The graphs look pretty damning to me. So you're suggesting that after February 13, all the players of this particular game simultaneously switched their playing style to one where they couldn't possibly hit the jackpot? Seems a little far fetched.
If you can't make a cogent point without resorting to ad hominem attacks, you should just stop, because you have already lost the argument.
If you can't make a cogent point without resorting to ad hominem attacks, you should just stop, because you have already lost the 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!
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.
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:
Statistically improbable progressive jackpot results
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.