Freebitco.in provably cheating

[LTU_btc]

The below screenshots show that 9994 to 10000 are all missing.  This is simply NOT possible in this reality.  The chances of all of these numbers being missed IN ORDER in ~20000 rolls is so small that the HD of this forum's server couldnt hold the amount of 0's it would require in order to represent the probability of it happening in 0.0000...%  It's absolutely clear that these results are from purposeful SERVER SEED changing (which you have noticed in your own DB,  I didnt even bother to record them as they are not necessary to see patterns in cheating).  You can see that 0-10 have no problem showing up as results,  it's only the upper numbers that have issues even though they BOTH should have the same probability of being rolled.  You certainly do NOT see 0-10 missing IN ORDER like you do for 9994+

I have made over 18 000 faucet claims in 3 years and I haven't rolled 9994 and higher numbers. Also, any of my referrals also haven't rolled numbers higher than 9993. But I don't want to believe that Freebitco.in are cheating. How you can explain things which are posted in this thread?: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1850855.0. There are hundreds of users who had posted proofs that they rolled 9998-9999 and several who rolled 10000, for example most recent winner of $200 -https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1850855.msg48648119#msg48648119. I don't even talk about 9994-9997 there is mathematically bigger chance to roll these numbers than 9998-9999, but we don't know how many user rolled these numbers. Offcourse, it would be interesting to know why server seed got changed for users who posted in this thread, but I don't want to believe that Freebitco.in would cheat their users for few bucks.

[broke_tradah]

I don't want to believe that Freebitco.in would cheat their users for few bucks.

What you dont want to believe and what reality actually is are two different things.  Believe whatever you want,  but the facts speak for themselves.  Just take a look at the screenshots and you can see clearly that there IS cheating going on as far as Freebitco is concerned.  As I stated before,  the answer to why people report things in the "big wins" thread is VERY simple as I explained in my #2 theory (which isnt really a theory anymore as much as it is a proven fact).  The site purposely throttles the amount of wins it doles out.  It does this not only for free rolls,  but the lottery AND the multiply game.  These are proven facts.  Why people still think this site is legit is a complete mystery to me.

[Flangler]

I'm talking about the free roll game.
Their system is provably fair, of course, but who's so stupid to save and check all the hash of every free roll? Me
My day job allow me to work on a computer so i'm able to roll about 14 - 15 times a day.
However, over the last months i managed to collect about 3000 free rolls, thanks to a script i managed to save every server seed hash, client seed and nonce right before and right after every roll, so i could check them later.

Most of them are fine, but 2 times happened that, after the roll, server seed hash was REPLACED with a new one, while nonce and client seed where still the same. This completely break their fairness, since replacing the server seed hash means that they are replacing the server seed and therefore they are changing our rolled number.

Server seed hash never change unless you roll. you can reload the page, logout and login and it would be still the same.
I'm fully aware of freebitco.in's thread where people post their big wins.
Since the highest number i got was 9993 and since i never deposited any satoshi, my guess is that they apply this cheat just for the first 3 prizes (so from number 9994 to 10000) only to people who have never deposited anything.
I say so also because probability to win one of the first 3 prizes is roughly 6 on 10000, so 2 on 3333 on average and this cheat happened 2 times over 3000, quite similiar to their big win probability.

If freebitco.in want to follow this behavior to discourage people like me who just play free rolls and never deposit, that's totally fine but they should atleast be honest with their users and it should be written somewhere

To be honest there must be something in it, many time I rolled number above 9990 and when I was certain that I won , the number automagically changed to lower. I would not be surprised If only friends of developers and devs are rolling the highest numbers. Same goes to their weekly lottery, there is tendency that new account wins. 

[nutildah]

You guys might want to check this out:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5092067.0

The fact that the guy posted this in the Altcoin Discussion board makes me think that it is legit and not some conspiracy generated by the freebitco.in devs. I know its only a $20 win but nevertheless it goes to show that it does happen.

