How big is the cheating? (RNG spinoff)

Discuss proper hold strategies and "advantage play" and ask questions about how to improve your play.
Post Reply
dinghy
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:24 am

Re: How big is the cheating? (RNG spinoff)

Post by dinghy »

OTABILL wrote:
Mon May 15, 2023 9:40 pm
My point is oddities happen without any reason to suspect shenanigans.
Yes, but people are not alleging oddities. They're alleging impossibilities.
OTABILL wrote:
Mon May 15, 2023 10:36 am
I might also remind everyone, that during multiple trips to Vegas and Laughlin, playing at a number of casinos, over more than a decade, neither my late wife nor I hit a single line rf. I attribute these results to randomness, and bad luck, not cheating.
What is your basis for that conclusion? I guarantee you if I went a decade without a single line royal, I would attribute the results to cheating. For my volume of play, it would be statistically impossible. But there's no way to assess your volume from the description provided.

advantage playe
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:38 am

Post by advantage playe »

onemoretry wrote:
Mon May 15, 2023 8:38 am
advantage playe wrote:
Mon May 15, 2023 8:23 am
I think dingy has the numbers right, Asteroid, I think u have 2 extra zeros at the end. I may be wrong. All math nerds please chime in !!
I do not consider myself to be a math nerd, but I will chime in to say that Asteroids number seems correct to me.
Thanks Onemoretry, but I think Asteroids numbers r 100x too high. I think, I smell wood burning !! lol.

onemoretry
Video Poker Master
Posts: 2836
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 8:00 pm

Post by onemoretry »

advantage playe wrote:
Tue May 16, 2023 8:53 am

Thanks Onemoretry, but I think Asteroids numbers r 100x too high. I think, I smell wood burning !! lol.
Well, here's how I looked at it. If the likelihood of hitting a royal is 1 in 40000, the probability of not hitting it is 39999/40000, or 0.999975. Multiplying that probability by itself 600000 times produces a probability of 0.0000003058. The inverse of that is 3,269,630

asteroid
Senior Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 10:36 am

Post by asteroid »

onemoretry wrote:
Tue May 16, 2023 10:31 am
advantage playe wrote:
Tue May 16, 2023 8:53 am

Thanks Onemoretry, but I think Asteroids numbers r 100x too high. I think, I smell wood burning !! lol.
Well, here's how I looked at it. If the likelihood of hitting a royal is 1 in 40000, the probability of not hitting it is 39999/40000, or 0.999975. Multiplying that probability by itself 600000 times produces a probability of 0.0000003058. The inverse of that is 3,269,630
Bingo - you explained it quite well IMHO. I should have just explained it rather than providing the end result in my initial response.

OTABILL
Video Poker Master
Posts: 2442
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:22 pm

Post by OTABILL »

dinghy wrote:
Mon May 15, 2023 10:36 pm
OTABILL wrote:
Mon May 15, 2023 9:40 pm
My point is oddities happen without any reason to suspect shenanigans.
Yes, but people are not alleging oddities. They're alleging impossibilities.
OTABILL wrote:
Mon May 15, 2023 10:36 am
I might also remind everyone, that during multiple trips to Vegas and Laughlin, playing at a number of casinos, over more than a decade, neither my late wife nor I hit a single line rf. I attribute these results to randomness, and bad luck, not cheating.
What is your basis for that conclusion? I guarantee you if I went a decade without a single line royal, I would attribute the results to cheating. For my volume of play, it would be statistically impossible. But there's no way to assess your volume from the description provided.
I have no idea how many hands of single line quarter either of us played in Nevada. Let's just say we spent an average of ten days a year, not playing all the time. During that decade both of us hit royals at casinos here in Arizona and once on a cruise. Ironically, on one trip, we both played a few hands of triple play nickels and ironically both of us got rfs. My point again is that randomness creates oddities and with no other evidence, there is no way to prove, or disprove, the machines were programmed improperly.

dinghy
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:24 am

Post by dinghy »

onemoretry wrote:
Tue May 16, 2023 10:31 am
Well, here's how I looked at it. If the likelihood of hitting a royal is 1 in 40000, the probability of not hitting it is 39999/40000, or 0.999975. Multiplying that probability by itself 600000 times produces a probability of 0.0000003058. The inverse of that is 3,269,630
Sorry, just getting to this now. I don't see a flaw in your logic, so I concede to you and asteroid.

I'm bad at math, and it's my best subject. :ouch:

advantage playe
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:38 am

Post by advantage playe »

As all of you hopefully know , its not how many days or even years you play, its the number of hands played that consitudes the sample size. for eg. I played a bit over a million hands at one store in a year playing full time on a great play and hit 25 royals. . exactly as randomness would predict which in itself is unusual !

FAA
Video Poker Master
Posts: 8477
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 11:58 am

Post by FAA »

That’s quite the story. IRS got paid.

advantage playe
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1913
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:38 am

Post by advantage playe »

FAA wrote:
Wed May 17, 2023 6:15 pm
That’s quite the story. IRS got paid.
They always do !!

dinghy
Video Poker Master
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 8:24 am

Post by dinghy »

OTABILL wrote:
Tue May 16, 2023 1:20 pm
My point again is that randomness creates oddities and with no other evidence, there is no way to prove, or disprove, the machines were programmed improperly.
I'm probably still not precisely on your wavelength. In a very technical sense, I agree that you can't "prove" unfairness by collecting play data. No matter how crazy the results, it's still possible you're just running bad. But we still have to make decisions despite our information being imperfect.

Example, some players are doubting the new machines at Soaring Eagle. What to do? If the casino has plenty of equivalent old machines, then I think it's reasonable to avoid the new ones.

But if the new machines are the only full-pay, then you have a much tougher decision. You have to think carefully about the statistical significance of your observations.

Another example, you go to Vegas on vacation and drive up to Aliante. They have a daily free kiosk swipe with two possible hidden prizes. You pick the one on the left and win $5. The prize on the right is revealed to have been $5,000.

Next day you go back and again win 5 instead of 5000.

What do you? Do you keep driving up every day? Do you postpone your flight home?

You can't prove the swipe is rigged, but I think that would be the logical conclusion.

Post Reply