| Posted by: HKGambler at July 5, 2002, 8:59 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
LOL. If you thought the comma was a period, what thing have you done to take care of the 210? Just joking! A mistake is a mistake, I know.
Also, Joeyl, I'd like to point out for your information that the probability of getting a Royal Flush in my calculation is 40/(52x51x50x49x48/5x4x3x2), approx. equals 65 thousand to 1- not 600 thousand to 1 chance.
[This message has been edited by HKGambler (edited 07-06-2002).]
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: drlucky at July 5, 2002, 7:14 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
oops! my apologies to all of the above. The calculator window on my laptop is so small that i thought the comma was a period, so it looked like the answer was 140.210 when it was really 140,210. It didn't seem to make sense to me either at the time, actually.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: HKGambler at July 5, 2002, 8:28 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Quote: Originally Posted by drlucky:
According to my calculations, the chances of not rolling a 7 is 30/36 = .833. So the chances of not rolling an 7 65 times in a row is .833 ^ 65 = .000007132. Thus, taking 1/.000007132 = 140. Thus, there is a 1 in 140 chance of this happening. Unlikely yes, but not to the level of proving a game is rigged.
can any of the experts around here (i.e. gamemaster, Wiz) affirm these calculations? thanks
Have I mis-read anything? I don't understand how you would come up with 1/.000007132 = 140?? It should equal 140213 to be exact. Thus, there is a 1 in 140213 chance of this happening.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: drlucky at July 5, 2002, 7:36 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
I think you all are misunderstanding the math here (or maybe I am). But rolling 65 times without getting a 7 is not a 1 in 140,000 chance as stated above.
According to my calculations, the chances of not rolling a 7 is 30/36 = .833. So the chances of not rolling an 7 65 times in a row is .833 ^ 65 = .000007132. Thus, taking 1/.000007132 = 140. Thus, there is a 1 in 140 chance of this happening. Unlikely yes, but not to the level of proving a game is rigged.
can any of the experts around here (i.e. gamemaster, Wiz) affirm these calculations? thanks
[This message has been edited by drlucky (edited 07-05-2002).]
[This message has been edited by drlucky (edited 07-05-2002).]
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: joeyl at July 4, 2002, 11:52 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Damian..It's not about anything other than proof..Not instinct.
No-one has been able to prove Micro is rigged,unlike CasinoBar and Handa Lopez etc..
No more,no less,nothing personal.It's about proof,not hunches.
I can't prove it is'nt rigged.
I can't prove it is either.
Neither can you..If you can prove it's rigged,then thats different.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Woody0 at July 4, 2002, 7:26 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
zrapture,
Playing single deck blackjack heads up, if you stand on two cards (no 5 in hand)against a dealer 5 the chance that dealer will pull the 3 remaining 5's are 1 in 110,544.
Just thought you might like to know .
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: damiandunlap at July 4, 2002, 7:13 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
no matter u tell people they done believe,
but i willl say it agian micro is rigged, i can tell when they get black jack , the game take a while a poss , just like when they win after i hit a winner streak , micro is rigged, the only other software i seen do that was black dog, which i think is diamond, i no for a fact the baccarat is rigged at micro , no matter what u do after u win a few times it bets the oppoiist, rigged, when they get tables where more than one person can play at the same time , i will go back , until it rigged. people dont want to here it , send these bull in , master said these,
only software makers that is not rigged crytop, boss, playtec, rtg
like i say and i will say it again it rigged from the jump , u cant set your bets, u have to bet by twos
compare the black jack game at boss then compare the black jack at micro
then tell me micro is not bull shxxxt
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: joeyl at July 4, 2002, 1:49 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Caruso said he has been dealt a pat Royal Flush on Jacks or Better..Apparently a 600 thousand to 1 chance..Jammy so and so,i'm jealous..
Way more outlandish an occurrence than 140'000-1.
Joeyl does'nt know for sure Micro is'nt rigged.The above lack of 7's from 65 rolls does'nt prove anything to me though..
The Wiz said send in the results.Upon that,i would.Maybe KM is right..If the run can be reproduced under certain circumstances i suppose,not that i know anything..
Zrapture said something quite relevant.If there is player profiling or whatver,then the thing will do it again..Twice in 2 days would raise the hackles somewhat,no?
I am sorry for being an apologist.
[This message has been edited by joeyl (edited 07-04-2002).]
