Roguish Tradition Casino and likely all Rival casinos are Rogue. All Evidence shown here.

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
Pinababy, I don't know who is freddy and i even don't know if this player is included in the list provided by rival.

I can only confirm that about 2010-02-22 an update has been made by Rival on normal blackjack and an other update has been made by Rival too about 2010-03-27 on Blackjack Multi-Hand.

So we simply need to know who is Freddy, at what game he played exactly and if he receieved an email from us last 4 days...

If this player is not listed or if he has not been contacted with exact detail of transactions + apologizes, i'd be VERY surprise....

Regarding the fact that you hate Rival, i'm affraid that i cannot help you. Hatred is a very deep feeling.

You are missing the point. According to you, the ONLY player who contacted you was SamD...NOT TRUE. Refre/Freddy contacted you (Tradition/Rival) on February 22nd...NOT March. The rigging was in place on February 22nd, a full month before it was posted about here.

You did NOT fix the issue, not immediately, not at all. THAT'S the lie...you are trying to make out like you weren't aware of it, and that it was only a temporary thing for a short time. Not true.

The gaffed game was in play for at least a month...yet, you want us to believe that in a month's worth of play (almost 3,000 hands), there were only a TOTAL of 19 blackjacks in play?

I'm done with this...cause when you are dealing with dishonest people, this is the kind of shit you deal with. And I'm not referring to the Tradition rep..I'm referring to the top of the food chain...the Rival crooks themselves. 19 blackjacks in 2,919 hands...what a joke. Either they are completely fudging the numbers, or the software is even more rigged than originally thought. And not by mistake.
 
Best Halloween Bonuses from Accredited Casinos

maphesto

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Location
Sweden
Pina:

Not to defend anyone but Tradition have responded this:

I don't know exact chance to hit blackjack but 2,919 hands played in march concerned normal blackjack

Those 19 BJ wasn´t in the "normal blackjack".
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
Pina:

Not to defend anyone but Tradition have responded this:



Those 19 BJ wasn´t in the "normal blackjack".
FFS'S, what is so hard to understand about the expectation of player and dealer Blackjacks??, repeat:

Blackjack will occur every 1 out of ~ 21 hands or 4.76%, I need to the read recent thread posts to catch up on this obvious inaccurate discrepancy which would be so blatantly obvious to the player, this discrepancy (too many standard deviations).........

If, for example, 3000 hands of Blackjack were played , both player and dealer blackjacks dealt expectations are approx. 0.0476 per 3000 hands or 142.8 blackjacks.

How many standard deviations are we talking about. So many sd's that there is a miscommunication obviously. There are so many more sophisticated ways to cheat and this discrepancy is not one of them. NJMO, common sense, rules of the turf, maybe!!......Now the irony of my having to defend Rival (well sorta and sad based on how I feel and know about Rival) and the game of Blackjack!!
 

maphesto

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Location
Sweden
FFS'S, what is so hard to understand about the expectation of player and dealer Blackjacks??, repeat:

If, for example, 3000 hands of Blackjack were played , both player and dealer blackjacks dealt expectations are approx. 0.0476 per 3000 hands or 142.8 blackjacks.

Nash!

We know that you have an own language, but can´t you at least read our? :rolleyes:

I´ll take it slow and easy (yes, like the Whitesnake song)

1. Tradition mentioned almost 3000 hands Blackjack

2. Pina, you, I and other members here realized that 19 out of 3000 is too few.

3. Tradition now told us that the 3000 hands was normal blackjack and the blackjack we ment was multihand blackjack.

3. Pina mentioned the 19 BJ out of almost 3000 hands and had clearly missed the fact that Tradition had corrected us with the number 3000.

4. I made this post right after a quote from Pina where she mentions the 3000:

Those 19 BJ wasn´t in the "normal blackjack".


5. Here is my answer to your question:

Nothing!

I have absolutely no problems with understanding that. I play Black Jack myself.
I only "corrected" the number from the earlier post.
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
Nash!

We know that you have an own language, but can´t you at least read our? :rolleyes:

5. Here is my answer to your question:

Nothing!
Agreed and btw, I was not directing my prior post at anyone specifically, Maphesto!!:thumbsup:..........I have been out of reach the last week or so and still need to read the last 10 or so posts (as mentioned) before I post again. Just glancing though I certainly do not need to rehash ethics, fraud, misrepresentaion and how it has consistently shows up time and time again with Rival.

