Baccarat Interblock RNG Stadium Baccarat...Fair?

Much more realistic.

 

When I first got my hands on the RNG programing code IGT and Sigma used for the VP machines, I could not but help think about how to build one that would NOT be random, but yet pass all mathematical tests required by gaming control to prove randomness. I did not write the code---BTW---so don't blame me. I did get into it far enough to know it's possible.

One thing, code like this would require a LARGE stored table of previous results. It do not believe modern slots store more than the last 10 plays.

 

I think you're spot on. I would make this comment in reference to "if it doesn't like the number"--the amount of extra code and hardware required to program liking or not liking a number would be daunting and nigh impossible to conceal from gaming.

 

This is from a post in 2018 on a different forum.

"$ 20 into a slot machine turned into $150. $150 was turned into $6300 in baccarat.

At the casino near my place they had video baccarat where multiple people could play against the computer. People kept commenting that the machines were rigged so I decided to only bet whenever the rest of the table went one way, and my bet would be ~10% of their bet. So if people were betting $1200 on banker, I'd bet $120 on player and vice versa. I somehow ended up winning something like 60-70% of my bets or so (which is insanely high if you've ever gambled). "

 

He was lucky.

The Shufflemaster machines display the total amounts bet on each side, before the cards are dealt. It's a slick way to encourage Player bets. I've played lots of hands where all the money was on Banker, and Banker still won the hand.

If that strategy had any merit, everyone would be doing it.

 

A mechanism could be quite simple in principle and very little code. e.g. if the quota/take is below target, use the random number if the payout is below a threshold otherwise select the next random number within a window of a millisecond or two that has the payout below a certain threshold.

I've worked on high assurance crypto systems with very strict requirements on randomness for key generation. Most payment and banking networks and ATMs use this kind of hardware as do public cloud service providers. Within the random generation of that hardware the outcomes had to be monitored to ensure certain statistical properties and certain outcomes like longer repeating sequences thrown away (even when they are still random) which didn't damage the quality. I believe skipping a few numbers as I've described is "in the noise" as who is to say precisely when a player pressed a button? It probably wouldn't damage any of the statistical tests.

 

Nothing is 100%, but even if it was 55% it would be worthwhile. You could do this at a regular table also through observation. The premise would be that the casino wins more than just its 1% house edge. Most people lose, so by betting against the money at the table in a limited way you are getting a piece of the casino's additional take. Seems as good as anything else if you had the bankroll for the swings.

 

As we are in Covid lockdown now on and off for two years, I haven’t played at stadium rng baccarat at the brick/mortar casinoverse .

Truth be told I really don’t recall the brand of rng machines used here in skipptophia, I’m actually appalled as I’m usually anal about having my facts correct, now I’m having to control myself as we are still in lockdown so I have to wait until reopening to satisfy my want to know the machines name lol.

As I stated in the stadium thread I had no problem with the perceived bias that the rng was rigged ( rng as opposed to the live dealer stadium style ) I found I lost and won as per posts on that thread. That includes session played when I appear to be the only one playing on that particular bank of rng terminals and also when other people are also playing on the same bank of terminals of rng stadium. This also includes when we are betting the same or differently to each other across differing unit amounts.

I have noticed and posted here ( another thread) previously a noticed bias( my opinion only) at the league clubs and rsl clubs rng stadium especially if I’m playing as the only player playing, as opposed to playing when many other people are playing. The league/rsl clubs are operated differently to casino and have a smaller threshold for losses to patrons. So I consider them to fall under the general opinion this thread re biased against you. I also do not know the brand of this stadium rng machines at the league/rsl clubs. I will check them out on reopening.

As per having to play at such places as the league clubs here as an example. I would and do change my approach to the game ( the league clubs were the only thing open at a time while the casino was closed ) my method of selection and money management,rules remains the same but the time frame I played changed. Whereas at the casino I didn’t play nights and Friday, Saturday at the league clubs you do just to get that buffer of other players to smooth that bias out. Imho. Because of the small unit size max bet is $100 at league clubs you really draw attention to yourself at that range, but playing at the $10-$$30 you are under the radar but it’s not really a personal thing for me playing at that reduced level. My opinion , if you are going to play you play large units, unfortunately the league clubs don’t offer the anonymity a casino offer in regards to other patrons, so the personal safety aspect also comes into play.

