Gaffed software at major Internet casinos
Quote: CanyoneroI think the problem is that internet casino style gambling is still a niche that is perceived as the domain of a small number of degenerate problem gamblers sitting at home in their underwear and losing their social security check. The shady online casino based in some banana republic is ripping them off? What else is news?
If it were related to sports betting, which is mainstream in the UK, the media would be all over this already...
Thats true in the UK, but as the thread-history indicates, there is a Company that owns or is owner of the gaming parties involved, and that Company is up for Nevada Liscense renewal, and that same Company has product installed in Nevada. Lottomatica has some serious 'splainin to do,
Quote: teliotThank you for your extraordinary summary of the posts on this topic at Casinomeister. It may be worthwhile for someone to archive the thread in case it is deleted there. I contacted the media about 2 weeks ago and it is my understanding that a story is being written that will be on the AP wire. But the investigation is obviously complex and no good journalist would rush this one.
The only benefit of getting this issue in the mass media, would be with the hopes of catching the attention of the right people, which could lead to creating a real mandatory enforced regulatory agency for online gaming.
Any online regulatory body in place that simulates the actions of the Nevada G.C.B., would put all this distrust to rest. One thing for sure, if an issue arose like this one we wouldn't be subject to reading 650 posts and still counting of utter unbelievable nonsense, obviously being taken for complete fool.
Thank you for taking the time to pull together your fantastic list. I appreciate that this must have taken you a considerable amount of time. (I have mixed feelings about being referred to as a "highly rebuttal software provider")
teliot suggested "It may be worthwhile for someone to archive the thread ..." Does anyone know how to do that?
Chris
I also wrote two articles about this and published them into the poker community to try and do my part.
Quote: binary1284ofaKind,
(I have mixed feelings about being referred to as a "highly rebuttal software provider")
Chris
Sorry fixed it to read properly. "binary" Executive at Galewind Software Corp. a highly reputable software provider
Quote: Katie Hale
From: Eliot Jacobson <eliot@jacobsongaming.com>
Subject: Request
To: "'Katie Hale'" <katiehale12@...>
Date: Monday, 31 December, 2012, 20:39
Hi Katie,
Can you please put me in touch with the mathematician you used for your original post?
Thanks
===============================================================
From: Katie Hale [mailto:katiehale12@...]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 1:46 PM
To: Eliot Jacobson
Subject: Re: Request
This was my brother. He is a financial adviser and doesn't want to give his name out in this as he is worried it could damage his career if he is associated with gambling. If you have only a couple of questions could you send them to me and I will pass them on to him?
Thanks
===============================================================
From: Eliot Jacobson<eliot@jacobsongaming.com>
Subject: RE: Request
To: "'Katie Hale'" <katiehale12@...>
Date: Monday, 31 December, 2012, 21:56
Katie,
Can you ask him to confirm the results in the post I just made?
Thanks.
===============================================================
From: Katie Hale [mailto:katiehale12@...]
Sent: Monday, December 31, 2012 2:58 PM
To: Jacobson
Subject: RE: Request
I spoke to my brother about this, he said he hadn't done any tests like this before. He tried to explain it to me over the phone but I didn't really understand so I asked him to write it down and email it to me. I've copied this below:
"I'm not really familiar with these kind of statistical tests as I've never stuidied formal fairness testing of casino games. I was able to come up with the probability figures by counting up the number of occurances and then using the cumulative binomial function in Excel. We were taught this for testing bias at school and university but nothing as advanced as the kind of tests Eliot is using. Sorry I can't be more helpful but it wouldn't be right of me to confirm results from tests which are beyond my level of understanding."
Regardless of who, what, and where are concerned, even if he were an Advanced Player, he ultimately exposed serious fraud being utilized by the casinos against the players, and that's the only issue here.
I hope you guys decide to stick around for awhile, this is an excellent general gambling Forum that has much going for it, and you guys will be welcome additions. You'll notice that we also have a Sub-Forum for On-Line Gambling.
We also have many great wagers and games between Forum Members, such as the NFL Playoff Prediction Pool and the WoV NFL Picks Game (headed up by yours truly) in which people seem to have a great time. There will also be a dice setting bet in a few months settled in Vegas at our own AHigh's stunning Craps Table being broadcast live on the Internet on the AHigh show.
