CrazyTime and Monopoly, should we trust?

[Alisha-k]

For me it's all about the results. If I got really drawn to these games, I'd keep playing regardless of trust that I have towards the people who run these or audit them. You can always test these by playing with small money and stick with it if it keeps going your way. From my experience most people choose the games they like and the games they have results in before they do their research about the site that runs them and all other small details. That's why lottery tickets are so popular despite very low chance to win and the government taxing the shit out of big winners.

But this manipulations could be frustrating atimes regardless if one considers this most casinos would lose clients. playing regardless of trust just keeps one going afterall gambling generally involves risk so keeping the risk minimal is just one approach to stay far from been heart broken

[Cryptock]

For me it's all about the results. If I got really drawn to these games, I'd keep playing regardless of trust that I have towards the people who run these or audit them. You can always test these by playing with small money and stick with it if it keeps going your way. From my experience most people choose the games they like and the games they have results in before they do their research about the site that runs them and all other small details. That's why lottery tickets are so popular despite very low chance to win and the government taxing the shit out of big winners.

But this manipulations could be frustrating atimes regardless if one considers this most casinos would lose clients. playing regardless of trust just keeps one going afterall gambling generally involves risk so keeping the risk minimal is just one approach to stay far from been heart broken

Risk is a fundamental thing related to gambling. Of course, it is best to try to reduce the risk as much as possible, but we simply cannot check many things and, unfortunately, we often have to rely on the opinions of others. In this case, the best source of opinion may be an external audit and I am afraid that better verification will not be found.

[Welsh]

Risk is a fundamental thing related to gambling. Of course, it is best to try to reduce the risk as much as possible, but we simply cannot check many things and, unfortunately, we often have to rely on the opinions of others. In this case, the best source of opinion may be an external audit and I am afraid that better verification will not be found.

There's a difference between a unknown risk, and a known risk. For example, if you bet on a sports team to win a match, you know there's three different outcomes, they win, they draw or they lose. There aren't any other outcomes, and you know this as a matter of fact.

However, as you suggested blindly trusting companies because there is a element of risk to gambling, unknown risks fall into the category of not knowing whether something is legit or not. This, when it can be proven isn't acceptable. Every gambling company that could implement a provably fair system, should. End of argument, since this should be factored into their costs when opening that game. Therefore, this should be done for every new instance of a game. In fact, I think the gambling commissions should be taking a look at this, and only approving licenses if every game they offer that should, and could be provably fair. I'd say it's in their best interests to vet services for provably fair systems.

So, while you're partially correct that there's an element of risk associated with gambling, hence the definition of gambling, these two examples given aren't the same risk. One is acceptable, and the other isn't or at the very least shouldn't be.

[pieppiep]

I guess I saw the wheels turning on Freebitco.in

I don't trust the game 100% because the game could manipulate. But if you just want to have fun, you can try it because that game looks like a very interesting game to play. I still prefer to play the usual gambling games and although the games can also be rigged, I don't care because I just want to have fun and don't expect too much from gambling games.

Maybe some people are really lucky to get the jackpot from that game but I don't know. It's better to play your usual game so that you can enjoy it more than thinking about how to get a lot of money from gambling games.

[seoincorporation]

... these two examples given aren't the same risk. One is acceptable, and the other isn't or at the very least shouldn't be.

That's what I mean, and I would like to share another example of unacceptable risk.

Here is a video about a mistake they made and how people lose their money by a fail on their dice machine.

The users get the resolution after 20 minutes: 'The game has been canceled. Please wait for the next game.'

At that moment some users stop betting, but the next roll was another '4 Rolls' with a huge win of x152. It was a great win but that doesn't change the fact that the previous bet was canceled and a lot of people lost their profit.

Source: https://youtu.be/EQIez6Pogac?t=130

[redsun114]

I don't put my hand into the fire for this kind of game, but I see they are really popular. In my country there are similar games of this kind, part of an important national TV channel's grade which gives lots of prizes weekly to people who purchase the tickets and sign a monthly "membership". And that is true there is no way to know for sure if the results are legit, especially because it's part of a TV show, but people really don't seem to care about it. They still put their money on this kind of thing, although we know cryptocurrency casinos are much more trustful and accurated on its results.

It really doesn't make sense why these gamblers don't adopt cryptocurrency to ensure they will be putting their money into provably fair games.

I know monopoly is well known game and i think this is where the monopoly gambling came from but I don't know about crazy time. It can be popular on some other countries but not on my place since I don't see this in my local channels. People play the game because they are popular and the issuer of the game and the casino where it runs is also trusted, that is why they do not doubt of its reputation.

I do not questions these type of games because they are simply not my taste to play but I am more into the classic games e.g dice, bj, but not their live versions. You cannot force them to adopt crypto because what if they do not know how to use it?

