22 replies to this topic

[ady]

Okay,

I'm no mathmatician, programmer nor a machine engineer but I have to smile when I see the remarks on the s16's etc....also some replies too!!

Random...Percentage...etc is always the question..sometimes the answer is "they can't be as there's a percentage" or "they cant be random as how can the percentage be got"?

This so so bloody simple, and yes a percentage can be achieved by a random machine.

The machine has say 1m ping-pong balls in it (each ball having an pre-determined outcome), the RNG selects a spin ( lets call it a ball) at random and its calculated towards the percentage.

Over 'x' time (spins) the RNG adjusts the amount of winning/losing balls it has the choice of picking..

Should the big winner be selected and the paid-out percentage is too high it simple puts more losing balls in, whereas if the percentage is too low it takes some losing balls out.

Some say there can't be a true RNG, mabey mabey not...I do know though when I was at school 30 years ago there was a simple <randomize> command in basic even then that did the job of 'randomly' selecting a number between 2 given digits that I for One had no control over the outcome.

These machine therefore are random, the next ball is not pre-determined..but some very logical and simple adjustments can be made to possibilities.

[fruitman69]

Okay,

I'm no mathmatician, programmer nor a machine engineer but I have to smile when I see the remarks on the s16's etc....also some replies too!!

Random...Percentage...etc is always the question..sometimes the answer is "they can't be as there's a percentage" or "they cant be random as how can the percentage be got"?

This so so bloody simple, and yes a percentage can be achieved by a random machine.

The machine has say 1m ping-pong balls in it (each ball having an pre-determined outcome), the RNG selects a spin ( lets call it a ball) at random and its calculated towards the percentage.

Over 'x' time (spins) the RNG adjusts the amount of winning/losing balls it has the choice of picking..

Should the big winner be selected and the paid-out percentage is too high it simple puts more losing balls in, whereas if the percentage is too low it takes some losing balls out.

Some say there can't be a true RNG, mabey mabey not...I do know though when I was at school 30 years ago there was a simple <randomize> command in basic even then that did the job of 'randomly' selecting a number between 2 given digits that I for One had no control over the outcome.

These machine therefore are random, the next ball is not pre-determined..but some very logical and simple adjustments can be made to possibilities.

"Over 'x' time (spins) the RNG adjusts the amount of winning/losing balls it has the choice of picking.."
Yes but that is controlled random.



Totally random would be it puts the ball it picked back after, then pick another from all them thus each ball has the same chance of being picked as it did before.


Most randoms dont need to adjust the "balls" as you put it as after a long time it would get to its overall % without having to compensate for the highs and lows.

Get it?

[ady]

Nowhere do they say 'controlled' random as a word though do they Steve?..random is the word (but bar Matt Whistler who say's birds the word ...so I see some kind of contradiction already!

Jokes aside,

Obviously to achieve some kind of a percentage there's got to be some medium, thats in order to give a return as is stated on the machines...that being as I said a few losing balls removed....I cannot see how without an adjustment that can be achieved where it's verses a percentage.

Total random cannot, and never will in a zillion years reach a stated percentage...

[fruitman69]

Nowhere do they say 'controlled' random as a word though do they Steve?..random is the word (but bar Matt Whistler who say's birds the word ...so I see some kind of contradiction already!

Jokes aside,

Obviously to achieve some kind of a percentage there's got to be some medium, thats in order to give a return as is stated on the machines...that being as I said a few losing balls removed....I cannot see how without an adjustment that can be achieved where it's verses a percentage.

Total random cannot, and never will in a zillion years reach a stated percentage...

HA HA oh dear

See my post recently about the dice game!!

[markleshark]

Total random cannot, and never will in a zillion years reach a stated percentage... sorry Ady but you are actually wrong,,,,, it is possible to reach a ZERO percent average if the programmer "accidently on purpose" forgot to insert any winning balls!!!! it is also possible for this to be the case + simply advertise on the outside of the machine 85% avarage!!! said gamblers lose a few fortunes + just think,,,,,, greddy bugger!!! im not joking either,, we all know its popssible to erase memorys, or even to "switch" by an unscrupulous operator for a while,, then after being replaced with the normal chip,, the machine + the players are none the wiser!!! i have personally come across this but you can never prove it!!!! its just not possible to check the guts of a machine regularly,,, bit like vosa looking for red diesel in your tank!!! you ever been stopped + checked????? i rest my case

[ady]

No I didn't, but given that reply I can sense theres some "you are havin' a laff comments" in my post.

See a few who have read this thread....come on guy's...opinions.

[fruitman69]

No I didn't, but given that reply I can sense theres some "you are havin' a laff comments" in my post.

See a few who have read this thread....come on guy's...opinions.

Here you go ady in case you didnt see it the first time round...

