Class Action against BETFAIR CASINO....Random? Ha!

Another point i put to the software people was that they state a figure which is called 'return to player'percentage being 97% 0r 98% or whatever the figure is and i said to the MD how can they predict a figure in advance if these games are truly random because if they were truly random the house could not possibly have an advantage and so impossible to predict in advance - he refused to answer that question.

There are two flaws in your argument here.  Firstly, random doesn't mean the house has no advantage and secondly the RTP isn't calculated by knowing the results in advance.  The house advantage is built into the rules and payout structure and the RTP is calculated from an understanding of these.

Live roulette is random but the house still has an advantage due to the rules and payout structure, giving an RTP of 97.3% (European wheel).

Here's a simpler example.  Lets say I offer to pay you even money on predicting what number will come up on the roll of a die.  Clearly with such poor odds I have a huge advantage but that doesn't mean that the roll of the die isn't random.  I can even calculate the RTP in advance - 16.6%.  Again, the advantage and the ability to calculate the RTP come from understanding the rules of the game and the payout structure, not from having a fixed die.

Sir,
    You pick out 2 points and say my arguement is 'flawed' however typically you seem not to mention the one box against one box, wherby not a single casino in the world would allow that so if the Betfair blackjack game is truly random how can you possibly allow 1 against 1. I think the casinos of the world know a little bit more about odds. You also fail to mention the cycles that i explained. You also failed to mention the the so called 'testing' by independents whom have admitted to me that they are done with credits and not REAL CASH. You are just part of the big conspiracy wagon constantly constantly still sticking to your story that these games are 'RANDOM' when we all know they are not, they may be some of the time but they are not random 100% of the time. When i am ready to go to court i will bring every organisation that has 'this machine/game is random' TO THEIR KNEES. I know it is a tough thing to prove hence i have been working on it now for nearly a year and i wont be ready to issue court action for at least another 18 months. I am in talks with someone who has left one of these software companies and is prepared to talk about the real truth what is going on and he is a major weapon that i will use in bringing justice to the punter. As i have always said i expect these machines to be fixed and i know people have to make money but when wording, THIS GAME/MACHINE IS RANDOM IS CLEARLY WRITTEN then that is where i have the problem.

You're correct, I didn't pick out all the flaws in your argument, merely the most obvious.  Namely, your assumptions that "random" is synonymous with "no house advantage" and that RTP cannot be calculated in advance on a random game.  Given your avoidance of both of these subjects in your reply I trust that you now understand.

Moving on then, heads-up blackjack is prohibited in most casinos since it gives card-counters an additional advantage by increasing the number of high-count rounds that they can play.  To a degree then you are correct, heads-up play can result in the casino having no house advantage, but (and this is the important bit) only in conjunction with card-counting.  Don Schlesinger covers this quite well in one of his books (Blackjack Attack - Playing The Pro's Way, I think) so I won't go into the maths here.  This obviously isn't an issue online since a new deck is generated for every hand thus rendering card-counting impossible and hence the casino cannot lose their advantage.  Heads-up blackjack is therefore commonplace online.

there is now live roulette blackjack etc on the net..real cards real roulette wheel..real dealers real time...no excuse now to play against electronic casinos...

please tell me what card counting has got to do with the number of boxes being played, all the cards come out of one shue, out of the dealers same hand, if a card counter is doing his counting, he is looking at the shue where the cards come out so what difference if the dealer lays the cards down on one box or 7, sorry but you are talking waffle, one box against one box is only because the game is NOT RANDOM which is why its allowed.
Whilst we are chatting, what is your position at Betfair? If you look at all the correspopndence i have from Global draw who are the worlds biggest software manufacturers, its amazing how threy react to my questions, in fact it is identical to the way that you answer or should i say try to answer awkward questions which is why i know you must have some conflict of interest, there is no way you are just a 'punter' you are either a moderator or staff at BF. Please confirm which it is?

By the way just for your information, when i started to delve into the mathmaticians (sorry not a gt speller)who are connected to Global Draw, i received a phone call telling me to 'STOP DELVING' the words which were used. I luckily taped the call although i know it is not admissable in Court but i am telling you that there is a very bad smell going on within this industry which i believe is so big that i have filed a report with my solicitors whilst i am making my report.

Next week i have a meeting at Bangor University where i shall be geting another sworn affidavit from an engineer who used to work in the industry.

GD

As previously mentioned, I suggest you read Schlesinger if you want the details (unless of course he's part of the conspiracy and a secret employee of Betfair too).

The fact that you're hearing "identical" information from multiple sources should tell you something.  Of course, it is possible that everyone you speak to is part of this great conspiracy against you, but perhaps it is also possible that they understand mathematics and concepts such as the house advantage a little better than you do.

To give you the benefit of the doubt, these games could of course be **** and I'm sure that you could put forward a good case for this.  You're just weakening your argument significantly by making some silly statements that don't bear up to the slightest scrutiny and only really serve to highlight your lack of understanding.

Please don't take my word for any of this.  Just spend a little time trying to understand how a random game can still have an inbuilt house advantage, how to calculate the RTP on a random game, what the house advantage is on heads-up blackjack and why the problems casinos experience with live heads-up blackjack don't translate to the online game.  Once you actually understand some of these concepts I'm sure you'll withdraw some of your earlier statements and any case you bring will be far stronger for you having done so.

**** = r i g g e d

Yet again you answer the questions that suit you. Answer the question about the dealing from the shue and what difference it makes how many boxes there are if the 'card counter' is looking at the shue, not whether the cards are placed on one box or 5 boxes, (see question previously) also what is your position at BF? which you so conveniently forget to address, if you cant answer my questions please don't insult my intelligence by totally avoiding them, so please answer them directly especially about the card counting being the reason why Casinos dont allow 1 against 1.

Incidentally another point i mentioned in previous correspondence was about the 3 cycles which again you mention nothing about, now let me guess, 'this is just the random generator at work' will be your reply

'great conspiracy against me' you quote, yet i have sworn affidavits from very influential people in some of the UK's biggest universitys plus a betting shop manager who has worked for Ladbrokes for over 20 years, conspiracy against just me? mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

To answer all your questions on card-counting and heads-up blackjack, for the third and final time please read Schlesinger.  Yes, I could rehash great chunks of his book on this forum but I doubt I would do him justice.  Having been given the source if you are too lazy to go and do the research yourself then I'm really not inclined to do it for you.