Pretty much the most unsettling thing about this particular dice site is that the house edge is considerably large... I don't know why people who accrued large amounts of bitcoin would use it when there's alternative with much better odds... yet they still do...

[Pffrt]

<>

Although I did never check, I also don't believe that freebitco will do cheating. I never have seen such kinda complain and I personally win $20 couple of times. It would be better if TheQuin put his/her opinion here.

[UserU]

The closest number I rolled so far was 9995, but I guess that they have to "protect" the higher earnings since there are like tens of thousands of claims daily. Besides, it's free.

[broke_tradah]

The closest number I rolled so far was 9995, but I guess that they have to "protect" the higher earnings since there are like tens of thousands of claims daily. Besides, it's free.

Makes sense...... unless you try to lie about it,  which they do.  They attempt to make it sound like there is an EQUAL chance to roll 10000 as there is with rolling 0.  But that just is NOT the case and it's been overwhelmingly proven by multiple people now which means their "Provably fair" claim can no longer be used since we now all know it's NOT provably fair as far as the rolls are concerned.  In order to be "provably fair",  there must be an EQUAL chance to roll ANY number that is within the given range (which is 0 to 10000 for freebitscam) and it must be mathmatically provable.  The fact that they dont acknowledge this now obvious cheating is what people like myself will bitch about.  In general, humans dont like to be lied to and they'll go to extreme lengths to make others aware of the lying going on.  It took me a YEAR of compiling roll results to prove this fact beyond a reasonable doubt without the need for the provably fair links.  I have so much data that its just blatantly obvious with no need to prove every single roll.  I can prove it just by sheer numbers of results that I've logged over a 1 year period for 3 accounts.  I think they "gambled" on the fact that no one would waste that much time to prove that they ARE cheating.........  well,  they lost that bet.  And if you've seen my posts,  you'll also see that I'm now one of their biggest critics also and I routinely point out all the lies that TheQuack and WetBackEars spews out.  They try to paint me as some troll hoping that no one will believe anything I say, but they can only lie for so long before it all careens off course and smashes into wall,  likely one thats got "Reputation:  Rekt" spray painted all over it.  They are going to try to "Rebrand" to wipe the accusation slate clean as well as get away from the google results associated with their name and all the cheating going on,  but that almost always fails anyway.

[LoyceV]

I think they "gambled" on the fact that no one would waste that much time to prove that they ARE cheating.........  well,  they lost that bet.

I think they assumed nobody would stop using the site because of this, and from what I've read in this thread, they won that bet.

[broke_tradah]

I think they "gambled" on the fact that no one would waste that much time to prove that they ARE cheating.........  well,  they lost that bet.

I think they assumed nobody would stop using the site because of this, and from what I've read in this thread, they won that bet.

Bitconnect tried the same philosophy.  It ended well for them,  they are still in the top 50 right lol.  I wonder how their rebrand is going that they had planned.

[nutildah]

I think they "gambled" on the fact that no one would waste that much time to prove that they ARE cheating.........  well,  they lost that bet.

I think they assumed nobody would stop using the site because of this, and from what I've read in this thread, they won that bet.

Bitconnect tried the same philosophy.  It ended well for them,  they are still in the top 50 right lol.  I wonder how their rebrand is going that they had planned.

Actually Bitconnect isn't even on the charts anymore because they're not being traded anymore (well, only on one highly questionable exchange). Their rank doesn't exist because the value of their market cap is effectively zero.

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitconnect


In your sig it says,

"Watch me rape Freebitco.in 24x7 with my gambling bot"

I dunno, from the way you complain about things it sounds like you're the one being raped.

[broke_tradah]

Since you're not quite capable of deciphering sarcasm from comments,  I'll refrain from speaking in tongue thats impossible for those with an IQ less than that of a rock to understand.

