Interesting article about online Ocean Magic in New Jersey.
https://www.njonlinegambling.com/adv...quhgDYjoMJ2LI4
Printable View
Interesting article about online Ocean Magic in New Jersey.
https://www.njonlinegambling.com/adv...quhgDYjoMJ2LI4
Great story and no way they should get away with screwing them out of their legal winnings.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
And of course the CoD on here as Mick loves to call them will deny this was possible.
I trade tweets with playwithanedge on twitter. It would have been nice to have gotten in on it. 4 spins on the 3rd column bubble is super strong. Highest bet level I've played is $100.Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozGreat story and no way they should get away with screwing them out of their legal winnings.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
And of course the CoD on here as Mick loves to call them will deny this was possible.
Impressive article.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Someone who can actually write and has a grasp of advantage/scavenger play.
I noticed the article did not mention to bet more when you are losing a certain amount.
Post of the Day, lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by monetImpressive article.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Someone who can actually write and has a grasp of advantage/scavenger play.
I noticed the article did not mention to bet more when you are losing a certain amount.
You have to be physically in NJ to play on these sites but can live anywhere. Philly TV stations are full of ads for these online casinos. Many PA residents signing up for the bonuses and driving over the bridge and sitting in mall parking lots to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI trade tweets with playwithanedge on twitter. It would have been nice to have gotten in on it. 4 spins on the 3rd column bubble is super strong. Highest bet level I've played is $100.Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozGreat story and no way they should get away with screwing them out of their legal winnings.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
And of course the CoD on here as Mick loves to call them will deny this was possible.
Far better than taking your chances with the offshore sites.Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozYou have to be physically in NJ to play on these sites but can live anywhere. Philly TV stations are full of ads for these online casinos. Many PA residents signing up for the bonuses and driving over the bridge and sitting in mall parking lots to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmI trade tweets with playwithanedge on twitter. It would have been nice to have gotten in on it. 4 spins on the 3rd column bubble is super strong. Highest bet level I've played is $100.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Boz
I second Boz.Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozPost of the Day, lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by monetImpressive article.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
Someone who can actually write and has a grasp of advantage/scavenger play.
I noticed the article did not mention to bet more when you are losing a certain amount.
Another part of it the CoD won't like is you had to have the capital to exploit it. Max bet was 3K a spin. Even with a 26% edge the number of spins you could make on each site was limited to like 80 I think (I'll have to reread the article). So the risk of losing on an individual site was significant.Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozGreat story and no way they should get away with screwing them out of their legal winnings.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
And of course the CoD on here as Mick loves to call them will deny this was possible.
Since the variance on Ocean Magic is unknown (without the par sheet) the Risk of Ruin calculation would have to be estimated I would guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmAnother part of it the CoD won't like is you had to have the capital to exploit it. Max bet was 3K a spin. Even with a 26% edge the number of spins you could make on each site was limited to like 80 I think (I'll have to reread the article). So the risk of losing on an individual site was significant.Quote:
Originally Posted by The BozGreat story and no way they should get away with screwing them out of their legal winnings.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbjb
And of course the CoD on here as Mick loves to call them will deny this was possible.
I'm surprised that the "extra value" showed up online and was available to every player. Last year I was at Royal River Casino in Flandreau, South Dakota when they installed 4 Golden Egypt's. There were 25 bet levels and they all had "extra value" upfront. The 1st, 3rd and 5th columns all had gold coins banked. So I got 25 plays off each machine and made about $700.
I've been told that when the game first came out the new installs had gold coins banked in all 5 columns.
Confirmed. On the inaugural day of a non-smoking room addition to a casino, my friend was there right when they opened - the GEs had 5 coins across he told me.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
It looks like a couple AP’s might have made some serious cash on this play. Apparently, 900K total was withdrawn from all 13 casinos from all the AP’s involved.
Yet, how much of that 900K total withdrawal (of which only 400K has been paid so far) is actual profit?
