...

[N_Faker]

Is this solely for your own hand histories?

You can change to whose history you want to view.

Is there nowhere to download ALL the histories of ALL players for a given game?

As far as I know, no.

[euklid314]

CaractatusPots: I also feel that you are accusing the BGA site to cheat - thus I respond.

Since I was curious about your playing strength some days ago I analyzed your most recent game (Nr. #110326383 against Angelika). She is definitely less experienced than you, if I am allowed to judge that from the play. In the end you are close to winning but Angelika gets lucky and wins.

By coincidence I might have just analyzed a game that gave you the impression that this game was "strange". If this is the case then please confirm it and I will write some sentences on the probabilities of this game.

If you feel that the above mentioned game is one of the "normal" ones then I would be happy if you could point out a single "strange" game of yours so that I can analyze it. I will not analyze a second game of yours on my own.

[N_Faker]

The majority of the players I have faced here are truly awful, some complete novices whose every move is only concerned with keeping every piece from being exposed as a blot. Some are good players. On balance I should be well up because poor play can not consistently stand up to sound strategic play in this game. Luck as a factor should even out and good players must then prevail very significantly. As it is well guess what, I have won a nicely balanced 50% of the games I have played.

Yes, the ELO ranges in which you have played in until now, in large part, only tries to minimize blot exposure. Which will usually result in exceptionally poor error ratings.

Yet, your own error rating isn't great either. I plotted your last 10 games into GNUBG which resulted in these overall ratings.

Error rate mEMG (MWC) __________ -37.2 ( -0.152%)
Snowie error rate _______________ -15.1 ( +0.000%)
Error based abs. FIBS rating _______________ 1666.7

GNUBG file

[dschingis27]

@CaractusPots
I think you made a good point in showing how easy it can be to skew results without a flaw in random numbers being noticed easily. This is something I haven't thought about for a while. I also agree in general on the statement that when it's about money on the internet - anything can be possible.

But I oppose the idea that rigged numbers are very profitable for gaming sites. Sure you can gain a little extra profit in short-term. But you would risk the whole company on the loyalty of the people who know about the fraud. Not a smart business decision if you ask me. Doesn't mean that it's not possible but it's not logical to me to assume that gaming sites would naturally manipulate numbers since the non-rigged versions of the games are already very profitable.

-------

Also, come on, you shouldn't evaluate your win rate after just 38 games. Of course randomness plays a big role here. I think you know that.

[CaractacusPots]

But I oppose the idea that rigged numbers are very profitable for gaming sites. Sure you can gain a little extra profit in short-term. But you would risk the whole company on the loyalty of the people who know about the fraud.

You can say the same thing about every fraud that has happened in history. There have been untold thousands of them. If we are talking about hard core gaming sites like online poker sites which rake in $billions then you have to understand the likely type of people behind it. Think Mafia style groups. No whistleblower would dare speak out otherwise they'd be "dealt with" in short measure.

But make no mistake large online poker companies HAVE been caught cheating. There HAVE been scandals of varying kinds, and yet the industry just carries on unabated. One site was discovered to have admin employees using admin consoles to play poker where they could see everyone else's hands. They had taken $10,000s before they were found out. Yet despite that event the poker companies of course all claim that no-one cheats. The authorities also closed down FullTiilt and Pokerstars and others some time ago, I think it was to do with money laundering or something, can't remember. But sure enough they soon started up again and are still raking in $millions today. I queried the online Bingo of a major gambling site in the chat window during a game. I don't play Bingo, it's moronic, but had £5 still sat in my account so used their Bingo to burn it away. The system said there were 50 people in my game of Bingo. The prize money seemed rather pathetic. What struck me was that unlike poker, I couldn't see the alias names of the 50 people playing in my game. I queried this in the chat window "How can I see the names of people I'm playing with?" The administrator immediately hopped into the group chat and said "You can't, the system doesn't display the players". So I said "Well how can I know if there really are 50 people or if in fact there are 200 ?" This is of course absolutely vital because prize money of say £100 when only 50 people are playing is much better odds that £100 prize with 200 people playing. The administrator very quickly said "I can't discuss this, you will have to email support". I persisted, explaining to him why it was important and within a minute I was expelled from the game. You can well imagine employees are rather tetchy about such things.

