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

[Pinababy69]

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.

 

[maphesto]

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]

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]

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?

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]

Nash!

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

5. Here is my answer to your question:

Nothing!

Agreed and btw, I was not directing my prior post at anyone specifically, Maphesto!!..........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]

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]

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]

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...?

KK

 

[maphesto]

After a very expensive education I have a masters degree on NASH speak.

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.

 

[chuchu59]

Sorry, but I haven't got the faintest idea what you are talking about...?

KK

Sometimes ignorance is bliss KK.

 

[AussieDave]

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]

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]

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

 

[LaurieJim]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?

 

[Pinababy69]

Was SamD playing multihand and Refre normal blackjack?

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]

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.

 

[Pinababy69]

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]

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]

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.

 

[chuchu59]

Oui Madame, parlez en francais.

 

[AussieDave]

Do you prefer i speak in french?

Oui Madame, parlez en francais.

Yes Madam, speak in French.

Your making a balls up of it speaking English


Cheers



Dave

 

[maphesto]

376 post with this one included! Tradition will never have this kind of commercial ever again.
"Tradition" is mentioned in the title, soon every one will think of Tradition when the word Rival comes up.

When new or old members look at the forum there are always same three casino names they see:

3Dice, 32Red and Tradition. (Vegas Regal is going to drop off the "hottest threads" list soon).

Solution: Change the title to "Evidence showing that Tradition cheated in BJ", in this way the word "Tradition" isn´t showed at the hottest threads without clicking or moving your mouse over it.

Back to topic!

@Tradition:

I want to know how many BJ there were in normal blackjack during feb and mars and how many played games there were during same time.

And I want the same information from the multi hand game.

Many of us think that it´s maybe too few BJ:s from the players. This is IMO worse than the original topic.

 

[tradition]

I want to know how many BJ there were in normal blackjack during feb and mars and how many played games there were during same time.

And I want the same information from the multi hand game.

Many of us think that it´s maybe too few BJ:s from the players. This is IMO worse than the original topic.

I don't have any possibility to find out these informations by myself but i'm going to ask this list to Rival. Not sure at all when i'll get an answer considering that Rival took 1 complete month for retrieve 19 hands... But i make the request now and we'll see

 

[tradition]

BTW I'd like to add that this request is a lost time because it will never be an objective possibility to calculate anything...

Having a payout about 98% (example) doesn't mean that if you deposit and play $100, you could lose maximum $2. Not at all! It simply means that casino bring you the possibility to lose maximum $2, but you can lose all your money if you won and if you continued to play until to lose all your money.

So, if a player miss the bj because he doesn't know how to play efficiently, payout still stays at 98%, but player would have lost all his money without making BJ at all or just few are blackjacks. What i'm meaning is that the number of BJ realized depends on the player quality, not on payout only. Did you know that?

 

[aceking123]

tradition

BTW I'd like to add that this request is a lost time because it will never be an objective possibility to calculate anything...

Having a payout about 98% (example) doesn't mean that if you deposit and play $100, you could lose maximum $2. Not at all! It simply means that casino bring you the possibility to lose maximum $2, but you can lose all your money if you won and if you continued to play until to lose all your money.

So, if a player miss the bj because he doesn't know how to play efficiently, payout still stays at 98%, but player would have lost all his money without making BJ at all or just few blackjack. What i'm meaning is that the number of BJ realized depends on the player quality, not on payout only. Did you know that?

hello players are mearly pointing out the fact that over the hands played ............(FYI, in March, we have had 1,954 hands played on normal Blackjack and 965 hands played on Multi hands ). that only 19 blacks in either normal black or mutihand black is a standing joke , these figures cant be correct unless your software is so bent that players are being stitched up. i dont think anyone is complaining about 2 dollar loss on 100 spent , there pointing to hands played (blackjacks )gotten in all those hands it does not make any sense , ofcourse in time you shall no doubt lose over long periods of blackjack play , but going by your stats your going to get rinsed far quicker , you need to come up with some facts here , ive been reading this thread without comment but alot of what p[eople are telling you 100% correct , i would of thought if my casino was going down the tube i would damn well jump at rival for all the unanswered questions & demand everything from cards going from first of feb 2010 - end of march 2010 , then at least you could put up proper stats for card including how many blackjacks there was, theres little faith in rival as it is & a whole can of worms has been opened from your casinos ,its about time as your the owner to come forth & listen to what players & affils are telling you , honest answers are the way forward , but the fact still remains that your casino got caught out cheating on cards wether it was a glitch , mistake or something else , it has been pointed out that back in feb there was a problem , realy it should of been sorted then ,even if it was sorted ,one would of thought that rival or you should of at least checked all card games , but no this wasnt the case . so step up & give us all the facts before going on about payouts of 98% !

