[DontTailMe]

DontTailMe, Thank you for your post and taking the time to write it. I appreciate it and was well thought-out. I respect that. Ok, that is a 1 for "Yes".

Oh, and I recognize that I did actually mock you a bit with the Dale Carnegie book. But I have to imagine that, in hindsight, even you would admit that you went a little off the rails in that post.

[RAIDER1223]

Oh, and I recognize that I did actually mock you a bit with the Dale Carnegie book. But I have to imagine that, in hindsight, even you would admit that you went a little off the rails in that post.

Yes. I recognize that and agree.

[pologq]

i would like to read what you have to say raider and i think transparency is key.

[SportsBettor74]

I agree that transparency is the key.


Here is a quote from the "Other MyBookie Thread" - posted by another user who racked up 200k on the same slot (quote redacted for clarity):

"

[BetSoft] stated that this is a technical issue and flaw in their 10 spin cycle structure.... This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning of its release date in 2019...

"

My understanding of how a typical slot works is:

1. The player decides on the base wager amount and number of lines

2. The player clicks "spin"

3. Events occur which are no longer within the control of the player and the player either loses his stake or receives a return that may be less than, equal to or greater than the initial stake.

[There may be intermediate events that come up from time to time - like "choosing" to open a treasure chest from a selection of chests - however my understanding is that the contents of the chest are already determined and in this example it is an illusory choice for the player (happy to be corrected if this is incorrect)]

An RTP of, say, 96% means that if the player does 1 - 3 above 10,000 times then he should expect to receive 96% of his total staked (in the absence of a "jackpot").

Based on the quote above from the impacted player, it sounds like what happened with this particular slot was:

1. The player decides on ** the minimum base wager amount ** and max number of lines

2. The player clicks "spin"

2[A] On some occasions, an event occurs within the game where the player gets some intermediate / nested 10 spin cycle

2[B] At this point - the player (who had initially wagered the minimum base wager) was able to intervene and increase his wager to the MAX wager

2[C] The player then invokes the nested 10 spin event

2[D] The nested 10 spin event ends and the player makes money

2[E] It is by following protocol 2[A] to 2[D] above that the players had found the mathematical edge that has been the subject of so much discussion within this thread

I base the above "best guess" on the quote (above) from the other MyBookie thread.

If the new zeitgeist here is "transparency" then some kind of confirmation by the OP that the "best guess" above is approximately correct would be good OR (if incorrect) a correction to the "best guess" above by the OP would be good

[RAIDER1223]

i would like to read what you have to say raider and i think transparency is key.

Thanks pologq. Cool. Sounds good. That makes 2 "yes". Appreciate it.

[RAIDER1223]

I agree that transparency is the key.


Here is a quote from the "Other MyBookie Thread" - posted by another user who racked up 200k on the same slot (quote redacted for clarity):

"

[BetSoft] stated that this is a technical issue and flaw in their 10 spin cycle structure.... This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning of its release date in 2019...

"

My understanding of how a typical slot works is:

1. The player decides on the base wager amount and number of lines

2. The player clicks "spin"

3. Events occur which are no longer within the control of the player and the player either loses his stake or receives a return that may be less than, equal to or greater than the initial stake.

[There may be intermediate events that come up from time to time - like "choosing" to open a treasure chest from a selection of chests - however my understanding is that the contents of the chest are already determined and in this example it is an illusory choice for the player (happy to be corrected if this is incorrect)]

An RTP of, say, 96% means that if the player does 1 - 3 above 10,000 times then he should expect to receive 96% of his total staked (in the absence of a "jackpot").

Based on the quote above from the impacted player, it sounds like what happened with this particular slot was:

1. The player decides on ** the minimum base wager amount ** and max number of lines

2. The player clicks "spin"

2[A] On some occasions, an event occurs within the game where the player gets some intermediate / nested 10 spin cycle

2[B] At this point - the player (who had initially wagered the minimum base wager) was able to intervene and increase his wager to the MAX wager

2[C] The player then invokes the nested 10 spin event

2[D] The nested 10 spin event ends and the player makes money

2[E] It is by following protocol 2[A] to 2[D] above that the players had found the mathematical edge that has been the subject of so much discussion within this thread

I base the above "best guess" on the quote (above) from the other MyBookie thread.