For what its worth, I was also very sceptical regarding his claims since they are hugely counter-intuitive for the reasons that you have stated, but I now understand where he is coming from and concur with the maths that he uses to back them up.

Regarding the Betfair issue, it was such over-the-top conspiracy-theorist nonsense that I chose to ignore it, but if it makes you feel better I have not at any time worked for Betfair or any other company that is involved with or stands to benefit from the gaming industry.

Finally, "conspiracy" was your choice of words, not mine.  If you read my posts again I have never claimed these games are random and never claimed that your conspiracy doesn't exist.  I've merely pointed out that some of your statements make no sense to anyone with an understanding of maths / gambling / odds (call it what you will) and they are weakening your overall argumment.

Just as i thought you cant answer the questions because you have no answer which gives my claim all the more substance anyway i must be wasting my time as it is not you i have to prove anything to and it is not you i am going to take to court and bring to your knees so what you have to say is 100% irellevant.I think i will leave it at that and carry on with my work which is important to me and of which you are certainly not.

Another point which is so valid is that in every Casino in the world you CAN NOT play one box against the bank if you are on the table on your own because the house would have 'no edge' so if playing Blackjack on your own in any casino you have to play 2 boxes against the bank.

rubbish i do it all the time in oz - get facts straight here please

Agree
You can play one box in Vegas at every hotel Ive been in. In the UK they dont let you because they are tighter. Remember the more boxes being played the more house collects

Look here for the varying house edges in comparison as to what you can do in UK against the US.

http://wizardofodds.com/blackjack/house-edge-calculator-pop.html

Ive been playing online casinos for years and have no doubt that Betfairs is straight.

Its just losers remember the bad times more than the winners do the good.

Let me get this straight.

This guy thought there was no house advantage when playing one box against the dealer.  OK, some people aren't good at maths and he's probably never played outside of the UK and seen this type of game being played so we'll let this one pass.

He then proceeded to donk £66,000 "proving" his theory.  Still OK if he can afford it, although at some point during this downward spiral you would think he should have considered that his initial assumption was a bit wobbly.

He's now seen it with his own eyes and had it explained to him by multiple people, but he still maintains that he's correct.  PMSL   Some people really should not be allowed out on their own.

Just found this bit.

if they were truly random the house could not possibly have an advantage

ROFL   Comedy genius.

Let me get this right! Are you Mr Second Coming saying that you are playing one box on a blackjack table against the bank and there IS NO ONE ELSE ON THE TABLE?

If this is the case are you actually saying that these computer casino/betting shop blackjack games are 100% Random 100% of the time meaning'LACKING ANY DEFINITE PLAN OR ORDER OR PURPOSE AND HAVING NO SPECIFIC PATTERN OR OBJECTIVE' every time a card is selected either for the player or the bank. Do you actually believe that? because if the answer is NO then you agree with what i am saying and an illegal case of misrepresentation is occuring.

As for you Mr BIg K you completely miss the point. I dont care if the house has an advantage and it is fixed 90% in their favour but when i see the wording 'THIS GAME IS RANDOM, IN BIG CAPITAL LETTERS' on ewvery one of these machines and you apply the definition as i have above which is the true definition of 'RANDOM' then there IS a problem, CAN you now see the issue? We all know the goddam machine/house has an advantage but you cant put on that Wording,'THIS MACHINE/GAME IS RANDOM' AND HAVE THE HOUSE HAVE A GUARANTEED ADVANTAGE in other words you cant have both, its one or the other. Can you now see where the misrepesentation is?

Finally to you 'er what happened there' i just looked at your Blacjack house edge calculator and its a JOKE! following those principles the house advantage is zero or to be precise fractions and fractions of 1% and although this is probably the true house percentage IF PLAYING A PROPER RANDOM GAME IN A CASINO then why does this percentage not apply to Betfairs and Ladbrokes Blackjack where the house edge is much much higher when it should be the same as your calculator because again i stress these games have it in writing 'THIS GAME IS RANDOM'(IN WRITING) so thank you because you have just reinforced the point that these computer blacjack games are NOT RANDOM otherwise their margin would be tiny like a normal casino so finally all you out there need to understand that when these games have 'THIS GAME IS RANDOM IN WRITING' they are clearly NOT THUS THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW, I REALLY REALLY HOPE YOU ALL TRY TO DIGEST EXACTLY WHAT I AM SAYING BECAUSE CLEARLY YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE POINT APART FROM 'RIP OFF' WHO STARTED THIS POST AT THE VERY TOP AND IS INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND

in other words you cant have both, its one or the other

A live roulette wheel is random, but the house still has an advantage.  Random does not mean "no house advantage".  You can have both.  The same principal applies to blackjack and just about every other gambling game.

following those principles the house advantage is zero or to be precise fractions and fractions of 1%

About half a percent to be precise, which is exactly right if you follow basic strategy perfectly.  The website makes very clear that it is only quoting figures for basic strategy.

why does this percentage not apply to Betfairs and Ladbrokes Blackjack where the house edge is much much higher

The RTP quoted for these websites is about 98% giving a house advantage of 2%.  Ooooh, you're right

No, of course you're not   The RTP would be 99.5% giving a house advantage of 0.5% if everyone played basic strategy perfectly.  They don't.  Most people haven't even heard of basic strategy and donk their money away with shabby play.  Thus the RTP is lower and the house takings higher.  Realistic house takings at live casinos are in the 2% region too.

You think you are a real smart****! dont you? Very simple look at my definition of random and if you think these machines play to that 100% of the time then you are a bigger fool that i first thought anyway i am interested in people who i can sue not smartalecs who think they know it all!

one final point is about that maybe your RTP is correct but it is the way it is done, because these games work in cycles if you are playing at the wrong time you can lose 10 hands in a row, EVEN MORE and you have to wait for the cycle to change and hopefully get a good run and whilst this may equate to 98% RTP OVER A LONG PERIOD it could be over a very very long time and this occurs regularly, the 3 cycle syndrome as i call it 1 some hands you win some you lose, approx 50/50, 2, you win almost every hand and cycle 3 the computer wins every hand, this 3 cycle syndrome is a regular occurence and if you happen to play at the wrong time it will clean you out in MINUTES. THIS TYPE OF FORMAT COULD NOT HAPPEN IF EVERY HAND WAS TRULY RANDOM AND THIS 3 CYCLE SYNDROME MAY HAPPEN JUST BY CHANCE OVER SAY A 3 DAY PERIOD IN A REAL CASINO BUT IT CAN NOT HAPPEN ON A REGULAR BASIS AS THESE MACHINES DO, SO THE RTP IS IRRELLEVANT IT JUST MEANS THE CARDS ARE NOT SELECTED RANDOMLY, IF YOU STILL DONT GET IT , I GIVE UP ON YOU MATE.