It's quite possible to rape a scamming casino.  You can watch me on my live stream for proof of that.  No amount of "provably fair" cheating on their part is going to be able to stop a gambling bot in what it does or how it works.  I have no problem racking them over the coals both on a forum as well as in their pocket   There are plenty of other casinos to screw with if freebitscam ever decides to close up shop (or in this case,  re-brand as they are attempting to do now to erase their bad reputation).  But why switch when they are the easiest crooked kid on the block to steal from and pick on.

[LTU_btc]

<>

Although I did never check, I also don't believe that freebitco will do cheating. I never have seen such kinda complain and I personally win $20 couple of times. It would be better if TheQuin put his/her opinion here.

Yeah, and there is even dedicated thread where people are posting their $20 and $200 wins. It's interesting how @broke_tradah would explain this thing. Probably he will say that freebitco.in allow to win for small part of their users to show that they're legit, while thry are cheating with rest of users.
It would be interesting to hear TheQuin words about OP case. I asked once him to post here, but he choose to ignore this thread because OP didn't provided more proofs than just words.

[LoyceV]

Yeah, and there is even dedicated thread where people are posting their $20 and $200 wins.

Did you see this post comparing the ratio between $20 and $200 winners in that thread? Based on my sample size of 118 winners, the $200 prize should have drawn 12 times more than it did.

[LTU_btc]

Did you see this post comparing the ratio between $20 and $200 winners in that thread? Based on my sample size of 118 winners, the $200 prize should have drawn 12 times more than it did.

I saw it and I don't think that numbers that you counted mean something. There is no way how we can know real number of $20 and $200 winners. Users who post in that thread proof of winning get extra $5 bonus. Users who won $20 are more incentivised to post because $5 is significant bonus to their winning. I think that big number of $200 winners don't bother to sign up on forum to upload proof just to get five bucks. And when people win bigger amount of money, not everyone want show it in public and attract attentiin to themselves. Offcourse, it's just my assumptions without knowing real number of $20 or $200 winners. There was also complaints about their lottery, that there was only few users that posted proofs that they won. But if I would win over 2 BTC one day, I'm not sure that I would want to post about it in public to get few bucks as a bonus.

[nutildah]

Did you see this post comparing the ratio between $20 and $200 winners in that thread? Based on my sample size of 118 winners, the $200 prize should have drawn 12 times more than it did.

I saw it and I don't think that numbers that you counted mean something. There is no way how we can know real number of $20 and $200 winners. Users who post in that thread proof of winning get extra $5 bonus. Users who won $20 are more incentivised to post because $5 is significant bonus to their winning. I think that big number of $200 winners don't bother to sign up on forum to upload proof just to get five bucks. And when people win bigger amount of money, not everyone want show it in public and attract attentiin to themselves. Offcourse, it's just my assumptions without knowing real number of $20 or $200 winners. There was also complaints about their lottery, that there was only few users that posted proofs that they won. But if I would win over 2 BTC one day, I'm not sure that I would want to post about it in public to get few bucks as a bonus.

I don't claim to understand how their particular hash generations work but it seems to me like you're right in that you can't use forum posts as a statistically valid way of counting winners. It is only potentially indicative of something and doesn't constitute as proof of anything.

[coinlocket$]

I don't claim to understand how their particular hash generations work but it seems to me like you're right in that you can't use forum posts as a statistically valid way of counting winners. It is only potentially indicative of something and doesn't constitute as proof of anything.

Also, 20x50 is 1000 posts and is not statically relevant as a number because we have a very low % of winning numbers (under 1%), we need a bigger number to get a realistic value besides variance.
Does this website haven't a public list of rolls?

[broke_tradah]

I don't claim to understand how their particular hash generations work but it seems to me like you're right in that you can't use forum posts as a statistically valid way of counting winners. It is only potentially indicative of something and doesn't constitute as proof of anything.

