Forum

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Yeah obviously with the dice example you could potentially win more off the 3 separate tickets, if for example by freak chance they all won.

With slots, I’d say look at it this way: if for example Book of Argyl takes on average 100 spins to land a bonus and 100 spins on average carries 70% RTP, if you load up £60 at £1 a spin you will probably get about 120 spins out of it before you bust and therefore have at least a 50/50 of hitting a feature in the aggregate of those spins. But if you have 3 separate £20 sessions over 3 days, in each session you only get maybe 35 spins before you’re bust so you’re in practice less likely to see a feature land.

Nothing is guaranteed good or bad either way with either strategy; maybe you hit a bonus first spin on your first deposit but the smarter strategy is to do one bigger deposit, simply because you increase your statistical exposure to the random results.

Sorry this is quite difficult to explain; just to be clear, if you have 500 spins on a slot (and its odds are fixed at all times), it doesn’t matter whether you have those spins in one session or ten. In aggregate across the spins, if you would expect to see a bonus within 500 spins, you will probably hit one at some point, even if you have 50 sessions of 10 spins each. If that was your underlying question, yes that’s true.

But the chance of a bonus landing in any individual spin isn’t our only variable when we play slots. We have the combined probability of a bonus landing in a given set of some number of spins, we have our stake, our bankroll, our average RTP per number of spins, the different games we’re playing. Are we upping the stake or changing game when we get a win? etc…

What it comes down to is if you have 50 sessions of 10 spins each, hitting a bonus in one of those sessions probably won’t make enough of a difference to your bankroll to be able to sufficiently sustain your play to hit further wins, because while overall RTP for a game might be as high as 96%, the average RTP it pays in 100 spins might be 50% or less.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Yeah the lottery thing was an analogy anyway, not a like-for-like comparison with slots, which is a more complicated scenario particularly if you are jumping between different games in the session. But yes, the more spins you have in total across all your games in a single session, the more likely you are to hit something before you bust out. When you spread your money over a few smaller deposits, you increase the chance you’ll have run out before you hit a feature, even though your odds on any given spin on a particular slot remain the same.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

ayma4quit wrote:

argyl53 wrote:

You’ll get more spins in the one session which gives you a better chance overall. It’s like buying 10 tickets for the same lottery draw instead of 1 ticket each for 10 separate draws.

Chances are exactly equal there again though……Sorry,but that’s simply not correct. The grouping of bets has absolutely no effect on the chances of you winning.

They’re not exactly equal. I’ll scale it down to explain why. Imagine a simple dice roll and you get to place a bet on the outcome.

You buy 3 separate £1 tickets for 3 separate rolls, all betting on the outcome being 6.

Your total probability of winning on any one of those is 43%, since it is the combined probability of 1 – (1st roll not 6) x (2nd roll not 6) x (3rd roll not 6). On each roll, you have a 5 in 6 chance of not winning, so combined probability of not winning comes to 57%.

Next you buy a single ticket for £3 for a single roll, but cover 3 numbers; 2, 4 and 6. Your chance of winning here is 50%, since you straightforwardly have 50% of the possible outcomes covered.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

You’ll get more spins in the one session which gives you a better chance overall. It’s like buying 10 tickets for the same lottery draw instead of 1 ticket each for 10 separate draws.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Ah right I get you.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

eejit101 wrote:

Actually thats really not easy. You cant automate a payment system to do that. As the PSP is triggered by the back office allowing the front end to insert that figure. The deposit size is easy, its just limiting what can do in that field. If you ask it to be an either/or/both function, then keep adding to that, youll put way too much strain on the system and it will crash. We tried it with a couple of parameters and the front end gets overloaded.

It’s a poorly designed system if you can’t prevent a player making a deposit over a certain figure; many casinos can do this with no trouble. You don’t let it get as far as the 3rd party PSP to do those checks on player limits, you do it before you’ve initiated any transaction.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

trr420 wrote:

Do you not think i did check them things considering i had to go there and bloody change it? When i changed it there was no spending limits. I don’t use wagering limits because i am a degenerate gamblers that gambles for fun and really pushing the limit. Many times i have spunked away thousands from 25, 50 and 100 deposits lol. Didn’t faze me in the slightest. I was told it must have been an error and was allowed to deposit and withdraw money without wagering which WOULD FALL UNDER MONEY LAUNDERING. Kind of why i was going to ask for help geting the deposit back, thankfully they were kind enough to admit it was an error.

Right, okay, I understand you now. Your scatty English makes it difficult sometimes. Yes allowing you to deposit and then withdraw without wagering would typically be prevented under AML regulation but there are exceptions for genuine error and cases like for example where you’ve self-excluded but they’ve allowed you to deposit because their automated check on your ID failed to pick up on who you were. In these situations they can return the money without triggering AML checks.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

trr420 wrote:

You understand they had to lower from 96% to 94%, yet come across as a paranoid Schizophrenic with trust issue to try and fade my previous comments. Now please counter the points i made or stop being paranoid. They make millions as it is. I don’t believe they cheat on roulette, i don’t think pokerstars QUANTUM RNG is rigged. Now… heres a shocker for ya. And i swollow my pride in saying it.
I have researched this all more than most because i used to be as paranoid as you seem. I thought everything was a scam and i was butt hurt like most of yous. Then i understood i didn’t need to gamble and understood how much money they can make off 6% over millions of spins. Or the real RTP on a roulette table rather than risk it all with magnets and so on makes them a fortune. Now even if i am wrong now, and was right and they do cheat.. then I WAS STUPID ENOUGH TO KEEP PLAYING LOL.
Responsibility for me own actions man. I have them now and feel the need to help spread reality.

