boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
November 2nd, 2011 at 5:23:07 AM permalink
No, it's clear that the BLR Tech software is biased to take a game with a 1.41%/1.36% and turn it into a 50% HA by cheating. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they took a 5.26% game and turn it into a 50% HA the same way. If they were smart they would have turned the 1.41% game into a 5% game where the bias would be impossible to detect, even in 3,200 rolls.

Given the length of time this software has been out there and the lack of complaints out there, it is either not noticed or is little used.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
Jufo81
Jufo81
Joined: May 23, 2010
  • Threads: 6
  • Posts: 344
November 2nd, 2011 at 5:28:25 AM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

No, it's clear that the BLR Tech software is biased to take a game with a 1.41%/1.36% and turn it into a 50% HA by cheating. I wouldn't be surprised at all if they took a 5.26% game and turn it into a 50% HA the same way. If they were smart they would have turned the 1.41% game into a 5% game where the bias would be impossible to detect, even in 3,200 rolls.

Given the length of time this software has been out there and the lack of complaints out there, it is either not noticed or is little used.



Yeah it is quite shocking actually how long the game has been around. It just goes to show how easy it is to misconsider being cheated as simply bad luck. One player at CM contacted the casino in question as he too had lost and the casino's response was hilarous:

"Unfortunately the people who starts this threads are not people like yourself that accept losing and spread their guilt for their irresponsible gaming in the most irresponsible way."
boymimbo
boymimbo
Joined: Nov 12, 2009
  • Threads: 17
  • Posts: 5994
November 2nd, 2011 at 5:32:48 AM permalink
I've posted this on the SBR forum as well.
----- You want the truth! You can't handle the truth!
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
November 2nd, 2011 at 6:05:38 AM permalink
Quote: Jufo81

They question is would they really bother to cheat on a game which already has >5% house edge and prints money for the casino as it is?

The answer to that is YES. Its the nature of the person, not the nature of the game. I'm sure that crazy wheel of fortune where you just plop your money down on a representation of a 1,5, 10, 20, etc. dollar bill with a 30 percent house edge is going to be gaffed if they can gaff it.

I too would be a great believer in "fleecing the sheep" for a sustained income over a greater period of time but most thieves have different values and would probably gaff everything in sight. As well as cheating the programmer who did it for them!

On-Edit: Please don't get me wrong. I realize that most of the people who would do such things are smart and shrewd and certainly know that it would be better to fleece than slaughter. Its just that it is not their nature to do it. American roulette already providing a 5.26 percent house edge would indeed be gaffed. It would never occur to them to not gaff it.
teliot
teliot
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 2159
November 2nd, 2011 at 7:02:37 AM permalink
Quote: boymimbo

The other table game that BLR runs is American Roulette. Does anyone want to try blowing their money there and look for a biased game? Maybe bet on all the numbers except 0/00? Or bet 2 of the 3 streets and see how often 3rd street appears?

I tried the game to check this out. I didn't have the bankroll or time to conduct a lengthy experiment. I tried two experiments. First, I bet "First 12" and "Second 12" to see if "Third 12" came out abnormally high. It didn't. Then I bet "Red" to see if "Black" came out abnormally high. It didn't.

Again, I didn't play enough to get a sample that allows me to say the game is likely fair, but I also didn't see any obvious bias.
Personal website: www.ijmp.org
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
November 2nd, 2011 at 7:27:35 AM permalink
Quote: teliot

Again, I didn't play enough to get a sample that allows me to say the game is likely fair, but I also didn't see any obvious bias.

The way I understand the math, it will always take more time and effort to pronounce something as biased because there is always the possibility that some very negative and even slightly suspicious numbers are really just part of "random".

Perhaps I am being overly negative in saying that a thief would instruct a programmer to "gaff everything in sight" but that is usually the situation. Any investigator or auditor knows that once you start finding "x" as being wrong... you can bet "y" and "z" are wrong also. Its often a bargaining tool. If an attorney settles with one of his complaining clients, then the bar won't send anyone in to look at the attorneys other files as well. Rarely is it that only Robert is getting robbed to pay Paul.
clempops4
clempops4
Joined: Oct 23, 2011
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 21
November 2nd, 2011 at 7:37:24 AM permalink
I think I said in an earlier post that I was running about 50/50 on bets and was winning several hundred dollars over several thousands bets. Everything was normal until all of a sudden I started losing bets and I just presumed that running bad and I thought that eventually it would turn around. So I think that this program was redesigned sometime this year.
teliot
teliot
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 39
  • Posts: 2159
November 2nd, 2011 at 8:08:22 AM permalink
Quote: FleaStiff

The way I understand the math, it will always take more time and effort to pronounce something as biased because there is always the possibility that some very negative and even slightly suspicious numbers are really just part of "random".

The tests I designed could produce a probable bias in as few as 100 rolls. For example, this morning I wagered simultaneously "Any Red" AND "Any Black" to see if 0 and 00 came up in a statistically abnormal amount. But, nothing funny happened.
Personal website: www.ijmp.org
Wizard
Administrator
Wizard
Joined: Oct 14, 2009
  • Threads: 1367
  • Posts: 22724
November 2nd, 2011 at 8:16:59 AM permalink
Here is a preview of my BLR Technologies warning on my Odds site. I have not announced it yet, but plan to later today. First, I would like to give the community here a chance to peer review the math and let me know if you find any typos.

Also, I played a little roulette today, betting only on red. Here are my results before the game crashed:

Wins = 11
Losses = 19

Clearly not enough data to make any conclusions.
It's not whether you win or lose; it's whether or not you had a good bet.
FleaStiff
FleaStiff
Joined: Oct 19, 2009
  • Threads: 265
  • Posts: 14484
November 2nd, 2011 at 8:16:59 AM permalink
Quote: clempops4

Everything was normal until all of a sudden I started losing bets. So I think that this program was redesigned sometime this year.

Possibly, or your winnings simply hit some secret "trigger point" at which the pre-existing routines started to be activated.

  • Jump to: