Advantage Players fighting for their winnings at NJ online caisnos
Poll
 | 6 votes (22.22%) | ||
| | 3 votes (11.11%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 8 votes (29.62%) | ||
| | 3 votes (11.11%) | ||
| | 1 vote (3.7%) | ||
| | 4 votes (14.81%) | ||
| | 14 votes (51.85%) | ||
| | 1 vote (3.7%) | ||
| | 4 votes (14.81%) |
27 members have voted
The question for the poll is what do you think about the article?
Quote: GWAEI wish I would luck into one of these one day. I wonder if the most feared AP on the east coast was involved?
Thanks for the compliment
But no. Had no idea it was going on. I missed out on that one
It doesn't surprise me as most of the players were notified by word of mouth in the AP community. My team is pretty separate and doesn't share info incoming or outgoing
So I am destined to miss opportunities like this one
And I WAS in AC that week :(
Quote: FinsRuleI played ocean magic once and I’m surprised the game was ever over 100% with the bubbles.
It was. I may be writing a page about it later.
Quote: TomGGreat article. My dream would be for the players to put a lien on the casino for defaulting on their debts
I agree that would be fun to see. More likely than not though, they'll eventually settle out of court for more than it would have cost them to just pay. Based on the article, it looks like this play was as clean as it gets...it seems that it was enabled by a massive blunder on the part of its creator, IGT. I'd be quite surprised if there isn't some sort of lawsuit or private settlement between IGT and the casinos involved to reimburse them for their losses. Borgata successfully sued the card manufacturer in the Phil Ivey case (though they were only awarded $26 out of the $9.9 million they sought), and I'd imagine the case against IGT is far stronger than the case against Gemaco was.
Some games come with "extra value" when first installed (or after hard-reset)...which can be +EV (over 100% for at least 1 spin). One game used to deliver with a lot of "extra value", but the manufacturer reduced the starting "extra value". Not sure why manufacturers do this...maybe an incentive to get people to play a new game?Quote: cwazyBased on the article, it looks like this play was as clean as it gets...it seems that it was enabled by a massive blunder on the part of its creator, IGT.
IGT's mistake here was allowing
(1) extra value (over 100%) on-line for EVERY player.
(2) extra value (over 100%) for high denominations.
Quote: mamatSome games come with "extra value" when first installed (or after hard-reset)...which can be +EV (over 100% for at least 1 spin). One game used to deliver with a lot of "extra value", but the manufacturer reduced the starting "extra value". Not sure why manufacturers do this...maybe an incentive to get people to play a new game?
IGT's mistake here was allowing
(1) extra value (over 100%) on-line for EVERY player.
(2) extra value (over 100%) for high denominations.
I understood the flaw. I was saying that doing it this way is a massive blunder. Maybe there is a legal/regulatory reason they do it? It's an interesting problem, because they couldn't just shuffle the reels at each reset either, otherwise online players would just reload the game until the conditions were favorable - which would have been an even bigger problem than the one they had here because each player could have played many more spins with an edge. So the reset state has to be something consistent. But I'm not sure why they chose a reset state that would give such a huge edge, especially since most players wouldn't know what they were looking at even when the game is favorable.
On topic, I will be interested in how this all comes out.
Quote: mamatSome games come with "extra value" when first installed (or after hard-reset)...which can be +EV (over 100% for at least 1 spin).
That is what happened with this play, except every new player that signed up got to play the game in the reset state, which had a huge advantage.
As to the players, I hear every casino except one has paid them.
Quote: WizardThat is what happened with this play, except every new player that signed up got to play the game in the reset state, which had a huge advantage.
As to the players, I hear every casino except one has paid them.
Do you know which one?
Im guessing Ceasars since the game was interrupted mid-action wben they took it down. They might have some argument although booking action and pulling the plug midgame is not my idea of a malfunction voids all pays and plays
If its Borgata thats just horrible business. The DGE will probably have to step in
????????????????????????????????????????????????Quote:“We then let all of our friends know about this crazy game,” Jay says, “and pretty much everybody we knew flew in and made deposits.”
well, we know "Jay" is not Axel
Quote: darkozDo you know which one?