Max says across all casinos and mathematically speaking the play could be worth 80K to 100K after playing all the denominations That’s 80 spins per site. If their playing max spins at 3K per spin, that’s risking $240,000.00 thousand dollars per site. That’s a quarter of a million dollars per site. If the AP bricks out like he admits many did on his first attempt he moves on to the next site. If he bricks out 3 more times, he’s down a million. If he bricks out on all 13 sites, he’s down 3.2 million dollars. LOL
Max admitted he got lucky on the first site and withdrew 220K. But he never spoke about what happened over the remaining 12 sites. He posts only 2 pictures in the article. One of the starting state and one when he’s up over 200K.
So, all the alleged forum AP’s want to say “see, we told you so” but all the facts are not available. Max said all his friends flew in to play the different sites. So, give me the total of bet in before you declare that 900K withdrawal was all profit. Like Max, were 3 or 4 AP’s the total of winners who withdrew? Were there like 15/20/30 big time AP losers? You’re talking huge risks. Even though the math says it’s good, there’s still one factor: you still have to win. This isn’t about results over 15 years or long term. You need instant results over 80 spins and then it’s over. Unless of course you have a couple more million you want to risk, you could take another 12 shots at it.
Let’s also remember that the site reporting this is named “New Jersey Online Gambling” a site that promotes gambling at New Jersey online casinos. I’m sure there is a reason the article only gives half the actual facts. They certainly wouldn’t want to brag how the casino was the big winner here and how only a couple of people got lucky like Max said. They want to convince everyone how easy it is to beat the casinos. LOL
Post how many AP’s actually played and amount they risked. Then post how many actually won. My guess at these huge numbers much more was lost than won. The only reason the casinos are holding back the rest is maybe they could get away with keeping it and add even more to their coffers.
You would think with all the experts here they would ask about the unknown facts before jumping on the stick it in your face wagon. Just more proof that alleged self-proclaimed forum AP's are just that.
The fact the casinos pulled the games is more likely because if Max for example could get lucky on his first attempt so could anyone else. Maybe Max gave it all back at other casinos but that doesn’t help the first one that took the loss. More than likely the amount of AP’s involved in this play made it profitable for the casinos. Yet, they certainly wouldn’t want someone like Max getting lucky on their first attempt and running with their money in the future.
Max never mentioned any friends getting lucky on the first attempt. Also, the casinos refuse to respond. Maybe it's better for them to keep quite about what they won, and just don't want anyone getting lucky on first shot in the future.
Sounds like there was about 20 different denominations for the game ranging from $1-$3000. If the Ocean bubble was located in the 3rd line at the very bottom of the screen you would get 4 shots per denomination of that bubble contacting an Ocean Magic bubble making every spot surrounding it wild.
That kind of start makes the game begin in one of the most advantageous states possible. Without knowing the payback settings and seeing the par sheets for the reel strip info you can only take an educated guess at the value. I would definitely say a 25% edge is safe to assume.
Apparently this glitch was spread across multiple sites. So each person's action they could get down very well could have been 80k with an expected value of 20k per person. If they got 40-50 people thru before the shutdown occurred then a million total profit sounds about right.
Apparently all casinos excluding Borgata paid so far.
That wasn’t the state of the game. The state of the game was one in row 1 and one in row 4Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Borgata is still not paying
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
“I took a look at it,” Jay says, “and realized that it started, on the first spin, in an advantageous position.”Quote:
Originally Posted by Robsingerwho
(Specifically, he saw that a “Wild” bubble appeared in the first column, second row)
There's a picture of this state in that article.
Row or column? I quit playing the lone bubble in column 1 and the lone bubble in column 2 because I failed to show a profit with them. But I did play 1 and 4 coordinated. The value of the lone bubble in column 3 is probably in the hundreds of percent.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobsingerwhoThat wasn’t the state of the game. The state of the game was one in row 1 and one in row 4Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Borgata is still not paying
Sir, do you happen to know what columns these wilds were in ? If so, I was wondering if you would disclose this information.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobsingerwhoThat wasn’t the state of the game. The state of the game was one in row 1 and one in row 4Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Borgata is still not paying
Thanks.
I don't think it had to be reels 1 and 4. I'm assuming it started in the same state the bonus feature starts which is 1 random bubble on any of 2 of the 5 reels.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobsingerwhoThat wasn’t the state of the game. The state of the game was one in row 1 and one in row 4Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
Borgata is still not paying
This is exactly what he said the state was along with a picture of this state in the article.
