This is correct and it's what the IGT memo I saw at the Silverton at the time said. It explained that all worldwide customers were to shut down the double up option on generation XX to XXXX machines, and that they would be shipping out eproms with the correct programming to all customers which they would have to replace & install on their own.
This tells me that since the bill validator on non-infected machines goes dark as soon as DEAL is pushed and does not light up again until the hand is over, it only makes sense that the fix would include that exact same procedure.
I do not know if pre double up bug machines or post bug machines include something different.
In other words, even though the memo doesn't state that the bill acceptor (which also validates the bills) goes dark as a result of the fix, you have no problem concluding that this is included in the fix. It could have been a rush job, where they just wanted to get a fix out there quick that won't accept bills until after the conclusion of the hand and could care less about the cosmetic fix of the acceptor/validator being lit. It may or may not have been included in the fix, but you drawing a conclusion when it wasn't stated explicitly is speculation that was portrayed as fact.
Remember they were under tremendous pressure and scrutiny (this is a publicly traded company) to get this thing fixed ASAP. So basically, sure it could have been included in the eprom patch, and we can state that it probably was, but please don't state this as if it is known for certain, because it isn't, unless you have further information than just the memo.
You need to better understand how the business world responds to major problems they are responsible for.
When IGT put out the worldwide memo, their announcing the manner in which they would correct the flaw (new eprom to be sent to all customers for self-replace & install) would have NEVER been a temporary fix, patch job, or bandaid get-by. It only makes sense that they correct the very embarrassing mistake (and by "mistake" I mean mistake by a programmer or a mistake/lapse in not having adequate quality control to spot the flaw--whether programmed in by error or not) by returning each machine to its originally intended spec.
So yes, this is my conclusion. But it's the only intelligent conclusion I can come to, based on years of being involved in similarly highly visible worldwide equipment flaws. I'm not all-knowing about everything that goes on inside IGT and I knew far less while operating this play. But certain aspects add up, and this is how I see it.
Assuming (for the sake of argument so as to advance the discussion) IGT included a bill acceptor/validator fix, along with the double up fix, then it is difficult to explain why Axel's bill wouldn't be accepted - I have little doubt that he chose the correct model (Game King 5.x) given his experience and the double up bug (as described) is easy to invoke so I don't believe he made a procedural error either.
If you climb down from your self-righteous moral high horse, you might understand my point. I'm claiming exploiting the flaw is not right or wrong, good nor evil. It's just playing the game as the machine and the law allows. Just because the Casino didn't expect those results is neither my problem nor my sin. And I'm certainly not perfect enough to label others as not having a 'moral compass' just because they see this as different from my thoughts. Let he without sin cast the fist stone. Cast away bro.
The double up flaw is driven by the bill feeder issue. If you were not able to insert a bill, which is the key to being able to change the denomination, then there would be no bug. So the "fix" had to focus on that.
Axel doesn't really know which generation machine he was playing, and I never had any idea about certain generations of machines having this flaw when I played it. I ran across plenty of possible machines back then that didn't work. The fact that he played a machine that lit up after a winning hand and before choosing to double up or not doesn't surprise me. But if you're saying that IGT did not send out new programs that did not 100% conform to the specs the machines were supposed to be running at, I'd call bs on that.
This bit of information about the bill feeder being the key because it allowed one to change denomination is another piece of information that adds to Rob's credibility. I had no idea why the bill feeder was key until Rob explained it here. I dont' think that bit of information was published anywhere or I would have recalled reading it.
"More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ
The bill validation issue was on WMS machines. A bunch of people got away with it at my home casino.
FYI, I knew this information before Rob had said anything, so it wasn't a complete secret. If you go back, you can see I mention something about this before however I may have disguised the exact thing I was talking about. I have been told by someone in the know that this information was public, but they were not 100% sure, they were just very sure.
I'm not sure if it was stated in this thread already but what are the Game King versions that are potentially exploitable? Any 5.x?
I was recently in a pretty divey casino that had 5.x (judging from Google images) though I didn't recognize the relevance of that.
The double up bug includes the fact that the lit bill acceptor accepted bills (and then the player can subsequently change denominations). When the bug was fixed, it was not necessarily the case that they also darkened the bill acceptor - they (IGT) could have just changed the code such that the acceptor doesn't receive bills (until after the hand is resolved), but not bother with fixing the unlighting of it until resolution of the hand. So, while it is likely that they fixed not only the bug, but also darkening the bill acceptor (as you state) it does not state it in the memo and so it is not a certainty. So Axel's situation remains a mystery. It could be that there is a setting on the old eproms that shuts off of the bill acceptor motor, so that an eprom swap is unnecessary (for those managers who believed/believe their patrons would hate not having double-up enabled), with the tradeoff being that the light is still on with the old chips. It could be that the new chips are in place and it was a hurry up fix as described above. It could be that the model Axel tried this on was not one of the models that had the bug, but I find this very unlikely because he already had knowledge of the bug before you described it to him Ron, and IIRC he stated that other people he knew have executed the maneuver successfully.
The reverse - sticking a bill into a darkened acceptor is something I could see people trying on various slots and VP machines, and, who knows, maybe it will suck a bill in with desirable consequences.
Last edited by tableplay; 06-17-2019 at 11:15 PM.
"More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ
Mickeycrimm, you want to see what you want to see. Having now befriended and decided you find Rob credible, THAT is what you see.
But the fact remains that for any objective person Robs claims remain dubious based on 20+ years of untruthfulness.
I don't see anyone debating that Rob now appears to have extensive knowledge of this play and how it worked. But it remains that there are numerous ways he could have come into this knowledge after the fact....after the story broke. And one of those ways is for him to have actually found and exploited the play to some degree, a smaller degree than his claim, AFTER the fact.
Now again, perhaps it went down exactly as Rob claims. Perhaps it didn't. Rob who for years demanded proof of everyone, you included on every claim, has offered absolutely nothing in the way of proof that would collaborate his claim. All paperwork and tax documents were mysteriously disregarded, when he knew that some day he intended to publicly make this claim and people would want to see something to back it up. How convenient!
In the absence of any such collaborating documentation, people only have Rob's reputation and 20+ years of untruthful claims to base any kind of credibility on. And THAT is exactly what credibility is. YOU build it up over time.
So you can now choose to put blinders on and accept your new friend's claim and support him by finding him credible, but it just doesn't make it so. A 20 year history says otherwise.
You're like that clown John Brennan every time he appears on kooky MSLSD tv. Whenever anyone articulates even the slightest wording that employs the faintest of support of or agreement with our President and regardless of the existence of strong evidence, Brennan jumps up & down crying foul like a wounded animal, and immediately goes into his same old repetitive boring rants of why Trump just CAN'T be trusted. He just cannot put up with anything positive being said about someone he foolishly hates so deeply. You'd think someone just tried sticking a tablespoon into his gut instead of a knife.
Rob, I don't care about John Brennan or Donald Trump or politics that you obsess over. And that is not the topic being discussed, so I'll ask you to stay on topic if you want to continue any discussion with me on this topic
But kew.....haven't you noticed? There IS no one interested in discussing any of your conspiracy theories with you. Methinks you'd create more interest if you told us about how you were going to change the world by attending that weirdo Burning Man thing this summer! After all, aren't those the type of people we want leading us into the future? Aren't they "the hope"?
I thought you were an AP. THAT'S where the money is.
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)