To finish up , as posted previously other threads, if you have to play under adverse conditions find a way to adapt to that particular playing field. If you can’t then don’t play. Don’t just give them your money. If you do continue to play in the unacceptable conditions don’t complain especially if you know it’s rigged. That’s just being doubly foolish. If the rigged rng is all that’s on offer and you have identified it as such , change your game to another game or just continue on as a degenerate gambler and continue to complain here and be read as an example of embarrassment for being a degenerate. Pretty simple.
Cheers

 

Was it Rapid Fusion Mini Baccarat?

 

May hands would have won 89 units after commissions for the flat-bet Banker only, every hand, bettors.

June hands would have won 39 units after commissions.

July hands would have lost 85 units after commissions.

Play ended on July 10. The total amount won after commissions from March to July, for Banker only bettors would have been 45 units.

Not limiting my bets to Banker only, worked out better.

I believe the Interblock machines in NY are fair and random, as the law requires.

5/3
PPPPPPPBBPPPBPPBPPPBBBBPPPPBPBBPBBBBBPBBBPBBPPPPBBBBPBPPBPBPPPPBBBBPPBBPPPPBBBPBPBBBBBBBBPBBBBPBPPPPBBBPPPBBBPBBPPPPBPBPBBPPPBBBBBBBPPBPPBPBBBPBBBBBPPBPPPPBBBPBBBBBPPBBPPPBPBBPPBBBPBPBBPPPBBBPBPBPBBBPBBBPBBPPPPPBBPPBBPBBPPBPPBPP

B Only = 11

5/4
BBPPBPBBPBPBPBPBBBPBBPBBPPBBPBPPBPPPPPPPPPPBPPPPBPBBBPPBPPPPBPBPBPPBPBBPBPBPPPBBBBBBPPBBBBPPBPBBPPPPBPBBPBBPBPBBPPBPBPPBPBBBBBPPPPBBBPPPPPPPBBBBBBBBBBPPBBPPBPBPPBPPBPBPPBPBBPBBPBPBBBBPBPBBPBBPBBBPBBBPBBBBBBPBBPBBPPBBPBBBPBBBBBBBPPPBBPBBBPBBBB

B Only = 24

5/5
BPPPPPPBPBPBPPPBPPBPPBBBPPBBBPBPBPBPPBBBPBPPPPBPPPPBBPPBBBPBPBPBPPPBBBBBPBBPBPPBBPPBBPPPPPPPPPPPPPPBBBPPBPPBBBPBPPBPBPBPBBBPPBPBBPPPBPPPPPBPBPBBPBPBBBBPPPBPPPBPBBBPBBBBBPBBBPPPPBPBPBPBPBBPPPPBPBPBBBPBPBBBBBBBBPBBPBPPPBBPBPBBBBBP

B Only = -8

5/9
PPPPPPBPPBPBPPPPBBBPBPPPBPBBBBPBBBPPBBPPPPBBPBPPPBBBBBBPBPBBPBBBBPPBPPPPBPBPPBPBPPBPPBPPBBBBPBBBBPPPBBPBPBPPBBBPBBBBPPPPBBBPBBPBBBPPBPPPBBPBPBPPPPBPPPBPPPBPBPPPBBBBPBBPPBPPBBPBBBBBBPPBPBBPPBPPBBBBBBBPBBBPBBBBBBPPBBBBBBBBPBBBBPPBPPPBBPBPBBBBPBBBBP

B Only = 24

5/11
PBBPBBBPBPPPPPBBPBPBPPBPPBPPPBBBBPBPPBPBBPPPPBPBPPPBBPBBBPPBBBPBBPBBPBBBPBBPBPPBBBPPPPBPPPPPPPPPBBPBBBPPBPBPBPPBPPBBPBBPPPBBPBPBBBBBBBPPBPPPBPPPBPBPBBBPPPPPPPBPPBPBBBBBPBBBPBBBPBPBPBBBPBBBPBBPBBBBPPPBPBPPBBPBBBPPBPPBPPBBBBPBBBPBBBPBBP

B Only = 10

5/13
PPPPBBBBBBPPBPBBPPPBPPBBBPBPPBPBPBPBBPBBBBBBBBBBPPBPPPPBBPPPBPBBPPPPBBPBBPBPBBBBPBBBPPBBPPBBPPPPBBPBPBBPPPBPBBPBPBBBPBPBBPBPBPPPPBBPBPBPBPBBBPPBPPPPBPPPPBBPPPBBBBPPPPPBBBPPBPPPPPBPBPBBBPPBBBPPBBBBPBBPBBPBBP