I actually complained to Betfair about a year ago about their blackjack after i had lost 34 hands in a row playing two hands per game, therefore 68 losers in a row. I asked them to look at the hands whose id numbers i identified and asked them to explain to me how they could justify this when the mathmatical odds of such an occurance are billions to one. I am desperately trying to find their email response but it went something like.

"we understand your frustration at the run of hands. however we want to ensure that Betfair poker is fair to everyone and pays out to the advertised percentage which can cause runs like this"


I responded to this that it cant be random if the rng is ensuring that the percentage is met and not letting the natural run of cards over time meet the percentage"

i got the normal "betfair poker is accessed as random by outside auditors" etc.

As soon as i find these emails i will copy and paste them onto here and forward them to anyone who wants to see them.

Let me get this right! Are you Mr Second Coming saying that you are playing one box on a blackjack table against the bank and there IS NO ONE ELSE ON THE TABLE?

If this is the case are you actually saying that these computer casino/betting shop blackjack games are 100% Random 100% of the time meaning'LACKING ANY DEFINITE PLAN OR ORDER OR PURPOSE AND HAVING NO SPECIFIC PATTERN OR OBJECTIVE' every time a card is selected either for the player or the bank. Do you actually believe that? because if the answer is NO then you agree with what i am saying and an illegal case of misrepresentation is occuring.

Dont think he said that. He said you can play single box in the US. Your arguement was you can play single box online so must be fixed.

Finally to you 'er what happened there' i just looked at your Blacjack house edge calculator and its a JOKE! following those principles the house advantage is zero or to be precise fractions and fractions of 1% and although this is probably the true house percentage IF PLAYING A PROPER RANDOM GAME IN A CASINO then why does this percentage not apply to Betfairs and Ladbrokes Blackjack where the house edge is much much higher when it should be the same as your calculator because again i stress these games have it in writing 'THIS GAME IS RANDOM'(IN WRITING) so thank you because you have just reinforced the point that these computer blacjack games are NOT RANDOM otherwise their margin would be tiny like a normal casino so finally all you out there need to understand that when these games have 'THIS GAME IS RANDOM IN WRITING' they are clearly NOT THUS THEY ARE BREAKING THE LAW, I REALLY REALLY HOPE YOU ALL TRY TO DIGEST EXACTLY WHAT I AM SAYING BECAUSE CLEARLY YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE POINT APART FROM 'RIP OFF' WHO STARTED THIS POST AT THE VERY TOP AND IS INTELLIGENT ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND

Never has so much crap been written by one person in such a short space of time.

Have you NEVER been in a live casino and won 3 hands in a row. On my phone I have a photo of a Roullete Wheels display In Vegas where the spin was 3 27s, then 13 then 27 and me with the biggest mound of chips I ever had. I play 27 (my lads Bday) and 6 and 13 as they are next to each other on a roullete wheel (in the UK)The odds of 1 particular number coming out in 4 of 5 spins are huge, but it does happen.


Love this line

i am interested in people who i can sue not smartalecs who think they know it all!

You can sue who you want, you wont win

By:
This user is online.
MarkEitzel
Date Joined: 01 Feb 08
Add contact | Send message
When: 08 Dec 10 22:39
I actually complained to Betfair about a year ago about their blackjack after i had lost 34 hands in a row playing two hands per game, therefore 68 losers in a row. I asked them to look at the hands whose id numbers i identified and asked them to explain to me how they could justify this when the mathmatical odds of such an occurance are billions to one. I am desperately trying to find their email response but it went something like.

"we understand your frustration at the run of hands. however we want to ensure that Betfair poker is fair to everyone and pays out to the advertised percentage which can cause runs like this"


I responded to this that it cant be random if the rng is ensuring that the percentage is met and not letting the natural run of cards over time meet the percentage"

i got the normal "betfair poker is accessed as random by outside auditors" etc.

As soon as i find these emails i will copy and paste them onto here and forward them to anyone who wants to see them.


Id have said I was playing Blackjack, not poker ?

you are a bigger fool that i first thought

I stay away from games that are biased against me, whether random, r i g g e d, or some combination of the two.  Foolish me.

You're £66,000 in the hole.  Clever you.

This thread is absolute gold if it's real, but I suspect Greedydog is actually just winding you all up. Nobody can actually be that dense, can they??

Another muppet enters equation, i know you you are one of those 'shrewdys' who bets in £2 and backs 6/4 shots and has his little £2 on at 500/1 hoping someone is gonna lay it and push the 500/1 shot by mistake and waits there all day investing his £2 dreaming like a lottery player. Years down the line and befair is still full of saddos

The machines are random. I know this for certain beyond any doubt. Not prepared to explain how I know but suffice to say that I have had access to more data than anyone on here. The problem is that people like the conspiracy theories to explain their losses.

As for taking the word of a Laddies shop manager well words fail me.

Banks, you prove to me beyond any reasonable doubt that these machines are random and £1k will wing its way to your bank account, please dont tell me this crap about you have seen data, that means nothing, it is the data thats flawed and if all you pricks who think they know it all, well let me inform you i am lunching next week with a Maths professor from Bangor university who knows more about these machines and the software that operates them then any of you dreamers, i have only just realised what muppets and how many there are on BF, so Mr Bank see if you can bank something for yourself and get proving.

Its so funny all the big mouths especially Muppett who thinks i am 66K in ' the whole' i challenge you that you probabl;y have not even seen 6k in your life, i will tell you, LODGE 20K with a UK Solicitor to prove yopu can lay your hands on it and i personally guarantee to another 5K because you my friend are on eo fthe potless loudmouths that think they know it all, so 'PUT UP OR SHUT UP

GD

There i found you MR K sorry i meant 'HOLE' before you using 'he cant even spell' lets see what you can pull up, cos we all know, ITS ZILCH, its always the potless ones with the big mouths so MR K, AGAIN PUT UP OR SHUT?

