No, they were saying you learned about a bug in one of the game that a game provider provided to BetPanda, and you utilized it. Not necessarily hacking into the provider, just realizing there is a glitch that open for a possible exploitation and you exploited it.
Regarding the bet history and amount to prove their rebuttal, given you can't provide for public yourself, I guess I can ask them for it, be the forum's eyes to verify their claim, but based on past experiences of witnessing these for-private-eyes-only evidence, what they'll show is the internal version of their log, so it's basically their property and contain elements that's not meant for public consumption. Thus, for-private-eyes-only.
If you're agree to it? Me seeing their supporting evidence for the forum's behalf?
I thought OP exploited Betpanda's original games, even though I don't even know if they have any originals. If the casino claims that the player exploited a possible bug/glitch from a game provider, they must have some kind of warning from the game provider, and I assume they removed the game from their website. I think the community would love to know what game they removed (if any), and OP to confirm if he played that specific game. As for showing the evidence, the casino should show the evidence to holydarkness regarding the warning they got from the provider or any kind of update from the provider. It's a big claim already. We have seen the provider come to the forum before to clear what happened.
Umm... I don't think it will be that easily feasible, for OP to confirm he played specific game, it'll be like admitting guilt. And double-blind test won't work here, as the real point being tested and inquired is already known, of which I believe if we ask OP to list the previous games he played as long as he can recall, under assumption OP did exploited the bug, he'll deliberately omitted the game he played and exploited from his list and denied when I crosscheck it with the list given by the casino. Likewise, the casino can also just mention a random game and insist it's the buggy one, though the game itself perhaps not necessarily bugged, nor perhaps even ever exist.
The easiest way, is for OP to let me see his betting history.
If he did exploited a game, there will be fluctuation in his betting pattern. Like he said himself,
[...] I don't know about you but if I were to hack a casino game, I'd probably go max wins on that game.
So, OP, simplest way to prove/disprove BetPanda's counter-accusation will be to agree to let me see the betting record as per what betpanda's internal database has, and certainly if you didn't exploit a bug, there won't be a noticable fluctuation in that data.
By your permission and agreement that what I see will be binding to both parties?
sure, go ahead.