B Only = 7

5/16

BPPBBPPBBPBPBPBBPPPPBBPPPPBPBBPPPBBBBPPPPBBPBPBBBPBPBPBBBBPPPBPPBBBBBPPPPPBBPBPBBBBBBBBPPPBPBBPBBPPBBBBBBBBBBPBPPBPPBBBBPBBPBPPBPPBBBPPPPPPBPBPBBBPBPPPPBPPPBPBPPPPPPPPBBBBBBPPBPPPPPPPPBBBPBBPBBBBPPPPBBBBBPPPPBBPBBPPBBBPBPPBBBBBBPBBBPPBPPPPPP

B Only = 5

5/17
BPPPBBBPBBBPBPPPBBBBBBBBBBPBPPPPBBPPBBPPBBBPBPPPPPPPBBBBBPBBPBBPBBBBPBBPBPPBPBPBPPBBBPBPPBBBPBBBPBPPPBPPBPPBBPBBBBBPBPPPPBBBPBPPPPPBBPPPBBBBBBBBPPBBPPBPPBPPBBPPPPPPPBBBBBPPPPPBBBP

B Only = 10

5/18
BBBPPBBPPBBBPBBPBBPBBBBPPBBBPPBBPPBPBBPPBBBBBPBPBPBBBPPPBPPBBBPBBBBBBBBBPPBPBPBBBBBBPPBPPPPPBBPPPPBBPBBBBPBBPBPBPPBPPPBPPBPPPBPPPPPPBBPPPBBPBPBBBBBBPPBPBPPBBBBPPPB

B Only = 16

5/20
BPPBPPPBPPPPBBBPPBBBBBBPPBBPPBPPBBBBPPPPPBBPBBPBBBBPBBBBBBPBPBBPBPBBBBPBPPBPPPBPBPPBBPBPPPPPPBPBBPPPPPBPPPBBBBPPBPBPPBPBPBPPBPBBBBBBBBPBB

B Only = 6

5/22
BPBBBPBPPBPPBPPPPPBPBBPBBPBPPPBPBBPBBBPPBPBPPBPBPPBPPBPBPPBBBPBPBBBPPBPBPPBBPPPBBPBBPBBBPPBPBPBBBPPBBBBPPBPPPPPBBPBPPBPBBBPBBBBBPBPBBBPBBPBBBBPBBBBBPPPPPBPPPBPPBBBBBBPPBBBPBBBPBBBPPPBB

B Only = 16

5/23
BPBBPPPPPPPBPPBBBBPPBPBBPPBBBPPPBPBBBPPBBPBBBBBBPBBPPBPBPBBPPBPPBPBBBBPBPPPBPPPBBBPPBBBPBPPPPPBBPPPBBPBBPBBPPPPBBBPBPBPPBBBPBBBPPBBBPPBPPPPBBPPBBBBPPBBBBBBBBPBBBPBPBBPBPBBPBPBBBBBBBP

B Only = 20

5/24
PBPBPBBBPBPPBBBBPBBBBBPPPBBPBPBPPPPPBPBBPBBBBBPPBPPBPBPBPPBPPBPBPBPBBBPPPPBPPPBBBBPBPPBPBPBPPBBPPPBPBBPPBPBBPPBBPBBBPPPBPBPPPPPBPBPBBBPBPBBPPBPPBPPBBBPBBPPPBBBPPBPBPBPBBPBPBBPBPPBPPBBBBBBPPBBB

B Only = 6

5/27
BBBPPPBPBPBBBBPBBBPBBBPBPBBBBBPPPBBBBPPBBBPPBPPPBBPBBBPBBBPBBPPPPBBPBBPPBBPPPPPPBBBPBBBPPPBBPPBBPBPPBBPPPPBBPPBBBBBBBBBBPPPPBBPPBBBBBPPPPBPPPPPBPBBBPBPBPPBBBBBBBBPPBPPBBPBPBBBBBPBBPBBPB