Whwn i started chatting to 'RIP OFF' who started this post, he is a really decent guy and we were having some good debates especially privately and then all these DICKS like POTLESS MR K come out from under the stone, do us all a favour cos we all know you wont Be able to pull up 20k so crawl back into your hole.

If Mr 'RIP OFF' reads all this i wont reveal his name because we only trade first names privately but if you are reading me venting my anger against these divs on Betfair i personally apologise to you and we will carry on the important stuff which we have chatted about privately by private email.


Finally over to you MR K

Erm Sorry, just to clarify its MR BIG K, Big at what? apart from shooting his mouth, its certainly not a 'BIG' bank balance, I dont know you, dont wanna know you but can you take me for 5K, you aint gotta do much, just pull up 20K within 7 days.
Cant Wait

GD

Greedydog what info do you require?

I have seen data from millions of spins. Are you suggesting that the data is manipulated? If so what is it that you need to see thta will satisfy your curiosity?

Do you know when this data is compiled, it is done with 'CREDITS' on the machine and not REAL CASH' Dont you know the software acts differntly with 'credits' ie playing for fun' than when real money is inserted and then data is compiled from that. So you tell meif data is wrong? I dont think it is purposely manipulated, NO' but it is not compiled correctly thus giving false data, only telling you whats Maths Prof who i am meeting next week is telling me, are you aware there is an investigation going on about how data has been obtained in the last 5 years by the department of trade and industry, DO YOU KNOW ALL THIS?
OVER TO YOU, WHAT DATA ARE YOU GONNA SHOW ME?

I WILL RESPOND IF NEEDED ONE MORE TIME TONITE IF YOU REPLY AND THEN CARRY ON MANYANA BUT I HAVE WRITERS CRAMP LETTING THAT IDIOT MR BIG K KNOW WHAT I THINK OF HIM, ANYWAY I AWAIT YOUR REPLY TO MY LAST.
CHEERS
GD

I have seen data from many millions of real spins and I am afraid that they do not support your theory.

You seem to be a little confrontational however I am no apologist for these machines and have no vested interest either way in this matter.

I can assure you that the machines do produce the expected theoretical margins over many millions of spins.

BANKS THATS COOL, I ONLY GET CONFRONTATIONAL TO PEOPLE WHO DESERVE TO BE TREATED THAT WAY AND I AM GLAD TO SAY, YOU ARE NOT ONE OF THOSE BUT AGAIN WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO SHOW ME? COS THE 1K OFFER STANDS BUT YOU HAVE NOT REALLY ANSWERED MY LAST REPLY YOU JUST SAY THAT WHAT I SAY DOES NOT BEAR OUT, YOU NEED TO ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT THE DATA TESTING BY INDEPENDENTS WHO REGULATE THE INDUSTRY AND HAVE BEEN USING CRFEDITS AND NOT REAL CASH, WHY IS THERE AN INVESTIGATION BY THE DTI, TO EARN YOUR GRAND YOU NEED TO DO BETTER THAN JUST SAY MY THEORY IS NOT SUPPORTED, IT IS NOT MY THEORY, THIS INFO AS COME TO MY ATTENTION, YOU REALLY NEED TO UNDERSTAND A BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT I HAVE BEEN DOING AND ABOUT 150 DOCUMENTS I HAVE COLLATED OVER THE LAST YEAR AND HAVE SPOKEN TO MANY INFLUENTIAL INDIVIDUALS IN THE INDUSTRY AND I DONT MEAN JUST BETTING SHOP MANAGERS, SO I ASK YOU AGAIN PLEASE ANSWER MY PREVIOUS POINTS AND WHAT ARE YOU ACTUALLY GONNA SHOW ME.
BANKS I AM DONE FOR THE DAY
HAPPY TO CARRY ON MANYANA AND AGAIN THE OFER STILL STANDS BUT IT HAS TO BE CONCRETE.

GOOD NIGHT
GD

BANKS, PREVIOUS PAGE 8TH DEC 20.20 PLEASE LOOK AT MY REPLY TO MR BIG K AND ANSWER THAT AND ALSO CHECK OUT THE DEFINING OF THE WORD RANDOM AS WRIITEN IN THE OXFORD DICTIONARY WHICH I ALSO POSTED ON PREVIOUS PAGE SOMEWHERE

THATS ME REALLY DONE FOR TONITE

GD

Greedydog I do not want your money. I am trying to save you time and effort.

I know that it is difficult on an anonymous forum to convince people that you are possibly better informed than they are.

There are many people who have doubts over the machines however that is because they are such an efficient product that people struggle to accept that there is nothing untoward. I wish you well in your campaign however you need to know that you will fail because you are wrong. It is up to you whether to accept this or not.

I have previously been in a position where I had access to data from billions of pounds of turnover and it conformed precisely with expectations.

I am sure you will find people who want to support you however I can assure you that you are barking up the wrong tree.

I challenge you to name 1 influential individual in the industry or ex industry either by name or job title who supports your claims. There won`t be one because anyone in a senior position will have seen the true data and know the facts. I hope this helps but doubt that it will.

PPS YOU KEEP MENTIONING SPINS, MY WHOLE CASE ARGUEMENT IS NOT ABOUT REEL FRUIT MACHINRES IT IS THE SELECTION OF CARDS AND APPLIES TO BLACKJACK AND BLACJACK ONLY AND NO OTHER GAME WHICH I HAVE NO INTEREST IN AND PREDOMINANTLY THESE ARE THE MACHINES MADE BY 'GLOBAL DRAW' AND SUPPLY LADBROKES AND HILLS, I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT REEL TO REEL FRUIT MACHIUNES

BANKS,
      WILL YOU PAY ME £1K IF I SHOW YOU A SWORN AFFIDAVIT FROM AN EMPLOYEE WHO WORKED FOR A SOFTWARE COMPANY WHICH INSTALLS THE SOFTWARE IN THESE MACHINES FOR 15 YEARS AND HAS NOW LEFT AND IN HIS OPINION THE DATA OVER THE LAST 5 YEARS NEEDS TO BE REASSESSED BECAUSE HE HAS SWORN THAT HE BELIEVES WHILST UNINTENTIONAL, THE DATA HAS SERIOUS FLAWS.