 

[maphesto]

So, if a player miss the bj because he doesn't know how to play efficiently, payout still stays at 98%, but player would have lost all his money without making BJ at all or just few blackjack. What i'm meaning is that the number of BJ realized depends on the player quality, not on payout only. Did you know that?

Eh!

Please do not go into this discussion, most of those who reads this thread is VERY aware of how Black Jack is supposed to be played and how it works.

If you get Black Jack at your casino it´s only if your first two cards(which you don´t pick/chose at all) gives you BJ.

You can´t in any way use your skills.

EDIT to add: You can´t chose not to have Black Jack if you know what I mean.

 

[Pulver]

Edited away by myself.

 

[RedAndi]

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.



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.

Question...
If Traditions trainee is supposedly the one who screwed up the payout number then why did Rival have to step in to repair it?
If you can tamper with it in house why the need to have Big Bro come in and RE-tamper?
Just wondering.....

 

[vinylweatherman]

BTW I'd like to add that this request is a lost time because it will never be an objective possibility to calculate anything...

Having a payout about 98% (example) doesn't mean that if you deposit and play $100, you could lose maximum $2. Not at all! It simply means that casino bring you the possibility to lose maximum $2, but you can lose all your money if you won and if you continued to play until to lose all your money.

So, if a player miss the bj because he doesn't know how to play efficiently, payout still stays at 98%, but player would have lost all his money without making BJ at all or just few are blackjacks. What i'm meaning is that the number of BJ realized depends on the player quality, not on payout only. Did you know that?

Hand histories would mean we would not have to CALCULATE anything, we would have the ABSOLUTE TRUE NUMBER of Blackjacks that were dealt to players, and what the software paid out on them. You would then simply check each BJ to see whether or not it paid 3:2. Rival took ONE MONTH to do this

It also seems YOU can do NOTHING, you are refering almost EVERYTHING up to Rival, even minor tasks such as getting player gaming logs out of the "back end".

Who did you say owns this casino?

Eh!

Please do not go into this discussion, most of those who reads this thread is VERY aware of how Black Jack is supposed to be played and how it works.

If you get Black Jack at your casino it´s only if your first two cards(which you don´t pick/chose at all) gives you BJ.

You can´t in any way use your skills.

EDIT to add: You can´t chose not to have Black Jack if you know what I mean.

This was quite a blunder for the rep to even CONSIDER explaining away the low number of Blackjacks as being down to the lack of STRATEGY employed by players. Granted, the RTP DOES depend on how close to "perfect strategy" the game is played, BUT the number of Blackjacks dealt is going to be the SAME; lack of skill determines the outcomes of NON Blackjack hands, where the player makes choices based on their cards, and the dealer "up" card.

The perception I now get of the rep/owner is of someone who knows rather little about the "nuts & bolts" of running a casino, but who has money, and has merely invested it with a Rival run casino, hoping for a return on capital. Players would expect the OWNER of a casino to have at least a basic knowledge of the games offered, even if NOT of the software. I am even MORE surprised that in this scenario such operators had the power to tweak a game the owner didn't even fully understand the rules for. Rival have at least (so they tell us), taken away this option, and now require this to be done through Rival.

The perception may not be accurate, but what I am seeing in this thread is what I have to make a judgement from.

 

[all4greed]

So, if a player miss the bj because he doesn't know how to play efficiently, payout still stays at 98%, but player would have lost all his money without making BJ at all or just few are blackjacks. What i'm meaning is that the number of BJ realized depends on the player quality, not on payout only. Did you know that?

Holy crap! There should be a 2010 list of the most ignorant things a casino rep can say and this should be number one.

Wow.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Holy crap! There should be a 2010 list of the most ignorant things a casino rep can say and this should be number one.

Wow.

Imagine......


