This site vs casino VP

[BillyJoe]

I am just curious. When we are playing a VP game on this site, is it using a RNG and formula the same way that a casino VP machine would? In other words, are the chances of hitting a particular card, or a STP multiplier, the same on a game at his site as they are in a casino?

[Webman]

The programming languages are different, but the approach is the same and every hand and draw card is random. Any time a card is dealt or drawn, there is no additional programming based on previous hands. Every hand is handled one at a time for truly random results. Obviously this also results in patterns that can be observed in any random distribution.The end result is a distribution as you would expect mathematically, and analyzing the games on the site has almost always come up with the expected results. Features such as multiplier frequencies are also designed to match the casino experience.People get hung up on RNG's, but a good random number isn't too hard to
come by in any programming language and the end result is pretty much
the same: choose a number between 1 and 52, display that card. No
attention is paid to the value of that card before it is selected. Because the games are re-written in a new language for the web (and because we need to support many browsers and ever-changing flash updates), there are occasional bugs but we correct these as quickly as possible when we come across them. So if something is behaving funny on this site, it doesn't mean you can't trust a casino game to behave properly. Those games are tested far more thoroughly and operate in a controlled environment on specific machines.So in almost all cases, you can expect the games here to operate similar to a casino. Our goal is always to imitate those games as closely as possible so that when you practice a game at home, you can take that same knowledge and apply it in the casino with a game that behaves the same way.

[BillyJoe]

Thanks, WebMan. That explains why I get bad scores on these games the same way as I lose money in the casino. The only game on this site that I somewhat consistently finish in positive territory with enough play is Wheel Poker, which seems to be disappearing from casinos as fast as it arrived. That should tell you something, right?

[ground control]

The day I go to a casino and play $200 dollars and my best deal or draw is a full house, I want be going back to that casino anymore. I'm from Louisiana and we had a couple like that here once. They went belly up only to be open by some one else. The new guys been around now more than 5 years.

[brmcc74]

I wish that I would have a day in the casino like a day playing these games. These games seem more forgiving to me,

[EDC1977]

Obviously this also results in patterns that can be observed in any random distribution.

  Boy, you had to go and mention patterns didn't you. Bubba will come on and agree 100% 

[bubbagene]

I noticed something yesterday while playing in the daily contest. I lost my internet connection and still had 60 deals or so remaining. The game played just the same until I funushed and it wouldnt register my score since my net connection is was down.
 
  So how could this be random? I guess once I choose the game and click on it the enture session must be loaded into my cpu.

[Webman]

A flash application can generate random numbers on the fly easily without an internet connection, just like any poker application you might download onto your computer. For example, Video Poker for Winners is never connected to the internet, but still creates random hands one at a time. However, you do need to retain your connection for scoring to work properly and count in the contest.

[bubbagene]

Okay so then when I clicked on to play say DDB that entire 100 hand session is loaded up into my cpu and that session does an internal RNG type of thing. That makes since. I was just wondering thanks.

[Frank Kneeland]

Whoops meant to post this in this thread...Perhaps this is a non sequitur
perhaps it is not. In the book I read recently "The Drunkards Walk" it
referenced an interesting study done into human pattern recognition.
Scientists set two buttons to give the subjects a reward if they pushed
the correct button. Only one button at a time was enabled to give the
reward, and they alternated which button was correct randomly with the
left button being correct 75% of the time and the right button getting
the remaining 25%. Rats scored an average of 70% correct pushes, as they quickly learned that the left button was right more often.ALL
the Human test subjects tried to guess at the non-existent pattern, and
NONE of them merely opted for always pushing the left button. The BEST
any of the human test subjects did was around 55% correct. Similar tests
have been conducted and in all cases rats and other non-primates like
pigeons score better than humans. The problem would seem to be that
humans perceive their pattern recognition as an "all the time asset" and
can't switch it off when it's a deficit...like when there is no
pattern.Oh, in the primary test they did not tell the
participants that the buttons alternated randomly. In a later re-test
they did, but most of the subjects still refused to believe the
scientists and continued to look for patterns even when they had been
told there were none. Some of the subjects requested to be allowed to
continue doing the test, because they felt they were close to figuring
out the pattern. These subjects left convinced the scientists were
wrong, and that there really was a pattern, even though their best
scores had been beaten by the weakest rats.If we have a hammer all problems become nails.In
another study scientists simply wanted to see if people could recognise
series of random coin tosses. The error rate was about 80%. 78% of the
non-random series were identified as random, and 82% of the truly random
series were thought to be man made.People almost perfectly perceive random events to be non-random and visa versa.~FK