"Specifically, he saw that a “Wild” bubble appeared in the first column, second row"
Having been in well over 100 casinos in about 20 states in the last couple of years I would say Ocean Magic is in about 80% of them. It's one of the games I expoit. The first thing we need to do is give the confederates a clinic in the game. Here's the slotlady playing the game. Yeah, I know. She's boring. But boring is good. You get to see the spins made, not just shots of big wins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBqdfqgd1fY
First, take note of the yellow Ocean Magic symbols landing in the screen. Then, bubbles can come flying out and land somwhere or....Stop the video at 0:51. At the bottom of the 3rd column you will see the top of a yellow bubble. That means on the next spin it will rotate up to the 4th row and turn wild. Make another spin it will rotate up to the 3rd row and turn wild. Make another spin it will rotate up to the 2nd row and turn wild. Make another spin it will rotate up to the 1st row and turn wild. Make another spin it will rotate off the screen.
So she makes the spin and the bubble rotates up to the 4th row. She makes another spin and it rotates up to the 3rd row. Stop the video at 1:01. Then you'll see the Ocean Magic symbol has landed on the bubble. Restart then stop the video at 1:04. When the Ocean Magic symbol lands on the bubble it turns all the symbols around it wild. So in this case you have 9 wilds. When that happens you get payed for a bunch of 4 in a rows plus you may connect for 5 in a rows.
As you watch the video take note that the Ocean Magic symbols can appear in a column either one at a time, two at a time, three at a time or four at a time. The OM symbols appear in the 3rd column more than any other column. The 1st column is next for most OM symbols. Then the 4th and 5th columns. The OM symbols appear the least in the 2nd column. And you will never see more than one at a time in that column. They won't land two or more at a time in that column.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...4nHOATw3wuvm9e
When the OM lands on a bubble/wild it turns all the symbols around it wild. Next, stop the video at 2:53. You'll see that a bubble/wild has landed in the 4th row of the 1st column. What if an OM had landed on it. All it can do is turn the 3 symbols around it wild. That's not that strong. Stop the video at 3:00. The OM lands on the bubble but it's not much of a pay because all it can do is turn two bubbles in the 1st column wild and 3 in the 2nd column.
If you connect in the 2nd column you get more wilds but it's hard to connect in that column because the OM symbols are rare on that reel and land only one at a time. Forget the 4th and 5th columns. They are so low payback they are not even worth discussing.
What I'm pointing out is the wild/bubbles have huge value in the 3rd column as opposed to the others. There are many more OM symbols on that reel than the other reels and when you connect you make a lot of 4 in a rows and 5 in a rows.
Finding the bubbles/wilds in the 3rd column is the main play in this game. Finding it in the 1st row has no value because it will rotate off the screen on the next spin. Finding it in the 2nd row has value for just one spin. Finding it in the 3rd row has value for two spins. Finding it in the 4th row has value for three spins. And finding the bubble at the bottom before it rotates up to the 4th column has the most value of all because you get four spins at connecting with the OM symbols.
The 3rd column is the powerhouse on this play.
More tonight. I've got things to do today.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
Can you clarify the starting positions of the bubbles? How many denominations were available? What do you think the value per player was? Why did you feel the need to make your play public? Could you not have gone to gaming and got paid without press attention?
I have played the game online at lower limits when it was there. Without the bubble boost the starting positions were reel 1 position 2 and reel 5 bubble below line.. With the bubble boost activated reel 1 was the same but the other bubble now started below reel 4. You got the one shot at each denomination which equated to 4 spins. Did the online game have a higher return. If you look at that photo with the bubble on reel three that is not a starting position. It shows a pay in reel one position 2. That not possible in the starting position. As soon as you spin the wild is on the way up.
Did more bubbles appear in your four spins?Quote:
Originally Posted by News777
Advantageplay, we have a confederacy of dunces on this site, Singer, Belly, Blackhole, Mendelson, that are to stupid to learn advantage play. They brag about beating negative expectation games and call us AP's dumb. That's how stupid they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
But the rest of us have been curious. If the starting positions for the bubbles are Reel 1 Row 2, and Reel 4 Below the 4th Row, then I would guess that not to be a strong play unless you knew that more bubbles were going to come out....and they were going to land in the same positions every time. Is that what was going on?