I quote "hows somthing random if it has a payout to meet?"
I quote "Obviously to achieve some kind of a percentage there's got to be some medium, thats in order to give a return as is stated on the machines...that being as I said a few losing balls removed....I cannot see how without an adjustment that can be achieved where it's verses a percentage"


Ok try this

Throw a normal non weighted die at a craps table just one.

Say it costs £1 a throw

and you get paid as below:-

1 = nothing ( lose £1 )
2 = nothing ( lose £1 )
3 = nothing ( lose £1 )
4 = 60p
5 = £1.20
6 = £2.40

Would you not call this random??

Yet the expected payout would be 70.00%

It will still fluctuate but after several thousands of "plays" eg throws it would be expected to be near the 70%

The more "games" "throws" "plays", what you want to call it the nearer to 70% you would expect it to be.



Senario ok my first go i get a 6 whooo hooo i got Jackpot lol £2.40

240% payout ! oops

The die dont get the hump and changes its chance of landing on a 6 to bring the % payout down.!

I still have the same chance as i did before of getting a 6 again !

[ady]

6 options v's thousands is a poor comparison...

Multiply each die by 1000x....precentage down and a few Sixes are taken out....mabey 2 Fives are randomly selected straight away and the machines on a negative so a few of those are deleted....still random as to whats rolled next though.

So it payed 240% (which it easily would at such slim combo's)....the Sixes, Fives 'n fours are restricted (by the anount being deleted/withdrawn depending on past 'balls' selected)..............it therefore is still random is it not?

[todd1970]

See a few who have read this thread....come on guy's...opinions.

Ermmm...too complex for my tiny mind..

[fruitman69]

6 options v's thousands is a poor comparison...

Multiply each die by 1000x....precentage down and a few Sixes are taken out....mabey 2 Fives are randomly selected straight away and the machines on a negative so a few of those are deleted....still random as to whats rolled next though.

So it payed 240% (which it easily would at such slim combo's)....the Sixes, Fives 'n fours are restricted (by the anount being deleted/withdrawn depending on past 'balls' selected)..............it therefore is still random is it not?

Maybe only 6 options but it dont matter how many options the math stays the same

(total payout / total combin) * 100 = expected % payout

my case (£4.20 / £6.00) * 100 = 70%

YES still random in the way your doing it BUT that is "compensated random" as if its adjusting each game dependant on previous outcomes then thats not being "fair" and the game would have to refect that in its wording.

Totally random or True random should mean there would be NO compensation used if it was above or below % payout.

Edited by fruitman69, 18 January 2011 - 09:08 PM.

[Chopaholic]

f*** me are we still doing this? It's really, really simple.

Let's say I have a big bag with 100,000 balls in it. 99,999 of them have LOSER written on them, the other 1 has WINNER written on it and pays £90,000.

I charge people £1 to pick a ball out of my bag, and whatever happens, I put the ball back into the bag before the next person gets to pick, after paying me £1.

The expected payout on my big bag of balls game is 90%, and over enough picks, that will be achieved, I'm not talking hundreds of picks, or thousands, we're talking millions - but it will get there.

I could achieve exactly the same payout by making 90,000 of the balls a WINNER but they only pay £1, the other 10,000 pay nothing. That's the exact same 90% payout over time.

As fruitman has already indicated with his dice game, the reality of course is somewhere in the middle, but he's also exactly right, the maths stays the same and is an absolute constant - you think casinos needs their roulette wheels to 'compensate' themselves over time, or their decks of cards to 'compensate' themselves in favour of the dealer? No, they've worked out the odds, maths will do the rest.

What you have to remember is that S16s and all the other random machines get to play millions of spins over their lifetime, that '90% payout' will be accurate over that period of time, and maths will back it up, but we could be talking in terms of a machine being on site for weeks or months for that to happen.

(I think I got my maths right with this post fruitman, correct me if I'm wrong lol )

[nails]

Nowhere do they say 'controlled' random

when i ordered machines from AMG, their was 2 types of RANDOMS i could order, controlled random like rainbow riches, and random random like slotto.

[nails]

Total random cannot, and never will in a zillion years reach a stated percentage... sorry Ady but you are actually wrong,,,,, it is possible to reach a ZERO percent average if the programmer "accidently on purpose" forgot to insert any winning balls!!!! it is also possible for this to be the case + simply advertise on the outside of the machine 85% avarage!!! said gamblers lose a few fortunes + just think,,,,,, greddy bugger!!! im not joking either,, we all know its popssible to erase memorys, or even to "switch" by an unscrupulous operator for a while,, then after being replaced with the normal chip,, the machine + the players are none the wiser!!! i have personally come across this but you can never prove it!!!! its just not possible to check the guts of a machine regularly,,, bit like vosa looking for red diesel in your tank!!! you ever been stopped + checked????? i rest my case