Sit down at table, place chip, and you are dealt A, K. You are so bad at Blackjack that you look up at the dealer, AND SIGNAL FOR ANOTHER CARD You just can't make it up

Remember, this situation is IMPOSSIBLE in ANY software, since the option for the player to "cock-up" a pat dealt Ace & Face is just not there - the game ends, and the BJ is paid, or pushed if the dealer also gets Ace & Face (other than in a few exotic variants of the game).

 

[all4greed]

Imagine......


Sit down at table, place chip, and you are dealt A, K. You are so bad at Blackjack that you look up at the dealer, AND SIGNAL FOR ANOTHER CARD You just can't make it up

Remember, this situation is IMPOSSIBLE in ANY software, since the option for the player to "cock-up" a pat dealt Ace & Face is just not there - the game ends, and the BJ is paid, or pushed if the dealer also gets Ace & Face (other than in a few exotic variants of the game).

Although this has nothing to do with Rival software, I did this little test at INetBet on pontoon. Why anyone would want to hit on a 21 is beyond me but it is possible. Is this one of the variants you referenced?

 

[Jufo]

Although this has nothing to do with Rival software, I did this little test at INetBet on pontoon. Why anyone would want to hit on a 21 is beyond me but it is possible. Is this one of the variants you referenced?

On Blackjack someone might considering doubling down on pat Blackjack because a blackjack pays 1.5x bet but a successful double down pays 2x bet, so there is an extra 0.5x possible win. It's a bit strange that softwares don't allow this but live Blackjack tables at B&M casinos do.

However, on Pontoon doubling down on Pontoon (two card Soft 21) makes little sense as Pontoon already pays 2x bet. The only way to get a larger payout than 2x bet would be to get 5-card-trick but it is a longshot.

 

[vinylweatherman]

On Blackjack someone might considering doubling down on pat Blackjack because a blackjack pays 1.5x bet but a successful double down pays 2x bet, so there is an extra 0.5x possible win. It's a bit strange that softwares don't allow this but live Blackjack tables at B&M casinos do.

However, on Pontoon doubling down on Pontoon (two card Soft 21) makes little sense as Pontoon already pays 2x bet. The only way to get a larger payout than 2x bet would be to get 5-card-trick but it is a longshot.

Pontoon is one of the "exotic variants" where you CAN play on after getting 21, and this is because the player might want to go for a 5 card trick. In Blackjack, a Blackjack dealt to the player automatically ends his turn, and the dealer hand is then ONLY played if the up card is either Ace or 10 in value, otherwise the player is paid there & then. Some softwares WILL play out the dealer hand, but this merely "burns" cards from the virtual shoe, it has no bearing on the outcome.

The real test is whether RIVAL software permits play beyond a pat dealt Blackjack, and if it DOES, the software should be considered "rogue" because it is breaking the rules for any "normal" Blackjack game, and the player simply CANNOT improve upon a Blackjack.

 

[Jufo]

The real test is whether RIVAL software permits play beyond a pat dealt Blackjack, and if it DOES, the software should be considered "rogue" because it is breaking the rules for any "normal" Blackjack game, and the player simply CANNOT improve upon a Blackjack.

I haven't played BJ at Rival but in all likelihood a dealt blackjack is an automatic stand for the player.

As for the number of blackjacks given by Tradition rep, the probability of a winning blackjack in six deck game is 0.04526 = roughly 1 in 22 (source:

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

). Simple Excel calculation shows that the probability to get only 19 or fewer winning blackjacks in 1954 hands played is zero. This means that there is 100% chance that the number provided by the rep is not correct, or the software is cheating. Even the probability to get 60 or fewer winning blackjacks in 1954 hands played is 0.00069 = 1 in 1455 chance. The should be at least 68 winning blackjacks in 1954 hands played for the result to be even remotely statistically valid.

 

[binshakindown]

I noticed all the free chip bonus offers have evaporated

which is not a bad thing. It also appears to be very quiet on Rival's front and from what I can see it was expected this thread died. Any more developments Tradition? Were all the peeps reimbursed?

 

[incrediblestuff]

The OP was reimbursed, and tradition owner posted he /she reimbursed everyone affected, but that is not proven, only said.
JHV posted he was reimbursed to his surprise, and rivals were taken of the accredited list anyway, thats all thats happened in a nutshell

 

[kenneth2816]

This post is merely an *opinion*, and we all know what those are worth. My impression of Rival and its evil twin Top Game is that they saw an open playing field when Microgmaing left the US market, and perhaps they believed that less competition meant less scrutiny. Or does anyone believe Micro did not dominate the US market?