This is getting even weirder now….do you not understand like half of my extensive post history on this forum is me explaining to people in painful detail how RNGs aren’t rigged, casino games are genuinely fair, all your outcomes are random luck, they don’t need to cheat anyone to make a profit and players need to take responsibility instead of blaming casinos for their losses? Same for Bio and eejit. How are you reading our posts and managing to interpret them as the exact opposite of everything we’ve ever said? I’m not even taking the piss, I’m really confused now as to what you think is happening here.

 

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

trr420 wrote:

Argyl53. Why is that taking over everything? What’s the issue. When i write a reply you don’t reply to, then all i seemed to get is a diversion. Reguardless. There was the same people here as there was on the other thread “has the streaming bubble burst” coming and changing the subject on me. If you read through you will see when i tried to end the other stream by coming here and explaining my intention was not for it to end up with multiple people attacking eachother and name calling in the Bandits house, you came straight in to tell me here i was wrong and you were right. You lead me to assume you gambled, as you are here. You made me assume you didn’t like video slots as you were calling for people to boycott them lol. Then have the cheek to tell me i am making shit up when it is reasonable to assume what i said.

So after insisting several times I retroactively edited posts to make it look like I was right and you were wrong, you now cannot cite any post you think I changed. Thank you.

You also yet again say I was “calling for people to boycott” Video Slots. Another bit of fiction from your imagination.

I didn’t tell you that you were wrong and I was right. The first post I made in this thread was in reply to you saying RTP is not as important for someone who plays a small number of spins as someone who plays a larger number. I said that while you’re correct RTP is a long-term measure, it’s not true that a lower RTP doesn’t make a difference – of course it does, because it means on any given spin your chances of winning are lower. That is something which can be easily proven via probability theory. If you think that’s wrong, please explain why.

You are making shit up I haven’t said. You’re still doing it right now, in this post. It’s extraordinary.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

He edited a post i wanted to reply to and then i had to change what i was writing.

Which post? There’s only one in this thread I edited in the few minutes after posting it’s possible to do so and it’s not one you’ve replied to.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Letting me deposit 100 quid and not let me spend it is stupid, I stand by what i said… it is like money laundering the funds i was allowed to deposit as i couldn’t actually spend that money. What would the site use the money for?

No. This is you having a spending or loss limit and a separate deposit limit on your casino account. Money laundering is the process of disguising money obtained from crime as legitimate income. Completely unrelated. On the deposit and wagering limits, to throw your own words back at you, you are able to check those things any time you log in and before you deposit so it’s your problem if you didn’t do that.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

trr420 wrote:

I was allowed to deposit 100 quid after a loss, but then i had my account suspended under old spending limits. I asked them why i would increase my deposit limits just to have the funds sitting in my account for 29 days until i was allowed to wager again, rather than increase my deposit limits to be able to spend more money … but i was made to feel stupid.

I was told i should have changed the spending limits… but when i Changed my deposit limits i would expect to be able to spend what i deposit to the site…. otherwise i am using the place for banking, as i am depositing money just to have it sitting there with no way to spend it. Isn’t that against money laundering rules? It just seems stupid to me and i didn’t believe i had any restrictions on the site, as i still believe now. I strongly believe they were imposed on me after my first of two activities ad in the first time in over 1 year from first deposit. All because of the bandits giveaway, or i’d play elsewhere thanks to lower rtp for UK players.

Given your contributions to the thread about Video Slots, surely you’re not telling us you expected them to make clear to you how spending and deposit limits worked before you were affected by them and that it shouldn’t have been your responsibility as the player to check all this stuff every single time you log in?

I’ve just eaten one of those Gu chocolate cheesecakes, but I’ve got room for the delicious irony here.

Sounds like you need to learn to take responsibility for your gambling and stop calling for Video Slots to be boycotted and forced out of the UK market 😀

 

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Biohazard wrote:

trr420 wrote:

All because of the bandits giveaway, or i’d play elsewhere thanks to lower rtp for UK players.

Oh my

OMFG! 😀 This is the sweet, sweet icing on the cake!

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Argyl. You did edit your post on this thread to correct a wrong that i was pointing out until you posted a new comment and i had to change what i was writing.

I’m curious to know what post you think I edited and to what end, because I’ll say it again as clearly as I possibly can: it didn’t happen.

Why do you seem overly obsessed with it?

I’m not the one who’s obsessing over someone else expressing a trivial opinion. I’m merely correcting you for the benefit of other readers when you wrongly claim I’ve called for VideoSlots to be boycotted, refused to take responsibility for my own gambling, edited my posts to make you look wrong and all the other fiction you’ve made up in your head and then ascribed to me. You say you’ve proved me wrong; I don’t even have any idea what it is you think you’ve proved me wrong about. All I’ve done here is state a personal opinion about a casino’s handling of something.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Haz40 wrote:

I had to get other people to make me stop ? ??. I seriously think your not right in the head. Deranged lunatic springs to mind.

Definitely exhibiting some worrying signs of instability….the latest theory, when he couldn’t find any evidence in my posts of all the stuff he’s made up about me and imagined me saying, is that I must be retroactively editing my posts after he’s replied to try and make him look stupid. This is despite the fact you can only edit comments for up to 5 minutes after posting.

[Author]

Posts