Topic: BetSoft Non-Payment of Jackpot - page 3. (Read 17835 times)

I posted on Betcoin's forum two days ago asking for an update on the freeroll.  I also included in the post the questions that I have asked them to answer regarding my contested jackpot spin.  They had told me that my questions would be answered.  It has been nearly a month and they have yet to do so.  Within minutes my post had been deleted, and the 200 chips I had put towards the freeroll had been refunded to my account.   I jumped on player chat to confront Betcoin William about this.  He condescendingly said that I am dwelling on the past and I should move on.   He did claim that they will do the freeroll at some point in the future.  I won't hold my breath.  And of course I am dwelling on the past.  I was cheated out of a 1,000,000 credit jackpot.  It is quite clear to me that they just want me to go away.  They do not want attention drawn to the fact that I was cheated out of a jackpot on their site. And the fact that they will not answer questions about how this occurred tells me that they are complicit in what amounts to theft from their players by allowing this to happen and doing nothing about it.  For anyone reading this play at your own risk.  Betcoin will not back you up if you have a problem with one of the software providers.

cjmoles

Please look at my first post in this thread.  Look at the screenshots of my spin, of the paytable at the time of the spin, and at the proof that TwitchySeal provided proving that Betcoin adjusted their TOS after the fact to account for the free spins round.  After looking this over answer this question for me:  Should I have been paid the jackpot?  All of this debate about statistics is confusing and can be interpreted a million different ways.  But my spin is simple.  Either it should have won or it shouldn't.  If your answer is that it should have won, then Betsoft is scamming players and stealing their money.  And Betcoin by not standing up for their player and continuing to use this software is complicit in this scam. 

Yes please do. If you do you'll see I was initially skeptical.

In fact reading it back now to my eternal shame I sounded a bit like cjmoles at the time. How embarrassing!  

Oh.  You should really read this thread where they discuss the details of how they figured out the Betsoft Jackpots are rigged.

I assumed you had educated yourself on casinolistings.com


Over a month ago I told you:

You really should have done more research.
Did you know that they track over 700 online progressive jackpots? https://www.casinolistings.com/jackpots/progressives
That they have been in the business for 10+ years and seem to be pretty respected within the online casino industry?

Edit: Hi Ed

This ridiculous idea that no-one was playing for the jackpots that were not being won at Bovada is so mind bogglingly wrong that it needs to be set straight.

If no-one was playing for those jackpots (i.e. picking Good or both Good/Bad modes) then their contributions from each wager would not be going to the jackpots and the jackpots would not be increasing, and the graphs would have flat horizontal lines. Playing in "Bad" mode does not make a contribution to the "Good" mode jackpot and vice versa. Playing at a 5c coin size does not contribute to the 10c jackpot and so on. They are all independent. So we know at a minimum that people were playing in both those modes (some at the same time) and at all coin sizes because all the graph lines were heading upwards (and down when they were won).

Players playing in both modes contribute to both jackpots and can choose their jackpot when the bonus round comes. If that is the case then you could reasonably expect them to pick the higher jackpot. If so, as soon as that one is won and it reverts to its seed value, you would expect most players to pick the other jackpot next time as it would now be higher. Thus you should expect to see a reasonably similar distribution of jackpot wins between good and bad at the same casino as the jackpots alternate between being biggest. And that is what we see at Slots.lv. But not at Bovada where several of the jackpots were huge and never won in bad mode compared to good.

Sticking to that theory, if the bad jackpots were much higher you would expect to see the good jackpots rarely won as presumably people would not elect to shoot for them when playing in both modes. Yet people kept winning the good mode jackpots. Perhaps the winners were exclusively playing in good mode despite the bad jackpots being thousands of times bigger. That still doesn't explain why no-one won the bad jackpots. In fact this suggestion makes the evidence all the more damning as the logical conclusion is that more people would have been going for the bad jackpots.

In addition, given the long history of data we have it is obvious that something changed when those jackpots that were being won several times a day suddenly stopped being won. And then a few weeks later they all reverted to their previous behaviour at the same time.