While that reasoning does stand by itself alone,  it really doesnt stand a chance if you also couple it with clear evidence that shows exactly WHY those statistics in the forum are what they are.  If you combine the forum statistics with my own screenshots and data collection over a 1 year period,  its VERY clear that my data EXPLAINS why the statistics in the forums exist.  Theres a reason for the large gap in the forums and it has absolutely NOTHING to do with people's lack of greed for an extra 5 bux and everything to do with the fact that there really are NOT as many $200 winners as their should be.  There are not even as many $20 winners as their should be either for that matter.

Just take a look at my statistics for numbers 0 through 10 and compare them for numbers 9000 through 10000.  Riddle me this,  why is there such a large statistical difference .  The answer is very simple if you stop and think about it.  It's that Freebitco caps how many winners that it will allow from each 'tier' I guess you could call it and if that were true,  we'd see exactly what we're seeing in both the forums statistics as well as my own data.  He wont reply here because he knows he'll get destroyed with any explanation he can dream up.  You just cant combat hard evidence and there is no point in trying to do so.  He will ignore anything that's actually proven,  but he'll be all over anything that ISNT proven like white on rice in an attempt to make themselves look legit.  The ONLY defense he'd have is "You made all that data up yourself".  Thats the only defense he'd have,  but it's not just me that is seeing this.  It's multiple people and we've each gone about proving the SAME result in different ways,  mine is probably the one that took the longest but imo it's also the most compelling evidence that exists given that it has the largest sample size.  So his next defense would be "You're all conspiring against us!".  At that point,  if you still believe him,  you deserve to lose whatever they steal from you

And I also dont think this cheating stops at just the free rolls.  As the old saying goes,  where theres one,  theres more definitely applies to fraudulent activity.  I fully believe this cheating extends into the dice game, jackpot option, and the lottery (although in a different manor).

Let us also not forget that this place has THE HIGHEST house edge of any online casino.  What is their excuse for that?  Their excuse is all the extra's such as the free rolls, promotions, etc.  But uhm,  we already know they're cheating on those,  so where does that leave them as an excuse for the house edge being so high.  It doesnt.  It just proves to us even more than these guys are just Bitconnect 2.0,  complete with a rebrand coming and everything (right as all the cheating accusations are being proven,  how coincidental is that lmfao).  The rebrand does one thing and one thing only for them.  It takes their name and connection to fraud/cheating out of all the google searches, forum searches,  etc.  Only those that were here BEFORE would know the difference.  New people (which they have already admitted is their target audience,  it's called turnover in the gambling realm) would not likely learn of their old past without substantial digging/research.  But when a gambling site rebrands,  it usually fails because it's most often times just a public admittance to the fact that they are indeed guilty of whatever it is they are trying to escape.  The best course of action is NOT to rebrand during a period where you're currently being accused of cheating.  Probably best not to rebrand at all regardless if you're a casino.  Casino rebrands are notorious red flags of scam sites.

[docthusinh]

Since acusation of the site's cheating right before 1Jan2019, the winning claim on another post popup like coming from nowhere (at least 5 nick names with $20 win). "God of luck" ilsten to you guys..lol.

[broke_tradah]

When dealing with sites that cheat in this manor,  it's not uncommon for them to suddenly disable it in an attempt to make it seem legit.  Like,  'O hey look!  See!  Theres the winners!'.  But it's all just part of a predictable behavior pattern that we can predict here before it even happens.  Or maybe they'll read me saying this and decide not to change a thing at all lol.  The data that is available is enough to convict them in the court of opinion and anything they do or do not do in the future is completely irrelevant.  As my wife has said and warns me,  once a cheater,  always a cheater.

[LoyceV]

Since acusation of the site's cheating right before 1Jan2019, the winning claim on another post popup like coming from nowhere (at least 5 nick names with $20 win). "God of luck" ilsten to you guys..lol.

Nothing changed there, there were always many users winning $20. This topic is not claiming nobody is winning, it's claiming not enough users win.