Before I went out of touch this week I had reviewed all my subject Rival PM's to Bryan which he labeled "cryptic" in a defensive reply post in this thread. Before posting as I previously mentioned, I will probably forward all to Bryan for his thoughts and review again but with a few exceptions, the PM's are spot on. Cryptic, Master of your Domain and such, no way!! Self absorbed conflicts of interest, double standards and similar when you get so many genres together on a forum, well all is to be expected! Courts may be an improvement and one's only true attempt of vindication. Carry On!
 

tradition

Dormant account
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Location
malta
Sorry but in all cases, you cannot count proportion of blackjack made on its 3000 mentionned total hands because the 19 BJ found out don't take in consideration hands paid properly after 2010-03-27 on Blackjack Multi-Hand Game.

More, the 19 BJ list provided include normal and multi hand BJ since 20th february, but do not forget that normal blackjack has been repaired about 2010-02-22, so all hands played later than 22th february have been paid correctly.

If i gave you total hands played during march at blackajack games, it wasn't for you try to calculate how many blackjacks players made... The only thing that is absolutely certain is my payout. In order to calculate payouts, there are some calculations to do but it's not possible without having all elements.

So, here you are payouts for these games :

Normal BJ - April : 90.63%
Multi hands BJ - April : 100.10%

For April, payout is not yet definitive, of course. Regarding other months :

Normal BJ - March : 109.67%
Multi hands BJ - March : 95.46%

Normal BJ - February : 92.96%
Multi hands BJ - February : 93.53%

Normal BJ - January : 93.59%
Multi hands BJ - January : 101.62%

Normal BJ - December : 104.04%
Multi hands BJ - December : 88.19%
 

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
Joined
Sep 26, 2004
Location
SOMEWHERE IN ASIA
Is it not possible for Tradition to say how many hands were played that yielded the 19 Blackjacks in question. Should be a simple answer really.
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
And oh the irony of mathematical BJ determinations that can be determined. Nevermind, a higher level of cheating where all mathematical determinations are simply labeled a glitch, malfunction, and/or with an officially accepted KK endorsed apology by a casino rep. (sorry KK but I do not get this apology thing or actually I do;)), seems to excuse the inexcusable aka double standards.
Sorry, but I haven't got the faintest idea what you are talking about...? :confused:

KK
 

maphesto

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Location
Sweden
After a very expensive education I have a masters degree on NASH speak. :D

Maybe he means that cheating from the casinos side sometimes can be explained as a glitch..

And he mentions KK which means that he might remember that you once (twice?) have explained something from a Rival casino as a glitch.

That´s my theory.:cool:
 

AussieDave

Banned User
Joined
Dec 24, 2005
Location
Australia
Hi All,

Why the need to make it more complicated and riddle it with convoluted theories, when it is what it is...

There was no glitch or staff screw up as to why the Tradition Casino Blackjack was paying 1:1 (even odds) for blackjack, instead of 3:2.

It was RIGGED and the casino was busted, end of story.

And if that's not enough reason to place all white label Rivals on the Watch List, the Tradition casino manager/owner has been bust lying in this thread.

The Tradition casino manager is not the least bit concerned with being busted for telling porky pies.
That in itself should speak volumes to the type of person operating this casino.

nuff said


Cheers

:)

Dave
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
I recall Tradition introducing herself as the OWNER of the casino, and that SHE was in charge, and "independent". Now, it seems she doesn't even have HER OWN GAMING LICENCE, and jumps to the tune played by Rival central when it comes to some of the aspects of operating the casino. SHE can't get her own audits done, SHE relies on Rival to sort out this issue, and more or less abdicates responsibilty to Rival because "these are the numbers Rival supplied....".

The 3000 hands for March may not be an exact number, BUT it is a reasonable ESTIMATE for the average monthly turnover of Blackjack hands. Given this "glitch" lasted about a month, 3000 hands is a good BALLPARK FIGURE to work from. The sheer SIZE of the discrepancy between the 19 confirmed underpayed Blackjacks is so far off what even a ROUGH ESTIMATE would tell us is the ROUGH figure for all Blackjacks generated during the "glitch" that there is little chance of convincing us that 19 Blackjacks is the TRUE TOTAL for underpayed hands ASSUMING the Blackjack game itself was not rigged, i.e., the cards were dealt randomly, and the correct number of Blackjacks were dealt.

The ONLY way to settle this is a FULL AUDIT of ALL Blackjack hands played. Firstly to find the times when the glitch began, and when it ended. During the period of the glitch, all hands that generated a Blackjack must be checked in more detail to ensure that the correct payment was made. Further, this audit MUST be done by an independent party, since Rival have already done this internally, and produced a figure of 19 underpayed hands, which does NOT come anywhere close to what is expected. I cannot believe that the March turnover of 3000 hands resulted from a sudden surge in play, but more that it represents the rough level of Blackjack play that the casino receives every month. This would be from players who have NOT taken any bonuses, or those that have completed WR on ones they have taken.
 

KasinoKing

WebMeister & Slotaholic..
webmeister
PABnonaccred
CAG
MM
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Location
Bexhill on sea, England
VWM; with all due respect I think you may have skimmed over a few posts which explain the numbers in more detail.
I think you should go back and take another look.