If the new zeitgeist here is "transparency" then some kind of confirmation by the OP that the "best guess" above is approximately correct would be good OR (if incorrect) a correction to the "best guess" above by the OP would be good

Thanks SportsBettor74. Good points. Well-stated. That makes 3 X "Yes".

[SportsBettor74]

Thanks SportsBettor74. Good points. Well-stated. That makes 3 X "Yes".

Thanks for the response.

But what I am saying here is that if we genuinely want this thread to be "transparent" then what we need is an explanation of this quote by rickron:

"

They stated that this is a technical issue and flaw in their 10 spin cycle structure. A flaw is different from a software malfunction whereas a flaw is a “imperfection or weakness and especially one that detracts from the whole or hinders effectiveness” and a malfunction is , “a failure to operate or function in the normal or correct manner : the action or an instance of malfunctioning”. This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning of its release date in 2019. So how could this be a software malfunction when the game has always operated and functioned this way? This again proves what Mybookie is claiming is completely false and made up.


"


Rickron is stating that there was some method for the player to "adjust their bet amount" in-play and thereby gain an advantage.

I took a guess (above) as to how this protocol worked in detail. If you could either agree with the description I have given above or correct it where it is wrong that would be good. The key is explaining how the player was able to somehow adjust the stake size in-play and thereby gain an advantage.

Otherwise - I don't really understand what we mean by "transparency" in this thread.

[pologq]

Thanks for the response.

But what I am saying here is that if we genuinely want this thread to be "transparent" then what we need is an explanation of this quote by rickron:

"

They stated that this is a technical issue and flaw in their 10 spin cycle structure. A flaw is different from a software malfunction whereas a flaw is a “imperfection or weakness and especially one that detracts from the whole or hinders effectiveness” and a malfunction is , “a failure to operate or function in the normal or correct manner : the action or an instance of malfunctioning”. This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning of its release date in 2019. So how could this be a software malfunction when the game has always operated and functioned this way? This again proves what Mybookie is claiming is completely false and made up.


"


Rickron is stating that there was some method for the player to "adjust their bet amount" in-play and thereby gain an advantage.

I took a guess (above) as to how this protocol worked in detail. If you could either agree with the description I have given above or correct it where it is wrong that would be good. The key is explaining how the player was able to somehow adjust the stake size in-play and thereby gain an advantage.

Otherwise - I don't really understand what we mean by "transparency" in this thread.

i am in agreement. we need to know all of the facts.

[DontTailMe]

Thanks for the response.

But what I am saying here is that if we genuinely want this thread to be "transparent" then what we need is an explanation of this quote by rickron:

"

They stated that this is a technical issue and flaw in their 10 spin cycle structure. A flaw is different from a software malfunction whereas a flaw is a “imperfection or weakness and especially one that detracts from the whole or hinders effectiveness” and a malfunction is , “a failure to operate or function in the normal or correct manner : the action or an instance of malfunctioning”. This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning of its release date in 2019. So how could this be a software malfunction when the game has always operated and functioned this way? This again proves what Mybookie is claiming is completely false and made up.


"


Rickron is stating that there was some method for the player to "adjust their bet amount" in-play and thereby gain an advantage.

I took a guess (above) as to how this protocol worked in detail. If you could either agree with the description I have given above or correct it where it is wrong that would be good. The key is explaining how the player was able to somehow adjust the stake size in-play and thereby gain an advantage.

Otherwise - I don't really understand what we mean by "transparency" in this thread.

Yes. This is why I sated in the other MyBookie thread that I'm curious to see the rest of rickron's conversation with Betsoft. See the middle conversation below. He posted this as evidence that there was no "flaw" in the software. But this appears to just be Betsoft covering their ass legally/financially/reputationally by trying to very narrowly define a software flaw. Meanwhile, MyBookie is trying to position it as a software malfunction, for obvious reasons.

Maybe it's just a coincidence, but it appears as if the scroll of this private message thread is conveniently positioned so as to get his desired point across while also hiding Betsoft's description of what is actually happening in this case.