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: KX at July 4, 2002, 1:29 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
I agree with you all about strange combinations happening all the time. In a game of Black Jack EVERY hand youīll get is VERY unlikely if you consider it by itself.
I would not take this standpoint though. I would consider the risk of losing as fast as simme did using a strategy of playing "7" in craps. I donīt know whether simmes calculation is correct (I never play craps and I donīt know SDīs for that game), but a 0,00007% figure is scaring by itself, and combining that with my results which are much much worse we have clear evidence of the game being rigged.
Show me ONE guy whoīve even been near winning as much at MGS-BJ as I lost and Iīll immediately stop claiming they are rigged (ie more than +1,5 SDs 5 times in a row).
Iīm just waiting for Dave R to send his results to the Wiz. I will get mine some time too.
Dave R seems trustworthy unlike Damians impossible 65% payback as well as the guy claiming he had 95% payback at Boss placing 25000 bets (like -6 ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: zrapture at July 3, 2002, 11:51 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
"What the hell does it matter if you "set up the test" before you play or after?"
I'll try to explain it to you although I'm not stat expert. In many BJ sessions any of us play we could probably find many instances of where the odds of something happening is 50,000 to 1 or greater. You'd be suprised how many there are. It happens all the time.
Lets use this as an example, Boss Media single deck BJ game, Dealer draws all four 5's to pull a 20 to beat your hand. I'm sure many of us here have lost to that same hand at online and B&M casinos in the past.
However the odds of getting that hand, have to be pretty extreme. Lets say 50,000 - 1 (although I have no clue). Now what if the dealer gets that same hand TWICE in the same 100 hand session! Pushing the odds to well over 100,000 - 1.
It is ery easy to look back at the last 10 minutes of playing and saying the odds of that happening are astronomical, it has got to be rigged. Some players would eve... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Got2Bet at July 3, 2002, 10:35 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Too many whiners in here.
The chances of rolling a 7 on any roll are 1 in 6. 1 in 140K is not a big deal.
Some of you will recall my real life battle with sic bo, where I could not get a six to show up on any die face for 26 consecutive rolls. The odds of that are way more unlikely - over a million to one, as I recall.
Yet I could hardly cry rigged, could I? It was a land-based casino, and there were many other people betting all over the layout - the chances of them being able to rig that against me were slim to none.
KM - why don't you try betting seven and seeing if you can produce a streak like that. I bet if you do that the rest of your life you might just manage it once - but if the game is rigged as you claim it is then surely the software will detect your betting pattern and you should be able to reproduce this result within a few days.
------------------
Spearmaster
Got2Bet - Online Gambling News and Information
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: HKGambler at July 3, 2002, 9:16 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
I am not this industry's apologist and I do not discard the possibility that reputable providers & casinos may rig since the games are served by softwares on the internet, which BY NATURE could always arouse suspicions. This is the core problem this industry must have to solve and that is why I say it is always the necessity & responsibility for SW Providers like MG to assure players that their games are truly random.
However, KM's emotions regarding Wizard, Croupier who just stating the facts are way out of line, and Woody said it right- crying rigged is one matter, stating it rigged from a scientific standpoint is another.
From a probabilistic point of iew, one in 140,000 is not that horrible, that could happen occasionally in real life. Also, we must bear in mind the mathematical truth that to expect something to happen BEFORE a particular time-frame & IN a particular dimension is much more improbable than to spot some unusual patterns AFTER the outcomes have realized. | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Woody0 at July 3, 2002, 7:30 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Originally posted by KM:
"What the hell does it matter if you "set up the test" before you play or after?"
The Wizard is well respected and is telling you the appropriate scientific way to run a test. First you form a hypothesis and then you collect data for a statistical analysis that tests the hypothesis.
"I just love the apologists for the industry. When have any of them agreed there was, is, or could be a rigged casino?"
I suppose you failed to notice the tests involving Casino Bar recently?
It's easy to cry rigged software. It takes effort and committment to gather data and perform alid tests.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: KM at July 3, 2002, 7:05 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
What the hell does it matter if you "set up the test" before you play or after?
This guy rolled 65 times without a 7. The results are the results.
Sounds like a glitch where the software recognized his betting pattern and forgot to let him win once and a while.
Kinda like the possibility that when a player uses negative progression once in a blue moon and that particular time he gets burned all the way.
I just love the apologists for the industry. When have any of them agreed there was, is, or could be a rigged casino?
