Suspected Rigged Online Slot - Advice Needed

blackmogu

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Location
London
Hi all,

I recently spotted an online slot that had a gamble option, which was advertised in the game rules as "a true odds gamble at all times that returns 100%". The gamble has 6 positions with +1,+2,+3,-1,-2,-3 as possible values. So according to the game rules, this should be like rolling a dice.

I proceeded to spend £1500 on this slot, gambling all wins in the hope of hitting the top prize. After a while of noticing the gamble wheel rarely give out the winning positions, I began to record the results.

After 287 gambles, these were the results:-

+3: 27, -3: 70
+2: 33, -2: 65
+1: 38, -1: 54

Full gaming history is recorded in my casino account.

As you can see, the results show the gamble is weighted in the losing positions over a reasonable sample size, and I suspect I have been unfairly robbed of my £1500.

The casino that offers this game is a reputable one, and I am taking pains to avoid naming either the game or casino publicly until I can gather advice from others on how to approach this.

Suggestions and experiences of others welcome !

Thanks,
-bm.
 

dionysus

Good(w)ill Ambassador
CAG
MM
Joined
Apr 27, 2009
Location
the land of snow and maple syrup
well, that doesn't mean it's rigged - the computer can still reach into the pool randomly for the result, but display a common visual image - video representations aren't necessarily in line with what's going on in the programme.

Take slots - they're random, but you might see common results on the reels - they're just the eye candy displaying the results
 

blackmogu

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Location
London
I don't even understand what that means. Post screenshot of the gambling feature and the name of the slot.

Neither a picture or the name is necessary at this point. All the gamble is, is a button that you press, and a wheel with 6 positions on it stops on either a +3, +2, +1, -1, -2 or -3 position. Your cash amount advances up or down the win ladder based on the number the gamble lands on.

Now, my contention is that if the slot game rules holds true, i.e: This is a TRUE ODDS GAMBLE AT ALL TIMES and returns 100%, then the result skewing in my sample is very unlikely as to be suspicious (perhaps a mathematician amongst us can calculate how unlikely my set of results were).

@dionysus - The point is the game rules state that this gamble is a TRUE ODDS GAMBLE AT ALL TIMES and return 100%. What is the true odds of hitting one position in 6 ? 1/6. To fulfil this statement, the gamble should land equally on each position with a 1/6 chance every time the button were pressed. If this is not the case, the gamble cannot return 100%, which is contrary to the game rules, and thus misrepresentative.

I don't wish to generate bad publicity for either the game or casino at this point, as I would appreciate others views on my position before I make accusations. If someone wishes to help and feels that they need this information, I will provide privately at this stage.

Thanks,
-bm.
 

Balthazar

The Governor
Joined
Aug 14, 2012
Location
Woodbury
Neither a picture or the name is necessary at this point.

I disagree: proof below

All the gamble is, is a button that you press, and a wheel with 6 positions on it stops on either a +3, +2, +1, -1, -2 or -3 position. Your cash amount advances up or down the win ladder based on the number the gamble lands on.

Unclear.

Say you won $3 on that spin and went to the gamble feature. You get to spin a wheel with 6 positions? Right? What the hell happens if it lands on +2? You win $3 + $2 ($5)? What if you won $0.50 on the spin and it lands on -3? You lose $3.50? What's that "up and down the ladder" thing? You need to be clear and you're not.
 

Simmo!

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
I can see why it looks odd. There are a few questions that need answering though, the first of which Balthazar asks about reward sizes. I assume climbing a ladder leads to higher prizes so there is logic that going up further would be harder to achieve. If however, you start in the middle and at the bottom is 0 and at the top is double your prize, with nothing ibetween then it sounds odd.

A second one would be, is this an AWP clone? If so, you would expect it to look odd as these are designed to run in streaks and the results are not truly random per se ( VinylWeatherMan will probably write you an essay on that if you need one :D ).

Whatever way, I would say that the text "a true odds gamble at all times that returns 100%" is ambiguous at best and that may well be an issue here. It doesn't say random - it just says true odds. And no gamble will return 100% or you'd never lose LOL so it needs better wording if that is the whole sentence taken in context.
 

blackmogu

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Location
London
I can see why it looks odd. There are a few questions that need answering though, the first of which Balthazar asks about reward sizes. I assume climbing a ladder leads to higher prizes so there is logic that going up further would be harder to achieve. If however, you start in the middle and at the bottom is 0 and at the top is double your prize, with nothing ibetween then it sounds odd.

A second one would be, is this an AWP clone? If so, you would expect it to look odd as these are designed to run in streaks and the results are not truly random per se ( VinylWeatherMan will probably write you an essay on that if you need one :D ).

Whatever way, I would say that the text "a true odds gamble at all times that returns 100%" is ambiguous at best and that may well be an issue here. It doesn't say random - it just says true odds. And no gamble will return 100% or you'd never lose LOL so it needs better wording if that is the whole sentence taken in context.

Hi Simmo!,

The game is quoted as being 100% random, 95% return. No previous outcome affects future outcome etc. etc. in the rules.

The prize ladder structure is as follows:-

LOSE, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 60, 80, 100

If you hit either LOSE or 100, the gamble stops. You can collect at any stage.

Now considering your remarks, if the wheel were an equal odds 1/6 distribution, then gambling would clearly be beneficial to the player in every scenario except for the 80 position. So given my sample data in the initial post, does the obviously weighted number outcomes compensate for the ladder prize structure in such a way that it returns 100% (i.e no difference in the long term if you collected all prizes or gambled them).