So then the only comeback is that our data is no good which has been suggested, again without any evidence to prove otherwise. Seeing as we recorded the data directly from Betsoft's servers after authenticating and getting a session token, we were receiving the exact same data that Betsoft was sending to its players while they were playing the game. So either our data is correct, or it is all wrong and therefore every player who was playing the games at the same time was being supplied with wrong jackpot data, which would be due to Betsoft incompetence. People can put their fingers in their ears and scream all they want about the data being no good because it doesn't support their predetermined conclusions or agenda that they are trying to push (sounding like a climate change denialist) but back in reality, Bovada's reaction says all you need to know about whether the numbers were right or not.

I'll quote Michael Bluejay (someone I have never met or spoken to before this) who wrote this after seeing the data:

Nothing proves the chance for hitting the "Bad Girl" jackpots are lower. In fact, you even state, "there were MANY people playing for the smaller... "Good Girl" jackpots". Don't you think that the Good Girl jackpots were hit because they were played more often, rather than the odds being lower?

Furthermore, why are you using information from a source you've deemed wrong? We've already shown the graphs were from Casinolistings, and their data.

Also, you want to notice how Bovada has no recorded wins for 5 cent, 10 cent, 25 cent, and $1? (Like shown on the graph)

Good job switching the topic from Greedy Goblins' contradiction with Betcoin ToS to now just BetSoft issues, which you for some reason are refuting.

---

Last thing to point out: previously you were saying that people would rather pay for the larger jackpot. Well, then why would it be that the data shows more have gone for the two cent games instead of the higher coin games?

Red text in the outside quote above added by me for clarity.

Where in the data does it demonstrate that the jackpot was won while nobody was playing?  It is an impossibility for that to occur, and I haven't seen any study that made that claim.  See, it's not the data that is wrong....it's the source of information that is wrong. So, find the person who is claiming that the smaller jackpot was won over 100 times while nobody was playing, and ask him to present the data and cite the source.  

And, the odds against hitting the "Bad Girl" jackpots are much greater than the odds against hitting the "Good Girl" jackpots; that's why the smaller, "Good Girl," jackpots were hit most often.  Furthermore, nothing in the data demonstrates that everybody was playing for the larger jackpot; in fact, the data shows quite the opposite; there were MANY people playing for the smaller, much easier to trigger, "Good Girl" jackpots, and fewer players playing for the larger, much harder to trigger, "Bad Girl" jackpots.  See Table Below

Do you think there's any possibility that these two graphs are accurate or no?

Above colored text added by me for brevity

You're on the right track Cjmoles!  Finally!

Something is obviously wrong.

One possibility is that the data was faked not accurate due to human error.

If the data is accurate though, then there is a serious issue with Betsoft software.

Have you seen this article?  I somehow missed it.

I think the author did a really great job of articulating Betcoins ethical responsibility in the "WHO PAYS?" section.

"Cj, How do you explain the smaller jackpot (the one nobody is choosing) getting hit over 100 times while not a single person wins the big jackpot that everyone picks?"  That is very strange, indeed, if nobody picks it, yet it is won over 100 times! It doesn't seem like it should be won at all if it wasn't played....Something's obviously wrong with that data too.
But, I do know that the smaller jackpot has a much higher probability of hitting than the larger one, by design, because I read the rules before I played.

1)  Playing both ways costs twice as much to play, so it wouldn't make sense to throw away money on propositions that have a minimum expected return when one can get twice as many spins at the proposition that provides the greatest possible expected value for the same price.

2)  Choosing which mode to play is independent of any bonus round...(It's a Betsoft game, not the RTG version)(play it free here: http://casinogamesonnet.com/?game=good-girl-bad-girl&id=742)

3)  Nobody likes arguing with trolls, so why would they open up a dialogue with them?

4)  Wouldn't it be funny if it was owned by casinolistings.com who's getting tons of clicks for their affiliate program from this negative publicity while still receiving money from affiliates who provide Betsoft software?