YES OR NO?
IF YES GET YOUR 1K I WILL SHOW YOU THIS EVIDENCE NEXT WEEK

Greedydog as I said earlier I have no interest in proving the case one way or another I just thought ot might be useful to mark your card for you.

I am pretty sure that I will have seen way more data for blackjack,roulette etc than all your sources combined and based on this I know that you are 1.01 to end up getting nowhere.

I advise that you find a current or ex senior contact ie director level from either one of the large machine manufacturers or top 3 bookmaker who is prepared to show you figures and I guarantee you will discover that you are wrong.

Banks,
     Thanks for all your replies but i really think that YOU think that this world of Capitalism we live runs along all nice and smooth and all boxes are ticked correctly sometimes people look through the world with Rose Color glasses, i will leave it at that. I only started answering to one guy called 'Rip Off' and then everyone else got involved and some became quite insulting, one in particular called Mr Big K, anywhere i have shut him up after i put a challenge to him, so apart from ,'rip off' yeah i know funny name but he is a decent guy and with the greatest respect i only wish to discuss matters with him which we now do privately, so on that note Banks, nice to make your aquaintence but i am bowing out from this particular post.


Oh as for you MR K Big Mouth, no doubt you have crawled back under your stone, Do us all a favour? STAY THERE?


Have a nice Xmas Banks.

GD

No worries. As I said I`m not fussed either way it`s just that I have probably more knowledge of this subject than anyone else on here and try and help if I can.

I wish you well but advise you to keep your expectations low because you are barking up the wrong tree. If I did not value my anonymity on here I could show you definitive proof that would end your campaign in one fell swoop.

I don`t like seeing people waste their time but can`t see how to help you anymore without revealing who I am.

Best of luck.

banks, i did say that i was bailing out of this post but felt i had to reply one last time, my email is allypops@btinternet.com and you email by return with PDF attach, your docs/data to prove what you say you can  do and if you do my 1k offer stands as i am a man of my word and your anonymity stays intact, if you are still worried about your anonymity go to hotmail and set up a new secure email address just for this purpose, there you are i have set you the challenge.

GD

WALOFS

What is?
Dont tell me another potless brainless **** has entered this post?
You must be related to Mr K Big

We all know what happened to Mr Big K

Losing 50K in two months is certainly possible. Wager 1.5 million on blackjack with weak strategy and it becomes expectation.

You'd need to know games played, initial wager size, total bets placed / amount wagered to be able to judge anything.

"Do you know when this data is compiled, it is done with 'CREDITS' on the machine and not REAL CASH' Dont you know the software acts differntly with 'credits' ie playing for fun' than when real money is inserted and then data is compiled from that."

There's no difference between fun mode and real mode. In fact, fun mode- if it doesn't run off the casino software but off your PC's RNG - is liable to be less random than the more advanced casino RNG. However, casino or PC RNG, the results would be in no material way different. And of course, most fun modes also run off the casino software RNG, so there is absolutely no difference.

Are you saying these machines in bookies, blackjack especially are 100% Random, 100% of the time, in other words there are 6 packs of cards ie 312 cards and every time a card is selected whether for the player or the bank, 100% of the time there is NO DEFINITE PLAN, OR ORDER,HAS NO SPECIFIC PATTERN, PURPOSE OR OBJECTIVE. iS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? BECAUSE ON THE MACHINE THERE IS METAL PLATE WHICH HAS 4 WORDS IN BLOCK CAPITALS 'THIS MACHINE IS RANDOM' JUST THOSE 4 WORDS, NO * SAYING SEE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, JUST THOSE 4 WORDS, NOTHING ELSE.

Just interested in your opinion, Yoks.
Cheers
Greedydog

Greedydog they are random. You just want conspiracy theories to explain your losses.

You are playing a game with a negative outcome expectation and then appear surprised when you lose.

Again I will reiterate that I have absolute proof that they are completely random. There are quite a few people like you who feel that they are on the brink of exposing a collosal fraud and all who have progressed with their campaigns have proven to be wrong.

You may not like it but the odds are that you are a problem gambler but just don`t want to admit it. It is easier to blame machines than yourself. No different to people who blame "cheating" jockeys.

Everyone needs an excuse and this is yours.

Greedydog:

"Are you saying these machines in bookies, blackjack especially are 100% Random, 100% of the time, in other words there are 6 packs of cards ie 312 cards and every time a card is selected whether for the player or the bank, 100% of the time..."

I think those bookie machines work on the UK fruit machine mechanism, and not from a RNG, and are payout-based. So no, I don't think they are random. I was only talking about online casino software as applied to games like blackjack, baccarat etc. Online slots also work off the same RNGs, but I believe the distribution may be weighted in some of them. Don't quote me on that latter bit, though.

Online blackjack et al IS random, however. There may be some small, dodgy suppliers with rigging algorithms, but Playtech (ie. Betfair), Microgaming, all the big one, are fine.

Banks: "Again I will reiterate that I have absolute proof that they are completely random."

What is that proof? I've never heard of such a thing.

I think those bookie machines work on the UK fruit machine mechanism, and not from a RNG, and are payout-based.

That is not true and would in fact be illegal.

Banks: "Again I will reiterate that I have absolute proof that they are completely random."

What is that proof? I've never heard of such a thing.

As I have explained in multiple threads I am not prepared to divulge who I am but suffice to say that I have had access to collosal amounts of data and can categorically say that they are not **** in any way.

I am not trying to defend these machines however I do try and offer advice here where possible although I realise most of it is ignored.

People should feel free to continue their campaigns however if/when they get hold of the data they will see that they are 100% wrong.

That is not true and would in fact be illegal.

It's not illegal for the fruities. Are you saying the roulette / blackjack (or whatever) bookie terminals are not based on the fruit circuit board mechanism, but an RNG comparable to the RNG online casinos use for their virtual equivalents?

As I have explained in multiple threads I am not prepared to divulge who I am but suffice to say that I have had access to collosal amounts of data and can categorically say that they are not **** in any way.

I wasn't asking who you were, simply the basis for the suggestion that their may be proof available that online software XYZ is random. I have no concern that it's otherwise, but as far as I'm aware there is no proof. Until such is presented, I can't give credence to the suggestion it exists, as I'm sure you can appreciate.