Im guessing Ceasars since the game was interrupted mid-action wben they took it down. They might have some argument although booking action and pulling the plug midgame is not my idea of a malfunction voids all pays and plays
If its Borgata thats just horrible business. The DGE will probably have to step in
Borgata
Quote: mcallister3200Borgata
They have mastered the art of the freeroll. Though I disagreed with the outcome of the Phil Ivey case, I did think that situation was questionable enough that I didn’t fault Borgata for trying their luck in court. However, this case is very clear cut. No manipulation of procedures/rules occurred. Players simply played the game that was presented to them by the casino. The fact that the game (by design) offered players a 100%+ edge on the first few spins has no bearing on Borgata’s obligation to pay.
I would imagine they’ll be forced to pay, either by a court or the DGE.
Some sort of fine is in order for the operator, as pulling the plug because you think you are going to lose is akin to the Pit Boss grabbing a spinning die off the craps table because he thinks it is going come up a winner. It’s cheating.
Quote: SandybestdogSo I guess the only thing worse than not knowing about this is knowing about it and not playing it. I knew this several months ago. So on the regular game it started with a bubble on reel one, one from the top and one bubble below reel 4. On bubble boost it was the same on one and the other bubble was below reel 5. So you basically just do 3-4 spins per denom all the way up. The bubbles are then saved to your account. It’s only about 40 spins total per account, assuming more bubbles don’t appear. I believe this is how it starts when the game is installed in the casino but of course denoms only go up to a few dollars so it’s no sweat. I think Egypt starts with one coin per reel when first installed. I would definitely play that at a few hundred a spin. I played Magic at a few places up to about $50. I think I won a couple hundred then gave it back. I just didn’t see how it was positive and trust me I would find an excuse to play anything. I was told don’t play bubbles on the fourth reel alone. That leaves only one spin with one bubble on the top of reel one. I didn’t see it. Obviously I was wrong. But playing Ocean for $2000 a spin is no joke. The game pays very poorly, especially bubble boost.
With regard to GE, I looked at that after this article came out because my mind went straight there. Sadly, they seem to have fixed that issue and no longer have a coin at the top of each column. I'm not sure when that changed or if it was ever the case. But it doesn't start in a playable condition anymore - not online anyway.
I’ve never seen GE at an online casino. That’s just what I heard they start out when set up at regular casinos but I’ve never seen it.Quote: cwazyWith regard to GE, I looked at that after this article came out because my mind went straight there. Sadly, they seem to have fixed that issue and no longer have a coin at the top of each column. I'm not sure when that changed or if it was ever the case. But it doesn't start in a playable condition anymore - not online anyway.
Quote: SandybestdogI’ve never seen GE at an online casino. That’s just what I heard they start out when set up at regular casinos but I’ve never seen it.
It’s around. But I have never seen it in a playable state.
Quote: KeyserThe APs will likely be investigated for money laundering etc because of the publicity and size of the win. Treasury/ IRS are likely involved at this point. The legal fees will be astounding.
Such imagination
But wrong
They haven't even filed their taxes for the wins yet so unless they fail to file this April 15th why would the IRS be involved
And winning large amounts in what is clearly a recognized win (the APs now have public knowledge of how they won the money and were paid in full by the casinos) so there is a clearcut defense against money laundering
Winning large amounts of money is not automatically money laundering
Quote: darkozSuch imagination
But wrong
They haven't even filed their taxes for the wins yet so unless they fail to file this April 15th why would the IRS be involved
And winning large amounts in what is clearly a recognized win (the APs now have public knowledge of how they won the money and were paid in full by the casinos) so there is a clearcut defense against money laundering
Winning large amounts of money is not automatically money laundering
*April 15, 2020