Having addressed your points, I will re-iterate my point for clarity.  My point is that no valid conclusion can be attained from data that comes from a non-random source if it is treated as though it were random.  To say that same more loosely: One cannot logically say, "Look at this non-random data; it doesn't appear to be random at all; therefore, it must be faulty."  The study was seriously flawed and if the people conducting it are actually qualified enough to make that determination, then they will quickly perceive the error....If they are qualified and they don't perceive the error, then they may be motivated by some other factor rather than truth.

CJmoles thinks the reason one jackpot is never won is because everyone chooses to play for the other jackpot instead.


He thinks everyone just picked whichever mode had the highest jackpot, resulting in the other mode never hitting.

Cj, How do you explain the smaller jackpot (the one nobody is choosing) getting hit over 100 times while not a single person wins the big jackpot that everyone picks?



My theory is that most people both ways, good and bad, at the same time and contribute to both jackpots with every spin.
When the bonus is triggered, sometimes they choose bad, sometimes they choose good. 
Someone who's up a lot of money is more likely to choose bad, someone who wants their money to last is more likely to choose good.
Most players will check it out each, "just to see"

It's pretty funny to see all the different ways you try to defend a casino that doesn't even bother trying to defend themselves. 

Any thoughts on the whole "this issue is between the player and a business that refuses to communicate directly with players and nobody knows who runs it or owns it? 
Wouldn't it be funny if it was the same people that owned Betcoin?

No, that's not my theory.  Here, again in quotes, is my point I made earlier:

"The problem is that this game is designed such that the player has the option of choosing which jackpot to play which also eliminates the possibility that the other jackpot could be won.  And, if one or the other jackpot is such that it has a higher expected return than the other, then that's the one that will be chosen.  Once it's chosen, the other jackpot cannot be won. This game is different than the other games because it is not a randomly distributed jackpot but rather a jackpot that is based on human choice which is motivated by non-random factors and incentives.  That's why the author concludes, 'the odds of this just being random luck are astronomical.' He's right, it's not 'just random luck' but that's not because the game is crooked, it's the way the game is designed. When those numbers came out, I don't believe he realized that that was the way the game was designed, so of course it's going to look aberrant....if it was any other game then it would have been aberrant.  It's not surprising that this game was the only game that demonstrated that astronomically improbable behavior."

And here it is said differently:

If it were a game that followed a RANDOM distribution model then the authors conclusion that "the odds of this just being random luck are astronomical" would be a valid observation.  However, it isn't a game that follows a random distribution model so the analysis is invalid.  TO BE CLEAR, WHICH JACKPOT IS WON IS NOT A RANDOM EVENT AS ASSUMED, BUT INSTEAD AN EVENT WHICH IS EXCLUSIVELY AND COLLECTIVELY DETERMINED BY HUMAN CHOICE MOTIVATED BY THE INCENTIVE TO MAXIMIZE PROFIT. It's not a random event so it can't be interpreted as a random event, then juxtaposed into a normal distribution frequency, classified deviant, and still be a sound argument.  When he states "the odds of this just being random luck are astronomical," he's right because they weren't random luck at all.

I didn't even notice you mixed them up to be honest.

You're theory is that everyone chooses the option to go for the bigger jackpot and nobody chooses to go for the smaller.

How do you explain the smaller jackpot (the one nobody is choosing) is getting hit over 100 times while not a single person wins the jackpot that everyone is choosing?

Twitchy, you know I meant to say "Good Girl" instead of "Bad Girl" and your just trying to misrepresent the case again as usual!  But, that's beside the point, you can see the numbers, you can look at the game, and you can read the data, then you can ask a friend to explain the data to you if you don't quite understand what you're reading.  If you would spend more time trying to be truthful and honest instead of a multi-accounting, lying, photo shopping, scam recruiting, East Coast pro-regulatory shill that talks to himself then maybe you could find a place to play.  It's not my fault that you got kicked out of the poker room....it's your own fault.  Start trying to be honest and you might find somebody to play with you.