I also have colossal amounts of data that the deal is fair. That is not proof, however.

It's not illegal for the fruities.

The law is completely different for the fruities. They are compensating machines not random.

Are you saying the roulette / blackjack (or whatever) bookie terminals are not based on the fruit circuit board mechanism, but an RNG comparable to the RNG online casinos use for their virtual equivalents?

Yes.

I wasn't asking who you were, simply the basis for the suggestion that their may be proof available that online software XYZ is random.

Sorry. My comments were more aimed at others on this and other threads who kept asking who I was.

I do have access to data that proves that the software is random however I can`t publish it on here as it is of course commercially sensitive. I wish I could as reading the many conspiracy theories frustrates me as people are wasting their time on crackpot ideas that the games are ****.

of course all software is **** towards the vendor else they wouldn't put it on there website, you will never win at all. Go to a real casino.

*their*

of course all software is **** towards the vendor else they wouldn't put it on there website, you will never win at all. Go to a real casino.

Absolute rubbish. There is no need to fix a game with negative expectations for punters.

To suggest that they are peddling an illegal product to win the punters money a little more rapidly is ridiculous.

They are random. End of story.

I do have access to data that proves that the software is random however I can`t publish it on here as it is of course commercially sensitive. I wish I could as reading the many conspiracy theories frustrates me as people are wasting their time on crackpot ideas that the games are ****.

I understand the argument, but I'm sure in your turn you appreciate that a claim with no backing doesn't have substance. If casinos have the capacity to prove their software random, but decline, that if anything gives more fuel to the fire, because if they can prove it, why do they not?

There is no need to fix a game with negative expectations for punters.

There is certainly no need. But that hasn't stopped them in the past, and the cases, such as Casino Bar and Odds On, are documented.

of course all software is **** towards the vendor else they wouldn't put it on there website

The software is already essentially "****" by means of the house edge. So although Banks's suggeston that one doesn't cheat when there seems no rational need to is not fully borne out by online gambling history, it's not true that the only software that casinos put online is ****.

After many years of experience, I'm 99.999% sure the major providers are fair.

Banks,
      yet again you continue to say you have this 'absolute proof' then you are worried about reavealing yourself, now i am a problem gambler, yet whenever someone puts a serious challenge to you, you either divert the debate or come up with some lame excuse that you have all this info which 100% dispels my reasoning but there is yet another reason why you cant divulge it.

I told you to go to hotmail register a new email address which will still ensure you remain 100% anonymous and then email this stuff, incidentally when i put this to you last week, you chose to ignore it.

I also offered you 1k if you could prove beyond any doubt that these machines were 100% Random, 100% of the time after seemingly very quick to respond to my offer, when i probed you further, you then all of a sudden were 'not interested in my money. I then made an offer to you after you said 'noone credible in the industry would ever agree with my points, so i made you another offer that i would show you a sworn affidavit from a software developer who has now left the industry and he has said these machines are NOT random 100%, 100% of the time and when i challenged you to pay ME £1k if i could show you this, again you fail to mention and again you run for cover.

Yoks then enters the debate and again he challenges you and again you 'run for cover' Your data means NOTHING Banks, i have repeatedly told you that, i also told you that the Depoartment of Trade aND iNDUSTRY ANRE INVESTIGATING how data has been compiled over the last few years, for reasons that i have given earlier, again you fail to aknowledge the fact.

Banks i am sorry but your credibility has gone South quicker than a lead balloon,I have made you financial offers, have challenged you prove to me 100% about this statement' These machines are random' and so on and so forth and all you do is come up with excuse after excuse. You can prove nothing Banks, oh i suppose you will come back and accuse me of being confrontational. Banks believe me you are making yourself look stupid. I will show you a signed letter from a Maths professor at Bangor University who has stated. ' The Data compiled on RNG's over the last decade needs reassesssing as in his opinion 'it is unsafe'. I am compiling all this stuff when i eventually go for Ladbrokes, Your words were no one in the industry would say anything detramental to current rules and Legislation, well i will pay you again £1.000 if i cant show this letter and you pay me £1000 if i can show you this statement which was produced last week, what are you gonna say now 'I dont want your money greedydog'

Yoks has challenged you and again you say you have all this data which will make me stop my 'campaign'instantly and you don't want me to waste my time, Dont worrry about my time Banks, THE TIME HAS COME FOR YOU bANKS TO EITHER PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

BANKS,SO YOU ARE SAYING YOU CAN PROVE YES TO THE STATEMENT BELOW:

Are you saying these machines in bookies, blackjack especially are 100% Random, 100% of the time, in other words there are 6 packs of cards ie 312 cards and every time a card is selected whether for the player or the bank, 100% of the time there is NO DEFINITE PLAN, OR ORDER,HAS NO SPECIFIC PATTERN, PURPOSE OR OBJECTIVE. iS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING? BECAUSE ON THE MACHINE THERE IS METAL PLATE WHICH HAS 4 WORDS IN BLOCK CAPITALS 'THIS MACHINE IS RANDOM' JUST THOSE 4 WORDS, NO * SAYING SEE TERMS AND CONDITIONS, JUST THOSE 4 WORDS, NOTHING ELSE.

GD

BANKS,
      I HAVE PUT THE TRUE DEFINITION OF 100% RANDOM HERE FOR YOU BECAUSE I AM NOW CONVINCED YOU HAVE NO IDEA TO THE TRUE DEFINING EXPLANATION OF THE WORD RANDOM, RERAD IT AGAIN BANKS:


NO DEFINITE PLAN, OR ORDER,HAS NO SPECIFIC PATTERN, PURPOSE OR OBJECTIVE.

GD

YOU ARE NOW STATING 'OF COURSE ALL SOFTWARE IS F*** TOWARDS THE VENDOR.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN YOURSELF?

IGNORE LAST POSTING BANKS, THESE WERE NOT YOUR WORDS, MY MISTAKE

BANKS,
      EVERYTHING YOU DISAGREE WITH IS A 'CONSPIRACY' LAME EXCUSE AND COP OUT

BANKS,
      DO YOU KNOW WHO GLOBAL DRAW ARE?

Greedydog it is clear from your posts that you are a problem gambler who needs help. I strongly advise that you do that.