Naturally I don't play any online Bingo. You have no real idea how many other people you are playing with so the odds are likely very grossly out of your favour. I deem all such sites just pure scammers and part of an enormous gambling cartel conglomerate which the authorities turn a blind eye to so long as they get their cut.

Not a smart business decision if you ask me. Doesn't mean that it's not possible but it's not logical to me to assume that gaming sites would naturally manipulate numbers since the non-rigged versions of the games are already very profitable.

Greed is always a major factor imo. They're not going to sit their raking in 0.5% when they could be making 50% from tweaking games. And the various scandals that have already been exposed and caught prove that.

But this is all nothing to do with BGA. BGA is nothing like those kind of large gambling sites.

[Giordano Bruno 1974]

BGA has been going ten years. It currently has two employees and is in the process of adding a third. If your argument is about huge amounts of money then I'd suggest you are barking up the wrong tree.

Added to which you've basically accused the company of fraud on its own website. And yet the banhammer has yet to be wielded.

[dschingis27]

But this is all nothing to do with BGA. BGA is nothing like those kind of large gambling sites.

I am glad you at least made this statement.

Ok, frauds happen. My point is that it's hard to imagine that intentional rigged numbers are the default for gaming sites. Maybe I am underestimating the criminal energy and greed of the people. Maybe you are underestimating the technical difficulty and stress this would yield for gaming site operators.

Well, back to topic. For BGA, it's just hillarious to imagine that the 2 admins of BGA secretly run scripts under the hood next to the openly available source codes that are used for bug hunting, updating, etc. by hundreds of volunteer programmers. The technical finesse, effort and stress to do this is enormous. Furthermore, they would not only betray the users but also these volunteer programmers, all under the constant risk that their now 10 year old passion project will loose its credibility and also risking their professional careers. All just to slightly increase the number of (mostly free of charge) games played on this site. I think if they had so much criminal energy, lack of principles and madness, they wouldn't run a free boardgaming site.

[Jest Phulin]

But make no mistake large online poker companies HAVE been caught cheating. There HAVE been scandals of varying kinds, and yet the industry just carries on unabated. One site was discovered to have admin employees using admin consoles to play poker where they could see everyone else's hands. They had taken $10,000s before they were found out.

Nice example. It has nothing to do with manipulating random events to level the wins of the average player.

The authorities also closed down FullTiilt and Pokerstars and others some time ago, I think it was to do with money laundering or something, can't remember.

Nice example. It has nothing to do with manipulating random events to level the wins of the average player.

I queried the online Bingo of a major gambling site in the chat window during a game. I don't play Bingo, it's moronic, but had £5 still sat in my account so used their Bingo to burn it away. The system said there were 50 people in my game of Bingo. The prize money seemed rather pathetic. What struck me was that unlike poker, I couldn't see the alias names of the 50 people playing in my game. I queried this in the chat window "How can I see the names of people I'm playing with?" The administrator immediately hopped into the group chat and said "You can't, the system doesn't display the players". So I said "Well how can I know if there really are 50 people or if in fact there are 200 ?" This is of course absolutely vital because prize money of say £100 when only 50 people are playing is much better odds that £100 prize with 200 people playing. The administrator very quickly said "I can't discuss this, you will have to email support". I persisted, explaining to him why it was important and within a minute I was expelled from the game. You can well imagine employees are rather tetchy about such things.

Nice example. It has nothing to do with manipulating random events to level the wins of the average player.

But this is all nothing to do with BGA. BGA is nothing like those kind of large gambling sites.

So, your entire post has nothing to do with the issue you are accusing BGA of doing. But, thanks to your logic, I have decided to not eat food from my community garden because McDonald's food has been deemed to be unhealthy.

[CaractacusPots]

Interesting final few throws in my last game

Me Opp

55 66
44 66
55 14
33 25
12 41
44 36
11 36

14 throws, 8 of them doubles

On a 1 in 6 basis you'd expect 2-3 doubles.

[Tisaac]

Interesting final few throws in my last game

Me Opp

55 66
44 66
55 14
33 25
12 41
44 36
11 36

14 throws, 8 of them doubles

On a 1 in 6 basis you'd expect 2-3 doubles.

That's uncommon, about 1/2000 probability, but far from rare and happens every day since about 2000 tables are played each day.
And agin, statistical analysis from only ONE game means nothing, and in particular not with such an event that if far from a miracle.