No, Ady is not wrong for a simple reason. Its random within its parameters. this is why some machines like elvis can take £10k+ before spilling 1 jackpot. you are both right, but both answering totally different questions.

random random
-------------
slottos and its use of the `bingo balls in a bag` scenario is a great way to explain TOTALLY RANDOM. all the machnie does is simply remove the said bingo ball and value and carries on, till eventually you may have out of the zillions of balls have 1 loser ball and one jackpot ball. the machine will indeed pick one of those balls at total random...


controlled random
-----------------
ok let us stick with the bingo balls in the bag scenario for a bit more BUT let us assume that if rainbow riches pulled a £100 ball, then the machnie compensates this by cheating and removing some higher win balls.



remember before branding any machine a cheat or complaining it doesnt do what you want it to do, their has been a strickt test of compliance objectives to meet before and machine is released. even if this depiction of random is not what you would call random...

[fruitman69]

No, Ady is not wrong for a simple reason. Its random within its parameters. this is why some machines like elvis can take £10k+ before spilling 1 jackpot. you are both right, but both answering totally different questions.

random random
-------------
slottos and its use of the `bingo balls in a bag` scenario is a great way to explain TOTALLY RANDOM. all the machnie does is simply remove the said bingo ball and value and carries on, till eventually you may have out of the zillions of balls have 1 loser ball and one jackpot ball. the machine will indeed pick one of those balls at total random...


controlled random
-----------------
ok let us stick with the bingo balls in the bag scenario for a bit more BUT let us assume that if rainbow riches pulled a £100 ball, then the machnie compensates this by cheating and removing some higher win balls.



remember before branding any machine a cheat or complaining it doesnt do what you want it to do, their has been a strickt test of compliance objectives to meet before and machine is released. even if this depiction of random is not what you would call random...

theres loads of ways to be "random" but actually only 3 Main ways:-

1. Each spin picks one out of the pool, and is NOT put back. ( RANDOM CYCLE )
2. Each spin picks one out of the pool, and IS put back. ( TOTALLY RANDOM GAME ) each game totally same odds no matter what has happen previously.
3. Inital spin picks one out the pool, and then pool is adjusted ( COMPENSATED RANDOM )

Pretty sure only options 2, and 3 are legal in the UK but not 100% on that.

Your comment:-

random random
well the slotto way you discribe is not right, you say it picks and dont put it back? BUT it does put it back so that every spin has a 100% equal chance of any being picked.


If it did it in the way you said you would get to the point of a jackpot would be more likely if it had not paid one in a very long time and thats more true for the other way, of taking each one out as its awarded.


I totally agree with you on the bit " even if this depiction of random is not what you would call random..."


I would say EVERY UK machine is random at least partly. even if it is just picking a "random losing spin" lol

[jim2311]

Ady says…if it’s totally random it cannot reach its stated percentage. I disagree ever so slightly in the fact that it could also surpass its stated percentage.

Fruitman69, your dice scenario –

1 = nothing ( lose £1 )
2 = nothing ( lose £1 )
3 = nothing ( lose £1 )
4 = 60p
5 = £1.20
6 = £2.40

You said “Yet the expected payout would be 70%”
I think you’ve made Adys point for him there by saying "EXPECTED", because you can’t predict with certainty after 100, 1000, 10,000, or 1 million throws what the % payout will be simply because the throw of the dice is totally random.

If you want a random game with a guaranteed 70% pay out, your dice would need to offer

1 = 70p
2 = 70p
3 = 70p
4 = 70p
5 = 70p
6 = 70p

Who would play?

[markleshark]

average,,, tossing a coin is 50/50 but it will not hit the average the more you toss it!!!! you can toss it 1 million times + end up with 673,000 heads + 327,000 tails, imagine if a casino only accepted a 1 pound bet on the roulette wheel,,,, at odds of 2-1,,, (which it is) would it profit?? the answer is they are not that stupid!!!! they do not expect the odds to average out over the next 50 years!!!!!! to be continued later,,,,,,,,,,, sry need 2 dash

[fuzion]

If a machine is making a choice to obey a percentage then it is not true random.

J

PS Can't imagine that they would put a '% controlled random' sticker on the machine. Probably put a lot of people off playing.

J

[nails]

If a machine is making a choice to obey a percentage then it is not true random.

J

PS Can't imagine that they would put a '% controlled random' sticker on the machine. Probably put a lot of people off playing.

J

do you people still not get it? read all this thread again and the answers are there, whether you agree a machine is true random or not is your choice - but it is.

[fuzion]

Well maybe I don't understand then. Fair do's.

[fuzion]

do you people still not get it? read all this thread again and the answers are there, whether you agree a machine is true random or not is your choice - but it is.

Well I understand that there are two types of random as you already said, so Rainbow Riches is a controlled random obeying a %?

J