I also believe that there are as many bona fide casino game inventors active on this Forum as any other.
If you ever need anything, just PM me.
Quote: teliotBecause Katie91 has been exposed as a fraud, it may be of interest to read our last e-mail exchange -- obviously, I was being lied to.
Suppose it was ACTUAL fraud. How would this affect the conclusions about the software?
Multi-accounting isn't fraud, it's against casino T & C. As, for example, is playing blackjack on a slots bonus. And in this case, I'll admit to being less than outraged that the player opened an additional account under a family member's identity.
The fact that the player was a multi-accounter offers a smokescreen lifeline to the industry, but it's irrelevant. Whatever the software does / did is unchanged, whether Mother Theresa or Joseph Stalin was playing.
From my end, if I knew I was being contacted by a person who was violating casino terms and conditions, I would have insisted on verification directly from the casino that the logs were originals and proceeded much more cautiously in how I wrote to the parties involved and parsed their replies. That time is now long past.Quote: CarusoSuppose it was ACTUAL fraud. How would this affect the conclusions about the software?
I am satisfied with the conclusions about the software; it is gaffed. But I am not satisfied professionally: I unknowingly agreed to do fairness work on behalf of a person who was attempting to scam bonuses from a casino and lied to me over a period of days.
Quote: teliot
I am satisfied with the conclusions about the software; it is gaffed. But I am not satisfied professionally: I unknowingly agreed to do fairness work on behalf of a person who was attempting to scam bonuses from a casino and lied to me over a period of days.
I understand your position, but either the casino, creator or Software Distributor (?), (Sorry, not up on the on-line gambling parlance) or some combination of the three attempted to scam an unknown amount of players and lied to them over a period of months. I understand it is more personal as there is a record of your communications with this individual, not to mention possible one-on-one communications to which I would not be privy, but it's just a con trying to con a bigger con. In the process, however, your fairness work has helped untold numbers of on-line gamblers who are not cons, so I wouldn't feel too bad.
That said, the issue here was never that he had been ripped off, but that the casino was purporting to offer a 100% game, which in fact paid only 96%.
This was confirmed by Betfred themselves, so the credibility of the evidence is really not in question given the admittance of guilt.
Are you satisfied that the game software could not be MODIFIED by an outside party, and/or the liscenced gaming company?
Thanks much for the enlightening discussion so far.
Quote: Mission146I wanted to just give a quick welcome to our new Members, Caruso and Chopley, as well as other Members who have been registered here for some time, but have not posted much prior to this incident.
I hope you guys decide to stick around for awhile, this is an excellent general gambling Forum that has much going for it, and you guys will be welcome additions. You'll notice that we also have a Sub-Forum for On-Line Gambling.
We also have many great wagers and games between Forum Members, such as the NFL Playoff Prediction Pool and the WoV NFL Picks Game (headed up by yours truly) in which people seem to have a great time. There will also be a dice setting bet in a few months settled in Vegas at our own AHigh's stunning Craps Table being broadcast live on the Internet on the AHigh show.
I also believe that there are as many bona fide casino game inventors active on this Forum as any other.
If you ever need anything, just PM me.
Hey, where's my welcome letter???
You've been here longer than me!
I've found my way onto the moderated users list at CM so that'll be the end of me posting there.
I have archived out the entire Betfred thread, saved as numbered .mht files.
You can grab it from here:
The only thing I can see that would make any difference is that the play logs were falsified but since the playlogs perfectly matched Betfred's statement, even that is not possible.
Quote: Jufo81So, Casinomeister keeps saying now that there is still more to the story and that people have made assumptions based on incomplete information. So what do you think that this new revelation from GRA will be that will earth-shatteringly change the outlook of the whole case?
The only thing I can see that would make any difference is that the play logs were falsified but since the playlogs perfectly matched Betfred's statement, even that is not possible.
The thing that will never go away here is Betfred's statement that they bought a cheating, licence-breaching card game on purpose.
I don't particularly care if the original player turns out to have been eating babies in his spare time, the issue here is the behaviour of the software provider and the casinos who ran that software.