If you read my earlier posts you will see that I explain I have no vested interest either way in knowing whether these machines are random or not however you appear to respond as if I am a bookmaker defending these machines which I am not.

The fact is that I do have 100% irrefutable evidence however that does not mean that I have a duty to reveal it to you. It is impossible to distribute it without the sources being obvious and possibly impacting on peoples employment.

Either way my aim is not to refute claims rather to put a marker down that may help some people. Feel free to ignore it however I can assure you that at some point you will find out for yourself that what I am saying is correct.

If you knew my position and contacts your comment of "do you even know who Global Draw are" would look a little embarrassing for you.

I wish you well however as a problem gambler you should be seeking help for that rather than trying to find non existant reasons for your addiction. The "evidence" you claim to have is not worth a bean. You will find that out in your own time however I was simply trying to help you reach that point a little quicker.

The longer you are in denial the worse situation you will find yourself in.

It would be nice to think that you will come back and post on here when you have concluded your campaign however knowing what the result will be I doubt that you will.

Banks,
      Please don't try and use your psycho babble tactics, you are really making youself look pretty stupid with these 'incredible facts' that you claim to posess and now you are using the 'problem gambler' as a diversion tactic, yet again you fail to answer any questions or provide any credible evidence to your arguement. How have you done on Betfair over the last 3 years? I promise you, i have made more money than you and also my account is in plus situation from the day i started, How? because i run my BF account with discipline, so all this problem gambler nonsense that you have plucked out of this air shows to me that not only am i wasting my TIME WITH YOU! but i can not carry on conversing with someone who is deluded.

Banks have a nice Xmas and New Year but i can no longer debate which i know are viable facts with someone who is unstable.


GD

Banks,

please go to this post, its about 3/4 down the page on page 1, see everyones comments, 'We are all wrong, all problem gamblers and you are the only one correct, educate yourself Banks, its riveting!

Blackjack      BigAdz

Its the 32nd one down from this forum on page one, the author is BigAdz and it is named simply Blackjack

i can no longer debate which i know are viable facts with someone who is unstable.

But which facts? What results are we talking about?

Never mind about unsubstantiatable claims that software is provabley fair, but what is the basis for suggesting software is NOT fair? Do you have bad results? If so, what?

Greedydog you seem to miss the point entirely.

I don't care if these products are random or not. I never play them. I do not work for a bookmaker so don't care if anyone else plays them. I was merely offering some friendly advice that may have been of use.

I am in a position where I have a huge amount of information and data regarding these products and thought it would be helpful to pass on my knowledge. Clearly I am not going to forward confidential data that does not belong to me.

You appear to be unable to understand that I am in an impartial position and attempting to offer help. In return you are confrontational which is what led me to conclude that you are likely to be a problem gambler. I may be wrong.

If you doubt my credentials I suggest you go on to the horse racing forum and ask whether my industry views are valid. I think you will find that they are.

I find it disappointing not that you ignore my advice, you are of course perfectly entitled to do that, but that you choose to respond in such an offensive manner when offered help.

It is no wonder that this forum is a shadow of its former self.

Banks,
     Yet again i am compelled to reply. There is no doubt you are clearly an articulate man which is why i like debating with you although you constantly saying i am 'confrontational' and a 'problem gambler' is i feel a bit of a personal attack and i can assure you i have no problem dealing with any shortcomings that i may have in my life and being a 'problem gambler' as you put it is NOT one of them.

Back to the point in question if only you could look at the bigger picture and put yourself in my shoes, you mention you are only trying to help and want to offer advice but surely you are intelligent enough to realise that if you announce in a public domain that you have all this data about these programmes being 100% random but you ARE NOT WILLING TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION. Please tell me why bother even saying you have this data in the first place, you are not willing to share it but in your eyes you are offering advice and are being helpful.I am sorry Banks but you are actually doing the opposite.


You obviously knew right from the very start that you were not prepared to share this 'data' so how do you expect people to react? I think you should of said nothing and you could of still given your views but once you start saying' i can prove beyond any reasonable doubt blah blah blah' you can only be setting yourself up for people to come back at you.

I just wanted to make you aware of this because for an intelligent man as you obviously are i think you should of approached this and handled it better.

GD

Greedydog when I discussed the possibility of you being a problem gambler I based this purely on what you have written on this thread. I also put in a caveat that I may well be wrong and I stand by that.

I realise that it is frustrating to you that I can't release the data however I am sure you must appreciate that it is probable that anyone who has access to such data is bound to have issues regarding the security of it.

As I said in my previous post I think you will find that other areas of the forum in particular the horse racing forum will vouch for my industry knowledge. Plenty of there have asked me to reveal who I am however I would rather not do that as I suspect quite a few will know me and I respect my anonymity.

I find it slightly strange that I am being asked to defend myself when all I have done is try and offer a lttle help and advice albeit not as much as you were after.

It would have been interesting to see whether you were as hostile if I said I had definitive proof that they were fixed but couldn't send you the proof.

It would have been easier for me to say nothing. Maybe next time I will.

YES....
Certainly a reasonable request and a good post.

I self excluded myself several months ago from Betfair casino. This was mainly because of a near impossible sequence of cards on blackjack.
I had been winning quite well on the slots and was in profit. When switching to blackjack I started losing badly. One incredible sequence of cards dealt by the dealer included a run of  7 consecutive blackjacks (ie Aces and ten).
Not only are the games NOT RANDOM, I believe Betfair have operators who manually override the games in their favour.

.....and so say all of us.

betfair are a total disgrace,the blackjack is totally **** and ive told them exactly this,i lost a couple of grand until this finally sunk in but why oh why did you want to give 90grand to these crooks?it really is throwing money down the drain and i hope one day betfair get found out

B.E.N.T.

I promise you one day betfair with all the other bookmakers will be exposed

The majority of people seem to think these games are NOT random

I promise you one day betfair with all the other bookmakers will be exposed


I'll wager you anything that they won't.

The majority of people seem to think these games are NOT random


That is because the majority of people do not have access to data that proves otherwise. Many people are making themselves look stupid.

I suggest you befriend a senior director in one of the bookmaking or machine supplier firms and ask them for evidence. You will soon see that you are barking up completely the wrong tree.

