from the other site - the complete data. And here is all breaks >= 2min.

Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -1 11.11.2008 16:46 95.5 / 94.5 
Break, 10 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -10 11.11.2008 16:56 100 / 90 
Break, 6 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -25 11.11.2008 17:18 140 / 115 
Break, 6 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -5 11.11.2008 17:40 195 / 190 
Break, 18 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -10 11.11.2008 18:12 340.5 / 330.5 
Break, 9 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -5 11.11.2008 18:48 445 / 440 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -5 11.11.2008 19:20 160 / 155 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -5 11.11.2008 19:47 345 / 340 
Break, 82 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -15 11.11.2008 20:17 485 / 470 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -20 11.11.2008 21:49 542.5 / 522.5 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -5 11.11.2008 21:56 605 / 600 
Break, 3 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -5 11.11.2008 22:11 725 / 720 
Break, 4 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -10 11.11.2008 22:33 890 / 880 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -10 11.11.2008 23:19 1510 / 1500 
Break, 22 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -100 11.12.2008 00:34 4000 / 3900 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -100 11.12.2008 02:12 4612.5 / 4512.5 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -100 11.12.2008 03:36 5127.5 / 5027.5 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -37,5 11.12.2008 04:07 7002.5 / 6965 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -25 11.12.2008 04:22 8165 / 8140 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 05:48 6155 / 5655 
Break, 2 min, Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:10 9750 / 9250

Simple logic applied previous posted script to achieve above stats:

  $_b1 = explode('.',$t[2]);
  $_b2 = explode(':',$t[3]);
  $this_hand_drawn = mktime ($_b2[0], $_b2[1] , 0, $_b1[0], $_b1[1], $_b1[2]);
  if($n[0] != 'WIN'){
    $_b1 = explode('.',$n[2]);
    $_b2 = explode(':',$n[3]);
  } else {
    $next2 = $lines[$i+2];
    $next2 = str_replace('Blackjack BJ_WIN1','WIN',$next2);
    $next2 = str_replace('Blackjack BJ BET1','BET',$next2);
    $next2 = trim($next2);
    $n2 = explode(' ',$next2);
    $_b1 = explode('.',$n2[2]);
    $_b2 = explode(':',$n2[3]);
  }
  $next_hand_drawn = mktime ($_b2[0], $_b2[1] , 0, $_b1[0], $_b1[1], $_b1[2]);
  if( ($next_hand_drawn - $this_hand_drawn) > 60){
    echo 'Break, ' . (int) (($next_hand_drawn - $this_hand_drawn)/60) . ' min, ' . $lines[$i] . "<br>\n";
  }

I like transparency in all forms of business, even if the world is corrupt in most ways!

 

[steinhaug]

Another one I compiled here, picking out all the different betsized used within each hour from start to end. Note that there are some uinregular betsizes, like $1250 - however I explain theese at the bottom.

Logic capplied PHP scrip:

  // Collect the data
  $hour_pointer = $_b1[2] . '-' . $_b1[1] . '-' . $_b1[0] . ':' . $_b2[0];
  $bet_variance[$hour_pointer][($t[1] * -1)]++;

  // Dump the data in forum format
        foreach($bet_variance AS $hour=>$data){
          echo '[b]' . $hour . '[/b]<br>';
          ksort($data);
          foreach($data AS $size=>$count){
            echo '...$' . $size . ': ' . $count . ' bets' . '<br>';
          }
        }

The results:

[b]2008-11-11:16[/b]
...$1: 46 bets
...$2: 4 bets
...$3: 4 bets
...$4: 3 bets
...$5: 2 bets
...$8: 1 bets
...$10: 2 bets
...$15: 2 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 64 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-11-11:17[/b]
...$1: 63 bets
...$2: 16 bets
...$3: 15 bets
...$4: 5 bets
...$5: 56 bets
...$6: 1 bets
...$10: 12 bets
...$15: 1 bets
...$25: 4 bets
...$30: 1 bets
...$50: 1 bets
...$75: 5 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 180 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-11-11:18[/b]
...$1: 20 bets
...$2: 1 bets
...$3: 6 bets
...$4: 1 bets
...$5: 86 bets
...$10: 10 bets
...$15: 4 bets
...$20: 1 bets
...$25: 4 bets
...$30: 2 bets
...$75: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 136 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-11-11:19[/b]
...$1: 16 bets
...$2: 4 bets
...$3: 2 bets
...$4: 1 bets
...$5: 138 bets
...$10: 24 bets
...$15: 8 bets
...$20: 9 bets
...$25: 18 bets
...$30: 4 bets
...$35: 3 bets
...$45: 1 bets
...$50: 9 bets
...$75: 7 bets
...$100: 3 bets
...$150: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 248 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-11-11:20[/b]
...$1: 4 bets
...$2: 4 bets
...$3: 1 bets
...$5: 44 bets
...$10: 9 bets
...$15: 4 bets
...$25: 2 bets
...$30: 2 bets
...$50: 4 bets
...$100: 5 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 79 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-11-11:21[/b]
...$5: 44 bets
...$10: 7 bets
...$15: 4 bets
...$20: 3 bets
...$25: 2 bets
...$30: 2 bets
...$35: 1 bets
...$40: 1 bets
...$75: 3 bets
...$100: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 68 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-11-11:22[/b]
...$5: 170 bets
...$10: 51 bets
...$15: 17 bets
...$20: 9 bets
...$25: 11 bets
...$30: 3 bets
...$35: 1 bets
...$40: 1 bets
...$50: 2 bets
...$55: 1 bets
...$60: 1 bets
...$70: 1 bets
...$75: 6 bets
...$100: 1 bets
...$225: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 276 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-11-11:23[/b]
...$1: 4 bets
...$3: 2 bets
...$4: 1 bets
...$5: 127 bets
...$10: 51 bets
...$15: 30 bets
...$20: 9 bets
...$25: 9 bets
...$30: 3 bets
...$40: 2 bets
...$45: 2 bets
...$50: 6 bets
...$55: 2 bets
...$60: 1 bets
...$75: 5 bets
...$100: 27 bets
...$125: 2 bets
...$200: 1 bets
...$625: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 285 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-12-11:00[/b]
...$5: 50 bets
...$10: 16 bets
...$15: 18 bets
...$20: 2 bets
...$25: 6 bets
...$30: 2 bets
...$35: 2 bets
...$40: 3 bets
...$50: 4 bets
...$75: 6 bets
...$100: 59 bets
...$150: 5 bets
...$200: 3 bets
...$225: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 177 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-12-11:01[/b]
...$5: 13 bets
...$10: 4 bets
...$15: 10 bets
...$25: 31 bets
...$30: 2 bets
...$35: 2 bets
...$50: 16 bets
...$55: 1 bets
...$60: 1 bets
...$75: 5 bets
...$100: 81 bets
...$150: 1 bets
...$200: 11 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 178 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-12-11:02[/b]
...$5: 6 bets
...$10: 1 bets
...$25: 56 bets
...$50: 8 bets
...$75: 6 bets
...$100: 160 bets
...$150: 8 bets
...$200: 14 bets
...$250: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 260 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-12-11:03[/b]
...$25: 9 bets
...$50: 5 bets
...$75: 3 bets
...$100: 232 bets
...$150: 9 bets
...$200: 35 bets
...$250: 1 bets
...$300: 1 bets
...$375: 1 bets
...$500: 6 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 302 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-12-11:04[/b]
...$5: 1 bets
...$10: 1 bets
...$15: 1 bets
...$25: 58 bets
...$50: 22 bets
...$60: 1 bets
...$75: 6 bets
...$100: 36 bets
...$150: 6 bets
...$200: 7 bets
...$250: 2 bets
...$300: 8 bets
...$375: 4 bets
...$450: 1 bets
...$500: 72 bets
...$750: 3 bets
...$800: 2 bets
...$900: 1 bets
...$1000: 11 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 243 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-12-11:05[/b]
...$5: 1 bets
...$25: 7 bets
...$50: 4 bets
...$75: 2 bets
...$100: 41 bets
...$150: 1 bets
...$200: 9 bets
...$300: 8 bets
...$400: 1 bets
...$500: 187 bets
...$750: 6 bets
...$1000: 26 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 293 bets
...= = = = = = =
[b]2008-12-11:06[/b]
...$25: 8 bets
...$50: 8 bets
...$75: 4 bets
...$100: 9 bets
...$150: 2 bets
...$200: 1 bets
...$250: 2 bets
...$300: 1 bets
...$400: 1 bets
...$500: 179 bets
...$750: 7 bets
...$1000: 17 bets
...$1250: 1 bets
...- - - - - - -
...Total: 240 bets
...= = = = = = =