The CM statement next to Betfred's entry on the accredited list is shocking.
Quote: ChopleyIOMThanks for the welcome chaps :)
I've found my way onto the moderated users list at CM so that'll be the end of me posting there.
I understand Bryan owns casinomeister and therefore has the prerogative to run and control it anyway he pleases, even if it’s in the form of a dictatorship.
Once anyone shows opposition to his views more then a couple of times they will either be moderated and or eventually banned.
I for one was impressed with your persistency to stand up for what was obviously right, and refusing to swallow what was being said.
I also think most don’t realize how much money he actually makes, which by the way is not being said in envious. Good for him and a creative niche.
This incident obviously involves several of his top bread winners. Instead of stepping up to the plate and actually trying to help fix what is confirmed broken, it became obvious his only real concern was his personal gain. Not that it wasn’t like that all along which is why most of the educated gamblers are no longer allowed there, but with an issue of this magnitude he blatantly was exposed.
Not sure how he plans to save face, but the closing arguments and alleged conclusion of facts yet to come should be entertaining.
This site W.O.V. is loaded with advice and entertainment from some of the best gambling minds out there. Enjoy it…
Quote: 4ofaKindSorry fixed it to read properly. "binary" Executive at Galewind Software Corp. a highly reputable software provider
OK, thanks. I prefer the mod version, but I guarantee my wife would have agreed with the first.
teliot, I think that the Nordic post confirming that the games are wrong, pulling all of them, and refunding players is the "second source confirmation" needed for your work in the thread.
I think that thelawnet's work with the send/receive XML fragments, as well as thePOGG's work with the actual game results (Play-for-Fun and Play-for-Real) are acceptable data as is.
I agree with several others - the CM OP started the ball rolling, after which they became irrelevant. IMO, continuing to include them as a discussion variable is equally irrelevant. (Well, perhaps entertaining, but irrelevant.)
The conclusions are surprisingly clear, as clear as with BLR Tech.
What I find stunning in all of this is the GRA.
As many here can confirm, dumping database queries into a CSV file and then onward into Excel for some simple tests does not take a lot of time. I made a post somewhere in that thread in which I indicated that all of this would have taken Pinnacle/Galewind 2 days, after which things would have been wrapped up tight. And that's not just shooting from the hip - that's based on a LOT of years in doing this. (teliot can confirm.)
It appears that the GRA is actually complicit!
As to Betfred, whether corrupt or not, I made a CM post in which I stated that at the very least they are staggeringly incompetent.
Chris
Quote: Jufo81So, Casinomeister keeps saying now that there is still more to the story and that people have made assumptions based on incomplete information. So what do you think that this new revelation from GRA will be that will earth-shatteringly change the outlook of the whole case?
The only thing I can see that would make any difference is that the play logs were falsified but since the playlogs perfectly matched Betfred's statement, even that is not possible.
I suspect their findings will be something similar to the Ron Harris programmer in the early 90’s hired by the Nevada G.C.B. to review software in search of gaffs. Instead he changed the code on some slot machines that would pay the jackpot after a certain sequence of coin amounts were put into the machines he rigged.
Of course this exact scenario with Ron Harris doesn’t seem logical with this issue, yet I see their findings having no choice but being the result of something like this being done from the inside by one rogue programmer. This would show that all the software companies and the operators were oblivious to any foul play.
I don’t see how this present issue would lead to personal gain for a rogue programmer, so maybe it’ll be the case of someone trying for whatever reason to bring down a company or companies.
For Betfred to return $20,000.00 US to this player which should’ve been based on their stored log files, they’ll have to say he hacked the casinos hard drive also.
Somehow it’ll all come down to the wrong help file put in the wrong place. Maybe the hacker did that to.
Whatever their findings are going to be, who could possibly trust in them after what we’ve all witnessed.
The way this incident was handled should be enough for anyone aware of it to run for the B&M’s.
Quote: ChopleyIOMThanks for the welcome chaps :)
I've found my way onto the moderated users list at CM so that'll be the end of me posting there.
I have archived out the entire Betfred thread, saved as numbered .mht files.