The fact that so many people have doubts about the products shows just how effective they are ie people can't accept that there losses can come from 2.7% margins because they have a poor concept of just how much they are staking. Whether this makes them a dangerous product for many punters is another question altogether. The fact that many people experiencing expected returns feel that they may have been conned would be a strong indicator that care needs to be taken with the product.

Further to previous messages, recently I disputed the 'randomness' of blackjack with another well known online casino.
I had played hundreds of hands of blackjack with this particular casino and made a record of the amount of Aces (first card) dealt to the dealer, against the Aces (first card) dealt to myself.
The ratio of Aces dealt to the dealer was approx 80%, against 20% to myself. In a real casino the ratio would be closer to 50/50.
I accused this casino of sharp practice in order to obtain more money from the player through paying insurance, and that the cards COULD NOT BE RANDOM.
They responded by saying that the cards were shuffled before every deal, and that they use the Random Number Generator (RNG) to guarantee the cards were random.
Interestingly, they stated they "DID NOT USE A BIASED RNG"....?!

Hundreds of hands is nothing. I've played over 100k hands of blackjack here and done ok.

Further to my previous email here is a copy of the email reply I got from the other well known casino concerning their blackjack:-

"We would like to take this opportunity to address your concerns regarding your recent gaming.
Robert, rest assured that our system is fair and our results are generated by the Random Number Generator (usually referred to as RNG), which is a hardware device used to ensure the fairness of the casino games. In all card-based games, like Blackjack and Baccarat, the decks of cards are shuffled prior to each hand being dealt.

RNG generates a sequence of numbers which correspond to various results in all the games. Nobody can predict the next number in a series, no matter how many previously generated numbers have come out.

Our casino would never use a biased RNG for the very simple reason that it could be used against the casino, if anyone could predict the results. RNG's outcome can not be modified or predicted in any way, so the results of the games are really based on luck or game skills."

Re my previous post from this casino, they state they dont use a BIASED Random Number Generator.However this implies other casinos DO use BIASED RNG's.
If this is the case, how can a BIASED RNG be RANDOM??!

I've sort of skimmed through this post, out of boredom mainly but I did spot this, which tickled me..


"I also offered you 1k if you could prove beyond any doubt that these machines were 100% Random...when i challenged you to pay ME £1k if i could show you this, again you fail to mention and again you run for cover."

Here Greedy Dog writes 'offered you 1k' not specifying 1k of what, but when he talks about money you would have to pay him he specifies you would have to pay him in £'s "pay ME £1k"

Okay, so he makes a mistake, no problem. Except he then does it again:

"well i will pay you again £1.000 if i cant show this letter and you pay me £1000 if i can show you this statement which was produced last week"

A 'clever' use of the decimal point.



Probably just coincidence but GreedyDog, go to the casino!

I THINK YOU NEED A HOBBY ,HAVE YOU TRIED FLOWER ARRANGEING ,ITS VERT THUTERPHERIC,ESPECIALLY WHEN THERES SOME DAFFODILS IN YOUR DISPLAY,

I WANT TO SING ALL THINGS BRIGHT AND BEAUTIFULL ALL CREATURES GREAT AND SMALL WHEN I TAKE A STEP BACK AND LOOK AT MY DISPLAY

I have tried these activities.... nice and wonderful.

I too have lost money on blackjack in the last month. The problem with bf's version of blackjack is that every hand is dealt from a new shuffled deck. It says so in its rules. I used to do ok on Bet365's blackjack as they had 6 decks that were shuffled after a certain amount of hands were dealt. Therefore you knew if more 10's were due to appear etc, and can judge doubling and splitting and your stakes better based on that. As betfair produces hands from a new deck every time there is no consistency to the game. The fact is they must make a fortune from their on-line casino, and wont change if they're making vast profits from it.

Hopefully there is such a thing as karma, and that it bites both whoever designed the software, and the decision maker who decided to implement it for no doubt destroying peoples lives as it does.

Threads like this do make me laugh. One mentalist (Greedydog) who clearly hasn't got the intelligence he was born with and one sensible poster (Banks) who is trying to provide useful information and is basically ignored.

I used to play a fair bit of online blackjack. Everyone is aware of the "patterns" that seem to occur online especially a long losing streak after you increase your stake.

Do these streaks really happen or is it that you only remember the hands that conform to your theories about how fixed the game is?

You don't remember the times when you pull a 5 out of your a s s with 15/16 against a face card for the dealer.
If the dealer does it to you, you cry "fix".

The bottom line though is not about how the game plays, it's about the RTP which is ALWAYS 97-98% (due to variances from basic strategy) at any online / land based casino.

If you want to have a slight chance of winning money, play slots. The high variance nature means you at least have a chance. Blackjack is ultra low variance. It just grinds your money away and it's mathematically impossible to beat.

If you have to play blackjack, go to a casino. At least that way you get some enjoyment / meet some people and have a few drinks.

Playing online blackjack is gambling suicide.

All blackjack online is bent.  All blackjack at land based casinos is manipulated.  The croupiers use 'batch shuffling' techniques to keep high value cards together meaning a lot more drawn hands or small value cards adding up to hit a lot of 19,20 etc.  For example 6 decks = 312 cards when broken down into 8 small piles to be shuffled.  Say for e.g the 8 piles are labelled A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H.  Shuffling A,H together B,G together C,F together and so on.  Basically it is not a 'true shuffle' but a manipulated one as cards are group shuffled.

If you think BF Blackjack is bad then

Did you get your 66k?

Banks - How do you explain this post

I actually complained to Betfair about a year ago about their blackjack after i had lost 34 hands in a row playing two hands per game, therefore 68 losers in a row.

In computer simulations after 7billion attempts they could never get 25 consecutive outcomes on 50/50.  You should also be careful of your definition of random.  Its not applicable in most online gaming.  Usually it must only meet a criteria as set by a regulatory body but you wont find a math scholar out there that will tell you natural random can be duplicated.  Whether you can fault someone for taking advantage of a license to steal is another conversation

In computer simulations after 7billion attempts they could never get 25 consecutive outcomes on 50/50.

I'd love to know where you got the 7 billion figure from, given that 0.5^25 = 33,554,432.

That's quite a bit below 7 billion.  About 6.9 billion below to be honest.

In fact, you would see 25 "consecutive outcomes" over 200 times in 7 billion attempts.

HTH.