What Would It Take???

"Fair" in this context means that each card has an equal chance of occurrence. Modern slot machines use a random process for determining what symbols appear on the pay lines, but they do not do so in an equi-probable fashion, some occur more frequently. So here "fair" means "equi-probable" and random as well.

"Normal" means your results fall within what is predicted by math with only moderate deviation. "Abnormal" would mean your results are significantly outside of what math predicts should be the standard deviation for the sample size. Obviously, in enough trials even abnormal results would be normal and predicted, so it gets confusing.

Just thought I'd chime in and ask what the board thought of slot machines that are made to look random but clearly are not.

On the Wheel of Fortune slot machines, you get a bonus spin on a wheel with 22 stops with various prizes. I don't have any evidence to support my next statement, but I am certain the chances of you landing on the 1000 (top amount) coin payoff are a lot less than the 20 or 25 coin payoff. The bonus wheel is made to look completely random like a roulette wheel, but is probably anything but.

Could anything like this apply to video poker? Maybe once you are dealt 4 to a royal, the CPU assigns the needed 5th card a probability of less than 0.021276595744.

What criteria does Nevada Gaming Control use for proof of "randomness" or "fairness"? How many millions or billions or trillions of hands do the machine manufacturers have to provide statistics on before the game is approved?

The bonus wheel is not random. The bonus wheel is just a graphical representation of the RNG's output.

The RNG is VP is supposed to be random. I don't believe the manufacturers provide billions of hands to prove randomness but rather provide their source code to prove no monkey business.

As I posited previously, if the RNG assigns the needed 5th card for a RF 1/70 instead of 1/40 it would be very difficult to prove or even notice.

That said, if you don't trust the game, there is no reason to play.

"Math class is tough!" __Barbie, 1992

The law is quite clear (as mud). If a simulated gaming device is a representation of a physical device it must have the same probabilities as the physical device. It's the law. Example: If you include video dice, they must roll 1-6 with equal probability. If you simulate a roulette wheel then each of the 38 numbers must have a 1 in 38 rate of occurrence. Since the WOF wheel is not to be found elsewhere in the casino, it can have any probabilities they want, legally. Because VP uses a deck of cards (something physical found in a casino) they are supposed to occur with a 1 in 52 frequency and be effectually the same as using a real deck.

This was discussed at the G2 conference I went to in a lecture.

Or at least that's the theory and what the law says. Hot news flash, some people break the law. The cases where people did bend/break the law and were caught are well documented. It's not out of the question that there have been other cases where they law breakers weren't caught. I have no direct evidence of this nor have I heard of anything specific...and when I've done tests myself, I've found nothing hinky. But that means nothing.

If you have doubts checking yourself certainly won't hurt anything. I hope my utility will help with this.

~FK

Progress is being made on what I have now entitled, "The Confidence Quantifier" utility. It's obvious at this point that it will take at least a month or more to complete, but when I have it done I be sure and let everyone know.