Yes, more bubbles can appear but that's normal on Ocean Magic. That's why the game is risky at high denominations. You have to keep playing until the wild bubbles are gone. When bubble boost is activated other wilds are spit out by the shell. It's not free. Your paying for those bubbles with each spin. Those wilds better hook up to create some wins or your stuck a bunch of money. You can find wilds all day long on the 4th&5th line in brick and mortar casinos and vultures won't touch them.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmDid more bubbles appear in your four spins?Quote:
Originally Posted by News777
Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimmSlobbie, you just step right in the shit every time you post. You can never produce a quote where I said I'm a dollar or under player. I've played for as high as $100 a spin. And here is the correspondence. Do you ever get tired of lying about other people?Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob.SingerSure you have mickey....probably in-between all your "correspondence" with these new bazookas who just joined in. And have you noticed how you claimed to be a dollar-and-under player, until this thread? Seems the bs stories all change with the wind. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Get your stories straight. You're seeming more and more like that solicitation clown redietz, who's certainly not right in the head.
I was advised by multiple different attorneys to speak to the press. We had already gone to gaming. I’ve been an ap quite a while. Fact is with this play it was on the sites since 2017 no one played it. After we hit it they removed the game off of every single platform in existence.
I do not do forum much. Much easier to send me a message on twitter My handle is in the article. Not sure if I am allowedd to say it on here
Yes, you can post it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
This week's Gambling With An Edge has some coverage of this situation with Borgata.
I heard, I may be doing the show in a couple of weeks, I have no decided yet as I am friendly with Richard The other host I am not all the fond ofQuote:
Originally Posted by tableplay
In answer to max pen question the value per person was 90-110k and we were right in line with that. The totals were probably slightly higher then what the article mention but I had misplaced some notes at the time
As a Pennsylvania native, I think I know Gettysburg when I've seen it, if you get my drift.
All that's left is Pickett's Charge. I don't expect Appomattox -- that would require perspective and a lack of narcissism.
Well done, mickeycrimm. Thanks, AdvantagePlay, for the reality verification.
P.S. Anyone interested in the science of disconfirmed expectations should read the classic on cognitive dissonance, "When Prophecy Fails." Leon Festinger is the primary author.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if you are not alone in this being a significant factor for deciding whether to appear on the podcast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
Just going with some stats in the article.
These are just ballpark stats:
First spin worth 126%,
3 subsequent spins worth 140%.
10 players
13 gambling sites
Results fell in line with expectation
Total win was 900K.
Average edge was 36.5%
900K is 36.5% of a total wager of about 2.5 million
Each player ran about a 250K total wager
That would be 25K per site
Each site lost an average of 70K
Each player won an average of 7K per site.
I'm sure that players lost on certain sites. But with such a strong edge I'm also sure they made up for it in their winning sessions on other sites. It was probably something like booked a win on 10 or 11 sites and lost a little money on 2 or 3 sites.
My guess is the Revel promotion in 2013 has something to do with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by tableplayIt wouldn't surprise me at all if you are not alone in this being a significant factor for deciding whether to appear on the podcast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
Quote:
Originally Posted by coach belly
I'm wondering why the wormm didn't report on this play, and the issue surrounding the players' winnings (and deposits!) being withheld, until after the article was published.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Why he didn't comment on the situation until after jb posted the link to the article?
After all, he's been a clitter-buddy with the "star of the article" for over a year, and was in line for a call on the play (how does he know that?).
This sounds like pretty big news in the AP community. If wormm had reported the news before the article came out, then wow that scoop would have been real validation for his AP insider reputation.
It's like he didn't know about the play, or the article, until the link was posted here...maybe I missed his post? He can always concoct a phony quote like the APs are known to do.
Looks like the ditz may have competition for past-posting supremacy on VCT.
The only people that knew about the play prior were the few I invited and one person who did the math for me. Some knew as it was going on but when it was on its last leg. Mr dancer would not have been on any call list
Why didn't you invite mickeycrimm, or tell him about the play after it was over and before the article was written?Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
How did Eric Raskin know about it?