"We have been informed that, in fact, this was not a flaw or malfunctioning - the Players..." The players what?

[SportsBettor74]

Yes exactly DTM.

Based on what we know now it looks like the following is being asserted:

1. The game was created in 2019

2. The game came with a programmed "feature" whereby a player could change the stake size in-play THEN execute further bonus spins in-play

2[A] 2 above is now irrefutable. We have the rickron quote "This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning..."

3. This is the advantage we have been looking for in this thread that explains (mathematically) why we have several (5+?) users who all racked up 200k+ on this 96% RTP slot

4. There is some argument as to whether this is a deliberately coded feature (doubtful) or a software flaw / bug that went unexploited for 2 years in production - until the case we have today [or perhaps it was carefully exploited for the last 2 years and some clever players have gotten away with it]

5. We know now that whatever the exploit was it has now been corrected - you won't find the exploit in current production versions of the slot :-(

Next Steps:

[1] Rickron to publish the full conversation as you suggest

[2] The OP here to give detail on the exact nature of the exploit (I have tried above with a guessed protocol - it is probably wrong but we KNOW that **somehow** the stake size could be maxed in-play followed by 1 or more bonus spins - and probably 10 bonus spins based on the Rickron quote)

[3] The OP to come clean here and admit that he used this exploit

Anything less and I fail to see how this new world of "transparency" means anything at all

[Thunderground]

Yes exactly DTM.

Based on what we know now it looks like the following is being asserted:

1. The game was created in 2019

2. The game came with a programmed "feature" whereby a player could change the stake size in-play THEN execute further bonus spins in-play

2[A] 2 above is now irrefutable. We have the rickron quote "This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning..."

3. This is the advantage we have been looking for in this thread that explains (mathematically) why we have several (5+?) users who all racked up 200k+ on this 96% RTP slot

You think?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZZwW10yTsc

[pologq]

raider, did mybookie mention anything to you about winning and getting paid the $84K already?

[DontTailMe]

raider, did mybookie mention anything to you about winning and getting paid the $84K already?

See Post #19.

[jacksonstreet]

shut the hell up. that's '1' for 'NO'......now add up all of the others that have stopped reading, including your best shot to get this settled in your favor (Optional), and you have a quorum. You sound like that 'DoubleRedDragon' guy that was going on and on about Cloudbet.

[milwaukee mike]

that "rickron"/ronald was setting up multiple accounts?
stuff like that is why i'm surprised this went on for so long... if someone can make $2000/week then why not set up friend accounts and make $6000/week... greed is a powerful thing

[Crusherrr]

that "rickron"/ronald was setting up multiple accounts?
stuff like that is why i'm surprised this went on for so long... if someone can make $2000/week then why not set up friend accounts and make $6000/week... greed is a powerful thing

Three different sites. Mybookie,mybcasino,xbet. All owned by mybookie though

[milwaukee mike]

Three different sites. Mybookie,mybcasino,xbet. All owned by mybookie though

oh boy
so someone could've gotten $6000/week just in their own name?
set up a few friends and just ONE PERSON could essentially take down a sportsbook like mybookie

[Crusherrr]

oh boy
so someone could've gotten $6000/week just in their own name?
set up a few friends and just ONE PERSON could essentially take down a sportsbook like mybookie

That's correct.

[ace7550]

Seriously. There are times that I think books are pretty sharp about knowing what's going on. There are also times like this when I think, "How could a sportsbooks be completely asleep at the wheel?"

[SportsBettor74]

oh boy
so someone could've gotten $6000/week just in their own name?
set up a few friends and just ONE PERSON could essentially take down a sportsbook like mybookie

I agree.

Here are some quotes from my prior posts:

"

The reason is that cases like this undermine the whole fabric that supports the bookmaker industry.

We cannot allow someone to knowingly rip off a bookie and then make threads / posts in an attempt to legitimize this.

I am not a huge fan of MyBookie - and recent occurrences of hacks (see other threads) have not helped the MyBookie case.

