 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
It is very easy to modify the results of a random number generator (so the house wins more often), and still pass the "provably fair" test. The only true test is to analyze thousands of hands, because they will ALWAYS fall within the laws of probability. As an example, check out this website: http://poker.ftppro.com. It deals 250 random hands a second, and the results always comply with the laws of probability. If Nitro (and other blackjack sites) would post an ongoing log (that users must opt-in for), then a similar program could prove that they are REALLY fair. Again, the only reason they will not post such a log is because they would be proven to be UNFAIR. In that case, I don't see how the log would prove anything. Couldn't they just modify that too? That is why I am suggesting that they include the Usernames of the players that opt-in. Doesn't sound that easy. If nitro is rigging, they would obviously modify the rolls or hands of their own accounts evening things out in the log. Unless you're talking about having the opt-in option available to only a select few or the option to show logs of select members which wouldn't be taking in the wins or loses from the other accounts. EDIT: IMO, the above really doesn't matter though. You would need data from both opt-ins and non opt-ins to come to a solid conclusion. The log feature would be very easy to implement. They would add a checkbox [Opt-In for Log], and a link that would display the log. This would allow people who complain on this forum to have proof if they felt that the deal was defying the probabilities (without having to take a video and manually count the results). Nitro would not want multiple users to show that the deal was unfair, so you will probably never see this feature.I wasn't taking about how easy the feature itself would be to implement so you must have misunderstood my post. Again, wouldn't you have to see ALL data (opt-in and opted-out combined) to prove anything? or at least have more opted-in than those who haven't? No, they wouldn't need to show all players for the log feature to be useful. You would be able to see all hands played by those that opted in (and their Usernames), so it would be obvious if each individual player was getting a fair deal (as long as they played enough hands). This feature would actually encourage more people to play more hands, so the only reason Nitro wouldn't add this feature is if they had something to hide. If Nitro added this feature it would make them appear to be much more honest. |
|
|
|
It is very easy to modify the results of a random number generator (so the house wins more often), and still pass the "provably fair" test. The only true test is to analyze thousands of hands, because they will ALWAYS fall within the laws of probability. As an example, check out this website: http://poker.ftppro.com. It deals 250 random hands a second, and the results always comply with the laws of probability. If Nitro (and other blackjack sites) would post an ongoing log (that users must opt-in for), then a similar program could prove that they are REALLY fair. Again, the only reason they will not post such a log is because they would be proven to be UNFAIR. In that case, I don't see how the log would prove anything. Couldn't they just modify that too? That is why I am suggesting that they include the Usernames of the players that opt-in. Doesn't sound that easy. If nitro is rigging, they would obviously modify the rolls or hands of their own accounts evening things out in the log. Unless you're talking about having the opt-in option available to only a select few or the option to show logs of select members which wouldn't be taking in the wins or loses from the other accounts. EDIT: IMO, the above really doesn't matter though. You would need data from both opt-ins and non opt-ins to come to a solid conclusion. The log feature would be very easy to implement. They would add a checkbox [Opt-In for Log], and a link that would display the log. This would allow people who complain on this forum to have proof if they felt that the deal was defying the probabilities (without having to take a video and manually count the results). Nitro would not want multiple users to show that the deal was unfair, so you will probably never see this feature. |
|
|
|
It is very easy to modify the results of a random number generator (so the house wins more often), and still pass the "provably fair" test. The only true test is to analyze thousands of hands, because they will ALWAYS fall within the laws of probability. As an example, check out this website: http://poker.ftppro.com. It deals 250 random hands a second, and the results always comply with the laws of probability. If Nitro (and other blackjack sites) would post an ongoing log (that users must opt-in for), then a similar program could prove that they are REALLY fair. Again, the only reason they will not post such a log is because they would be proven to be UNFAIR. In that case, I don't see how the log would prove anything. Couldn't they just modify that too? That is why I am suggesting that they include the Usernames of the players that opt-in. |
|
|
|
It is very easy to modify the results of a random number generator (so the house wins more often), and still pass the "provably fair" test. The only true test is to analyze thousands of hands, because they will ALWAYS fall within the laws of probability. As an example, check out this website: http://poker.ftppro.com. It deals 250 random hands a second, and the results always comply with the laws of probability. If Nitro (and other blackjack sites) would post an ongoing log (that users must opt-in for), then a similar program could prove that they are REALLY fair. Again, the only reason they will not post such a log is because they would be proven to be UNFAIR. |
|
|
|
|
Are the last two posters Nitro shills?
The user would have to opt-in for their hands to be included in the log. No violation of privacy there, so Nitro will have to find another excuse.
If the other user trusts the "Provably Fair" excuse, then he might be suckered into believing that it overrides the laws of probability, which is what Nitro wants you to believe.
|
|
|
|
|
There is no reason whatsoever that an honest blackjack game would refuse to post a log of all hands dealt. If a player doesn't want his hands to be logged, then he simply opts out.
Nitro refuses to post a log of their Blackjack hands, because they know that it would prove that their blackjack game is rigged. This also casts doubt upon the honesty of their poker game.
It is interesting that Nitro has refused to respond to this active thread. It appears that they haven't found a clever a way to divert the attention from their dishonesty (like the "Provably Fair" bullshit).
Hey Nitro: If your blackjack game is honest, then post a log of all hands dealt (with usernames) to prove it. Otherwise, STOP RIPPING PEOPLE OFF!!
|
|
|
|
|
