How much do we still not know?

[Eduardo]

Did that 3x make the games positive?

[Tedlark]

Ed I was thinking about Chris the other day. And as for farcebook, I will NEVER, (I am shouting here) NEVER be involved with them as long as they continue to ask me to friend Chris.

[sam434343]

Daburglar, my ears are hurting from the shouting,(lol) Everything you said in your last paragragh about how the chips works in one state or dosnt work in another ect.ect. and how humans are you hit the nail on the head I agree with you 99.99999%,oh! wait going to take one of those .9 off(lol, I need that .9 for luck) like I said before I have had one oh two feet in the real grave,(wife gets pissed,she wants me to irritate her many more years(lol) I think you understand what I am talking about. And everything you wrote make sences to me! Sam

[shadowman]

I think we need a few more tin foil hats. The conspiracy pecans are back.

[faygo]

[ImALooserBaby]

In March of this year i was playing deuces wild at Showboat AC and hit a royal no deuces for $1000. I was playing at the bar in the center where the kiosks are, not the bar where the live music is and the escalators. I might of feed $40 into the machine before I hit.Also i'm new here. Hi y'all

[BillyJoe]

Billyjoe, I think my response above answers this question. You would play about 16 hands (96 seconds) to get to a new segment with + or - 3% variation. Your own variation will be much higher for so few hands.

The fact is you could happen to hit good hands even in a poor segment or bad hands in a good segment.
I understand, Shadow, providing ALL the segments had good hands available. But here is where I am driving this.
 
If (once again, I say IF) a casino wanted to make the game less prone to good hands (like quads), could they LEGALLY have an RNG that had many segments where it was impossible to hit quads, but still consider itself random, and paying within the paytable parameters, since the other segments DID have quads available?

[Vman96]

If (once again, I say IF) a casino wanted to make the game less prone to good hands (like quads), could they LEGALLY have an RNG that had many segments where it was impossible to hit quads, but still consider itself random, and paying within the paytable parameters, since the other segments DID have quads available?

Class II machines are random too billyjoe. They just don't follow the probabilities of a standard poker deck, so therefore the paytable can not used to fully determine the game's return.

So New York (state-run racinos), Alabama, Washington machines to name a few all do this.

But in many states like Nevada, Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Oregon, West Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Mississippi, Louisiana, New Jersey, and others I am just leaving out due to laziness...the RNG can have hot and cold streaks, sure, BUT in the long run, probabilities must conform to a standard poker deck. So if you find a cold streak, there will be enough hot streaks to counterbalance it. Anything less than conforming to a standard poker deck will violate one of their laws.

[shadowman]

[QUOTE=shadowman]Billyjoe, I think my response above answers this question. You would play about 16 hands (96 seconds) to get to a new segment with + or - 3% variation. Your own variation will be much higher for so few hands. The fact is you could happen to hit good hands even in a poor segment or bad hands in a good segment.
I understand, Shadow, providing ALL the segments had good hands available. But here is where I am driving this.
 
If (once again, I say IF) a casino wanted to make the game less prone to good hands (like quads), could they LEGALLY have an RNG that had many segments where it was impossible to hit quads, but still consider itself random, and paying within the paytable parameters, since the other segments DID have quads available? [/QUOTE]

No, the RNGs, while able to generate lots of numbers, are still limited. Remember, the segments were only + or - 3% so they had to have just about everything except possibly RFs.

[spxChrome]

[QUOTE=shadowman]Billyjoe, I think my response above answers this question. You would play about 16 hands (96 seconds) to get to a new segment with + or - 3% variation. Your own variation will be much higher for so few hands. The fact is you could happen to hit good hands even in a poor segment or bad hands in a good segment.
I understand, Shadow, providing ALL the segments had good hands available. But here is where I am driving this.
 
If (once again, I say IF) a casino wanted to make the game less prone to good hands (like quads), could they LEGALLY have an RNG that had many segments where it was impossible to hit quads, but still consider itself random, and paying within the paytable parameters, since the other segments DID have quads available? [/QUOTE]

You can write a program to do whatever you want. I know slots have a min payback of like 80% or something so I guess this applies to VP as well. So they can do whatever as long as it pays out at least 80%. I don't think it says anywhere in the Regulations that a 9/6 JOB must payout 99.76 or whatever %. So the deal maybe random but after that whos knows what the computer does. I don't think its documented anywhere exactly but that could explain why a majority of my handpays have been dealt this year lol.