KK
 

GGW Laurie

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Location
In the Beautiful South !!
VWM; with all due respect I think you may have skimmed over a few posts which explain the numbers in more detail.
I think you should go back and take another look.

KK


Im sorry but this Kool-Aid still has a foul smell to it and we will not drink it nor serve it to our guests, if others want to drink it up just to have it on their menu, go right ahead, but once proven tainted, its makes it too bitter to swallow and shouldnt be served to guests (players) imho.

It just blows my mind that some are so easy to forgive what this casino did. Its not ok to cheat players and this would have never came to light unless the OP posted it.

Do you think Tradition would have came on CM and said" hey players we screwed up, we havent been paying you all what you had due(cheated) and it really wasnt our fault, yada yada yada but lets make nice and it wont ever happen again".

Nope, just cant drink this Kool Aid being offered, i pass.


Laurie
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
VWM; with all due respect I think you may have skimmed over a few posts which explain the numbers in more detail.
I think you should go back and take another look.

KK

I thought it was the rep herself who quoted 3000 as the number of hands played in the month of March. Another poster, not the OP, noticed this glitch long before SamD made it a big issue. This suggests it was live for about a month. Although this period did NOT align with the calendar month of March, surely the number of hands played IN a calendar month overlapping the one in question is a reasonable starting point for a rough estimate.

Despite the other arguments, I cannot believe that an entire month's play generated a mere 19 Blackjacks dealt to players between the time this was FIRST noticed (and ignored), to the time when SamD made such a big fuss that Rival stepped in and fixed it for BOTH game variants.

It seems many other players share this view, and one simple figure would go a long way towards clearing this up.

How many hands were played WHILST THE GLITCH WAS LIVE.

This would be a period starting from when the trainee screwed up the settings, to the two dates where the fault was fixed in each of the two games.
 

AussieDave

Banned User
Joined
Dec 24, 2005
Location
Australia
THE GLITCH

A glitch is a malfunction caused by a bug in the software.

This is nothing of the kind. It was a premeditated attempt to RIG the blackjack to scam players.

I draw this conclusion because Refre/Fred reported it to Tradition Casino on February 22, 2010. Was told it was fixed but it wasn't.

The casino manager attempted to slide the blackjack game off as an error made by casino personnel and at the time was to address the OP.

However with Refre/Fred bringing additional proof to the thread that the Tradition Casino blackjack was RIGGED on February 22, 2010 when he played.



Cheers

:)

Dave
 

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
FYI, in March, we have had 1,954 hands played on normal Blackjack and 965 hands played on Multi hands.

I'm not sure why everyone is telling me to go back and "reread" the numbers or Tradition's posts, unless I'm missing something?

1,954 hands of normal Blackjack, and 965 hands on Multi Hand Blackjack, for a total of 2,919 hands. BOTH versions of the game were rigged, not just multi-hand. Check out SamD's screenshots/history in the first post....it was Multi-Hand Blackjack. Now check out the screenshot that Refre/Freddy posted from February 22nd. That was NOT the multi-hand version, it was NORMAL blackjack, and it was rigged.

So what am I missing, that everyone keeps trying to point out? 19 blackjacks out of a possible 2,919 total hands is bullshit...not to mention I have a hard time even believing that 2,919 figure for starters. That may be what Rival provided to Tradition....but an independent audit sure would be nice, wouldn't it? Course, they've had plenty of time to cook the books now...so what good would it do? Cheating is cheating...no other way to say it, and no other way to look at it. End of it for me.
 

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
A glitch is a malfunction caused by a bug in the software.

This is nothing of the kind. It was a premeditated attempt to RIG the blackjack to scam players.

I draw this conclusion because Refre/Fred reported it to Tradition Casino on February 22, 2010. Was told it was fixed but it wasn't.

The casino manager attempted to slide the blackjack game off as an error made by casino personnel and at the time was to address the OP.

However with Refre/Fred bringing additional proof to the thread that the Tradition Casino blackjack was RIGGED on February 22, 2010 when he played.



Cheers

:)

Dave

Yeah Dave, I love it when anyone (especially a casino rep) tries to slide the word "glitch" by. A glitch implies software that was functioning incorrectly, for whatever reason. This functioned precisely as it was intended to...paying out 1:1. That is not a glitch...sugar coat it all you want, it's a fixed game...when people are playing it with the belief it is paying 3:2.

EDITED TO ADD: Twice now, the Tradition rep has attempted to say that the only person who reported this was SamD, and that it was only on March 22nd. The first time, I supplied her an out by asking "don't you mean February 22nd"? Of course, she jumped on it...I knew she would..which is why I posted it. The second time was the other day, to which she still hasn't replied. As Dave stated, SamD is NOT the only one who reported it, and it was NOT fixed immediately. Care to clarify those lies as well Tradition?
 

maphesto

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Location
Sweden
The more I read, the more you post, the more sure I am over the fact that we are dicked around when it comes to the numbers of BJ:s out of the expected numbers.