The $1250 clearly stand out from the full data, I would only guess this is spiltting and maby insuring a dealer BJ? The $1250 data is from this part of the data:

Blackjack BJ_WIN1 1250 11.12.2008 06:35 5800 / 7050
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:35 6300 / 5800
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:35 6800 / 6300
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:34 7300 / 6800
Blackjack BJ_WIN1 2000 11.12.2008 06:34 5300 / 7300
[B]Blackjack BJ BET1 -1250 11.12.2008 06:34 6550 / 5300[/B]
Blackjack BJ_WIN1 1000 11.12.2008 06:34 5550 / 6550
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:34 6050 / 5550
Blackjack BJ_WIN1 1250 11.12.2008 06:34 4800 / 6050
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:34 5300 / 4800
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:33 5800 / 5300

 

[tofu23]

From the Rep;

c. Of the 14 hr. long session, only that the last ~7 hrs. are the suspicious ones, where the player both refines his strategy and begins his [fraudulent] winning streak

Surely you mean where the "bot" refines its strategy?



Why does the Casino consider its Blackjack game to be beatable?
(If the Casino does not believe its game is beatable then how can a winning strategy be employed?)

You see CM himself renamed this thread "robot or no bot" and has proceeded under the impression that the matter is reduced to this simple equation of whether a 'bot' was used - yea or nay.

But now Rusty is starting to dig in under the 'bot play' pretense. As quoted above, 7 hours of bj play does not make a 'bot' player. But a 'refined strategy' and a 'winning streak' does doth make a 'bot' player according to our Casino Club friends.

And knowing the mathematics of the game such 'winning streak' must be fraudulent for one reason, and one reason only. The BM sw is non-random.

And Casino Club are pissed that their non-random game has been exploited - and have the utter gall to point a fraudulent accusing finger at the OP.

And no matter how many times one pleads Casino Club to unequivocally state their 'fraudulent case', they are never likely to 'fess up to a non-random game as the basis to their spurious claims.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

I AM BOT, J/K!!

Or a liar as I have been told time and time again!!! Below are 2-time and transaction logs excerpts below. (Can email the entire CSV if it possibly helps a la a over time just about anything and everything can and will occur assuming a fair game in gaming specific situations)

A less than $1000 deposit, 300 or so hands later I do my best to bust out with my usual high risk of ruin. Doesn't happen (this time,lol).

Over the next 14 consectutive days, 48,000 hands were played , $48,000,000.00 plus wagered!!.......... Hours played???, Too many but the math in my case is just a statistic as Mr. Twain reminds me/us!!

I was 86'ed from the Venetian via false accussations after a $30,000,000.00 handle and being .49% above (my favor) the casinos theoretical expectation. Hence, I was compelled to take legal action as a matter of principle or better said a violation of one's constitutional and civil rights. An absurd concept!!

The above said, I as well as most members are not privy to the entire PAB facts,etc. We, ususually , are not whatever the reasons including but not limited to player privacy, legal, and other reasons/issues. Yes, iirc, it also has been said especially in all these fraud per se issues that the PAB process would not work without CM et al, the player advocates/casino watchdogs respectfully, protecting the security of the casinos. (Reps. circumvent issues via the same reason)..............A double edged sword or paradox. Moreover, it may be this lack of transparency (whether nature of the beast ,lol, or not) that is compelling some of the issues in this thread.

 

[maxd]

My apologies if you feel/felt offended Max.

:steam ON:

I don't "feel" offended, I am offended, for the reasons cited above. You were trying to shoot holes in Casinomeister as a site and as my employer because of what you deemed to be ... what, an imperfect offering of FREE dispute resolution services?

Such attacks are unfounded, uncalled-for and unwelcome. You were just taking potshots because you think you can and that's what has me steamed.

You want the details? See my previous post.

And before you go off on the "oh, sorry I can't question your decisions" snit I'll remind you that it's not what you question, it's how you "question" it. Saying we might as well shut down the PABs, and that "we all remember" my Lucky Ace screw-up as if that's the only other case I've worked on this year is idiocy and bullshit, as previously stated.

Ask the players whose monies have been recovered, all $350,000-plus of it, if they think we should kill the PABs. Ask them how well they "remember" the Lucky Ace thing. It's perspective you're missing here buddy, and that's what I'm offering you a slice of.

Trolls crap on the linoleum because it creates a big fuss which they get off on. Participating members of this forum community contribute to the discussions because they get something out of it and they want to help others where they can. Which one are you?

If you're a troll then yes, "piss off" is probably great advice for you. If your serious about being a contributing member here then think 10 seconds before you post shit like you did earlier in this thread.

