Is provably fair really real?

[TheUltraElite]

If you are able to verify the result using the server and client seeds and the nonce, then the result is provably fair. It means that the casino did not manipulate the outcome. If you find them and use it to verify the outcome, by all means you can trust this casino.

However the concept of winning or losing does not depend on whether you can verify the result or not. House edge is different from being provably fair. A game can be provably fair but have a massive house edge, like the dice game on the now defunct freebitco.in which was close to 5%.

So your winning or losing is dependent on your luck at that moment. But if a site is not provably fair, then surely post it here in "Scam accusations" for calling it out.

[Pi-network314159]

To me probably fair is not fair, the algorithm is set in a way that people thinks is fair when it's never. Sometimes the casino allow it to look probably fair, but when they see that people want to understand it, they switch it to random algorithm where you lost control over your analysis. My father is a lottery gambler and he is good in studying and predicting this game called pools, there is a time the system will be left to look probably fair an he wins and think he will win the next time from same analysis, but after being confident and stake higher the whole setting will be disorganized, and he will lose. He told me this guy's are very smart, that they knew if this pattern continues the lottery company will fold. That's I believe that gambling site are not always probably fair, they switch without people noticing it.

[Julien_Olynpic]

Provable fairness exists, but unfortunately, we can't always verify it with many sites. And so, indeed, part of the meaning of this concept is blurred. Furthermore, no one is generally interested in provable fairness per se, as its usefulness is only for marketing. Everyone is only interested in the long-term potential for winning. And that still doesn't favor the player in the long run. However, we know successful players who have managed to nearly bankrupt the casino, lol.

[viljy]

There is a provably fair one, but in order to understand this, you need higher education than basic. That's the problem- it's impossible to prove anything to a person who can't understand the proof. Therefore, sometimes a simple hash verification is issued as proof, well, that is, the proof boils down to "look, here are 5 and this is also 5." But where did this 5 come from initially remains outside the scope (why not 8?).

Such methods are somewhat populist, since they do not strictly prove anything, except that the original hash did not change during the spin. Therefore, for most gamblers, the most important criterion is still the reputation of the casino, and not mathematical proofs that are difficult to understand.

[tiCeR]

There is a provably fair one, but in order to understand this, you need higher education than basic. That's the problem- it's impossible to prove anything to a person who can't understand the proof. Therefore, sometimes a simple hash verification is issued as proof, well, that is, the proof boils down to "look, here are 5 and this is also 5." But where did this 5 come from initially remains outside the scope (why not 8?).

Such methods are somewhat populist, since they do not strictly prove anything, except that the original hash did not change during the spin. Therefore, for most gamblers, the most important criterion is still the reputation of the casino, and not mathematical proofs that are difficult to understand.

I think it doesn't require everyone to understand the entire process behind proving the "provably fair" claim. If a few guys, who do indeed have the knowledge, go and investigate whether that proof is true or not for a casino, I think the community as a whole still has a lot of benefit from that. Now to be fully accurate, you are of course right that this is still not 100% insurance for everyone, but I think a good start if a casino passes that test from time to time conducted by random knowledgeable users.

The problem is that I think casinos hardly get tested for this on a regular basis. Which leads me to the idea that tests of that provably fair claim could as well be a community funded effort.

What I wondered about is if you run that experiment with let's say $0.10 and it is provably fair, is it still the same with $1 per spin? I ask this question because in some casinos I had this strange feeling that lower stakes seemed to be closer to the advertised rates. Could be totally subjective and wrong, but maybe someone else had that same feeling too.

[Showlove01]

My cousin who have been a gambler in the past and quit said that if gambling is truly provably fair many casinos won't make it because there is always a load of people testing that one game and they will win even more which will result in loss for the casino, do you believe what he said about this?

I agree with him, gambling is not probably fair because if it did and it is constantly tested by the  players and they win, the casino will shutdown because there are many people who has been testing if they can win the casino by all means to confirm if they are probably fair. I believe these lack of probably fair game is why we have house edge. This house edge is a system that forbid you to win the house no matter what strategy you use to win them. So gambling is not probably fair, and house edge proves it right.

So my question now is; since gamblers knew there is a house edge protecting the casinos so that gamblers won't win then why do gamblers still went ahead to gamble? i mean that is crazy isn't it? i do not want to believe there is something like this in the casino  because if i do i might stop gambling because it is just like knowing that a gate is locked and a driver still go ahead to hit his or her car. i just want to believe that winning is not certain or guarantee but with my luck and little skills i am sure i will win.

[Queen uloma]

My cousin who have been a gambler in the past and quit said that if gambling is truly provably fair many casinos won't make it because there is always a load of people testing that one game and they will win even more which will result in loss for the casino, do you believe what he said about this?

I agree with him, gambling is not probably fair because if it did and it is constantly tested by the  players and they win, the casino will shutdown because there are many people who has been testing if they can win the casino by all means to confirm if they are probably fair. I believe these lack of probably fair game is why we have house edge. This house edge is a system that forbid you to win the house no matter what strategy you use to win them. So gambling is not probably fair, and house edge proves it right.

So my question now is; since gamblers knew there is a house edge protecting the casinos so that gamblers won't win then why do gamblers still went ahead to gamble? i mean that is crazy isn't it? i do not want to believe there is something like this in the casino  because if i do i might stop gambling because it is just like knowing that a gate is locked and a driver still go ahead to hit his or her car. i just want to believe that winning is not certain or guarantee but with my luck and little skills i am sure i will win.

I think I understand why some people  don’t  believe that there’s house edge in gambling, because if they believe  gambling will look less attractive. But what I want you to understand is that, house edge doesn’t mean that every gambler must lose always, it only means that over the long run, casino has little advantage  that makes them remain in business. Individual can still win today or tomorrow but if people decide to play nonstop the odds Favor’s the casino more.

 The reason why many gamblers still gambles nonstop is because they see it as entertainment, while some believe that one day luck will shine on them. The problem start when a person believes that they can consistently beat the house edge in the game that casino controls and that’s where many people lose.