Especially new or obscure games. We have a table game that's very rare we hit every so often that Jacobson doesn't even know about. Great game with a nice edge and very low variance too.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I was going to reach out to micky but I need people that were very close. This all happened very quickly . In fact the game was pulled down for a few hours and I thought the play was over. Somehow they put it back up with no changes. It was at that point we went even further full steam ahead.
Eric knew about the play through his boss who I was in contact with during the play as he is somewhat of a friend of mine.
Advantage play, of the ten people that worked the play how many were net winners and how many were net losers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
When I have the article interview I didn’t have final tally so not all of the numbers or amount of people were accounted for. Of all the people we had, did not have a single net negative person. Some accounts lost at some casinos but each individual as a whole. did not have a negative result.
Thanks for the reply, Advantageplay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
Congratulations. Now you certainly can't blame the casino companies for removing the games and for investigating and delaying the payments. If any of us ran a casino we'd do the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
There was a flaw, it was exploited, and the casinos were hammered.
I guess a litigious casino could start all sorts of actions in an attempt to cancel or delay payments. That wouldn't surprise me either.
Hold up payment.... sure. It’s been three week. It wasn’t a glitch by any means
I agree that three weeks is too long. But it wouldn't surprise me that all of the casinos were talking to the game maker and trying to discover what happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
I called it a glitch because it was like being dealt three to the royal on every hand -- that's not supposed to happen.
You found a game with a reset pattern, and it wasn't completely random.
I wonder if the reset pattern gives the casinos a basis for litigation? I hope not but it doesn't surprise me.
The reset pattern was there since install in 2017. It was hard to know the true edge u til I had the math done. I just kind of sat on the play until I could get everything lined up. Igt is a large company. I offered to speak to them about it in efforts to speed up the payment process but they had no interest.
IGT is not going to talk to you. It wouldn't surprise me if IGT is also worried about litigation from the casinos. To be sure their reputation was damaged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
IGT might be the giant but there are other companies competing for floor space. This will hurt IGT for a long time.
Alan, not looking to argue, but I have numerous contacts at igt and have been in contact to consult for both a table games company, 2 slot manufacturers and a few cash is previously.
I wonder if this situation could be the same as Ron Harris and the keno play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonI agree that three weeks is too long. But it wouldn't surprise me that all of the casinos were talking to the game maker and trying to discover what happened.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
I called it a glitch because it was like being dealt three to the royal on every hand -- that's not supposed to happen.
You found a game with a reset pattern, and it wasn't completely random.
I wonder if the reset pattern gives the casinos a basis for litigation? I hope not but it doesn't surprise me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan MendelsonIGT is not going to talk to you. It wouldn't surprise me if IGT is also worried about litigation from the casinos. To be sure their reputation was damaged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Advantageplay
IGT might be the giant but there are other companies competing for floor space. This will hurt IGT for a long time.
I actually agree with Mr. Mendelson on this. I think the casinos will attempt to hold IGT liable.
There's probably some backdoor investigations being done of everyone who is owed money to ascertain whether they have any relationships with IGT employees. They'll work on the premise that there may have been a sleeper set-up. It's not unprecedented. So the casinos will likely try to pin this on IGT one way or another, and if they find nothing substantive, they may still hold onto that as their arguing point. If they find nothing, that doesn't necessarily mean that there was nothing to find.
I wonder if the hard reset on the Ocean Magic's on the websites were the same as the new installs in the casinos. The great bulk of those in the casinos have these bet levels:
non-bubble boost.....50/1/1.50/2/2.50
bubble boost.....1/2/3/4/5
If you play in bubble boost mode you get a lot more bubbles/wilds but the payscale is only about a third of non-bubble boost.
Anyways, if the hard reset is the same the casino can't get beat up that bad because of the low bet levels. IGT may have installed the game online with the same hard reset as what they put in casinos....without giving it any thought. And because of the much higher bet levels someone exploited it.
I deleted a bunch of troll posts and kicked coach, Rob, and blackhole from the thread.
This is a good thread, don’t ruin it.