:steam OFF:

 

[steinhaug]

Attached you find the complete PHP script and complete playlog for the player. I suspect some of you would like this.

If you don't have PHP installed locally, you could easily upload the script and TXT file to your webhotell and run the script in your browser.

Enjoy.

 

[Westland Bowl]

There is no such court and such speculation is not really relevant to the issue. We're talking about how it's done on a day-to-day basis in the real world. And in the real world play pattern analysis is used every day to detect bot and cheat system play.

That may not be to everyone's taste but it is reality.

Furthermore in most bot use cases there would be no tampering with the software, that's the whole point of bots! They're just playing the game as it is instead of the player playing. No tampering, hacking, etc involved.

If we want regulation of the online gambling community, there will be a court for actions like this.

So if there is no tampering, hacking, etc. of the casino's software, then there is no tampering of the Random Number Generator (RNG)! Why would the casinos act like they got a friggin' broomstick up their ass if the RNG is not manipulated, bot or no bot??? It shouldn't matter to the RNG or casino if their software and RNG is not compromised!! To me, the bot accusation is a Strawman built up to point to and knock down in order to deny winnings.

(By the way, Maxd, I'm not yelling at you in the above paragraph! Just thinking out loudly and publicly! : ))

 

[The Dude]

Okay,

To begin - I want to thank everyone who is participating in a positive way in this thread. There is a hell of a lot of valuable information here - and volatile as it may be - I really appreciate those who have been level headed about this and maintained their mellowness.

I have been pounding my brain cells on this and taking a myriad things into account - some of which is not privy to most of the forum members. Using this information, I concluded that the original findings of the casino were spot on.

I am still looking into this, and have engaged a few third parties to assist. And this may take a couple of days since it's Thanksgiving in the States and some people may not be readily available.

But regardless, what I have been gathering so far is changing my outlook on things - I believe I may have been reading the data wrong, which changes things somewhat. To be fair and honest, I'll have to admit that I am not convinced a bot was used. So I get a little crow instead of turkey this Thanksgiving - well that's just the way it is sometimes. But I hope you realize that Max and I will strive to do the right thing - and that's what we've been doing from the git go. And it's those members who contribute their constructive criticisms and analysis who can take the credit for bringing these things to light. Thanks again. This is what makes this community extremely valuable to the online gaming community. It's not just me, Max, Spear, and Simmo that bring value to this forum, it's you.

The bottom line is that in this case, I am unsure whether or not the casino has analysed the data correctly (I know I didn't). At this time I'm hoping that they will reopen this and take a fresh look - perhaps engaging the assistance of a third party. Fair is fair - I don't think this was done deliberately, and I understand that there are a number of circumstances that could contribute to the initial impression of a bot being used.

Again, give this a few days to be ironed out. And be cool about it.

 

[The Dude]

I should add "kimss, you're a star."

 

[maxd]

So if there is no tampering, hacking, etc. of the casino's software, then there is no tampering of the Random Number Generator (RNG)!

That's right, using a bot usually entails zero software tampering.

The reason the casinos don't like bots is -- if I read the party line correctly -- because they're offering games to humans not to programs.

Another way to look at it is that humans make more mistakes (supposedly) than 'bots and ... well, they lose more money and faster because they don't follow perfect strategy, etc etc.

Advantage players can use bots to maximize their chances in low margin games like BJ, especially if there are bonuses involved which effectively tilt the margin more toward the player.

Bottom line though is that if the casino doesn't like bots then the casino doesn't like bots. It's their choice and if a player uses one anyway -- not saying that about any particular player just players in general -- then their winnings are rightly forfeit if that's what's spelled out in the T&Cs.

That's really what's at the heart of this particular issue: the question is "did the player use a bot or no?" If no, then we've been barking up the wrong tree and ... as B said, a little crow for Thanksgiving this year. If yes, the player was botting, then their ass is grass because it's strictly forbidden in the T&Cs.

 

[Jufo]

The reason the casinos don't like bots is -- if I read the party line correctly -- because they're offering games to humans not to programs.

Another way to look at it is that humans make more mistakes (supposedly) than 'bots and ... well, they lose more money and faster because they don't follow perfect strategy, etc etc.

Tofu23 made a good point about "Responsible gambling". Almost all casinos encourage players to gamble responsibly, and bots are the prime example of responsible gambling. So isn't banning bots in fact saying: We don't actually want you to gamble responsibly, so that we get more.

 

[steinhaug]

I should add "kimss, you're a star."

:notworthy Thanks! I will meet you in London next january, I will take the trip and share some beers. After all - after my Red Flush win I have the money too,

After getting the hang of this data I quickly moved from my initial over-the-top post to a more "neutral" observer since my reaction was indeed pre-mature. Compiling data and using different visualization-models quickly shares new light on most matters. Looking at the lifetimedata of the user, accumulating some statistical footprints from the sessions looking at hands pr hour, agressiveness during time, day of week whatever. The more data the more possibilities to do statistical diggs and comparisons.

Using a day or two, one could easily create a stat-analyzer which creates graphs and curves in all kinds of views and dimensions, and maby by luck one visualization-model stands out as an obvious detection scheme. Problem is - publicicing such a footprint/trend/graph would be foolish ironically, since then a bot - if existing that is - could easily be tweaked to avoid such a detectable footprint. I know bezier curves usually are fun to play with!

Then again, what are stats for really... Looking at stats, the safest way to drive is under the influence of alcohol (statistically you don't crash as often!).

So what does it all mean... I'll leave it to the professionals to solve this one!

 

[Westland Bowl]

That's right, using a bot usually entails zero software tampering.

The reason the casinos don't like bots is -- if I read the party line correctly -- because they're offering games to humans not to programs.

Another way to look at it is that humans make more mistakes (supposedly) than 'bots and ... well, they lose more money and faster because they don't follow perfect strategy, etc etc.

Ohh, ok. I understand that viewpoint now. Yes, human error is an advantage to the casino and botting eliminates that. I kinda thought that normal random blackjack card drawing gets to the same end result (player loses money) in any case, but I guess human error gets there faster.

Advantage players can use bots to maximize their chances in low margin games like BJ, especially if there are bonuses involved which effectively tilt the margin more toward the player.

Ah, ok. I don't bonus hunt so I didn't understand the thinking of a bonus player.

Bottom line though is that if the casino doesn't like bots then the casino doesn't like bots. It's their choice and if a player uses one anyway -- not saying that about any particular player just players in general -- then their winnings are rightly forfeit if that's what's spelled out in the T&Cs.

And that I can agree with. Certainly casinos have their right to ban bots and the player using bots would be in violation of the terms.