But collectively - we cannot allow people to knowingly exploit a bookmaker and then pretend they have a legitimate claim to 100's of K - and then expect us as a community to support such an action.

In the short term people may think "It's ok. The bookie has plenty of money. Let's stick up for the small player against the big bookie.".

But in the long term this degrades the whole industry. We can't allow it AND simultaneously expect the industry to continue in the way we know and like it. I posted above about why it is not realistic to adopt this approach.

"


and from my post: Why the OP should not be paid:


"

If MyBookie pay, all of the honest bettors here are damaged. If MyBookie pay this damages the industry. See above for the rationale.


"

[lonnie55]

Also, regarding my message earlier about what BETSOFT said about it being a flaw

They stated that this is a technical issue and flaw in their 10 spin cycle structure. A flaw is different from a software malfunction whereas a flaw is a “imperfection or weakness and especially one that detracts from the whole or hinders effectiveness” and a malfunction is , “a failure to operate or function in the normal or correct manner : the action or an instance of malfunctioning”. This feature that allows players to adjust their bet amount was integrated into the gameplay from the very beginning of its release date in 2019. So how could this be a software malfunction when the game has always operated and functioned this way? This again proves what Mybookie is claiming is completely false and made up.

Rickron is stating that there was some method for the player to "adjust their bet amount" in-play and thereby gain an advantage.

@RAIDER1223, Rickron, Spencerho:

Can you please explain this in detail? I still don't get it. Was it possible to adjust the bet size within the free spins?

In this video the player is not adjusting his bet size at any time. So what does Rickron mean when he says that "this feature (...) allows players to adjust their bet amount"?

[jp5148]

Lonnie55, the video doesn’t show what they were doing. The bet adjustment doesn’t happen in free spins. On these game every 10 spins the bombs accumulated during the spins turns to wild on 10th spin. So the 10th spin on every game is typically a larger payout. So the glitch allowed them to spin 9 times on the lowest bet amount, then on the 10th spin change bet to higher amount. So all the bombs on 10th spin turn to wild and it’s a big payout. Now that the glitch is fixed every bet change resets bombs accumulated. It’s hope this explanation is not too confusing.

[jp5148]

I’m not saying that’s what raider and the others done. That is just how the glitch works from what I understand.

[Judge Crater]

TBH, it is more than a little disturbing that I find myself sympathetic to MYB on a player payout dispute.

[ace7550]

I think if I'm the player I would treat this like a bad line. If you wanna bet it and hope that it doesn't get cancelled that's fine. But if it does get cancelled don't go complaining to everyone. If I found a flaw in a casino slot and made 84k off of it I definitely wouldn't be complaining.

[SportsBettor74]

Lonnie55, the video doesn’t show what they were doing. The bet adjustment doesn’t happen in free spins. On these game every 10 spins the bombs accumulated during the spins turns to wild on 10th spin. So the 10th spin on every game is typically a larger payout. So the glitch allowed them to spin 9 times on the lowest bet amount, then on the 10th spin change bet to higher amount. So all the bombs on 10th spin turn to wild and it’s a big payout. Now that the glitch is fixed every bet change resets bombs accumulated. It’s hope this explanation is not too confusing.

Thanks for the explanation jp. Makes complete sense and is in line with the rickron quote.

So - the puzzle has been pretty much solved and the mathematics conundrum has been resolved.

What is still unclear is if any of the users (other than rickron) had multiple accounts either on any given site or between the various sites - and whether the users were all in cahoots. Maybe we will never know.

It seems to have been a nice little earner while it lasted.

What puzzles me is the attitude / stance of the OP throughout this thread.

Imagine for a moment that you had 200k outstanding. You had "earned" this by pressing a button for many hours per day. You would want that money. You would be humble. You would be polite (but not sycophantic or obsequious) to those who seemed to support you and you would be calm and patient with those who smelled a rat. You would just calmly stick to your story that you got lucky and in this way fend off the nay-sayers.

With 200K at stake this is the kind of strategy you would employ.

It seems to me - when this thread is taken as a whole - that the OP took his eyes off the prize and was unable to prioritise the 200k over other considerations like "the need to be right" and perhaps some ego considerations.

