Due diligence

The Wiz has clearly shown that certain on line casinos were cheating their customers, of that there can be no doubt. He has warned the gambling world about the software maker which allowed these casinos to steal money from unsuspecting dupes. However, I think the admonition to not use any casino that used that particular software did not go nearly far enough. I would state that any casino that allowed that software to be used at any time to be a rogue casino. They allowed customers to be subject to a fraudulent system while, if not intentional, then clearly grossly negligent. Is anyone believing that these casinos didn't notice a ridiculous rise in their winning percentage? I can assure you if the software was working that way for the player and not the casino, it would have been noticed in hours, not weeks. I find it hard to believe that the casinos were unaware of this trickery well before the gambling community and the Wiz called them to task.

I'm with you on this, SOOPOO. At some point, casinos were profiting and winning from an unfair game. The error has been discovered, and it will be up to the casinos involved to compensate. However, given that none of these are regulated in the United States, the odds of a online casino going back retroactively and giving back players money will be slim to none.

And who knows what the algorithm was that BLR was working with or whether it was even working that way since its inception, or whether this was a rogue software update. We do know that the software was operating in its rogue fashion since May and IS working that way today.

Therefore, for online casinos to make good, they would need to have BLR's software independently tested, determine which other of its games are biased, and then refund players for all of their losses via casino credit or cash. I don't expect this to happen.

Of course, they knew. Why would BLR give them cheating software without them asking for it? What incentive could it possibly have had? And what casino owner would be stupid enough to put software in use without testing it? And how could he not notice the excessive profits?
There is simply no way they did not know.

I've occasionally used the term "green eye shade-type" for an expert in numbers and in this day and age of computers and different style of dress for accountants it is indeed going to be different to some degree, but the one fact remains: the casino personnel are in the business its their job to watch the numbers and notice when something does not ring true.

Did they know? Of course they knew. Its their job. They knew and they knew just how many dollars and cents it was.

I cannot summon any sympathy for anyone who dealt with an online casino. You got cheated - exactly what you should have expected.
Maybe you just thought you could outcheat them.

Quote: dm

I cannot summon any sympathy for anyone who dealt with an online casino. You got cheated - exactly what you should have expected.
Maybe you just thought you could outcheat them.

It is because of this possibility that I have never risked money at an on-line casino. I would surmise once it becomes legal in the US and is regulated, and felons like the ones exposed by the Wiz can be punished, then it will approach the safety of land based casinos.

I didn't vote. 100% is high enough for me.

Quote: dm

I didn't vote. 100% is high enough for me.

Since there seems to be no dissent from the thought that the casinos were complicit, the 'software' part of the story is less relevant. The important part is that some on-line casinos were intentionally stealing money, and were just so stupid that they were caught. Why would we not think that other on-line casinos are just adjusting the house edge so that players will think they are just on the wrong side of variance but not that far off to think something is fishy? If I were the Wiz I would put a permanent blacklist on all casinos that used the tainted software.

Not stupid, just greedy.
They probably knew eventually someone would wise up and test them, but until then they might as well rake in whatever they can. Its not as if they have anyone watching over their shoulder and about to make them put the candy bar back. Its their money now.

Refunding a few thousand to the noisy ones, is just a cost of doing business. Even if the operation were totally blacklisted, it is very easy to start up again with a new name, p.o. box and shuffled names on the owners documents. The down economy has caused many of the "sheep" to wander off. It appears that some of the ones that remain are being eaten to keep the rancher fat and happy.

The casino section of the sites in question is a very small part of the their operation. Legends, WorldWide and 5Dimes have been around for a while so changing their website and reappearing elsewhere won't work with them.

From my perspective, it appears that the casino SOFTWARE is what is in question. 5 Dimes killed their casino right away at the start of this scandal but they had other casinos on other platforms to offer. Legends is claiming that the RNG is theirs and there is no problem. Someone will have to test that, but given that WorldWide and 5Dimes had the same bias using the same software platform tells me that the problem lies with BLR and not the casino itself and that the bias will be at Legends as well.

You made me vote.

Quote: boymimbo

The casino section of the sites in question is a very small part of the their operation. Legends, WorldWide and 5Dimes have been around for a while so changing their website and reappearing elsewhere won't work with them.

From my perspective, it appears that the casino SOFTWARE is what is in question. 5 Dimes killed their casino right away at the start of this scandal but they had other casinos on other platforms to offer. Legends is claiming that the RNG is theirs and there is no problem. Someone will have to test that, but given that WorldWide and 5Dimes had the same bias using the same software platform tells me that the problem lies with BLR and not the casino itself and that the bias will be at Legends as well.

