why do you care so much about my recommendation as if i am some important person? I am a nobody on the internet and my recommendation has 0 impact on this case. I just really don't like liars and wanted to make that known. Every single person who has read this thread knows that raider1223 knew he was playing a +eV game, it really should not be that hard for him to admit it.
-
Comment -
I'm not going to admit that I was playing an +EV game when just because I had a net win from that game, as well as others, that I knew that the game may have had a flaw. For the millionth time, I did not know that there was an alleged issue with that slot game. Betsoft has even stated that there was no flaw and it is not the Player's fault. Spencer has even attested to this fact. It's in writing from Betsoft.
Therefore, that in and of itself proves that the game was not a +EV game, nor was there any known or deliberate advantage taken. Not sure why some people are having such a hard time comprehending this, but rather want to automatically point fault since the balance made from multiple slot games (both Betsoft and Nucleus) yielded a large net balance over 10 months. This is MYB's fault. Not mine.
Let it go with the "I knew there was a flaw and exploited it" garbage. It's old and untrue.Comment -
Comment -
The OP is delusional. It has already been admitted by Optional, Spencer and rickron that the game was +EV. Spencer even detailed just how he did it.
Optional has stated in a prior post that after 3 weeks he finally got the details of the system the other two used. Optional then stated how it worked (see his prior posts).
This is why most here now see the OP for the deceptive and manipulative character that he is. The other guys admit there was a loophole, told Optional how they did it but argue that even with this loophole they should get paid. That is worthy of respect and is not a terrible argument.
On the other hand, the OP is still stuck with his 7-10 slot bs and that there was no exploit - and that is why recent posters are correctly calling him out for what he is.
The OP already admitted it was the "Take The" slots only he profited from:
"But in the end, a select amount of Players (and there could be more, we don't know) ended-up having a large balance win from that slot [the first Take The slot] and maybe the other Take "slot". "
"I'm taking the high road here. No more fighting and bickering."
Last edited by Ewan101; 06-02-21, 01:43 AM.Comment -
This is clearly a scam by MB. The chances of them not knowing there was a glitch + the fact they are seeking account balances means players are going to lose everything they out into it. Full blown racket.Comment -
I think there would be a legitimate concern of them paying if there was no glitchComment -
Exactly this. He even got defensive earlier in this thread and went off on his history with online gaming and his knowledge of everything.
There is zero doubt in anyone's mind that he knew what he was doing. The reason he keeps mentioning the 7-10 slots was because he went and punted $100k in other games to make it seem like he was just lucky/unlucky.Comment -
You just can't stop and can't let it go. You know everything. Have all the facts. All the documents and transactions. All the bets made. Everything. You've solved the riddle; the missing pieces. You should be an investigator. You're really good at it. Congratulations.The OP is delusional. It has already been admitted by Optional, Spencer and rickron that the game was +EV. Spencer even detailed just how he did it.
Optional has stated in a prior post that after 3 weeks he finally got the details of the system the other two used. Optional then stated how it worked (see his prior posts).
This is why most here now see the OP for the deceptive and manipulative character that he is. The other guys admit there was a loophole, told Optional how they did it but argue that even with this loophole they should get paid. That is worthy of respect and is not a terrible argument.
On the other hand, the OP is still stuck with his 7-10 slot bs and that there was no exploit - and that is why recent posters are correctly calling him out for what he is.
The OP already admitted it was the "Take The" slots only he profited from:
"But in the end, a select amount of Players (and there could be more, we don't know) ended-up having a large balance win from that slot [the first Take The slot] and maybe the other Take "slot". "
"I'm taking the high road here. No more fighting and bickering."
Not fighting with you. Waste of time.Comment -
I knew what I was doing. You're right. I broke the code. Manipulated the game. Controlled it. Won whenever I wanted and lost on purpose whenever I wanted. Congratulations. You should be an investigator too. Perhaps you should replace "DJ" as My Bookie's hired "Auditor". Betsoft could use your investigative services too to help fix their gaming software issues since apparently they have glitches and flaws in all their games as well. Yet, there are not thousands of people whom have won over $100,000-$200,000+ on Betsoft games. I wonder why? Everyone should have taken advantage of these apparent glitches and flaws. Those other players across the world must be stupid. How could they have not seen these obvious glitches and flaws? You said they have existed; that they were obvious. Are all of the other Players across the world are that stupid/ignorant? I guess they are Crusherr. Maybe you should jump on Take The Bank and Take Santa's Shop on one of the casinos around the world and expose the glitches and flaws to your advantage. Give it a shot. Go win a couple hundred thousand. Let me know how you do man.
Maybe Nucleus could use your help too; to make sure that their games really use RNG technology and are protected from apparent glitches and flaws. You could make a living at solving online casino irregularities.
I really like reading these posts from the same 5-8 people. You guys have controlled the board now. It's fun. It's entertaining. I really enjoy it.
Keep 'em coming. It's like a movie that never ends.