That's really what's at the heart of this particular issue: the question is "did the player use a bot or no?" If no, then we've been barking up the wrong tree and ... as B said, a little crow for Thanksgiving this year. If yes, the player was botting, then their ass is grass because it's strictly forbidden in the T&Cs.

Right on. Thanks for clearing up for me (and hopefully others) the issues.

Can you determine bot play from player bet sizing aka pattern analysis?....well, I don't know. Going from bad basic strategy to perfect basic strategy?....then I think yes, bot play is likely. Playing 20+ hands a minute for hours?.....yes, I think bot play is likely.

Interesting thread! Thanks, Maxd

 

[spearmaster]

Can you determine bot play from player bet sizing aka pattern analysis?....well, I don't know. Going from bad basic strategy to perfect basic strategy?....then I think yes, bot play is likely. Playing 20+ hands a minute for hours?.....yes, I think bot play is likely.

Bet sizing would not in itself indicate a bot - it would, however, most likely indicate a method of play (in other words, a system).

Going from bad BS to perfect BS also would not indicate a bot - sometimes people "feel" certain cards coming and throw the strategy out the door... and when that doesn't work, go right back to playing perfect BS. Although I personally try to play perfect BS, there are times - especially with a big bet on the table - when I do the stupid thing and play according to my gut feelings instead.

Playing 20+ hands a minute for hours MIGHT indicate bot play, but this is not certain- given a fast net connection, I've known VP players who can play at this speed (arguably a lot tougher to do than BJ).

The short answer is - only the poorest, most basic, simple bots will ever be caught - it does not take a rocket scientist to create a bot that will be completely unpredictable (apologies to Vortran).

And since it is just stupid to ban bot play anyhow, personally I feel that all operators should throw out their bot ban terms and conditions - unless they feel that their own software is NOT fair and can be beaten. However I do support (in general) a restriction on the use of bots when a bonus is in play, though personally I'd rather see all the casinos stop throwing out silly bonuses as well (now risking the wrath of others LOL).

 

[Zodiac]

Okay,

To begin - I want to thank everyone who is participating in a positive way in this thread. There is a hell of a lot of valuable information here - and volatile as it may be - I really appreciate those who have been level headed about this and maintained their mellowness.

I have been pounding my brain cells on this and taking a myriad things into account - some of which is not privy to most of the forum members. Using this information, I concluded that the original findings of the casino were spot on.

I am still looking into this, and have engaged a few third parties to assist. And this may take a couple of days since it's Thanksgiving in the States and some people may not be readily available.

But regardless, what I have been gathering so far is changing my outlook on things - I believe I may have been reading the data wrong, which changes things somewhat. To be fair and honest, I'll have to admit that I am not convinced a bot was used. So I get a little crow instead of turkey this Thanksgiving - well that's just the way it is sometimes. But I hope you realize that Max and I will strive to do the right thing - and that's what we've been doing from the git go. And it's those members who contribute their constructive criticisms and analysis who can take the credit for bringing these things to light. Thanks again. This is what makes this community extremely valuable to the online gaming community. It's not just me, Max, Spear, and Simmo that bring value to this forum, it's you.

The bottom line is that in this case, I am unsure whether or not the casino has analysed the data correctly (I know I didn't). At this time I'm hoping that they will reopen this and take a fresh look - perhaps engaging the assistance of a third party. Fair is fair - I don't think this was done deliberately, and I understand that there are a number of circumstances that could contribute to the initial impression of a bot being used.

Again, give this a few days to be ironed out. And be cool about it.

Hoped that you will post this, because at the afternoon and your posts before i was not sure more what you will do.

And i believe you wasn't sure too.

Finally hope that the third parties become the same impression that all was a correct playing session in this affair.

I hope this for the player too and that CC must review again.

CM and with all his experiences members here is a very great community and if you or we can't help who can do it ?

 

[The Dude]

But how can Casino Club rule that the case has been closed even though Casinomeister is still analyzing the data?..

You can tone it down now. I've asked them to take a relook at this issue. It's late at night, and I may not get a response for a day or two.

:notworthy Thanks! I will meet you in London next january, I will take the trip and share some beers. After all - after my Red Flush win I have the money too, !

Actually, all members of this forum will be invited to the annual "Meister Meeting" which will be held at Waxy O'Conners on the 27th Jan. 5 - 8pm proceeded with a tour guided pub crawl through Picadilly/Leicester Square

 

[NASHVEGAS]

The $1250 clearly stand out from the full data, I would only guess this is spiltting and maby insuring a dealer BJ? The $1250 data is from this part of the data:

Blackjack BJ_WIN1 1250 11.12.2008 06:35 5800 / 7050
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:35 6300 / 5800
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:35 6800 / 6300
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:34 7300 / 6800
Blackjack BJ_WIN1 2000 11.12.2008 06:34 5300 / 7300
[B]Blackjack BJ BET1 -1250 11.12.2008 06:34 6550 / 5300[/B]
Blackjack BJ_WIN1 1000 11.12.2008 06:34 5550 / 6550
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:34 6050 / 5550
Blackjack BJ_WIN1 1250 11.12.2008 06:34 4800 / 6050
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:34 5300 / 4800
Blackjack BJ BET1 -500 11.12.2008 06:33 5800 / 5300

Good Info But Need To See The Hand Histories, (not sure if part of the zip download as I could not open ,yet!!). Then Want To Look At The Hourly Logs And Order Of The Bet Size Amount Distributions. Is This A Peek or No PeeK Game And Are Their Any Other Rules That Differ From A Basic Vegas/AC Game As I Am Not Familar With This Casino??? Any Help Appreciated!!!

I am currently auditing, yes moi, 100,000 hands of BJ. Most are flat max. bets but for different reasons there are hands where my bet size varies but not each hour with the distribution range of amounts as posted. I may post a simulated study on the fallacy of those that preach progression systems (a rude awakening awaits them).

Kimss,nothing unusual about hand #51030 below. I noticed a laid $200 bet (right bolded number) post on my hand histories as simply 4 figure bet multiple times. Somewhat misleading below as provided until the hand histories clarify. Not sure if the same is applicable to the bet size amounts you post for the OP as I may need to reread all, visit other forum, get your zip file to open.