You can grab it from here:
http://users.manxbroadband.com/21801/finsoft_spielo.zip
Hey ChopleyIOM.
So, you got hit with the "moderated posts" hammer? Not surprising I guess. Still, something tells me that your world will continue unabated in its rotation ;)
Thanks for the time and trouble to create the archive.
Chris
Quote: binary128Hey ChopleyIOM.
So, you got hit with the "moderated posts" hammer? Not surprising I guess. Still, something tells me that your world will continue unabated in its rotation ;)
Thanks for the time and trouble to create the archive.
Chris
Hi Chris,
Yes I'm now in the moderated queue, which is a de facto ban as far as I'm concerned but TBH I was expecting to be properly banned this morning anyway. Either way it doesn't make any difference as I'm done with that site.
The CM handling of the Betfred Jag Promo disaster zone was bad enough but I gave the guy the benefit of the doubt. There is no doubt this time.
Still, at least I've learned the truth in the end :)
Quote: teliotThought experiment: assume the worst for the original poster -- that this really is a worst case scenario of fraud by "Katie Hale." What if the data that was originally given was produced fraudulently by someone with the access and ability to change the programs and log files? If that is the case, then what? Don't argue admissions or other evidence. Just go there -- what if?
Wow, I have a feeling that you are not just speculating "What if..." above but you might be onto something new.
If the person actually had the ability to modify the actual game itself and/or manufacture the logs I admit that it changes everything. But it will also open a can of new questions. Assuming this hacking ability was confined to Betfred, it leaves unexplained why Bet365 and Nordicbet admitted there being issues with these games.
One might also suspect that the whole story of the OP being able to modify the game and play logs is so far-fetched that it has to be an extreme cover-up attempt, where the OP has been further bullied/threatened to go along with after no one bought the previous attempt with that fake "confession letter".
Quote: teliotThought experiment: assume the worst for the original poster -- that this really is a worst case scenario of fraud by "Katie Hale." What if the data that was originally given was produced fraudulently by someone with the access and ability to change the programs and log files? If that is the case, then what? Don't argue admissions or other evidence. Just go there -- what if?
I agree the explanation of foul play has to fall upon the opening posters shoulders and whoever else is named. That outcome became predictable early on, like Jufo mentioned right after the confession letter.
Regardless who they blame for this, it remains undeniable that cheating and or altering the software was able to be done.
This whole matter just confirms that their is no regulation or enforcement in place at all when it comes to online casino games. No matter what they say their going to do in the future, without a real regulatory body in place it's meaningless.
It should also be obvious the amount of players (customers) it really takes to keep a billion dollar industry in business. What's being exposed on a couple of forums is meaningless when compared to the unaware masses all over the world that make it a billion dollar industry. This is why outside exposure is critical to help clean this up.
Even when players know up front their gambling against the house odds, the fact that their willing to gamble that their even getting a fare game, then gamble again that they will even receive any winnings, is something I just can't comprehend.
Quote: teliotThought experiment: assume the worst for the original poster -- that this really is a worst case scenario of fraud by "Katie Hale." What if the data that was originally given was produced fraudulently by someone with the access and ability to change the programs and log files? If that is the case, then what? Don't argue admissions or other evidence. Just go there -- what if?
That still would not change the fact that the "fun mode games" play entirely different that the "real mode games" do...would it?
That in and of itself is a complete deception is it not?
This is your first post. I assume you have a screen name that is more commonly known.Quote: BigBonerThat still would not change the fact that the "fun mode games" play entirely different that the "real mode games" do...would it?
That in and of itself is a complete deception is it not?
As for your question, that is a separate issue that deserves its own investigation. I am only asking about the part of the issue that Katie91 brought to light and that I investigated.
The OP is basically an irrelevance now, how he brought all of this to our attention, by what means, and to what end, are all irrelevant.
Betfred have been caught cheating, and they damned themselves by their own words on the CM forums.
Quote: teliotThis is your first post. I assume you have a screen name that is more commonly known.
Not sure how that would be of any relevance to the issues here or there, but just so you know, I've always respected your opinions on matters of such importance as these are.