[Boristhecat]

I also questioned the fairness of these games. I can't imagine that somewhere part in the world, there's really a live studio hosting these games. Even it was a part of the popular gambling site, I don't trust these games even for a purpose of entertainment.

Not just Monopoly or games similar to it but for other live casinos as well.

Live Casinos is not in my vocabulary to play with.

I have the same feelings about these games and therefore I have never played them. But logically, if these games were dishonest, then sooner or later their organizers would be caught on something (or there would be a leak of information about how everything really works) and the organizers of such games would lose their reputation. But I don't think I've heard of any such investigations or scandals.

[cabron]

I also questioned the fairness of these games. I can't imagine that somewhere part in the world, there's really a live studio hosting these games. Even it was a part of the popular gambling site, I don't trust these games even for a purpose of entertainment.

Not just Monopoly or games similar to it but for other live casinos as well.

Live Casinos is not in my vocabulary to play with.

I have the same feelings about these games and therefore I have never played them. But logically, if these games were dishonest, then sooner or later their organizers would be caught on something (or there would be a leak of information about how everything really works) and the organizers of such games would lose their reputation. But I don't think I've heard of any such investigations or scandals.

No one yet surfaces out of dismay for losing thousands in the game. The monopoly game I use to play was is a board game, not this kind. But yes if it has auditors I guess they all could conspire players in thier favor by rigging the devices.

Hard to prove fairness, I even suspect the live cam casinos are arranging those decks of cards already before they distribute to the players. I don't buy it when there is no cheating. The house will hate the game if that is the case.

[Tumanggor]

I also questioned the fairness of these games. I can't imagine that somewhere part in the world, there's really a live studio hosting these games. Even it was a part of the popular gambling site, I don't trust these games even for a purpose of entertainment.

Not just Monopoly or games similar to it but for other live casinos as well.

Live Casinos is not in my vocabulary to play with.

I'm also like you, I'm not so sure about the 'fair' of live games, that's why I never want to try to play in this kind of game

I am more confident and comfortable with sports betting, casino or crash games

[Cryptock]

Risk is a fundamental thing related to gambling. Of course, it is best to try to reduce the risk as much as possible, but we simply cannot check many things and, unfortunately, we often have to rely on the opinions of others. In this case, the best source of opinion may be an external audit and I am afraid that better verification will not be found.

There's a difference between a unknown risk, and a known risk. For example, if you bet on a sports team to win a match, you know there's three different outcomes, they win, they draw or they lose. There aren't any other outcomes, and you know this as a matter of fact.

However, as you suggested blindly trusting companies because there is a element of risk to gambling, unknown risks fall into the category of not knowing whether something is legit or not. This, when it can be proven isn't acceptable. Every gambling company that could implement a provably fair system, should. End of argument, since this should be factored into their costs when opening that game. Therefore, this should be done for every new instance of a game. In fact, I think the gambling commissions should be taking a look at this, and only approving licenses if every game they offer that should, and could be provably fair. I'd say it's in their best interests to vet services for provably fair systems.

So, while you're partially correct that there's an element of risk associated with gambling, hence the definition of gambling, these two examples given aren't the same risk. One is acceptable, and the other isn't or at the very least shouldn't be.

There was no better way to explain it! 
Of course, this is a very big difference and in my opinion it should also be regulated top-down so that institutions which issue licenses, give them only to casinos that have provably fair games. Only in this way we would be sure that the risk is only related to our decision, and not something that cannot really be checked.

[Welsh]

That's what I mean, and I would like to share another example of unacceptable risk.

Here is a video about a mistake they made and how people lose their money by a fail on their dice machine.

I can't watch the video currently, but without even looking I can almost guarantee they've got it written into their terms, and conditions that they aren't liable for loss of funds through unintentional bugs. That's usually the norm with reputable companies, let alone this one. I wouldn't use it, and I'd recommend others not to either.

In fact, I bet they don't even have the rights to be using the brand Monopoly.

[chaser15]

I also questioned the fairness of these games. I can't imagine that somewhere part in the world, there's really a live studio hosting these games. Even it was a part of the popular gambling site, I don't trust these games even for a purpose of entertainment.

Not just Monopoly or games similar to it but for other live casinos as well.

Live Casinos is not in my vocabulary to play with.

I understand your approach to live casinos and your doubts. However, if you do not believe these games are fair, on what basis do you believe any other casino games are fair?
I also understand that there can always be doubts, but if a casino is licensed and is checked by external audits, the risk of cheating is extremely small.

If I have to ask you, do you believe those live casinos are really live like they are really doing it somewhere in a live studio with updated feeds?

It's different to the usual casino games like slots, roulettes, and dice that's why your question seems not relevant.

Anyways, since we have different views, what we left here is just speculating things. My stand won't change, however.

[24Kt]

I also questioned the fairness of these games. I can't imagine that somewhere part in the world, there's really a live studio hosting these games. Even it was a part of the popular gambling site, I don't trust these games even for a purpose of entertainment.