51024 Dealer: 3s,Tc,Ac,3s Player: Jh,4d (14) -200 200 8/26/2008 14:45
51025 Dealer: 7c,5c,Ad,Ac,Qc Player: Js,5c,5c (20) 200 200 8/26/2008 14:45
51026 Dealer: Jd,Ks Player: Ac,8h (19) -200 200 8/26/2008 14:45
51027 Dealer: Ac,Ad Player: Jc,2c,Ts (22) -200 200 8/26/2008 14:45
51028 Dealer: 7c,5c,8h Player: 9s,Td (19) -200 200 8/26/2008 14:45
51029 Dealer: 5s,4c,9h Player: Jh,Kh (20) 200 200 8/26/2008 14:46
51030 Dealer: 4c,Jc,2h,Qd Player: 7s,3d,6c (16) Doubled Split 7d,8d (15) Split 7s,2c,Td (19) Doubled Split 1000 1000 8/26/2008 14:46
51031 Dealer: Qc,Js Player: 2s,2c,Qc,7h (21) 200 200 8/26/2008 14:46
51032 Dealer: 7h,7h,Js Player: 6s,9d,6h (21) 200 200 8/26/2008 14:46
51033 Dealer: 6s,Ah,5d,Qc Player: 6c,5d,Ah (12) Doubled 400 400 8/26/2008 14:46
51034 Dealer: Qd,9c Player: 5s,2c,Js (17) -200 200 8/26/2008 14:47
51035 Dealer: Qd,Td Player: 3d,9d,6s (18) -200 200 8/26/2008 14:47

 

[Jasminebed]

Perfect strategy

Perfect strategy for blackjack is widely known. Most casinos sell cards in their gift shop. Sites like

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

and many other offer strategy charts. They are not that difficult to memorize.

The data we have does not indicate if the player players perfectly or not...just whether he wins or loses a hand. Perhaps the casino has provided Maxd and Brian with more data than the player has been able to provide from his logs.

I am glad that Casinomeister is willing to reconsider their impression of the player's play, and I hope they can convince Casino Club to do likewise.

On the note that this session differs from the player's other sessions, there could be many reasons. My playtime is short when I do not win. Perhaps his initial deposit was larger than normal, allowing more bets at higher levels to be used. He may have "won" this money elsewhere and felt he could take larger risks. Maybe the wife was out of town and he was bored. He could be taking Prednisone or some other drug prescribed for him. I know I was pretty "zippy" on Prenisone before surgery, and had three sleepless nights in the two weeks I was on it, and no night longer than 4 hours asleep.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Perfect strategy for blackjack is widely known. Most casinos sell cards in their gift shop. Sites like

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

and many other offer strategy charts. They are not that difficult to memorize.

"Beware, many casinos will intentionally sell (or give away) flawed basic strategy cards in their on-site shops"-Eliot Jacobson,THE BLACKJACK ZONE

Another excellent site for basic strategy tables (sorry affilates) is

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Back to scheduled programming

 

[WAYLANDER]

My Feelings

This is how i see the issue...

In the favour of the casino:-
If the player did indeed use a bot ( i can not see any evidence to show this, but i am not privy to it all ) then it is banned in the terms... so tough luck

In the favour of the player:-
1 Where is the motive ? no bonus no gain
2 Who on earth would let a bot make decisions with that amount of money, especially considering the bankroll... a bad run at $1000 bets and its all gone in minutes
3 Playing 14 hours with small breaks... Nothing too unusual there for a seasoned gambler
4 Unusual playing patterns... i am sure most gamblers have had the " red mist " some time in their lives and done stupid/different things ... one example for me was playing on my usual poker site and having two bad beats in close succession which cost me about $70 ... 5 minutes later i had clicked the Blackjack button which i had never done before and was making $100 bets ... very unusual but not fraudulant !

The data shown doesn't IMOA show sign of bot play.... just gambling using some kind of bet increasing system

WAYLANDER

 

[spearmaster]

"Beware, many casinos will intentionally sell (or give away) flawed basic strategy cards in their on-site shops"-Eliot Jacobson,THE BLACKJACK ZONE

LMAO... why am I not surprised?

I suppose if they get caught out they can always point to the "Printed in Timbuktu" as an excuse...

 

[tofu23]

Tofu23 made a good point about "Responsible gambling". Almost all casinos encourage players to gamble responsibly, and bots are the prime example of responsible gambling. So isn't banning bots in fact saying: We don't actually want you to gamble responsibly, so that we get more.

Unless the legitimacy of the subject 'bot ban' T+Cs is put thru the wringer we will all be back here again next week with yet another expose on betting patterns - something akin to looking at tea leaves.

There seems to be an idea floating around that a Casino can simply add ANY kind of T+C irrespective of the regulations under which it operates. Granted, Casino Club operate under Malta LGA so are effectively unregulated. But in other cases, the very appearance of a 'bot banning' clause offends the Responsible Gambling code to which the online Casino must comply.

As Max remarked above - Casinos are looking to promote a greater level of player mistakes thru a 'bot ban'. This is a direct contravention of the Responsible Gambling code.

CM is enlisting the services of third parties to examine the play logs so that a qualified determination can be made with respect to alleged 'bot play'. Such an enforced situation is plainly ridiculous. Why engage third parties to read teal leaves - instead why not prohibit 'bot banning T+C'. That's the fairest solution, otherwise..........................see you all next week for another repeat of reading tea leaves.

 

[heffernan]

hello,

i play in cc since june/ july 2006. until today i paid in there several thousand euros. and never paid out anything.

the 11.11.08-11.12.08: one day before i start my not planned holiday.

days before i deposit 250 and also lost. like all times.

but look:

PaySafe 11.11.2008 16:35 Finished 70.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 11.07.2008 21:12 Finished 250.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 10/17/2008 20:28:35 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 10.10.2008 21:51 Finished 100.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 10.10.2008 21:51 Bank Declined 100.00 EUR
PaySafe 10.10.2008 19:41 Finished 100.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 09/19/2008 20:14:51 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 09.12.2008 19:37 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 09.12.2008 16:29 Finished 100.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 08/28/2008 20:59:23 Finished 60.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 08/28/2008 20:22:23 Finished 60.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 08/16/2008 00:22:46 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 08/15/2008 22:01:58 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 08.08.2008 22:52 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 08.08.2008 21:08 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 07/18/2008 20:35:35 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 07.11.2008 22:32 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 07.11.2008 19:29 Finished 40.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 07.09.2008 21:49 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 07.09.2008 20:22 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 07.09.2008 19:54 Finished 60.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 06/30/2008 17:39:17 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 06/30/2008 16:33:40 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 06/20/2008 21:23:29 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 06/16/2008 20:12:55 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 06/16/2008 17:59:02 Finished 60.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 05/26/2008 15:42:57 Finished 25.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 05.09.2008 21:06 Finished 60.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 05.09.2008 19:22 Finished 150.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 04.10.2008 20:00 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 04.10.2008 19:09 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 04.10.2008 17:36 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 04.10.2008 16:25 Finished 120.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 03.07.2008 20:52 Finished 100.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 03.07.2008 20:04 Finished 100.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 03.07.2008 18:25 Finished 100.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 03.07.2008 16:49 Finished 100.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 02/25/2008 17:03:14 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 02/15/2008 21:53:18 Finished 20.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 02.11.2008 20:33 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 02.11.2008 19:14 Finished 120.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 01.11.2008 15:37 Finished 120.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 01.11.2008 11:38 Finished 125.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation
PaySafe 07.09.2007 18:17 Finished 50.00 EUR Processed by Reconciliation

 

[vinylweatherman]

Unless the legitimacy of the subject 'bot ban' T+Cs is put thru the wringer we will all be back here again next week with yet another expose on betting patterns - something akin to looking at tea leaves.

