Privacy settings

We use a number of cookies on our website. Some are essential, while others help us improve our portal for you.

Privacy settings

Here is an overview of all the cookies we use. You can choose to accept whole categories or view more information and select only certain cookies.

Essential (6)

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the website to function properly.

Statistics (3)

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
If the statistics cookies are subsequently deselected, they will remain on the computer until the expiry date. However, they are neither updated nor evaluated.

Online Casinos in general: Is there evidence of fraud in online casinos? (Page 57)

Topic created on 01st Jun. 2018 | Page: 57 of 58 | Answers: 573 | Views: 143,200
Anonym
Langhans wrote on 07/23/2023 at 12:59 PM:

Now please do not confuse me, Slotti Especially since I have no clue about poker. Sure, there are extreme cases and I have also mentioned...that can happen and they also occur with everyone times. But extreme cases lasting for months do not exist. Here now really quite a few participants have given Leon numerous pieces of advice to the best of their knowledge and belief. He is of course completely free to smile at them, not even to thank them, to throw them all to the wind and to continue the casino test, shouting fraud and shredding his balance sheet further and further.

Of all the tips he got, I eigtl. only found the one from Falke good. That he should just stop playing.

And of course there are extreme cases for months, they are even rather the rule (depending on how you define extreme case now).

I just used the Variance calculator to transfer this 1 to 1 to slots with an RTP of 96% (all raw without Cashback, freespins whatever). The probability of ending up in the minus after 1 million spins is 99.9968% and becomes even greater with each additional spin.

With only 100k spins: 89.7048%
With only 1k spins: 55.0329%

What do we learn from this? The gamblers among us who play only 1-3 times a year in the casino have the best chances to end the year as a winner, but hopefully most of you already know that.

Edit by Caro: superfluous paragraphs have been removed

This post has been translated automatically

Langhans
Expert
SlottiKarotti wrote on 23.07.2023 at 15:46:

Of all the tips he got, I eigtl. thought only Falke's was good. That he should just stop playing.


And of course there are extreme cases that last for months, they are even rather the rule (depending on how you define extreme cases now).

I just used the Variance calculator to transfer this 1 to 1 to slots with an RTP of 96% (all raw without Cashback, freespins whatever). The probability of ending up in the minus after 1 million spins is 99.9968% and becomes even greater with each additional spin.

With only 100k spins: 89.7048%
With only 1k spins: 55.0329%

What do we learn from this? The gamblers among us who play only 1-3 times a year in the casino have the best chances to end the year as a winner, but hopefully most of you already know that.








Interesting values that the variance calculator throws out there. At first glance, 1 million spins sounded like a lot to my ear..., but "only" 2,740 per day, if you calculate that over a year. That certainly create heaps of people loose...also from here. I now not necessarily...would roughly estimate that it is about 2,000 spins per day. So I would need a few months longer, but that is also completely secondary in the calculation. That of these people are actually 99.9968% of the players in the minus, I can not imagine but really. That would be 3 players out of 100,000...so virtually no one...that does not sound plausible to me I think in addition other parameters come into play, such as the game behavior (stakes / payouts, etc)... You can make 100 deadspins and the Zwanni is then gone. But if you hit 200X in the next session and pay out in time and don't keep playing endlessly, you'll be ahead again. And as for the other...clear, the sledgehammer advice "Stop completely" is always the best...However, suggestions for game optimization also have their legitimate place, I think

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym

Langhans wrote on 07/23/2023 at 5:13 pm:
Interesting values that the Variance calculator throws out there. At first glance, 1 million spins sounded a lot to my ear..., but "only" 2,740 per day, if you calculate that over a year. That certainly create heaps of people loose...also from here. I now not necessarily...would roughly estimate that it is about 2,000 spins per day. So I would need a few months longer, but that is also completely secondary in the calculation. That of these people are actually 99.9968% of the players in the minus, I can not imagine but really. That would be 3 players out of 100,000...so virtually no one...that does not sound plausible to me I think in addition other parameters come into play, such as the game behavior (stakes / payouts, etc)... You can make 100 deadspins and the Zwanni is then gone. But if you hit 200X in the next session and pay out in time and don't keep playing endlessly, you'll be ahead again. And as for the other...clear, the sledgehammer advice "Stop completely" is always the best...However, suggestions for game optimization also have their legitimate place, I think

This figure of 99.xx on 1 million spins doesn't seem plausible to me at 1st glance either, but the others do. But even if it were 97%, would you want to speculate on being one of the 30 lucky ones out of 1000? Very daring venture ^^


I am also the worst Mathenoob, vllt. can someone veri- or falsify that. But the trend is certainly true. So the more you gamble, the more likely you will be a loser in the long run.

Good suggestions for game optimization are not bad either, but that's rather something for people who have their game at least halfway under control. With 100€ a day, I doubt that this is still the case.

This post has been translated automatically

Langhans
Expert

SlottiKarotti wrote on 23.07.2023 at 18:54:

This figure of 99.xx on 1 million spins doesn't seem plausible to me at 1st glance either, but the others do. But even if it were 97%, would you want to speculate on being one of the 30 lucky ones out of 1000? Very daring venture ^^


I am also the worst Mathenoob, vllt. can someone veri- or falsify that. But the trend is certainly true. So the more you gamble, the more likely you will be a loser in the long run.

Good suggestions for game optimization are not bad either, but that's rather something for people who have their game at least halfway under control. With 100€ a day I doubt that this is still the case.

