Give up on Yahtzee

[RicardoRix]

Yeah, that's great and everything, but conspiracy theories are so much cooler. Sorry, you lose.

I was talking to the RNG the other day, and it was saying just how much it hated shaking dice. So it's no wonder really there are so many genuine complaints on here.

[Ceaseless]

Over 10 MILLION games of yahtzee have been played on BGA so of course there will be many many occurrences of triple yahtzees within that

I've seen perhaps 2 or 3 times in my 1,200 or so games of yahtzee on BGA

But how many real life games of yahtzee have I ever played? Certainly not 1,200. Probably less than 100.

So no wonder I didn't see it as much in real life.

The RNG is fine.

Chances of getting ONE Yahtzee are about 4.7%. You should see one on average every 21 turns.

A game of Yahtzee is just 13 turns in length.

So really you should only see a Yahtzee about once every other game.

To get 3 Yahtzees in ONE game is clearly HIGHLY unlikely.

Those who run online gaming sites of any nature always use the same excuse which is SAMPLE SIZE. It's a crutch to lean on in order to pacify the many millions of angry users who see stupid dice rolls or card deals on a daily basis. The companies always just say that until you've played 100,000s if not millions of games/hands then you can't make any judgement and they say that because they know that most players won't ever get that far (and if it's a paying site like real online poker they know you'll be bankrupt long before that number of hands).

Also, citing that an "RNG is fine" holds absolutely no weight whatsoever. You can rig or tweak the outcome of any online game using a perfectly legit RNG. It comes down to how the actual GAMING SOFTWARE utilises the numbers from the RNG. This has been explained elsewhere such as the backgammon thread where good real life players just know that the dice throws are fixed/rigged. The number of doubles that are "thrown" in the Backgammon here on BGA is patently absurd, but it is what it is.

It's an old circular discussion that will never be resolved until whistleblowers expose gaming sites. That's how things change. For example the online poker industry, which is worth $BILLIONS, claimed endlessly that no-one, not even site administrators could see the cards that are dealt to players.
Everything is random and legit they said. Then the "Absolute Poker" scandal happened and a player called "potripper" was caught cheating via being able to see all the other players cards.

https://upswingpoker.com/ultimate-bet-a ... r-scandal/

Here's the truth. People lie. Online gaming companies lie. There's too much money involved. Lying comes naturally, they don't care.

So the moral is to never to put real money into ANY online gaming site be it poker, bingo, casino slots and so on. On sites where there is no money involved, just treat it as a bit of fun and expect to be leveled when you start winning to often. Simple as that.

There is no fully random online gaming site on the internet. There are sites that use legitimate random RNGs, but it's the actual gaming software that chooses how to use the numbers generated from an RNG. Nuff said.

So, since people lie, we should just accept that all the "dice are rigged" people are probably just lying to save their ego? Probably not a bad policy, they usually are just making stuff up after being salty in a game. Instead of listening to their magic probability where all annoying events somehow have 0% chance, we can just ignore them until they put up some actual evidence.

[Thoth12]

Why do people give up the game when they know they cannot win? To me it seems unpolite and unsportive..

Coming from a chess background to me it is unsportive to not concede a lost game. I will generally concede unless there is just one quick move to go. I also prefer opponents to concede instead of making some meaningless moves that can not alter the otucome.

[frogstar_A]

So really you should only see a Yahtzee about once every other game.

To get 3 Yahtzees in ONE game is clearly HIGHLY unlikely.

Those who run online gaming sites of any nature always use the same excuse which is SAMPLE SIZE. It's a crutch to lean on in order to pacify the many millions of angry users who see stupid dice rolls or card deals on a daily basis. The companies always just say that until you've played 100,000s if not millions of games/hands then you can't make any judgement and they say that because they know that most players won't ever get that far (and if it's a paying site like real online poker they know you'll be bankrupt long before that number of hands).

Everything is random and legit they said. Then the "Absolute Poker" scandal happened and a player called "potripper" was caught cheating via being able to see all the other players cards.

https://upswingpoker.com/ultimate-bet-a ... r-scandal/

Here's the truth. People lie. Online gaming companies lie. There's too much money involved. Lying comes naturally, they don't care.

The sample size argument isn't saying YOU have to play 1 million games, it's saying that if 1 million games are played and NO ONE got 3 yahtzees that would be indicative of manipulation in itself, because unlikely things will still crop up from time to time.

There was no issue with RNG at absolute poker so your comment is deliberately muddling bad RNG and cheating.

There is clearly an incentive for a cheater who can see hole cards to profit from that. Please explain how you think BGA is profiting from the alleged over rolling of yahtzees and backgammon doubles? It would make no business sense.

[Zozoken]

Over 10 MILLION games of yahtzee have been played on BGA so of course there will be many many occurrences of triple yahtzees within that

I've seen perhaps 2 or 3 times in my 1,200 or so games of yahtzee on BGA

But how many real life games of yahtzee have I ever played? Certainly not 1,200. Probably less than 100.

So no wonder I didn't see it as much in real life.

The RNG is fine.

Chances of getting ONE Yahtzee are about 4.7%. You should see one on average every 21 turns.

A game of Yahtzee is just 13 turns in length.

So really you should only see a Yahtzee about once every other game.

To get 3 Yahtzees in ONE game is clearly HIGHLY unlikely.

Those who run online gaming sites of any nature always use the same excuse which is SAMPLE SIZE. It's a crutch to lean on in order to pacify the many millions of angry users who see stupid dice rolls or card deals on a daily basis. The companies always just say that until you've played 100,000s if not millions of games/hands then you can't make any judgement and they say that because they know that most players won't ever get that far (and if it's a paying site like real online poker they know you'll be bankrupt long before that number of hands).