Thanks,
-bm.
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
The maths is flawed here - assuming you start with a £1 win every time, and use the wheel, effectively getting +3 will quadruple your win. +1 will double it at the start. You've made the mistake of assuming you have a 1/6 chance of ANY outcome, and have noticed that far less than 1/6 result in a +3 result. When it says TRUE ODDS analyse you overall outcomes - add ALL your results up, i.e. the total of your PLUS results minus the MINUS results. You will have a small negative figure at the end (if as you say you lost overall) and then do the percentage figure against total stakes. You'll find you're a few percent off of 100, therefore the game has played near enough its advertised RTP. TRUE ODDS means that the overall outcome of the gambles will reflect over a period of time the TRTP of the game, NOT give you an equal chance of getting +1 or +3......
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
Hi Simmo!,
The game is quoted as being 100% random, 95% return. No previous outcome affects future outcome etc. etc. in the rules.
The prize ladder structure is as follows:-
LOSE, 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 40, 60, 80, 100
If you hit either LOSE or 100, the gamble stops. You can collect at any stage.

Now considering your remarks, if the wheel were an equal odds 1/6 distribution, then gambling would clearly be beneficial to the player in every scenario except for the 80 position. So given my sample data in the initial post, does the obviously weighted number outcomes compensate for the ladder prize structure in such a way that it returns 100% (i.e no difference in the long term if you collected all prizes or gambled them).
Thanks,
-bm.
Looks to me like you've answered your own question in the bolded sentence above.

Now we have that sorted - how about naming the slot at least, if not the casino as well?

KK
 

SubzeroWins

Webmeister
webmeister
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Location
-
If you want i can calculate if this is to be expected by randomness with a 95% or 98% confidence interval (meaning you can be reasonably sure, ofc never fully). In my studies of biologie we use these statistics tests to check if the results of an experiment significantly differ from a control group, or differ just by chance

edit: nevermind, i just read that the 6 outcomes have different hit percentages which would make this test usesless
 

dunover

Unofficial T&C's Editor
Staff member
webmeister
PABnonaccred
PABnononaccred
CAG
mm3
Joined
May 22, 2012
Location
the bus shelter, opposite GCHQ Benhall
If you want i can calculate if this is to be expected by randomness with a 95% or 98% confidence interval (meaning you can be reasonably sure, ofc never fully). In my studies of biologie we use these statistics tests to check if the results of an experiment significantly differ from a control group, or differ just by chance

edit: nevermind, i just read that the 6 outcomes have different hit percentages which would make this test usesless

Yeah, that's what I said. The true odds refers to the overall long-term outcome, as opposed to a non-weighted 1/6 outcome for the 6 positions.
 

blackmogu

Dormant account
Joined
Jul 18, 2011
Location
London
Looks to me like you've answered your own question in the bolded sentence above.

Now we have that sorted - how about naming the slot at least, if not the casino as well?

KK

The slot is High Rise by Realistic Games, featured on Bet365.

I'm still not convinced that the game returns what it should do, the gamble numbers from my sample data seem to be hugely overly harsh to compensate for the ladder steps, but to find out would require some knowledge of how they weight the gamble on each level of the ladder (I assume each step has it's own weightings, as the benefit to gambling on 40 is higher ore than gambling on 80), and a load of runs collecting data.

Thanks,
--bm.
 

Finn

Dormant account
Joined
Nov 2, 2013
Location
Finland
After 287 gambles, these were the results:-

+3: 27, -3: 70
+2: 33, -2: 65
+1: 38, -1: 54

The slot is High Rise by Realistic Games

Ok, so if this distribution was for the first step of gamble, assuming starting point 3 oranges, lemons or plums hit, since when you hit -3 or -2 on the firs step, in reality you lose only -1, the expected value gained or lost from gamble

27/287*3+33/287*2+38/287-(70+65+54)/287= -0.014

Now if the distribution was slightly different like 1 more +3, 1 less -3

28/287*3+33/287*2+38/287-(69+65+54)/287 = 0

so that would be exactly 100% rtp in that case. By quick look, it looks reasonably close to 100% rtp for gamble, slightly less, but not in anyway abnormally so.

Ladder weighting seems to keep it pretty similar for other steps, assuming that you get nice hit and get to start the gambling from x40 rather than the usual x5 lowest step,

(27/287*60+33/287*40+38/287*20-(70*25+65*20+54*10)/287)/40=0.001

So if your -+ distribution was for gambles starting at x40, with hit like 2 x 3 water melons, the rtp for your gambling sessions would be over 100%.
 
Last edited:

me_and_ed

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
CAG
MM
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Location
Vancouver
Ok, so if this distribution was for the first step of gamble, assuming starting point 3 oranges, lemons or plums hit, since when you hit -3 or -2 on the firs step, in reality you lose only -1, the expected value gained or lost from gamble

27/287*3+33/287*2+38/287-(70+65+54)/287= -0.014

Now if the distribution was slightly different like 1 more +3, 1 less -3

28/287*3+33/287*2+38/287-(69+65+54)/287 = 0

so that would be exactly 100% rtp in that case. By quick look, it looks reasonably close to 100% rtp for gamble, slightly less, but not in anyway abnormally so.

Ladder weighting seems to keep it pretty similar for other steps, assuming that you get nice hit and get to start the gambling from x40 rather than the usual x5 lowest step,

(27/287*60+33/287*40+38/287*20-(70*25+65*20+54*10)/287)/40=0.001

So if your -+ distribution was for gambles starting at x40, with hit like 2 x 3 water melons, the rtp for your gambling sessions would be over 100%.

I didn't know Zoozie had a child.;)
 
Top