Personally, I've read enough (not just here) that I would not deposit at either brand.

On the other hand RTG sure seems to be adapting........

 

[ergopro]

So this era of Tradition Casino ends...they went belly up. Got an affiliate announcement from them.

IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT 22th MAY 2010

Dear affiliates,

Foremost, we deeply apologize for this brutal announcement. Rival Gaming, the Tradition casino software provider is responsible for all banking transactions: our company has never had any agreement with any payment processor. Last months activity decreased because of processing problems both in U.S. and Europe that Rival Gaming did not anticipate, nor resolve.

As you know, the game industry is a sector that is both highly competitive and have unstable legal terms: first, our society can not continue to pay winnings players considering that player have received a match bonus on his deposit and that his deposit amount that enabled this winning has been blocked by a bank named X or Y... Until today, we paid all our players.

In addition, if your own players deposited and if these deposits are held by the bank, we are not able to pay you any commission, although, like us, you worked hard. We can not endure this situation.

Last, we can not stand to see dying Tradition casino by lack of support from the majority of our affiliates members. That said, we can not blame you, you expect a financial return as the fruit of your work, exactly as us.

Tradition casino has been created in order to give us the opportunity to prove that an online casino could establish a trusted relationship with players and affiliates, with transparency, and with all the love for this profession that characterized each member of our team. Therefore, given that we do not want to cheat nor "shave" your stats and/or stop pay our winners, we decided to stop the bleeding by stopping now our activity.

However, we waited several months before taking this decision, we also tried to find common ground with Rival. Unfortunately, no agreement and no viable solution has been presented to us, therefore we don't have any other choice but to cease Tradition Casino.

Igaming.pro website will be online until June 5th Igaming.pro, like this you will continue to access to your statistics and we really hope that, in the future, Rival Gaming will honor its commitments with you, better than they have done with us.

Although Tradition casino is already offline, your existing players can still continue to play and you are still cumuling earnings. However, please immediately stop sending any traffic on Tradition Casino website. Rival Gaming has already bought a domain name related to our name "Tradition Casino", so it means that Rival have a clear idea about the strategy they want to adopt with players and affiliates.

Our approach has often seemed unusual, we know this. There was gale of laughter and some conflicts as well; please keep make the most of this situation and do not forget that we did our best. Until 5th June you can still leave us your comments, simply send us an email : [email protected].

We apologize again for the inconvenience and we wish you continued success in your business affiliation.

Thank you for your trust.

Warmest regards,


Igaming.pro Team
"Better die a beggar, than live a beggar."

 

[dominique]

First Slotpower walks from Rival accusing Rival of being at fault, now Tradition does.

I thought Rival had solved it's processing issues - apparently not.

 

[bb1webs]

Hi all,

like other casinos (not all), treat their players with little appreciation or respect

I just wanted to agree with the above and note it again in hopes maybe some casino manager will have it sink in because obviously it is something still not fully understood to as the writer stated, not all, but certainly a share of casinos.

read enough (not just here) that I would not deposit at either brand.

On the other hand RTG sure seems to be adapting........

Nothing to say but agree with top game, however I've had a quality experience with box24 so far, and I think betus is also rival, whom I imagine are pretty decent about their approach.

I can't speak on the blackjack, just that my experience with the slots have been (... sometimes crappy), but other times quite nice so I would play them again .. but I would stick to a select few of rivals.

And that due to ease getting paid by 24 and that all else fails, I have a contact with 24 whom is ever-gaining my confidence.

..........

Agree with RTG, I've always felt they had very good software, and were adaptable , its just that there is always something that comes along and prevents them from being .... a MGS.

Anyway,... I came here to see how everyone liked the new mystery software for the MGS casinos (for US players) , so I'm off to find that.

 

[Suave]

What happened to this horrible sham tradition casino operation? When you hit download there you get the winpalace application which is rtg software?

 

[maphesto]

The casino still works but Rival is operating it themselves. The former manager obiously owns the webpage and gets affiliate income for sending players to winpalace instead.

 

[Suave]

Really a sham operations run by amateurs until the end. So if a player goes to the site, checks and likes those silly bonuses, downloads, he'll get a total different casino software and promotions, terms etc?
They could have done something much more informative, cleaner and not as misleading, as barakacasino have done when closing. Old habits die hard I suppose.