Not just Monopoly or games similar to it but for other live casinos as well.

Live Casinos is not in my vocabulary to play with.

I understand your approach to live casinos and your doubts. However, if you do not believe these games are fair, on what basis do you believe any other casino games are fair?
I also understand that there can always be doubts, but if a casino is licensed and is checked by external audits, the risk of cheating is extremely small.

If I have to ask you, do you believe those live casinos are really live like they are really doing it somewhere in a live studio with updated feeds?

It's different to the usual casino games like slots, roulettes, and dice that's why your question seems not relevant.

Anyways, since we have different views, what we left here is just speculating things. My stand won't change, however.

At the end of the day, it boils down to the player himself if he wants to play or not, for entertainment or for other reasons. We may never know the ultimate truth about their fairness, but if you are a player who wants to enjoy the game, you are just trusting the casino is a fair one. If you are in doubt and has hesitations, you can always opt to other games that you prefer the most.

[harizen]

I also questioned the fairness of these games. I can't imagine that somewhere part in the world, there's really a live studio hosting these games. Even it was a part of the popular gambling site, I don't trust these games even for a purpose of entertainment.

Not just Monopoly or games similar to it but for other live casinos as well.

Live Casinos is not in my vocabulary to play with.

I have the same feelings about these games and therefore I have never played them. But logically, if these games were dishonest, then sooner or later their organizers would be caught on something (or there would be a leak of information about how everything really works) and the organizers of such games would lose their reputation. But I don't think I've heard of any such investigations or scandals.

Let's say that was pre-recorded, still, gamblers just have to place their bets. In the event they picked it right, then there's no question. I also don't think that was a dishonest part since everyone is guessing. It's just that it wasn't live which should be not a big deal as in the first place, it's still a game of luck.

However, as I mentioned, I rarely play these games so I can't share any good experiences.

It will now end up on a gambler's choice if they really love playing those games or not regardless of the concerns about live casinos.

[romero121]

When we've got more number of trusted gambling platforms with number of casino games and sports betting access, what's the need for risking our money on such games where the legitimacy isn't known. Atleast with the gambling platforms it is possible to check the fair functioning. With those games what the outcome is the result, and it can't be cross checked. Even the trusted platforms fail at times, so better is to avoid these kind of games.

[goinmerry]

Since trusting them is a question, we just have to trust ourselves with our choices.

It's clear that there are lots of gamblers who patronized live casinos and there are also gamblers who are not.

If we are getting good profits or our winning success rate is high playing at live casinos like on the game stated by OP, then it's nothing wrong to continue playing on those live games.

[agustina2]

For me it's all about the results. If I got really drawn to these games, I'd keep playing regardless of trust that I have towards the people who run these or audit them. You can always test these by playing with small money and stick with it if it keeps going your way. From my experience most people choose the games they like and the games they have results in before they do their research about the site that runs them and all other small details. That's why lottery tickets are so popular despite very low chance to win and the government taxing the shit out of big winners.

But this manipulations could be frustrating atimes regardless if one considers this most casinos would lose clients. playing regardless of trust just keeps one going afterall gambling generally involves risk so keeping the risk minimal is just one approach to stay far from been heart broken

First of all, there's no concrete evidence that everything is manipulated.

I don't think that way because what if the gamblers really won by selecting the pre-result exactly. Even before, there are issues about live casinos being live but there are gamblers who are actually profiting on those. If not, we shouldn't see live casinos now at every gambling site.

Generally, it means the market here was big and there are lots of money flowing on these games.

[electronicash]

reminds me of the online bingo in the Philippines which the numbers are air-mix drawn. it's sort of fair when it's done that way but some are still suspecting the weight of the tennis balls. which in this monopoly game are they suspecting to be unfair?

[michellee]

The game seems interesting and exciting since we are only waiting for the wheel to spin and give the result. Some television shows have this game and often make people who interact with the game get their heart beat faster because they expect to get the big prize or hit the jackpot. But if that is about manipulating the wheel, that will be back to a personal opinion because some people will not care about that while others believe that they are not manipulating it.

If they rigged the machine, how do we know for sure? So it is better to enjoy the game and see how good our luck and who knows, we can win some prizes. No need to think about many things that we do not know.

[Kakmakr]

The games give the House an obvious advantage over the players, because they have the odds in their favor. Crazy Time Odds =
38.88% chance of stopping on 1 (21 segments) 24.07% chance of stopping on 2 (13 segments) 12.96% chance of stopping on 5 (7 segments) = Source https://casinogrounds.com/casino-games/crazy-time/

You can actually track the history of the bets here ==> https://casinoscores.com/crazy-time/ and get expected frequencies for numbers to be spun.

The old saying is... "The House always Win" and that is why they use the odds to their benefit, when they design these games.