There seems to be an idea floating around that a Casino can simply add ANY kind of T+C irrespective of the regulations under which it operates. Granted, Casino Club operate under Malta LGA so are effectively unregulated. But in other cases, the very appearance of a 'bot banning' clause offends the Responsible Gambling code to which the online Casino must comply.

As Max remarked above - Casinos are looking to promote a greater level of player mistakes thru a 'bot ban'. This is a direct contravention of the Responsible Gambling code.
CM is enlisting the services of third parties to examine the play logs so that a qualified determination can be made with respect to alleged 'bot play'. Such an enforced situation is plainly ridiculous. Why engage third parties to read teal leaves - instead why not prohibit 'bot banning T+C'. That's the fairest solution, otherwise..........................see you all next week for another repeat of reading tea leaves.

I have to disagree, because this very thing has come up before, and fast play through a botlike interface has been ruled as NOT "responsible gambling", since the player can lose far more this way without being aware of it.
As a result, it was considered "responsible gambling" to restrict any autoplay interface to 3 seconds between plays, and to allow players to set limits. MGS have partially deviated from this by REMOVING the ability to set a stop loss in credits in their autoplay. This used to be available in the older slots, but all the options have been stripped away for newer releases beyond Thunderstruck. MGS Autoplay is, in effect, a bot.

 

[PattyD]

Hello,

I just wanted to say that I don't think its fair to ever take peoples winnings for playing too fast or without breaks. I'm sure casinomeister has further evidence but going just on hand histories alone is completely unfair. I like to play quickly does this mean I have to stop every once in a while in case I'm mistaken for a bot? Why can't the bot user stop the bot every 30 minutes? Hand histories don't prove anything.

Sure if someone uses a bot then take there winnings and even their deposit. I don't care. My point is more evidence is needed.
I know poker sites scan hard drives and do other things to detect bots. Maybe Boss should do this if bots are a problem.

 

[tofu23]

I have to disagree, because this very thing has come up before, and fast play through a botlike interface has been ruled as NOT "responsible gambling", since the player can lose far more this way without being aware of it.

I don't understand your argument vwm. If a player chooses to use his own bot, set at a speed of his choosing, what has that got to do with the casino?

The casino chooses what speed its gaming interface operates at. If speed was a 'responsible gaming' issue things would have been slowed down to a walk a long time ago.

Restricting 'bot play' begs the question why? And the 'why' has been previously addressed - to ensure player strategy mistakes go unfettered. The 'why' has nothing to do with protecting the integrity of the game - but everything to do with increasing the Casinos bottom line profits at a unwitting players expense. That offends the 'responsible gaming' code.

This problem isn't going away until such time the Casinos are obliged to comply with their obligations for fair play. Betting patterns are going to be examined with a forensic fervor all day long. It's all quite laughable.

The solution is simple. Play fair.

 

[cyprean]

FWIW this case just looks like the player got lucky and had a hot streak. Casino-Club doesn't seem to like big cash outs, they get reviewed and suddenly they found an excuse not to pay.

I maybe totally wrong but this is what this case looks like to me. I would not feel too confident about getting my money if I won anything big at Casino-Club after this incident. I hope they review the logs, realize their HUGE mistake and pay the player.

It just makes me sad that these kind of things happen. And the first time when this player tried to seek justice he got booted from forum. How many screwed players must be there that have had their winnings parted from them and give up in frustration?

 

[The Dude]

Update

Here is an update:

I've just gotten off the phone with Casino Club, and after further reviews on this case and close cooperation between me, Max, Casino Club and other third parties, Casino Club has decided to pay out in full the winnings of the player, and the funds should be in his account by the next business day - I would guess Monday.

Casino Club is still convinced that the gaming session under scrutiny involved usage of a bot, but they agreed that in this specific case, that I would have the final word.

The bottom line is do not use bots - especially with Casino Club - or any site that prohibits the usage of bots in their terms and conditions. It is definitely not worth the hassle.

 

[Upset]

Good Job Casinomeister LAND. GOOD JOB!!!

 

[The Dude]

CM is enlisting the services of third parties to examine the play logs so that a qualified determination can be made with respect to alleged 'bot play'. Such an enforced situation is plainly ridiculous. Why engage third parties to read teal leaves - instead why not prohibit 'bot banning T+C'.

I don't dictate what the casinos state in their terms and conditions. That's something their lawyers are paid for. I am only concerned whether the terms and conditions are fair, and that the player and casino abides by them. I can always give advice, but it is up to the casino to decide whether or not my advice makes sense.

...It just makes me sad that these kind of things happen. And the first time when this player tried to seek justice he got booted from forum. How many screwed players must be there that have had their winnings parted from them and give up in frustration?

Anyone getting booted from the forum for fraudulent activity/bogus PABs has my email address and can always get back to me. There has only been about four or five cases like this in the last ten years where the player has asked me to check into it further and it turned out either I or the casino was wrong. 99% we're spot on - so it's not like there is a legion of jilted players out there.

 

[Simmo!]

Quite a case.

IMO the best that a Bot can achieve when a bonus isn't in play is optimum strategy. That still leaves a house edge, so a casino refusing to payout - even if Bot play is proved - is both wrong and unethical.

If Bot play is a worry when a bonus is in play, then casinos should change their T&C's to a) either remove BJ from the WR altogether or b) follow the Wagerworks model of awarding the bonus after WR is complete. It's not relevant in this case but the bottom line is, if you want to use the old "free money" to entice a player in, you have to expect to attract "advantage" players.

No sympathy either way for the casino from me.


---

As an aside, knowing what goes on behind the scenes, if it had been me I'd have banned the posters who attacked the integrity of CM and Max because they disagreed with their opinions without knowing all the facts. That sort of short-sighted narrow-mindedness really pisses me off. Be constructive or don't get involved. Why the need to put someone down publically? It's not an opportunity for a bloody popularity contest.

