Nitrogen Sports Rigged

[naidray]

I think a lot of people here are commenting without actually trying the blackjack there. Deposit 0.01 BTC and play 10 hands at .001 BTC a hand and see how many you win.

I am not sure whether you mean in positive or negative aspect of nitrogensports but yes many people are just commenting without even listening and reading to OP. They just know NS is legit and just saying that, which sometimes is wrong.

[joksim299]

They say their site is provably fair.  Which is complete bullshit.  3 times i Played there blackjack the dealer won 85% of the hands.  There Dice they have it if you play the over 50.5  it will go under 95% of the time.  There algorithm is set up to cheat its players.  STAY AWAY there site is rigged.

Its not, trying playing more thank 100k hands and analyze the data

[D3ViL]

They say their site is provably fair.  Which is complete bullshit.  3 times i Played there blackjack the dealer won 85% of the hands.  There Dice they have it if you play the over 50.5  it will go under 95% of the time.  There algorithm is set up to cheat its players.  STAY AWAY there site is rigged.

Its not, trying playing more thank 100k hands and analyze the data

Online casinos do not need to fix the outcome of any games due to the house edge that's inherent within the game itself. The house advantage means that the player, over a period of time will lose anyway, and all that the casino hopes is that the player stays around long enough for that to happen.

[rickadone]

NitrogenSports has proven more than once that they are one of the most established casinos here at btctalk. Quite frankly you'd need more than what you have right now to convince anyone.

Or, you can always try BetCoin.ag

The problem is that a established site may even badly make script to make them win, not saying that nitrogensports is rigged or such, dont mistake me. But I mean that we can't just blindly ignore him because he is saying of a trusted and long since running site.

[Slowturtleinc]

Would really like us to be able to figure out how legit the poker is,from my perception I am losing at to high a percentage with AA and KK and thats the more obvious ones preflop allin. Blind vs. Blind in tournies seems to be more risky than normal to shove around the bubble,have run into monsters more often than not.

Maybe we record a thousand hand session and that would be proof. As it is right now the hand histories do not record in
normal format and it takes you to their site to view the hands in question. Find disconnects are more likely for both players in monster hands as well.

I know variance is a bitch but the numbers are not adding up and I have played online since 2007ish.

[MrNiceGuy22]

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!!

[Slowturtleinc]

A link to this thread from their promotional thread might get the attention you are requesting. Rather discuss things without their attention because you instantly get the shill accounts that all these site use to confuse the issues.

[xetsr]

Full log of blackjack and dice can be found at https://nitrogensports.eu/mycasinowagerslog/ - This includes all the Provably Fair info you need to verify

So can someone please explain how they're cheating? I must not understand how provable fair works.

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!!

That's just ridiculous. No gambling site would do that unless they don't give a fuck about the user's privacy.

[MrNiceGuy22]

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.

[xetsr]

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.

It's a simple question, how are they cheating if it's provable fair? I'm not shilling, I just find it interesting on how they're able to do that. Wouldn't that mean all the other sites are able to rig too?

I didn't see that part, you must have edited your post after I posted or I overlooked it.

[MrNiceGuy22]

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.

[Slowturtleinc]

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.

Calling me a shill for Nitro shows you have not read my posts in this thread or the nitro thread,they can do better.

[xetsr]

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?

[MrNiceGuy22]

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.

[xetsr]

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.

[MrNiceGuy22]

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.

[xetsr]

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?

[MrNiceGuy22]

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.

[Vispilio]

I've just been using this Nitrogen site to play some poker tournaments, so my experience relates only to the poker section:

I won a couple of freeroll tournaments there. Usually pots see a lot of action, but hey whatever it's a freeroll and maybe there is a lot of crazies out there, didn't seem too unusual.

HOWEVER as soon as I sat down on a cash game it took me 5 minutes to figure out how rigged it is. Someone called 100 BB reraise with 2-5 and won with a runner runner straight. I have seen no one, in no NL cash game, unless they are complete imbeciles or it's their first day of poker, call 2 reraises from two different opponents accumulating at 100 Big Blinds with 2-5, and then go on to win it.

Needless to say I wrote a few msgs on the chat commenting on how unusual and out of this world bizarre that call was, and no one even blinked. Might be a lot of bots operated by the staff to rob real people of their money...

I would put the chances of a poker room where such outlandish incidents are commonplace to be a legitimate and honest business to less than 0.0001 %, but feel free to get scammed at your own risk. Alternatively I can recommend the freeroll tournaments, as at least there is no deposit to lose in those situations.

[stafford999]

Xoчy cкaзaть пpo этoт pyм. Eщe пoлгoдa нaзaд был впoлнe пpиличный пoкep. B пocлeднee вpeмя cкaмилcя. Блoкиpyeт вывoды. Блoчит aккayнты. Toлкoм  бeз пpичины. Жaль. Был  нopмaльным  pyмoм кoгдa  тo.