An FOBT has just bought the dust

Noels Beard · Post by **Noels Beard** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 12:14 am

There is no decision as to whether it can afford it. Just a hand goes into the bag of possible outcomes and chooses one. Obviously there are more losing outcomes than winning ones.

feeder22 · Post by **feeder22** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 12:40 am

So why are they set to a percentage then?

I get all the concept of random (as random as a machine can be)

But even roulette and its 97.2% payout could in theory every bet placed result in a win. I could in theory go into a casino and place a million bets one after another and every one of those would win.

Why do I get the feeling that fobts and b3's decide when they have taken enough or paid out enough.

Cf · Post by Cf » Wed Aug 01, 2012 11:22 am

feeder22 wrote:So why are they set to a percentage then?

I get all the concept of random (as random as a machine can be)

But even roulette and its 97.2% payout could in theory every bet placed result in a win. I could in theory go into a casino and place a million bets one after another and every one of those would win.

Why do I get the feeling that fobts and b3's decide when they have taken enough or paid out enough.

They're not "set to a %" in the way you're thinking. Let's take an even simpler example along the line Noel's Beard was saying. £1 a go. In a bag are 100 balls. 92 of them say WIN which gets you your quid back. 8 say LOSE. The ball is replaced each time. There is a random game that over time will pay out 92%. Utterly pointless to play of course. We could alter it so only one ball says WIN but the prize is £92. You're now going to lose a lot more but when you win you'll win big. But it's also a 92% game.

But your second point about in theory being able to place 1,000,000 winning bets in a casino... no, you can't. In the same way you can't place 1,000,000 losing bets. I don't really know how best to explain this... But essentially random numbers over a large sample size are predictable. So when they say the house always wins they mean it. And they're correct. There is no beating randomness. The whole world is built on it.

And your last point.. people think that because generally they don't understand how it works and it's easier to blame the machine/buy into conspiracy theories/etc.

trayhop123 · Post by **trayhop123** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:28 pm

ive always thought fobt roulette was fixed ,,,,,,,,,, but im not gonna be a closed book ,,,,,, i'll keep an open mind

even if fobt roulette is 100 % not tampered with in anyway , and the win/loss graphics are meerly a representation of said outcome

why does it continue to show these representations in an odd and totally unrealistic manner ? ,,,,,,,,, is it just to wind up the punter ?

im talking of course ,,,,,, the all toooooooo common sequences of say ,,,,,, 21,17,4,17,17,5,11,17,12,35

whenever you watch anyone for an hour or so involvement etc ,,,,,,,,,,,, a 4 in 10 representation like this always always always occur's

just looking at histories when checking lucky 8's etc ,,,,,,,,,,,, i see this all the time

now like i said , im willing to accept that they may not be riping you off in the erm ,,,,,, riping you off sense

but graphic representations or not ,,,,,,,,,,,, this is an extreme rarity on a real wheel ,,,,,,,,, and at the very least points to shoddy programming , if not a scam .

Oscar · Post by **Oscar** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 1:51 pm

I just don't know where to start with that post.....

So I won't.

Dunhamzzz · Post by **Dunhamzzz** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 3:04 pm

feeder22 wrote:The features appear to be set to certain pay structure. i.e. Three leps average amount won £30 with the odd big win chucked in, but if they were truly random wouldn't we know of more people hitting the big wins not just once in a while?

What you see on a screen is just a representation of a pre-defined win. As soon as you press start the machine knows if you've won, so for example it may be like ,"hey this guy has just won £30, lets give him a fruit amount/feature that's worth £30" obviously there are various further odds involved to make features rarer

trayhop123 · Post by **trayhop123** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 3:26 pm

Oscar wrote:I just don't know where to start with that post.....

So I won't.

what are you saying you dont see bizarre sequences and repeats ????

you play em more than most

so instead of just being your sarcastic self ,,,,,,, give us your thoughts properly

gambogaz1 · Post by **gambogaz1** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 3:50 pm

I fully understand that the human mind looks for patterns in things but even though I know there's no need for roulette to be cheated I'm always going to be in the camp that sometimes it just doesn't sit right.

Now I've rarely played Roulette other than in a casino, and only last week I gave that Gamestec digi Chip stack roulette a couple of quid out of boredom. I play the same way, bet £1 on red or black, then bet 10p chips splitting all the red or black numbers dependant on what colour I think is due so to speak. Always manage to land on a number thats got 2 or 3 splits giving £1.80 or £2.70 or if I'm lucky £3.60, but both times I've reached £3.60 I've covered almost all the table, Looked at the grid and said anything bar black 4, what hits ? yup black 4, next time I'd got £3.60 I looked, anything bar red 36, what hits ? yup red 36.

Total coincidence ? Yup most probably but for someone that hardly plays the wheel, for that to happen twice just screams fixed at you.

It's a good thing really, that's why I refuse to entertain them outside of a casino, I just don't trust them.

qwerty · Post by **qwerty** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 3:50 pm

definately spotted some number patterns e.g 4 0s in a row, i know this happens in casinos but just seems more than often on the fobts.

maverick69 · Post by **maverick69** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 7:16 pm

when i used to play them alot. 0-36.36-0.....1-33 and 1-16.....all the 0's after 0 .10.20.30.....reverse numbers alot 31-13.21-12........

feeder22 · Post by **feeder22** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 7:59 pm

I do understand most of it but there's certain elements that i struggle to understand the logic of the explanation.
When an answer to a question I've asked leaves me with more questions I guess the only thing to do is stop being lazy and research the questions myself.

mr lugsy · Post by **mr lugsy** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 8:15 pm

it's been said on here umpteen times before.

if there were never any dodgy sequences appearing there would be more chance of it being rigged

feeder22 · Post by **feeder22** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 8:30 pm

I never claimed they are rigged just struggled to understand how something random can be set to a %.

GaryChandler · Post by **GaryChandler** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 8:52 pm

It's an average percentage, completely different to a compensated percentage...

mr lugsy · Post by **mr lugsy** » Wed Aug 01, 2012 9:08 pm

feeder22 wrote:I never claimed they are rigged just struggled to understand how something random can be set to a %.

sorry, should have quoted to avoid confusion my reply was to lee's post further up the page