KM
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: WizardOfOdds at July 3, 2002, 6:33 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
I agree with Croupier. The test has to be set up before the results. When looking back at a game often some unusual pattern is spotted. Preparing the test in advance will refute the argument that it was just a coincidence.
I would encourage those who are suspicious to take a sampling and record the number of occurrences of every roll. Send the results to me and I'll put them through a chi squared test.
So far I have yet to see any evidence to convince me Microgaming isn't fair. That also goes for Real Time Gaming.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: KX at July 3, 2002, 4:22 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Simme; They would be quite stupid NOT saying that, donīt you think?
This single occurence can surely happen, but combine it with 100s of other ppls extreme events and it will prove the game is rigged.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: simme at July 3, 2002, 3:17 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
I dont think Ladbrokes tries to cheat.But I have sent them an e-mail and asked them if they review the SW. They assured that they review all the results and all the games are fair.
Probably it was a bad day!!?
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Tester at July 3, 2002, 3:10 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
First, I have to thank simme for providing us with the input. I think its no evidence for cheating, but providing the public with data is always a aluable thing.
The problem with the "140,000" qoute is three fold:
1) Many people palay each day at many MGS casinos. That's a high number.
Let's multiply with that number.
2) Each of them plays a lot of rolls/hands/spins etc. so anybody can begin his count from whereever he sees the interesting event. Suppose I played just 200 rolls, I have 135 "66 consecutive rolls" i.e. 1-66, 2-67, 3-68, ........ 135-200.
Let's multiply with it.
3) There are a lot of interesting structures one may observe (actualy, its a large part of the gaming experience - have fun!).
One may observe 13 loses of the "don't pass", and lots other patterns.
Let's multiply with it.
Multiplying the 3 factors, will make the "140,000" a ery probable case.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: joeyl at July 3, 2002, 2:57 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Judging by what Caruso said,this occurance does not prove the game is rigged..
If the game is'nt proven to be rigged,then one can only guess it is'nt..
I can't see the point in sending the results to the Wiz or the G/M..All they'll say is the game is'nt proven to be rigged..Just bad luck..
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: caruso at July 3, 2002, 2:53 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Did anyone say it was proof of anything?
If someone tells me "playing game A at casino B I experienced a one in 140,000 occurance", my immediate reaction is NOT "I will now play game A at casino B".
Do I have this choice?
Just call me a oodoo-ridden ole' gambler.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: croupier at July 3, 2002, 2:44 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
How does a 1 in 140,000 occurance prove the game is rigged?
I've spun 5 consecutive numbers on a roulette wheel and that's a 1.8mill to one chance.
You guys have got to remember that there's over 60 MGS casinos with 1000's of players a day - these improbable occurances will happen and they mean nothing when reported after the fact - you need to set up the boundries of your test BEFORE recording results.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: KX at July 3, 2002, 2:35 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Simme; send your results to GM and Wiz! Another clear evidence of MGS being rigged like h*ll
Have you played alot of MGS for promotions and such? Iīm still wondering if gcs "switch" theory is correct...
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: caruso at July 3, 2002, 2:10 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
It tells you that if you roll a pair of die 65 times, then repeat the process 139,000 times, on one of those occasions you should go the whole hog seven-less.
Simme hit just that one occasion.
This may not prove definitively that the Craps game as offered by Ladbrokes is rigged/riggable.
It does tell you to NEVER play Craps at Lsdbrokes.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Dave R at July 3, 2002, 1:27 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
Why does all of this not surprise me.
Ladbrokes is powered by Microgaming.
A highly reputable company like Ladbrokes should have "thought twice" before getting involved with Microgaming.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Got2Bet at July 3, 2002, 12:55 pm | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
What poor luck! Had you been betting on the numbers, though, you would have been filthy rich! I would die for a roll like that...
------------------
Spearmaster
Got2Bet - Online Gambling News and Information
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Valhel at July 3, 2002, 9:47 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
This remebers me to my roulette "career". It happened ery often that my bet number didn't come for more than 300 times, but each other number quite reguralely.
Only my bet number was missing.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: simme at July 3, 2002, 9:02 am | | Topic: 65 rolls without a seven!!! Forum: Winner Online |
I playd craps today and I manage to roll 65 times without a 7.
After about 40 I thougth a seven would come and started to bet on only the seven.
But no way I lost my 200$ that I had left.
I have calculated the probabilty for that and it is about 0.0007%!!.
Is it unluck or is it ery common that you can manage to roll 65 times without a 7?
| | Static Link |
|