Also, citing that an "RNG is fine" holds absolutely no weight whatsoever. You can rig or tweak the outcome of any online game using a perfectly legit RNG. It comes down to how the actual GAMING SOFTWARE utilises the numbers from the RNG. This has been explained elsewhere such as the backgammon thread where good real life players just know that the dice throws are fixed/rigged. The number of doubles that are "thrown" in the Backgammon here on BGA is patently absurd, but it is what it is.

It's an old circular discussion that will never be resolved until whistleblowers expose gaming sites. That's how things change. For example the online poker industry, which is worth $BILLIONS, claimed endlessly that no-one, not even site administrators could see the cards that are dealt to players.
Everything is random and legit they said. Then the "Absolute Poker" scandal happened and a player called "potripper" was caught cheating via being able to see all the other players cards.

https://upswingpoker.com/ultimate-bet-a ... r-scandal/

Here's the truth. People lie. Online gaming companies lie. There's too much money involved. Lying comes naturally, they don't care.

So the moral is to never to put real money into ANY online gaming site be it poker, bingo, casino slots and so on. On sites where there is no money involved, just treat it as a bit of fun and expect to be leveled when you start winning to often. Simple as that.

There is no fully random online gaming site on the internet. There are sites that use legitimate random RNGs, but it's the actual gaming software that chooses how to use the numbers generated from an RNG. Nuff said.

Probability is one of those things that humans are very bad at intuitively understanding. Honestly, it's what makes statistics such an interesting field of study to begin with.

First of all, outside of gaming, there are a ton of resources available for the study of probability. Many academic papers have been published. There are textbooks solely dedicated to the complicated math behind probability. And even videos on YouTube that dive into the fascinating world of probability and make it accessible. From the real world life-and-death cycles of the rabbit population to the absurdity of getting 3 Yahtzees in a single game, there's a lot of things about probability to surprise and boggle the mind.

That being said, it seems you believe BGA or several other online gaming sites, particularly gambling sites, are not acting in good faith. You cite Yahtzee and Backgammon on BGA as an example. We could go on and on about whether or not triple Yahtzees are "possible" in real life using honest dice (they are)... and on whether the GAMING SOFTWARE is abusing its RNG to give more doubles than usual in Backgammon for the thrill of it... and on whether a SAMPLE SIZE can conclude with certainty on whether someone cheated on Can't Stop because they were able to get all three 6-7-8 columns on the very first turn of the game...

But that conversation doesn't go anywhere. Feelings are not sufficient. Humans are good at pattern recognition. Humans are bad at intuiting probability.

So if you are accusing a site of acting in bad faith, and you say their explanations are not mathematical truths but rather used as a disguise for acting in bad faith... then the burden of proof lies on YOU. It's on you to explain how someone can win a lottery when it's statistically unlikely for one person to win but many people are playing over a period of time until somebody ends up winning. It's on you to back up what you are saying with real data and evidence instead of feeling it's a con. It's on you to showcase, preferably with actual code, how BGA is taking the RNG and using it with the purposeful intent of making a series of dice rolls that would not exist if using physical dice in the real world.

Sorry if this post comes off as harsh, but the forums here are filled with thousands of these kinds of claims. But unlike most of the other posts, you linked a source that showed a gambling site as fraudulent. So it sounds like you might have proof that BGA is doing the same. You do have proof, right?

[ufm]

Honestly, as the current developer, absurd conspiracy theories without any proper evidence feel pretty much insulting, as they mean I somehow conspired against random BGA users for no reason.
I don't even get paid for this, and the game codes are all open.

[gmrsmrt]

My 2 cent

There are people convinced that the earth is flat. The body of counter evidence are irrelevant.
I guess answering this kind of allegations just please their ego. Given the recurrence of such posts I think that
a change in the moderation policy might be useful:
either you come out with solid data and some commonly accepted statistical test which RNG fail to pass (or even worst you
have a PROOF of fraudulent coding) or you get moderated and the topic locked

Some of the alligations here seem to suggest that BGA is purposely lying to its customers... it's pretty serious and if it's claimed without proof it shouldn't go without consequences.

[CaractacusPots]

Honestly, as the current developer, absurd conspiracy theories without any proper evidence feel pretty much insulting, as they mean I somehow conspired against random BGA users for no reason.
I don't even get paid for this, and the game codes are all open.

Hi

1 - Where can someone find the open source code please?

2 - How can anyone know whether it is that specific code that the site is using?

[CaractacusPots]

Please explain how you think BGA is profiting from the alleged over rolling of yahtzees and backgammon doubles? It would make no business sense.

Business sense?

Ok let's start from first principles.

What, in your opinion is the basis for the business of BGA?

What do you think the business model is ?

[Zozoken]

Hi

1 - Where can someone find the open source code please?

2 - How can anyone know whether it is that specific code that the site is using?

In other words, you won't believe it's fair even if you see the source code for yourself?

You know, there's just one thing I can't figure out about players that think dice rolls are cheated on BGA. Why do they insist on playing games that involve dice or other random factors? There are many luckless games on this site. Why do they play games they think are rigged? And why say they are rigged when there's no proof? As CaractacusPots puts it, "How can anyone know whether it is that specific code that the site is using?" How can you know for sure the dice are honest or cheated?

Well, that's not true. Even playing in luckless games, first player is often randomly determined. Though usually this does not have much impact on the game result, I've seen several threads on BGA claiming the site rigs that, too. It seems like a hopeless discussion. It's a shame not even hard data, statistics, and seeing the game code for yourself would change your mind.

Anyway, I hope you find enjoyment playing on BGA or other sites in spite of feeling the system is out to get you or other specific players. Life is short, enjoy the games you play as much as you can!