-
AuthorPosts
-
10th February 2019 at 9:03 pm #47897
The Bandit locked a thread because people were sniping and not discussing. I’m sorry to reopen discussions but I had just written this monologue and wanted to share with someone lol. The thread was locked moments before I tried to post this:-
I am not a programmer, merely a physicist and mathematician who has programmed RNGs to simulate natural processes. There is a well-known experiment called, “Buffon’s Needle”, which can be simulated using an RNG. The simulated answer should yield Pi to a certain accuracy, that accuracy depends on the number of random trials. If you set a really large number of trials you will get closer to Pi but it’s important to note you could set the number of trials to infinity and not diverge on the exact value of Pi because the RNG isn’t truly random (also experiment isn’t perfect, a computer can’t handle infinity)
It’s impossible to create a true RNG from a piece of software. That’s an important fact some experts have overlooked. To get something close to “truly random”, a true source of entropy is required, like radioactive decay or a photon cannon. According to the laws of quantum mechanics, it’s impossible to predict on a photon-by-photon basis whether or not a photon will be absorbed or reflected under a certain configuration (i.e. PokerStars’ RNG). Likewise with a radioactive substance (blob of atoms) spitting out energy, we know it’s radioactive and radiation WILL be emitted, but we have no way to know which particular atom will decay at any given moment. The overall processes though, the half-life or the absorption/reflection rate, are predictable and follow statistical processes.
Whether you are using a quantum RNG, a regular RNG, a compensated RNG or your hands to physically pick numbers on a dice, all of them are fundamentally compensated. A quantum RNG is compensated by events which are individually random but collectively form a distinct pattern (same underlying principle as interference patterns from electron cannon in Young’s Double Slit, radioactive decay etc). A standard RNG is compensated by, “the law of large numbers”, which is a simulation of the quantum RNG statistical processes. It’s actually governed by Central Limit Theorem but semantics. A compensated RNG uses a statistical summary based on past events to determine the present and future. That’s actually the same as a quantum RNG albeit flawed like Buffon’s Needle because there is no true source of entropy (computers cannot generate truly random numbers) and there may be defined limits (e.g. RTP is exactly 90% after £1,000,000 wagering). Then using your hands is compensated because you are trying to roll an equal quantity of each number (1,2,3,4,5,6) over a set number of spins, or as close to that number as your margin of error allows
Anyway, WWTBAM. The Bandit said it right on video when talking about Extra Chilli. Those individual pie gambles are true odds (1/10 to hit purple ron) and each one corresponds to a different payout. So the 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24 spin bonuses will pay different amounts. If you consider Machina or whatever that game is and the difference in cost between 18 and 15 spins when buying the bonus, it’s HUGE. Those last 4 spins on Chilli are worth a lot more than the 4 spins from 8-12, 12-16 or 16-20.
Millionaire. They claim those bonuses are true odds the same as Chilli. I’m calling bullshit on that. The 50/50’s are not 50/50. I’ve played it a lot and seen plenty of others play it. The 50/50 loses 75% at least. I think I won like 1 out of 50, something ridiculous like that
So rigged or not? Let’s define rigged first because math gives us clear boundaries. If results are between 0 and 3 standard deviations from the mean, you might see some crazy shit but that’s still within the realms of reason. Approaching and going beyond 3 SDs you should be highly suspicious about any game claiming to be “random”. Beyond 5 SDs a game is rigged by definition.
In plain English:- If you get 1,000 bonuses on WWTBAM with 50/50 gamble and you lose 532 times or more, it’s very likely you are playing a biased game (99.7%). If you lost 750 times or more it’s almost certain you are playing a rigged game (99.99%)
Note that nothing is 100% certain (the fundamental nature of the universe is uncertain). There is a finite possibility you lose 1,000 flips in a row. That number is extremely small (power of -300). The total number of atoms in the universe is like 10 to the power of 82 so a number to the power of 300 is difficult to comprehend
Even PokerStars’ RNG has received criticism (resetting the photon cannon etc) – and stars’ RNG is a lot more sophisticated than the RNG in any slot machine
1210th February 2019 at 9:09 pm #47898One of the best posts I have read my friend!. Most gamblers (including myself) turn a blind eye to the basic mathematics that slots adhere to, it is too easy to point an accusing finger and accuse a game of being “rigged” purely because the odds haven’t worked in your favour.
If Albert Einstein accused that the only way to beat a roulette wheel was to “steal from it” then a daft little fucker like myself has no chance.
Thank you.
110th February 2019 at 9:10 pm #47899Also need to add that BTG are my favourite provider and I like WWTBAM, Chilli, Bonanza, DHV more than other slots. I defended WWTBAM I think twice in another thread and submitted a big win with 400x in the base game. I am not hating on BTG or WWTBAM, I like both
10th February 2019 at 9:12 pm #47901Off a quick read (sorry on my phone), looks like everything you’ve said is spot on.
The only thing I’d add in relation to online slots is that there is no requirement for them to be “true random” (which as you point out, is not a capability any computer has since they are by definition deterministic state machines). They are required to be “acceptably random”, which means they play within what a statistical analysis would consider random as per your comments on standard deviation.
Fact is, using hardware RNGs to seed a pseudo RNG, or by using device entropy as a software CSPRNG, we can simulate a million coin tosses and get an almost exactly 50/50 split between heads and tails. That may not be “true random”, but it’s close enough in every practical sense.
