Stop making excuses for these cheating casinos. Going 0 for 50 lines with KJ suited is prof enough for me that the casino is cheating. Use Bayes theorem. I have talked about how to do this. Please people stop making excuses and believe what the facts say. If the guy was reporting right going 0 for 50 with KJ suited he was 100% CHEATED. You can believe me!!
Sent from my iPhone
No kidding.
I have a friend who was playing $1 5-play NSUD. She drew to a pair of 2s
and got quads on THREE LINES.
Obviously, the casinos are cheating scum.
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 5:56 PM, Steve Norden Nordo123@aol.com [vpFREE] < vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Stop making excuses for these cheating casinos. Going 0 for 50 lines with
KJ suited is prof enough for me that the casino is cheating. Use Bayes
theorem. I have talked about how to do this. Please people stop making
excuses and believe what the facts say. If the guy was reporting right
going 0 for 50 with KJ suited he was 100% CHEATED. You can believe me!!
The royal cycle in most games is like 40K-50K hands. By your "logic"
this is proof that anyone who's ever hit a royal 100% CHEATED. Or a
dealt royal, geez, that's 1 in 650K.
There's no point name-dropping Bayes' theorem or appealing to "facts"
if your threshold for cheating is "my gut says this is impossible."
On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 2:56 PM, Steve Norden Nordo123@aol.com [vpFREE] <vpFREE@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Stop making excuses for these cheating casinos. Going 0 for 50 lines
with KJ suited is prof enough for me that the casino is cheating. Use
Bayes theorem. I have talked about how to do this. Please people
stop making excuses and believe what the facts say. If the guy was
reporting right going 0 for 50 with KJ suited he was 100% CHEATED. You
can believe me!!
Ok, I’m going to do something that doesn’t happen anywhere near enough on this site. I’m going to lay out all the conditions for a statement then look at the results.
The original poster said that he went 0 for 50 holding KJs in deuces wild. Here’s what that would look like:
Game : 9/4/4 deuces wild 50 play ( I picked a deuces wild flavor. It shouldn’t matter too much for this case)
Event: dealt KJ suited ( discards weren’t specified, but should not matter too much)
Result: no winning hand
Math
p( non winning hand from KJs) = 13802/16215 = 0.85119 (from Winpoker)
p( non winning hand from KJs on all 50 hands) = 0.85119^50 = 0.00031714 or 1 in 3153 ( from Bayes, so at least you got that part right)
This is roughly the same probability as seeing red come up 11 times in a row at roulette.
So, from a sample size of 1, not having set the conditions or hypothesis beforehand, a 1 in 3153 result becomes conclusive proof of cheating? You should never walk into a casino again. And you saying ‘believe me’ when you lay out a nonsensical argument doesn’t help your claim.
Pretty stupid way to cheat. You take a low paying event ( KJs is worth 1.7 coins per line) and force a rare occurrence ( no winning hands). So, a casino sets up a high risk of detection event for a low payout? Casinos do some stupid things but this isn’t on the list.
Glad someone is on the right track (in my initial reply I put frequency at 1 in 2000-3000, allowing a range of potential hold penalties).
It’s threads like these that warm the cockles of my heart (extending faith that a decent number of attractive plays will continue to exist because some “diamonds in the rough” will continue to be overlooked because of preconceptions).
—In vpF…@…com, <greeklandjohnny@…> wrote :
Ok, I’m going to do something that doesn’t happen anywhere near enough on this site. I’m going to lay out all the conditions for a statement then look at the results.
The original poster said that he went 0 for 50 holding KJs in deuces wild. Here’s what that would look like:
Game : 9/4/4 deuces wild 50 play ( I picked a deuces wild flavor. It shouldn’t matter too much for this case)
Event: dealt KJ suited ( discards weren’t specified, but should not matter too much)
Result: no winning hand
Math
p( non winning hand from KJs) = 13802/16215 = 0.85119 (from Winpoker)
p( non winning hand from KJs on all 50 hands) = 0.85119^50 = 0.00031714 or 1 in 3153 ( from Bayes, so at least you got that part right)
This is roughly the same probability as seeing red come up 11 times in a row at roulette.
So, from a sample size of 1, not having set the conditions or hypothesis beforehand, a 1 in 3153 result becomes conclusive proof of cheating? You should never walk into a casino again. And you saying ‘believe me’ when you lay out a nonsensical argument doesn’t help your claim.
Pretty stupid way to cheat. You take a low paying event ( KJs is worth 1.7 coins per line) and force a rare occurrence ( no winning hands). So, a casino sets up a high risk of detection event for a low payout? Casinos do some stupid things but this isn’t on the list.