Was SamD playing multihand and Refre normal blackjack? :confused:
 

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
Was SamD playing multihand and Refre normal blackjack? :confused:

Absolutely!! Screenshots from the thread below...first one is SamD, playing MH Blackjack on March 22nd. Second one is Refre/Freddy playing normal/single hand Blackjack on February 22nd. If the rep is trying to imply that only one "version" of the game was rigged....more bullshit!!
 

Tengil

Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2006
Location
Finland
Absolutely!! Screenshots from the thread below...first one is SamD, playing MH Blackjack on March 22nd. Second one is Refre/Freddy playing normal/single hand Blackjack on February 22nd. If the rep is trying to imply that only one "version" of the game was rigged....more bullshit!!

from the reps post:

the 19 BJ list provided include normal and multi hand BJ since 20th february, but do not forget that normal blackjack has been repaired about 2010-02-22, so all hands played later than 22th february have been paid correctly.

So if JHV played normal BJ after 22nd Feb and it still paid 1:1 then the rep is lying.

Didnt actually know that a casino can have so little hands played in a month, 3-4 hours play. Also calling 100$ bets in BJ huge and not knowing the probability to get a black jack shows that the skin owner is quite unexperienced and maybe a skin is the best option. Just wonder how much they could screw up if they were totally independent.
 
Last edited:

Pinababy69

RIP Lisa
Joined
Oct 15, 2004
Location
Toronto, Ontario - Canada
from the reps post:

the 19 BJ list provided include normal and multi hand BJ since 20th february, but do not forget that normal blackjack has been repaired about 2010-02-22, so all hands played later than 22th february have been paid correctly.

So if JHV played normal BJ after 22nd Feb and it still paid 1:1 then the rep is lying.

Didnt actually know that a casino can have so little hands played in a month, 3-4 hours play. Also calling 100$ bets in BJ huge and not knowing the probability to get a black jack shows that the skin owner is quite unexperienced and maybe a skin is the best option. Just wonder how much they could screw up if they were totally independent.

Thank you Spider...so that's what I was missing then? Fair enough...but that makes it even worse IMO. They say they "repaired" (stupid terminology) the "normal" Blackjack on or about February 22nd...but no one even thought to check the settings on Multi Hand? Or did they check them, and just decided to leave it as is? Guess we'll never know will we? Just have to take their word for it.

The Tradition rep states that "they" (meaning Tradition) repaired the normal BJ, yet in another post stated that Rival went in and changed the settings on ALL blackjacks AFTER the initial posts by SamD on this forum.

Way too many inconsistencies for me....and another of those cases where we will just never know for sure if there was "intent" or not. I choose to err on the side of caution, and the player.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
from the reps post:

the 19 BJ list provided include normal and multi hand BJ since 20th february, but do not forget that normal blackjack has been repaired about 2010-02-22, so all hands played later than 22th february have been paid correctly.

So if JHV played normal BJ after 22nd Feb and it still paid 1:1 then the rep is lying.

Didnt actually know that a casino can have so little hands played in a month, 3-4 hours play. Also calling 100$ bets in BJ huge and not knowing the probability to get a black jack shows that the skin owner is quite unexperienced and maybe a skin is the best option. Just wonder how much they could screw up if they were totally independent.

Not just JHV, what about the other players, did ANYONE notice this AFTER 22nd of Feb. Pity JHV got banned, otherwise he could check whether this was the case from his records.

Even if it WAS fixed on the 22nd Feb, what about the hands played BEFORE this, have they ALL been checked, or only a few?

In the Multi-hand version, we know it was NOT fixed UNTIL JHV complained, and RIVAL fixed it. How many hands of multi-hand were played in this time, and does this fit the number of Blackjacks underpayed according to Rival?
 

tradition

Dormant account
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Location
malta
They say they "repaired" (stupid terminology) the "normal" Blackjack on or about February 22nd...but no one even thought to check the settings on Multi Hand?

Stop to play with my words! Do you prefer i speak in french? I'm sure not...

When Rival "repaired" the normal blajack, they should have had to check the multi hands one, for sure, but they didn't. I cannot do nothing now against this fact unfortunately.

The Tradition rep states that "they" (meaning Tradition) repaired the normal BJ, yet in another post stated that Rival went in and changed the settings on ALL blackjacks AFTER the initial posts by SamD on this forum.

I never told that someone of my personal team "repaired" BJ : in these two cases Rival made the change and when this post started i ignored that these 2 games have been repaired at different dates : i discovered it when i have had the complete hands list.
 
Top