Most interesting and at the same time perplexing.

I would still like to see the full conversation that rickron had with Betsoft - but I guess it's unlikely we will see it now.

This youtube clip sums it up well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXUq...=PatrickRooney

[DontTailMe]

that "rickron"/ronald was setting up multiple accounts?
stuff like that is why i'm surprised this went on for so long... if someone can make $2000/week then why not set up friend accounts and make $6000/week... greed is a powerful thing

You're referring to what XBet said in their message to him? I'm not sure we can say that. The problem is that MyBookie has several skins, and we know that he had MyBookie and Xbet accounts. So that could be what they're referring to, as opposed to multi-accounting as a rules violation.

[HedgeHog]

I agree.

Here are some quotes from my prior posts:



"

The reason is that cases like this undermine the whole fabric that supports the bookmaker industry.

We cannot allow someone to knowingly rip off a bookie and then make threads / posts in an attempt to legitimize this.

I am not a huge fan of MyBookie - and recent occurrences of hacks (see other threads) have not helped the MyBookie case.

But collectively - we cannot allow people to knowingly exploit a bookmaker and then pretend they have a legitimate claim to 100's of K - and then expect us as a community to support such an action.

In the short term people may think "It's ok. The bookie has plenty of money. Let's stick up for the small player against the big bookie.".

But in the long term this degrades the whole industry. We can't allow it AND simultaneously expect the industry to continue in the way we know and like it. I posted above about why it is not realistic to adopt this approach.

"


and from my post: Why the OP should not be paid:


"

If MyBookie pay, all of the honest bettors here are damaged. If MyBookie pay this damages the industry. See above for the rationale.


"

Try not to dislocate your shoulder while patting yourself on the back. Having the need to highlight the main points of your previous ramblings is disturbing, but don't let me stop you. It's your thread...oh wait, it's not. Take a break blowhard.

[pologq]

See Post #19.

yes thanks

[DontTailMe]

I think if I'm the player I would treat this like a bad line. If you wanna bet it and hope that it doesn't get cancelled that's fine. But if it does get cancelled don't go complaining to everyone. If I found a flaw in a casino slot and made 84k off of it I definitely wouldn't be complaining.

I agree that when playing a grey area edge like this, you have to expect the worst and hope for the best. Every weekly $2,000 payout should have been viewed by the player as one they got away with. I'm glad they came away with at least $84k plus whatever the other conspirators pulled. Couldn't have happened to a nicer bookie /s

[pologq]

if the flaw is as mentioned and it was me, i would be happy to get the 84K and move on. i am not siding either way but there is something for getting 84K already in all of this.

[Crusherrr]

if the flaw is as mentioned and it was me, i would be happy to get the 84K and move on. i am not siding either way but there is something for getting 84K already in all of this.

If the flaw is as mentioned, I'd win about $2,000 a week and no more. After all, you can't get paid more than $2,000 a week, so why try to win more than that?

That's the downfall to the OP and or anyone else involved. Assuming this is what he was doing that is...

[HedgeHog]

I agree that when playing a grey area edge like this, you have to expect the worst and hope for the best. Every weekly $2,000 payout should have been viewed by the player as one they got away with. I'm glad they came away with at least $84k plus whatever the other conspirators pulled. Couldn't have happened to a nicer bookie /s

I think you nailed it with this post.

[ace7550]

If the flaw is as mentioned, I'd win about $2,000 a week and no more. After all, you can't get paid more than $2,000 a week, so why try to win more than that?

This is a great point. If they reinstated the account it would take OP 2 years to get it all out.

[DontTailMe]

If the flaw is as mentioned, I'd win about $2,000 a week and no more. After all, you can't get paid more than $2,000 a week, so why try to win more than that?

That's the downfall to the OP and or anyone else involved. Assuming this is what he was doing that is...

Yes, it seems like smart play would have been to only win as much as you can withdraw to keep your balance low and inconspicuous and maximize your potential winnings. But maybe MyBookie would have been triggered at the $84k withdrawal point no matter what. We'll never know.

But what usually leads people to getting caught - not just in gambling, but in any money making scheme - greed. It's human nature.