Thanks Dan. Makes things much easier to reply to
Advantageplay, I would think that for the play to be profitable there must be a pretty good chance of more bubbles coming out in the four spins? Is that accurate?
I believe it was profitable either way . However you are paying basically double the bet for the chance of bubbles coming out - vs the non bubble burstQuote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Advantageplay, In the casinos I quit playing lone 4th column bubbles because I wasn't showing a profit. Why were they profitable on this online play?
Alan Never you mind, as you said before...there is no such thing as $500 or $1000 an hour plays .
I believe that some of the line pays relative to the bet amount are better without the Boost than with it 4OaK and 5OaK, but I'll check tomorrow. I know there are some three-of-a-kinds that pay with the Boost off that do not pay if the Boost is on, at least, on the physical machine game.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Also, extra bubbles can still come up from the bottom whether or not the Boost is on. Overall, Boost probably has a better return percentage, but not by all that much. I would certainly take a Bubble in the center reel with or without Boost, there is no question the advantage is substantial either way.
The point is, the article is stating column 1 row 2 and 1 bubble somewhere in column 4. Mickey is stating that is not playable based on his experience. I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mission146I believe that some of the line pays relative to the bet amount are better without the Boost than with it 4OaK and 5OaK, but I'll check tomorrow. I know there are some three-of-a-kinds that pay with the Boost off that do not pay if the Boost is on, at least, on the physical machine game.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Also, extra bubbles can still come up from the bottom whether or not the Boost is on. Overall, Boost probably has a better return percentage, but not by all that much. I would certainly take a Bubble in the center reel with or without Boost, there is no question the advantage is substantial either way.
I wrongly assumed a starting bubble in Column 3 as well. There is something being left out of the story, which is fine. I'm pretty sure that I know what it is.
That was the starting state. Nothing from that part is being left out. We ran in line with the math . We had over 100 total accounts. If you are counting 1 per 1 casino as an account. I’m sure we didn’t run 10x expecatation
With all due respect, this is almost definitely an advantage on the initial spin, in my opinion, even on the physical machines. I can't speak for the following spins that may or may not involve Reel 4 by itself, and again this is just speaking to physical machines; (never played the online game) I wouldn't personally play Reel 4 by itself...but I can't say with 100% certainty that it is not advantageous.Quote:
Originally Posted by MaxPen
I think the only thing to do is the next time I'm around the OM's I'm gonna play the lone 4th column bubble for a hundred spins or so to see if I missed something. Also differentiating between boost and non-boost.
I've taken several hundred 4th reel wild spins and do not think they are +ev by themselves and no longer play them. However, I wouldn't be surprised if I was wrong and it's just a long term +ev play when you combine your immediate equity with the equity of getting more bubbles and/or hitting the bonus. The one exception I make is if there is a hidden 4th reel bubble below the payline, I'll take 1 spin and continue if another bubble pops up in the 1st-3rd reels. I'm def convinced 4th reel wilds by themselves are not profitable on OMG.
There's a thread started today by the Wiz on the math of the game over at WoV.
http://tinyurl.com/y28vpmn2Quote:
Originally Posted by LeonardShelby
The Wizard currently has bubbles in the first column valued higher than bubbles in the 3rd column. This is just not correct. The 3rd column is the powerhouse on the play. The 3rd column has by far more OM symbols than any other reel. And you make 4 in a rows and 5 in a rows when you connect.
Agreed.
I agree 100%. There are many more OM symbols on the third reel, OM symbols are conspicuously absent on the second and almost never stack, Reels 1, 4 and 5 are relatively equal on frequency.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
More than that, there are fewer higher paying regular symbols (with exception to OM) on Reel 3.
I think he will eventually come to that same conclusion once he looks into it a little deeper.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
Something a little confusing to me is that the article states the math had been confirmed before play commenced. I think somewhere Advantageplay had said (maybe on his Twitter account — can’t remember for sure) it was Wizard who did the math. But it appears Wizard is just now digging into the details of the game. Maybe the initial analysis was just an estimate that looked good enough to move forward with higher denomination play.