Unreal.Comment -
Another bs, novelette post by the OP that no-one who has familiarity with this thread will bother reading.
The OP creates a "straw man" to attack instead of dealing with the arguments presented. He has done this from the start so no surprise there.Comment -
The OP may really be as naive as he is claiming.
He sounds like he has been playing the game for a very long time. If the casino did not stop you, and kept paying you, for 10 months, I think many readers here would convince themselves it must be fine.
Hindsight and math helps makes it very obvious there was some sort of issue going on but in the heat of the moment many gamblers would keep convincing themselves it was fine.
But really, does it matter?
If the operator made a bad setting (still not confirmed) I think it is still on the operator to make good on the outcome. In some way. Some way better than treating players like they are cheats at the very least.
And for the threads info. There is approaching 60 players identified as benefitting from the issue. I dont know the total outstanding balance but something between 5 and 10 million $ would not surprise me..Comment -
The OP's comments in this thread are no longer relevant.
3 others and Optional himself all say there was a glitch and describe how they used it.Comment -
If it was a "glitch" or software error, the terms would cover the book not paying.
But the software maker says there was no glitch or software error and they also have told one player that "the players did nothing wrong".
If it's a setting the operator made, it's far more questionable if the terms cover it..Comment -
The point being that when you say "the issue" you are referring to the issue with the "Take The" slots and no other slots.
The problem is that the OP keeps going on with his BS about 7-10 other slots and winning and losing on those other slots when even you - Optional - and the 3 other players who are part of this thread all concede that the ONLY slots where anyone made any money were the "Take The" slots. All the players lost money on all other slots as you would expect from a 96% RTP game.
The OP also mistakenly admitted this and now tries to take it back.
"But in the end, a select amount of Players (and there could be more, we don't know) ended-up having a large balance win from that slot [the first Take The slot] and maybe the other Take "slot". "
It is no wonder that so many posters now see the OP for the dishonest manipulator that he is. He cannot admit to this thread that it is ONLY the "Take The" slots that are the issue here. Kind of obvious when we now see there is 10 Million at play.Comment -
It's still an assumption that MB made the setting change. Betsoft may have compiled a specific version for the operator with that setting hard coded in. If it is that, did MB specify it or did Betsoft do it in error.
Everyone just wants to cover their own behinds so it's tough to be 100% sure..Comment -
Oh dear. This looks definitive to me. It looks like finally the question of other slots being relevant has finally been put to rest.
As for this "It got nominated by JoeCool. (see above, page 24)" - I mean, anyone who thinks that a nomination by the distinguished and knowledgeable poster JoeCool (re: maths) is somehow a credit?
Comment -
Stealing this from @Ewan101's Post #825 because I don't feel like looking up the applicable MyBookie rules myself:
If this is truly what the rules say, then I can definitely see MyBookie hiding behind this. As someone who spent over 20 years in IT, "software" doesn't always necessarily mean just the code itself, but often refers to its implementation, including settings. I don't know what case law say about this in the USA or Costa Rica, so I'm just speaking from practical experience, not legal. And in this context, I don't think it's crazy to argue that "software" here refers to everything behind the computer screen that makes the game run. This isn't exactly a contract between a software provider and a software user; it's a contract between a casino and a player. So it's reasonable to assume that "software" has a more general meaning here."We reserve the right to deduct from your account any payouts, bonuses, or winnings due to activities which include:
7. Unfair advantage, which is defined as the abuse of a fault, loophole, or error in our software."
On a somewhat related point, while I understand BetSoft's desire to wash their hands clean of this issue, I'd argue that - even if this was partly caused by operator error - there is still a problem with their software code. I think it's crazy that it even allows for the possibility of operator error causing the game to flip +EV. The game implementation should be much more fool proof than that, and I'd be a little pissed off if I were MyBookie.
Edit: To be clear, I'm not passing judgement on whether MyBookie should hide behind this rule. I'm merely saying that it's a legitimate argument.Last edited by DontTailMe; 06-02-21, 03:32 PM.Comment -
60 cases (that we know of) and millions of dollars. Wow.
Between this and the recent hack / infrastructure / payout issues (whatever that whole mess is/was), MyBookie has had their hands full lately.Last edited by DontTailMe; 06-02-21, 02:26 PM.Comment -
This is just pathetic.
I know you have been stalking me on this forum to deduce that I am from the EU and your ridiculous PM to me also indicated your have been stalking me.
Your unwelcome, stalking PM to me included this: "You're from the EU and it just exemplifies why most of the world think very lowly of many in the EU."
There is something seriously wrong with you. I would be almost certain that you have had issues with stalking people in your present and past.Last edited by Ewan101; 06-02-21, 03:36 PM.Comment -
What's new about their payout limits? It's $5k now for sportsbook and has been for as long as I can remember. I know they're saying $2k in this thread, but my understanding is that's only for casino-generated winnings. Was the casino payout limit much higher than $2k prior to recently? I honestly have no idea.Comment