Quote:As for your question, that is a separate issue that deserves its own investigation. I am only asking about the part of the issue that Katie91 brought to light and that I investigated.
Glad that we can both agree on the importance of "fun play" verses "real play" games should be investigated.
Regarding the issue that you investigated for Katie91, I would just simply ask you, how do you explain Nordicbet's admission and removal of those games?
Again, that is not part of my hypothetical. Yes, there is much more evidence than just the OP's claims and log files. I am not trying to explain anything. I am just asking, "what if?"Quote: BigBonerRegarding the issue that you investigated for Katie91, I would just simply ask you, how do you explain Nordicbet's admission and removal of those games?
Quote: teliotAgain, that is not part of my hypothetical. Yes, there is much more evidence than just the OP's claims and log files. I am not trying to explain anything. I am just asking, "what if?"
I personally believe that for "any" hypothetical to work correctly, you would have to take into account the fact Nordicbet admitted and removed the games in question as well as the Betfred statement whereas in essence they did in fact admit to the rigged games as well. A company the size of Betfred in my belief would just not simply pay out a $20,000 refund to some punter to hush them up when there is case after case in the past that they have not done the same for much lessor punters with many smaller claims.
IMO, the "what if" became irrelevant after Nordicbet completed their own internal investigation and made this post:
" Hello everyone,
I'm sorry for the delay. We have now completed our internal investigation and just as already concluded by many others - it was obvious that the game was not acting as it should have. We have reimbursed all losses on HiLo Gambler to all players since we launched the game, on all of our brands.
As I mentioned earlier we have of course removed HiLo Gambler. We have also taken the decision to remove all other games supplied by Finsoft. Those games should be removed early next week.
Rob "
SOURCE:
Quote: Jufo81So, Casinomeister keeps saying now that there is still more to the story and that people have made assumptions based on incomplete information. So what do you think that this new revelation from GRA will be that will earth-shatteringly change the outlook of the whole case?
The only thing I can see that would make any difference is that the play logs were falsified but since the playlogs perfectly matched Betfred's statement, even that is not possible.
This is perhaps the most fundamental issue of Casinomeister's functioning: secret information.
As long as CM is able to claim secret information, he can effectively say whatever he wants and his judgment must stand. The PAB process stands as a testament to this mode of functioning. He's trying very hard to take this situation private, and that's what these posts represent.
It's not like he's the first in history to claim "secret" information as justification for pulling shit. The US government does it on an almost daily basis, and big surprise, those parts of our government are as corrupt as hell too.
Oh, and I'm also joining this forum. Hi everyone!
Edited to add the quote that this was in response to.
Does anyone here honestly trust any online casino?
Quote: KeyserIs anyone really shocked by any of this?
Does anyone here honestly trust any online casino?
Never did, but I used to trust the information on Casinomeister...
Quote: rainmanIs my understanding correct that cmeister maintains a list of casinos accredited by him and some of those pay him?
I think that that is up in the air. He is most definitely an affiliate, and as such, most, if not all, of the casino links on his site are affiliate links, but as to whether casinos are paying him flat fees to remain prominently listed is unknown.
I suspect that that is true. Casinomeister's "picks" and the "top rated" casinos are all likely additional fees for the listed casinos.
Blacklisting the worst of the lot hardly gains much. Running some sort of administrative interference pattern on behalf of the less notorious sites shouldn't be able to go on for long.
All these "thumb on the scale" sites seem to be very profitable... eventually though they will run out of trusting suckers who fall for their spiel.
Quote: Gibraltar Gambling Commissioner Remote Technical and Operating Standards – Version 1.1.0 20/09/2012. Standard 3.4(11) The general playing rules and the payout percentage for a particular game should be the same in free play mode as it is in the real money game.
http://www.gibraltar.gov.gi/images/stories/PDF/gaming/remote_technical_and_operating_standards.pdf
(11)The general playing rules and the payout percentage for a particular game
should be the same in free play mode as it is in the real money game.
Where I am King (Weasel)
The general would read: All
should would read: must
Quote: 7crapsYou call that a knife?
(11)The general playing rules and the payout percentage for a particular game
should be the same in free play mode as it is in the real money game.