Experienced members know Bryan offers this service free and is as ethical as they come. He (and Max) put a lot of time and effort into PABs and he doesn't have to. He's probably the most ethical guy in this industry that I've met so far. A lot of players come in, do a PAB then go without even so much as a thanks. I see comments like the ones earlier in this post and wonder why he even bothers.

 

[cyprean]

GG Casinomeister!

This is great news and you have AGAIN done a big favour to the player community. Thanks for taking the time and helping out the player.

 

[KasinoKing]

Here is an update:

I've just gotten off the phone with Casino Club, and after further reviews on this case and close cooperation between me, Max, Casino Club and other third parties, Casino Club has decided to pay out in full the winnings of the player, and the funds should be in his account by the next business day - I would guess Monday.

Brilliant news!
Well done CM, Max & all others involved in investigating this case! :notworthy

As an aside, knowing what goes on behind the scenes, if it had been me I'd have banned the posters who attacked the integrity of CM and Max because they disagreed with their opinions without knowing all the facts. That sort of short-sighted narrow-mindedness really pisses me off. Be constructive or don't get involved. Why the need to put someone down publically? It's not an opportunity for a bloody popularity contest.

Experienced members know Bryan offers this service free and is as ethical as they come. He (and Max) put a lot of time and effort into PABs and he doesn't have to. He's probably the most ethical guy in this industry that I've met so far. A lot of players come in, do a PAB then go without even so much as a thanks. I see comments like the ones earlier in this post and wonder why he even bothers.

Brilliant post!

However I do have to say that to the outsider looking in, based solely on what was posted in this thread, there was no clear evidence of Bot play (quite the opposite in fact), and it did look initially like CM was going to agree with the casino. So it is understandable that some people got quite upset about this case.

KK

 

[Jufo]

The last unanswered question is: Will Casino Club be removed from the accredited casino list? The mishandling of this issue on their part is not a minor matter.

 

[tofu23]

I don't dictate what the casinos state in their terms and conditions. That's something their lawyers are paid for. I am only concerned whether the terms and conditions are fair, and that the player and casino abides by them. I can always give advice, but it is up to the casino to decide whether or not my advice makes sense.

No worries - understood. I wasn't having a crack at you but the need to go out and get third party opinions makes a circus out of a cash-out process that ought to be relatively straight forward. Play, win, cash-out. This 'bot ban' hoopla is illegitimate.

But anyway - again you have come to the fore in getting dough out an otherwise recalcitrant. Congratulations are in order. I'm sure the OP will tip something you're way because i doubt he was ever going to get paid a zack otherwise.

 

[The Dude]

The last unanswered question is: Will Casino Club be removed from the accredited casino list? The mishandling of this issue on their part is not a minor matter.

No. Bot complaints are complex - that's something that everyone I'm sure will agree with after reading this thread thoroughly...if they dare.

It's also a learning experience for all. I'm sure CC - and other casinos not directly involved - are reviewing some of the more constructive player opinions in this thread.

 

[steinhaug]

This is great news, I am very happy for the player getting paid back! I know how it feels to deposit over and over again never getting a withdrawal, which is most likely why he went for a big win! After all, without any withdrawals any possible withdrawal should compensate all earlier deposits - this is atleast the way I think, I would also assume there are more casinos he didn't withdraw from - so this was his shot for glory! Who wouldn't take it!

I have never myself been denied any winnings, and I do not even want to try and think what I would do if such a thing happened! However I do find it sadening [horrible, frightening really], that the casinos can take our money without problems - and the day we win - it's agony and no sleep for us until we possible get the money!

Atleast we get a lot of action for the buck! First we get the excitement of the gambling itself, then we get the excitement trying to get our money back! Thats 2 for 1! LOL

Members looking at the data wrote the possible bot play was so human like that one could question if it was a bot at all. This I translate as, say I pull 1 kg of coffe and do a marathon like a machine where I end up winning, I might get confused for a bot? This is terrible, it's infact horrible!

Looking at the results I am glad I misread the logs so that this thread caught fire! I guess we have a happy camper now waiting for his money!

CasinoMeister has again shown it's positive effect for the players community - hands up for the team everyone! Great work!

 

[Simmo!]

However I do have to say that to the outsider looking in, based solely on what was posted in this thread, there was no clear evidence of Bot play (quite the opposite in fact), and it did look initially like CM was going to agree with the casino. So it is understandable that some people got quite upset about this case.

Agreed. But there are better ways to put forward your opinion than to openly attack someone. Attacking someone publically is the quickest way to alienate yourself. If you want to influence people then it's imperative to show some level of respect and provide constructive criticism when a "debate" is active.

"Always treat others how you wish to be treated yourself" - there's no better advice in the world IMO. Apart from "stop gambling with your mortgage money" of course

 

[Simmo!]

The last unanswered question is: Will Casino Club be removed from the accredited casino list? The mishandling of this issue on their part is not a minor matter.

Although clearly this has been a contentious issue and as previously stated I have no sympathy with the casino, I'd be inclined to say that this is an unnecesary move for two reasons:

Firstly, bearing in mind the confusion over the formatting of the logs, it's easy to see why many people may have thought it indicated Bot play originally.

Secondly, when Casinomeister came up with a final decision, they instantly went with it and paid the player.

I've played there for some time and never had any issues whatsoever. Payments are fast, games seem fair and service is good. Also, they have thousands of players and a case like this is a first so is it fair to judge their whole operation on one occasion when they made an incorrect decision, especially as they (eventually) admitted a mistake? Personally, I feel this thread alone is probably punishment enough.

Also, I don't think players should lose sight of the fact that a lot of players out there are out to - politely put - try and take advantage of a situation and Bot play is an issue that most casinos are very aware of, especially when a bonus is in play. Although the player in this instance appears perfectly legit, every player that tries to "get one over" damages the experience for the rest of us. "Proper" players should be as anxious as the casinos to ensure that fraudulent players are outed and ostracised.

 

[vinylweatherman]

While this case is over, it still has me worried.

Bot play is not allowed at most sites, but the worry is how they go about "proving" it. They DON'T actually detect a bot, but they look for signs that indicate there MIGHT be a bot in use, and seem to take this as proof absolute.

I now worry about such things as length of play without significant breaks, what is acceptable, and what is going to have the casino looking for bots.

I also feel quite offended that casinos look at my history and attribute to me a "playing style", and woe betide me if I read a book, see a forum/website, and try something completely different that just happens to give me a big win.

While the argument is there about whether or not bots give an advantage, CM is right that if the T & C clearly state "no bots", and the player uses one despite this, then tough - I am only concerned about non-bot users being falsly detected, and having a big struggle to clear their names.