Now we are getting closer ...You can talk about everything here I assume that most people have an intention to make a profit and that it is not just for pathological reasons that you spend (too) many hours with the matter. So I would like to belong to the 3%.....daring venture or not...But that's exactly my primary motivation besides the fun of playing

This post has been translated automatically

Falke
Expert

SlottiKarotti wrote on 23.07.2023 at 18:54:

This number of 99.xx on 1 million spins doesn't seem plausible to me at 1st glance either, but the others do. But even if it were 97%, would you want to speculate on being one of the 30 lucky ones out of 1000? Very daring venture ^^


I am also the worst Mathenoob, vllt. can someone veri- or falsify that. But the trend is certainly true. So the more you gamble, the more likely you will be a loser in the long run.

Good suggestions for game optimization are not bad either, but that's rather something for people who have their game at least halfway under control. With 100€ a day I doubt that this is still the case.

That will come so about in any case, provided that the stake always remains the same and how you calculate that. If you have a x1,000 hit on 10 € bet, then you can of course make extremely many spins on 0.20 € before you lose.


But, if the bet size stays the same, then there's pretty much no win on 1 million spins. You must never forget that as a player you need luck on every spin, while the casino needs bad luck to lose.

If you assume an RTP of 96% and a bet of €1, then you will lose €4 on average on 100 spins. The only reason why we still play in casinos is the volatility and Variance, that is: the uneven distribution of the wins and the random factor of how the wins and losses are distributed.
But, the higher the number of spins, the less the variance matters.

To illustrate: Being in the plus at 1,000 spins is not unlikely. At 10,000 spins, you need a lot more luck. At 1 million it is already very very hard and at 100 million spins it is almost impossible.

Slots and gambling in general are based on an insurmountable mathematical system and the more spins you make, the closer you get to the actual RTP value.

This post has been translated automatically

Anonym
It is called Return to Player and not Return to You.
The slot pays out 96€ from 100€ bets. But not to you, but to any player.

This post has been translated automatically

RainerHeiner
What you have calculated and described here is basically not wrong... but the laws of Variance also apply in the other direction. This is what the user XXLeonidasXX wants to point out. If he makes several 100000 spins a year, he doesn't necessarily expect to win thousands, but that his personal RTP will approach the nominal values of the slots he plays. If he then feels (and I think he's smart enough to calculate) that he's deviating far from those values, then you can start to doubt whether everything is above board. Of course, when calculating the variance, one must also take into account the volatility of the game. In lotto, for example, the variance looks different than in a moderately volatile slot or even like in Roulette or poker. I have the feeling that many slots are recently designed more in the direction of Lotto in terms of volantility. 99% win nothing (or much less than they have paid in) and 1% can collect big wins. It also looks good when 60000x winning pictures are published....

This post has been translated automatically

Falke
Expert

Ruehle wrote on 23.07.2023 at 20:41: It's called Return to Player and not Return to You.
The slot pays out 96€ from 100€ bets again. But not to you, but to any player.

This is not true. The more spins, the more exactly the 96% arrives at you.


With several million spins you will pretty much have an RTP of 96%.

This post has been translated automatically

Langhans
Expert
Falcon wrote on 23.07.2023 at 21:13:

That's not so true. The more spins, the more exactly the 96% arrives at you.


With several million spins, you will pretty much have an RTP of 96%


. Summarizing it would then be as follows: the RTY (Return to you... ... created something new right away) can easily be 20% or even 200% in the short and medium term), before the RTP as well as the RTY should reach a value of 96% after many millions of spins side by side, which approximates the value of the machine. I believe this to be true as well. But would contradict the statement that you make more and more loss, the longer you play, since I - if I now make 5 million spins on 20 cents and pay 1 million for it- then quasi "only" make 40,000 loss. All this under the assumption that 5 million spins are enough to sufficiently reflect the values Seen from this perspective, we would all have to spin like crazy....hope that the bankroll is enough to at least collect the 96% in the end. That would certainly be a good deal for many...at least a better deal than now

This post has been translated automatically

Falke
Expert

Langhans wrote on 23.07.2023 at 21:36:

. Summarized it would then be as follows: the RTY (Return to you... ... created something new right away) can easily be 20% or even 200% in the short and medium term), before the RTP as well as the RTY should reach a value of 96% after many millions of spins side by side, which is close to the value of the machine. I believe this to be true as well. But would contradict the statement that you make more and more loss, the longer you play, since I - if I now make 5 million spins on 20 cents and pay 1 million for it- then quasi "only" make 40,000 loss. All this under the assumption that 5 million spins are enough to sufficiently reflect the values Seen from this perspective, we would all have to spin like crazy....hope that the bankroll is enough to at least collect the 96% in the end. That would certainly be a good deal for many...at least a better deal than now




I think you are completely misunderstanding something or am I misunderstanding you? Can you explain in more detail what you mean?

This post has been translated automatically

Hot Topics17th May. 2024 at 05:41 pm CEST

GambleJoe is aimed exclusively at user whose allowed to play legally with his current location in online casinos and does not violate the current law.
It is the responsibility of the user to inform himself about the current legal situation. Gambling is prohibited for children and adolescents under the age of 18.
GambleJoe is a registered trademark with the EUIPO of GJ International Ltd.

© 2012-2024 GambleJoe.com

Forgotten your password?

Create a new password here

  • 1. Fill in the 3 fields carefully and click on the green button
  • 2. Check your email inbox for a message from GambleJoe
  • 3. Click on the confirmation link in the email and your new password will be active immediately