Cjmoles thinks that everyone decided to try and win the $350k+ Badgirl jackpot on the right (which nobody ever won) instead of the much smaller Goodgirl Jackpot on the left (which was hit over 100 times)

Maybe I was a little harsh, I apologize, I am frustrated...but look at your own tone as well.  Here I will try to explain again without all the extra garbage Twitchy inserts to confuse the point.  My reference was to this data found at the casinolistings website quoted in the blue text below:


After being alerted to potentially "locked" Betsoft jackpots that are seemingly unable to won by a member of our forum, BlackjackAA, back in September of last year, we set out to monitor and record the values of multiple Betsoft jackpots using our jackpot tracking software. We chose Bovada and Slots.lv to be our test subjects as they have a large customer base and a full collection of Betsoft games. After almost nine months of recording jackpot values we can say with certainty that there is something seriously wrong with these games. In a comparison between Bovada and Slots.lv we have identified two major issues.

Firstly, jackpots on certain games and specific coin sizes are never won at all at Bovada, despite being won many times a week at Slots.lv, even though the numbers show that the amounts being wagered and contributed to these jackpots are much higher at Bovada. It does indeed look as if some of these jackpots are "locked" or unable to be won. The odds of this just being random luck are astronomical.  (https://www.casinolistings.com/news/2016/06/warning-avoid-all-betsoft-slots-and-casino-games)



You can play the game for free here: http://casinogamesonnet.com/?game=good-girl-bad-girl&id=742

The problem is that this game is designed such that the player has the option of choosing which jackpot to play which also eliminates the possibility that the other jackpot could be won.  And, if one or the other jackpot is such that it has a higher expected return than the other, then that's the one that will be chosen.  Once it's chosen, the other jackpot cannot be won. This game is different than the other games because it is not a randomly distributed jackpot but rather a jackpot that is based on human choice which is motivated by non-random factors and incentives.  That's why the author concludes, "the odds of this just being random luck are astronomical."  He's right, it's not "just random luck" but that's not because the game is crooked, it's the way the game is designed. When those numbers came out, I don't believe he realized that that was the way the game was designed, so of course it's going to look aberrant....if it was any other game then it would have been aberrant.  It's not surprising that this game was the only game that demonstrated that astronomically improbable behavior.

I also have issues with the other points the author makes, but I have made no reference to them thus far.  All the graphs that Twitchy spewed all over my argument are totally unrelated to this one simple point that I tried to demonstrate. But, in general, there are no references to player populations, no parameters for demographics, no tolerances for market trends, no current event considerations....etc.  You know, college grants and loans were issued in January....no significance?

See....I wrote this again....and again it's going to be diluted with all this other unrelated stuff to obscure the point I made....so forgive my frustration beforehand....I'm just trying to present an honest evaluation and it's constantly being derailed.  I've never cheated anybody, never scammed anybody, and I try my best to state things the way I see them....that's all.
 

Perhaps your points would be clearer if you could dial it back for a minute and drop the sarcasm, conspiracy theories, and personal attacks. You have only succeeded in derailing your own half-baked argument.

No, that's what YOU'RE saying.  Maybe read it a couple more times or something....I don't know...Maybe the words I used were too big?....I don't know why you're confused....I wrote it in English so I don't know how you can interpret me saying anything such as what you asserted, but I guess that's your style....if you guys can't figure it out, then just make something up, right?

You know, lying and being deceptive isn't going to help you increase your player field at SwC because it's only proving what type of people you have playing there....But, maybe all eight of you can get together and teach each other how to palm cards, or something when action's slow; I don't know.  I heard that another collusion crew was discovered playing there a few weeks back....Maybe if you spent more time trying to stop the collusion on your own site instead of making false stuff up on other sites, then maybe you could increase registration honestly....you guys are something else!

"JACKPOT CANNOT BE MULTIPLIED" = FREE SPINS QUALIFY FOR THE JACKPOT BONUSES within the FREE SPINS MODE description is of course contradictory to the by Betcoin hand written "Bonus round and free spins do not qualify for the jackpot bonuses."

Only a brainless would be not able to realize this...