Casinos need to incorporate proper bot detection software with their casinos, so that PROOF of a bot process, or at the very least software that seems to be interfacing with the casino instead of a human.

One worry though, what about players who are simply RECORDING their sessions for posterity (or analysis) using screen recording applications - these can easily be mistaken for a data feed INTO a bot, yet nothing in the T & C prohibits the "filming" of your gaming session.

Considering the zeal with which Casino Club have pursued this, there must be a BIG bot problem out there, which shows how much bot technology has advanced in the last couple of years OUTSIDE the field of poker bots.

As a side issue, casinos that vigorously pursue the bot exclusion when players are NOT using bonuses are feeding the fires of the "rigged software" debate - but having said that, it's FUN, and makes a nice change to gambling

 

[Jasminebed]

Another happy ending

Casinomeister, Maxd, CasinoClub and heffernan:

I am glad that this case was thoroughly reviewed, and that CasinoClub was open-minded enough and concerned enough about their reputation to reverse its original decision based on the opinions of CM.

Thank you to to heffernan for his cooperation in this investigation also. I truly hope you enjoy your big win!! I know you are new to this site, but there are a list of charities that CM supports at https://www.casinomeister.com/donate/. Or you may have a cause that is close to your own heart.

A huge thumbs up to all the players who took time to analyse data, post and express their valued opinions here.

 

[tofu23]

While this case is over, it still has me worried.

Bot play is not allowed at most sites, but the worry is how they go about "proving" it. They DON'T actually detect a bot, but they look for signs that indicate there MIGHT be a bot in use, and seem to take this as proof absolute.

They look into the tea leaves and one person sees a bot at play - another sees an inveterate gambler. And whilst Casino Club are paying up they still yet claim a 'bot' was at play whilst the rest of us see nothing of the sort.

And so tomorrow the 'bot ban' song and dance will go on - despite the established fact 'bot' play can in no way alter or tamper with the integrity of the game.

And for the record - it has been reported on other gaming forums that Casino Club have denied numerous otherwise legitimate player winnings on the basis of spurious 'bot playing' claims. This particular T+Cs is proving to be a cash pulling bonanza for them. And we know form the OPs case what sort of evidence they rely upon.

Lastly, Cryptologic have recently introduced a bj bot as standard fare to assist players in the enjoyment of games at Casinos such as Intercasino et al. Go figure that Casino Club.

 

[Jufo]

(Post Removed)

 

[Scooter7]

Lastly, Cryptologic have recently introduced a bj bot as standard fare to assist players in the enjoyment of games at Casinos such as Intercasino et al. Go figure that Casino Club.

MG has a pretty complex autoplay system and Crypto's new game has a similar one, plus an autobet feature. You can program bet patterns or 'if I win/if I lose' scenarios to change the next bet amount. There is one and only one reason to prohibit bot play. If a bonus abuser sets up large numbers of accounts and needs to clear more bonuses than he/she can personally play. Something that isn't worth enough dollars per hour to be of use suddenly is worth it when you automate and work on volume.

 

[steinhaug]

"Always treat others how you wish to be treated yourself" - there's no better advice in the world IMO. Apart from "stop gambling with your mortgage money" of course

So true, indeed! However sometimes [not this one however] trying to throw an ironic punch to pull a smile can go awfully wrong, especially combining a thread with good wine and strong opinions,

That donation idea from Jasminebed was sure a good idea. But to be honest, if I were heffernan, instead I would buy a big cake for the CasinoMeister crew! They deserve it! A little token of appretiation for a happy ending! (I would also buy that cake around 27th january, since I'll be there aswell and can grab a piece of it, LOL).

I would have to agree with Simmo! that this thread is good punishment for the casino, and it will make them think twice [have proof?] before dropping a payout due to claimed bot play. I believe this thread have cost them quite abit more than the withdrawal in lost revenue.

Saying something many times doesn't make it come true, there has to be some facts involved. If not, we are up for endless arguments!

You are dumb! ... No I'm not? Yes you are!

Where do you go from there?

Or what about the Big-Nose scene in Life of Brian. Kinda hard for this guy claiming his nose wasn't that big really... Shut up big nose! An impossible argument.

 

[maxd]

They DON'T actually detect a bot, but they look for signs that indicate there MIGHT be a bot in use, and seem to take this as proof absolute.

As I'm sure you know tracing activity is used in everything from gambling to market trading, horse racing to credit card fraud. Whether we like it or not these traces of activity are exactly how many, many things are discovered in our digital society. Play records are not an inherently illegitimate form of data. As always it's how they are used and what one takes as "satisfactory indicators" that make the difference.

I'll give you a concrete example: a while back I handled a PAB where bot use was claimed and the proof given was a trace where the player was "playing" at about 500 hands [strike]per minute[/strike] per hour (sustained). The casino claimed that was sufficient proof that a bot was in use and I agreed with them 100%. Would anybody here claim otherwise? I seriously doubt it. And so, voila!, we have a case where the play records and the conclusions drawn from them were pretty much beyond question.

So yes, it some cases it's as close to "absolute proof" as needs be. In other cases, obviously not. In other words it's a matter of degree.

Frankly I've become convinced that I need bigger, better, stronger, faster tools to analyze these traces and probably a little schooling in how to interpret the results. In other words I want more insight into the traces, not less. Apparently that makes me unpopular with a portion of our audience, so be it. Activity traces are a valid source of data for fraud, or in this case 'bot, detection and I do support their use.

I now worry about such things as length of play without significant breaks, what is acceptable, and what is going to have the casino looking for bots.

No offense VWM but don't you see that you are taking the easy road here by saying "oh my god, what might they think?" as some kind of proof that they shouldn't be looking at your activity at all? Surely you see that's just being bombastic for the fun of it.

Casinos need to incorporate proper bot detection software with their casinos ...

You do realize that that implies an increased level of invasiveness into your computer don't you? If the casinos have to go to the source to prove their case then then the players are going to have to get comfy with opening up their systems to that level of prodding. And isn't it obvious that that opens up a whole other can of worms, as in serious opportunities for privacy violation? None of this comes for free, there's a price to pay whichever way it's done. Personally I'd rather have the casino looking at my play logs than at the contents of my hard drive. No question!

One worry though, what about players who are simply RECORDING their sessions for posterity ...

Again, aren't we going for the bombast button here just a little too quickly. Frankly if a casino presented that as "evidence" in a bot case I'd tell them to try a little harder. Just 'cause something _might_ happen doesn't make it the right thing to get up in arms over.

Considering the zeal with which Casino Club have pursued this, there must be a BIG bot problem out there ...

You've got that right! From what I'm seeing at the PAB end of things some of these casinos are virtually under attack from the bot users. I don't envy them their end of the business at all!