So boymimbo, you are saying a business (on-line casino) bought a product (software) from a company (BLR) and started using it and didnt check it even cursorily? Even if that was true, that would be damning enough. But how many test rolls would it have taken for the company to notice the likelihood of there being a problem? You don't think if you did a 100 pass line trial and noticed 25 wins and 75 losses that would at least be cause for concern and further testing? I found the software manufacturer's website and as best I can tell the company is based in Costa Rica. Has there ever been an on-line fraud tied to that country......???? Now we can add another....

The sites do not feature a certificate of fair gaming or any kind of randomness test, so I think the casinos are absolutely complicit.

It could have been easy enough as BLR doing a software update which contained the rogue code and the affiliate not being aware that the software update barfed up the odds. Who knows?

Legends is in denial, and I haven't seen any statement from WorldWide.

Edit: Both of the above casinos have been put on CasinoMeister's rogue list.

Further Edit: I'd leave 5 dimes up on the list as well until they have refunded the players who lost their money.

I didn't really post anything on this in any thread since frankly, I didn't really get into any of them to begin with. Since the Wizard's posting on this WoO site, I thought I'd check it out. I still didn't feel the need to post anything, but I do want to make a comment on this poll and the situation in general.

First, this poll is kind of like asking OJ Simpson "Did you murder them by shooting them, or are you completely innocent?" The first answer isn't entirely a "Yes" so it's a NO. In the case of these two questions, there's something in between being completely complicit and completely unaware... at least to find a reasonable answer. OBVIOUSLY, the casinos were complicit as they didn't do enough tests to figure out whether the software was rogue.

A better poll question is "To what degree did the online companies know the software was rogue?" Then you could have 4-5 options... I'm most curious as to how many people think they knew something was wrong and didn't do anything about it. Obviously, two companies are still denying it, meaning they must KNOW that's it bad software.

Perhaps the better question about the situation is... WHY DID PEOPLE KEEP PLAYING THERE???? I feel bad that a guy played 3000+ rolls, but SERIOUSLY... at what point do you say you just need to give up??? I would NEVER play online, including poker, except for play money. But even if I did, I wouldn't DARE go to an online casino and give up that many rolls and sit back and say it's ok.

It's like the new machines on Pai Gow Poker that set house ways AND where the cards go. I KNOW NGC would not allow those RNGs to be rogue, but I still don't like playing on them. Why? Well it was amazing how when I did play on them, the dealer got all the great bonus hands, and usually had the strongest hands. If they didn't, the house way would be set to beat.

OK, I KNOW FOR A FACT that this was just variance at my time at the Cosmopolitan. I wouldn't make an argument otherwise, but after losing 300 pretty quickly, I said, I'll go to Caesars where at least they shake the dice up. But an online casino... after about 10 rolls I would be saying "See ya!" and pray that I get the money I sent back...

At some point in time, it no longer becomes about the money. You try to prove a point to yourself and the world. I've done that - sat at a video poker machine at a casino asking myself, is this just bad variance or is the machine rigged and played until i came to my own conclusion (it's rigged). Unfortunately the only way to do this is with real money.

ClemPops who was the OP posted that he had only won 843 (it was actually 853) of 3,200 bets. Well, if the bet is a YO or even a C&E bet that would be a good thing. Everyone doubted him until DorothyGale and I started asking for an receiving the videos. If he had only recorded 500 bets and he won only 130 we would chalk it up to bad luck and send him on his way. He wouldn't have posted the videos and probably that would be it. Now he probably didn't have to go to 3,200 bets but he did, videotaping each set along the way. He had $25 Grand in his account balance so some $1 don'ts probably fascinated him at first until it became a clear anomaly and probably a fascination.

But to Clem he didn't have a statistics background to realize the sample size required to discover cheating. And it took analysis by DorothyGale, myself (who became quite curious) and realtime tests (with statistical analysis) by teliot and the Wizard to back it up. And it took an activist to advertise it on the sbr.com and casinomeister site, which most gamblers don't even bother reading.

Sometimes you just can't believe it. There have been several threads about online casinos cheating, and the typical response has been "why would they - they have the edge built it". Well, sometimes the built in edge isn't enough, apparently, and that's quite sad. And given that the sportsbooking side of the wagering site has been given A+ ratings to Legends and 5Dimes (WorldWide is a B) at SBR.com, there are probably many many players who think "trust the sportsbook, trust the casino" and were absolutely ripped off.

News is spreading: now at reviewed-casinos.com.

And I've learned over at SBR that 5 dimes is not going to refund money to someone who had lost earlier at their rigged casino.