10th February 2019 at 9:18 pm #47903Slightly “off topic” but could I imply that BTG develop games to be more and more of a high variance level where the mathematics balance itself out but the player is ultimately chasing a dream. I hear a lot about potential with these games but rarely see the end result.
10th February 2019 at 9:41 pm #47907Gunner, as far as I am concerned there are two important definitions of rigged.
1. Rigged and lies about RTP
2. Rigged and does not lie about RTP
I admitted I am in no way saying WWTBAM is rigged (1) because that would take evidence and while JB feels it was rigged (1) for him, which I can understand, if RTP is balanced over 100,000 or 1m spins, there’s no way JB can satisfactorily state rigged (1)
I am however clearly stating that these slots are rigged (2) by the RTP and the remainder profit. I am clearly stating that anything random going on, in the slot is governed overall by that rigging. I think others are looking at it backwards thinking random dictates when that RTP is paid when in fact for a business model to be viable, the opposite has to be true.
Let’s look at a new slot release.
X Slot is released in 1,000 stores. Would it not be fair to say this is maybe the one place random is given it’s first task of randomly letting some pay at an initial loss for the vendor and some pay gaining a profit ? Would it also be fair to say we don’t know if even at that initial stage, there is an overall loss or profit however, the whole thing is still governed by RTP/Profit and random is allowed to play with those boundaries.
JB was happy to agree the genuine coin toss as a business would never get a deal on dragons den. Strangely enough, those who were trying to discredit with how it is said to be, by law, avoided that unequivocal “I’m out”.
Random as the ruler guarantees nothing. RTP/Profit makes the business viable. I’m not sure why anyone would think otherwise. This does not negate random playing a part but it does demonstrate viably, who is boss.
I have to say it is also seriously unfair to (whomever this concerns) try and dictate who should or shouldn’t be able to speak on the matter, regardless of what they have to say. Stating “no one else needs to speak” is just wrong. Additionally, being upset that the debate has been brought up again doesn’t prove anything. Likewise, I hope I didn’t resort to insults although I do not like being talked down to, whether I am right or not and I will not discuss this further. People here generally do not know me personally so the snide remarks trying to look like banter will not pass)
10th February 2019 at 9:47 pm #47909@Mr B – I liked your comment about Dragon’s Den in the other thread and I liked the thing that @haz40 was saying. Can’t remember what that was but I agreed with it lol
I think what you are saying is that no matter how it is calculated, the RTP is “forced” in some way. If that’s what you mean, I agree with that too
10th February 2019 at 9:51 pm #47911In reference to Mr B’s rather unusual definition of rigged, my position was that you imagine a bet on the outcome of a (fair and entirely random) roll of a dice, where numbers 1-4 pay nothing, 5 is money back and 6 is 2.5 times your bet back.
That game can in no way be accused of being rigged under any sensible definition, yet it is a profit yielding game for the vendor with a mere 58% long term RTP. It is also exactly how online slots work, just a much more simplified example, equivalent to a single reel, single win line slot.
10th February 2019 at 9:52 pm #4791210th February 2019 at 9:55 pm #47915In reference to “Dragon’s Den”, if the business model was “it’s a coin toss at £1 a go but if you win you get £1.80 not £2”, that would be a profitable business to invest in with a 10% house edge / 90% long term RTP. But it’s still completely random and not rigged.
10th February 2019 at 9:57 pm #47916In reference to Mr B’s rather unusual definition of rigged, my position was that you imagine a bet on the outcome of a (fair and entirely random) roll of a dice, where numbers 1-4 pay nothing, 5 is money back and 6 is 2.5 times your bet back.
That game can in no way be accused of being rigged under any sensible definition, yet it is a profit yielding game for the vendor with a mere 58% long term RTP. It is also exactly how online slots work, just a much more simplified example, equivalent to a single reel, single win line slot.
See Argyl, how I defined it is just normal to me, not unusual. However….. the similarity in your dice game is that you have dictated the RTP with the prizes which is done before any random comes into play thus agreeing with me that RTP is the boss. You set the RTP / prize fund and then let random do it’s thing. It doesn’t matter how much of the “game” a RNG is allowed to play with, the RTP is still head cheer leader.
10th February 2019 at 9:58 pm #47917In reference to “Dragon’s Den”, if the business model was “it’s a coin toss at £1 a go but if you win you get £1.80 not £2”, that would be a profitable business to invest in with a 10% house edge / 90% long term RTP. But it’s still completely random and not rigged.
and again you have stopped random, changed the prizes and then let random work after. Random isn’t involved until the coin is tossed thus RTP comes first. I’m not sure how much more simple and clear it can be put.
10th February 2019 at 10:10 pm #47920I still have no idea what you are defining rigged to mean, but I’m certainly happy to agree to disagree at this point…I’ve explained my position and am happy you’ve understood what I’m saying. I just don’t get what you mean by RTP comes before random…the only event in this scenario is a random coin toss. The RTP is calculated from the prize levels.
10th February 2019 at 10:19 pm #47925Rigged : meaning someone has added rigging, ropes or controls, levers. Rigged. Random means no control.
10th February 2019 at 10:26 pm #47928 -
AuthorPosts