Where I am King (Weasel)
The general would read: All
should would read: must
Doors must be left unlocked all over the place.
Quote: MathExtremistIn case nobody has seen this yet, at least one remote gambling regulator has very clear regulations on the issue of the operation of games in free play vs. real money modes:
Aren't they ones who granted a Spielo a license in the first place?
Let's assume that the entire industry is as corrupt as some of us suspect. Did Bryan Bailey enter into this thinking "Yeah! I'm gonna' become a success and then go corrupt as fuck!"
No. He obviously didn't set out to do that. He's probably just some guy who got lucky when he was one of the few resources for players online back in the 90's. As such, he is in a position of power and profit that did not come from skill or business acumen, but happenstance. He is not a powerful business presence like Steve Jobs or Michael Eisner. As such, if thrust into a high-stakes situation, he wouldn't know how to respond.
Now let's look at his behavior, most especially his recent line about not risking things.
Quote:I'm not about to put this site in jeopardy to appease those few who want blood.
In much the same way as the "apology" from the OP looked like it was elicited with bright lights and electrified nipple clamps, these seem like the words of a man who is threatened. The users aren't a threat, so something else must be.
This case most likely represents the tip of a very large iceberg, one which has massive companies like Gtech, Lottomatica, and Betfred contained therein. If we assume that they are corrupt, they would be more than willing to tell Bryan Bailey that he had better get this situation under control else they will unleash the fires of hell on his house.
This is so big, it may be a case of Bailey being scared, not greedy.
Personally i can't imagine what evidence could possibly make all this go away, but sometimes i lack imagination on that front. I also think that shutting threads like that is more likely to do more damage than less as it just fuels the fire for those who believe there's something unscrupulous going on, but that's just my personal opinion and it's not my business that needs protecting.
Quote: TheLastCylonThis is so big, it may be a case of Bailey being scared, not greedy.
His choice of words - "I'm not about to put this site in jeopardy ..." - struck me the same way.
Bryan is no fool - I'm sure he knew that all of his actions regarding this thread/issue (banning the OP, his "Editor's Note", locking the thread, putting Betfred back on the Accredited List, etc.) would significantly harm his credibility, and not just short-term harm but long-term harm.
As I type this, the "Views" count on this thread is 61,478 and climbing. His actions here have received a huge amount of exposure. (Fortunately, so have the actions of Betfred, Bet365, Spielo G2, Finsoft, and the GRA.)
However, and regardless of my, or anyone's, opinion concerning how much damage his credibility has already taken over the years because of similar actions with "less global" incidents, that phrase "put this site in jeopardy" caused me to pause and wonder whether he might have received stated, or implied, threats.
I felt it necessary to respond to this one sentence.
Chris
Quote: binary128
Bryan is no fool - I'm sure he knew that all of his actions regarding this thread/issue (banning the OP, his "Editor's Note", locking the thread, putting Betfred back on the Accredited List, etc.) would significantly harm his credibility, and not just short-term harm but long-term harm.
That's another good point. When someone is the locus of discussion for so long, the ways that certain behaviors ripple over the Internet become readily apparent to him/her. He's receiving a spanking in the forums, and one must assume that he knew that this would happen. That means that whatever could possibly happen to him must be much worse than what would definitely happen to him.
That's an unsettling thought.
I hope he knows that as the operator of a forum, he falls under most "safe harbor" laws, and as such cannot be held responsible for the actions of forum members. Generally, the worst that could happen is that he could be legally forced to turn over their IP addresses.
Granted, that's US law. I'm unsure as to where he lives.
Quote: binary128His choice of words - "I'm not about to put this site in jeopardy ..." - struck me the same way.
I can't speak to the subject of libel lawsuits in Germany. However I've twice been warned of a lawsuit by the attorneys of the allegedly injured party. Both times, after much time and expense, they backed down. Two members of this forum have threatened to sue me over allegedly libelous posts by other members, but neither did anything.
So, I don't know what jeopardy Bryan is referring to, but I hope it isn't a threatened lawsuit. Chances are 90% such a threat is a bluff, and assuming it isn't, in this country at least, I'd give his chances of winning in court at least 90%.