As far as the math goes, the Wizard's involvement is like swatting a fly with a sledgehammer IMHO. You need two contingency tables as depicted in the screenshot below. One to collect the frequency of occurrence of Ocean Magic symbols and one to collect the occurrence of Wilds. From these two contingency tables you can estimate the marginal probability of occurrence of each symbol (wild or ocean magic) and their joint probability of occurrence (frequency of a Ocean Magic bubble landing on a Wild bubble obtained by multiplying the marginal probabilities together for that cell). These, when multiplied by the payout against the various other symbols can give the player an idea of their edge. So the hard part isn't the math, but the tediousness of collecting the data (youtube,observing other players,playing it yourself,being part of an AP crew and getting a hold of a par sheet, etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by kuma
The problem with the lone 4th column bubble is even if you connect with an OM symbol is doesn't mean the spin will pay anything. The first two columns won't line up for anything quite a lot. That's always been my problem with the 4th column bubble. I just don't see it as a positive play.
The more I think about this story the more it just doesn't add up to me. My current opinion is that if the play had been offered to me as it has been presented I would have turned it down. My experience with lone 4th column bubbles would not allow me to risk that kind of money on such a play. Remember, this is a very short term play. The edge has to manifest itself quickly. I don't see that happening with a lone 4th column bubble.
Another question. Who were they other AP's on the play? No one has come forward.
The problem with the lone 4th column bubble is even if you connect with an OM symbol is doesn't mean the spin will pay anything. The first two columns won't line up for anything quite a lot. That's always been my problem with the 4th column bubble. I just don't see it as a positive play.
The more I think about this story the more it just doesn't add up to me. My current opinion is that if the play had been offered to me as it has been presented I would have turned it down. My experience with lone 4th column bubbles would not allow me to risk that kind of money on such a play. Remember, this is a very short term play. The edge has to manifest itself quickly. I don't see that happening with a lone 4th column bubble.
Another question. Who were they other AP's on the play? No one has come forward.
There are other details that I cannot discuss at the moment. Probably in about two weeks I’d be willing to discuss more.
On a side note borgata did release the holds on all of the accounts.
There won’t be anyone else coming forward since most were not full time APs. Just people that the play was shared with .
Mickey -- do you think it could possibly be positive in Bubble Boost mode where you have that Reel 4 wild, and are also paying for the possibility of a barrage of bubbles hitting Reels 1-3? I agree the majority of time hitting an OM symbol on a lone Reel 4 wild yields nothing, and not worth playing in non-Bubble Boost.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
This was a really interesting thread. At one point though there were too many columns, rows, reels and bubbles. I couldn't keep up, too confusing for me. I think mickeycrimm is a big man to express some doubts. To say lets slow it down and think about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I give credit to redietz also for showing a good amount of integrity earlier in a post now gone. He'll know what I am talking about.
Thanks for the compliment Pete. But now I'm going back the other way. There is something that hasnt been discussed about the play. And that is overall payback percentage. In the casinos Ocean Magic is in the mid to upper 80's percentagewise. What if the online game is say mid 90's. Would a lone bubble in the 4th column be playable then. I think so. I'm now thinking that is the missing piece to the puzzle.Quote:
Originally Posted by pahrump peteThis was a really interesting thread. At one point though there were too many columns, rows, reels and bubbles. I couldn't keep up, too confusing for me. I think mickeycrimm is a big man to express some doubts. To say lets slow it down and think about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
I give credit to redietz also for showing a good amount of integrity earlier in a post now gone. He'll know what I am talking about.
I think we have been comparing apples to oranges. If the game has a high enough payback percentage then a lone bubble in the 4th column becomes playable. The cost to operate an online casino has to be much lower than operating a brick & mortar casino. The B & M's have a lot of overhead including RFB. The online casinos can probably afford to offer higher payback video line games. I now think that is what is going on with this play.Quote:
Originally Posted by kumaMickey -- do you think it could possibly be positive in Bubble Boost mode where you have that Reel 4 wild, and are also paying for the possibility of a barrage of bubbles hitting Reels 1-3? I agree the majority of time hitting an OM symbol on a lone Reel 4 wild yields nothing, and not worth playing in non-Bubble Boost.Quote:
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm
They beat the NJ online casinos again:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...TU3EOJvnKwhgTx