B Only = 26

5/31
BBBPBBBPBPPPPPBBBPBPBBBBBBPBBPBPPBPPBBPPPBBBBBPPPBPPBBBPBBPPPPBPBBBPPBBPPBBPBPBPBPBPBPPBBPBPPBPBBPBPBBBPPBBPBPBBBPPBPBBPPPBBPPBPBBPPBBBPBBPBPBPBBPBPPPPPPBBPPPPBBPPPPBPPPPBPBPPBBPBPPPBPBPBBPBPPPBPBBPBPPPBBPBBPPPBBBPPPBPPBPBPBBBBPPPPPBBBBPPBBBBPPBBPPPPPBBPBPPPPPPBPBPBBBPBPBPBBBBBPBBBBPBBPBBPPPPBBBPBPPBPPPBBBBBPPPBPPBPBBPPBBBPBBBPBBBPBPBPBBPPBPPPBPPBBBBBPPBBPBBPPBBPPPBBPBPPBPPBPBPPPPPPPBBPPBPPPBPBPBPPBBBBPBBPPPBBB

B Only = 2

 

We always find an excuse why we lose in baccarat. If the machines are RNG, the RNG is against your winning.
If it is live dealer, you lose because they use preshuffled cards.
The real reason you lose is the house advantage.

 

This reminds me of Baccarat tournament strategy. If you bet with the table then all that happens is everyone goes up evenly. If you bet against the table you can win while everyone else loses. Obviously, things can go in the other direction. The trick here is the round only ends when all but one player goes bust.

 

I would tend to agree with you Stephen. Unless, someone is doing something to alter the house edge, there is no reason to look for additional causality when losing on a negative expectancy game. You are supposed to lose. The issue of course is that people try a new strategy and it wins for awhile. When it stops winning, it feels like the house did something to change the game and derail your winning system.

It would be perfectly normal to have winning and losing streaks playing any system on a fair game.

This is almost never considered by anyone ever.

A Win = I did something right
A Loss = I did something wrong or the casino is cheating me.

The true reality is that our results are often disenfranchised from our actions. Good luck trying to get your brain to understand that. We are but narrators for the real actor and under strict rules from management to spin only positive stories.

 

One of my greatest personal internet arguments was over trying to explain to someone that the fact that they were wining didn't prove anything whatsoever. I always got, "How can you say wining doesn't prove I have a winning system? You're an idiot."

That sort of thing for days. I gave up eventually. Peace!

 

Excellent post, especially the quoted section.

Btw not all IB machines are unbeatable or possibily favoring more than due the HA.
We've found roulettes affected by a kind of randomness 'bias' that even double zero machines provided an edge for the player. Of course this thing didn't last for long.

 

Your post is spot-on, Asymbacguy, and I truly believe that I am speaking for most members when I thank you for the clarification.

Where the discrepancy lands in our own personal beliefs as to the efficacy of the Interblock (or any computerized games) is in the individual machines. In other words, I firmly believe that is it the machine that we, individually, are playing at the time that is "skewing" the results against the player.

Forget the "roads" that are on display at these games; it is the individual's results that only matter at that particular machine. And it is those results that, to me, appear to be skewed in favor of the house; sometimes sooner, sometimes later, but that machine you're playing will tilt against your particular play in the end.

Given this unfortunate probability, I simply cannot be comfortable playing these computerized games.

Take care and stay well, all.

 

Therefore you have adjusted your play , realised the terms and conditions are not to your satisfaction and you have / will not play on a playing field that you personally cannot find an edge to.

You are a professional.
Well done, other readers should be able to take something from your post and save themselves money or at the minimum they could just go play slot machines funnelling in their cash while marveling at the pretty lights and sounds wee ohhh ahhh , if they don’t understand what you have posted
Nice.
Cheers

 

Not sure I look when re open cheers, but does seem familiar. Cheers

 

In my experience the rng does not replicate the result you buck up against with real, legit hand dealt mortar and bricks shoe. Buck up against the baccarats game on dragon ace csino app if you wanna see garbage, nonsensical rng, bulls shits result, hey hey.

 

That's because they use terrible RNG algorithms which have had known defects for around 20 years and which fail many statistical tests. The most common RNG used is the Mersenne Twister, even the WoV uses it (who should know better) and it's a lost cause, fails basic parity tests (even vs odd numbers is skewed).

To learn how bad it really is the following paper assembles much of the literature and knowledge and is worth a read for the mathematically inclined https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.06437

How do I know about this esoteric stuff? I've spent much of my career working in cryptography where randomness really matters.