Paradise Win Casino: playing multiple games affects the RNG

Paradise Win Casino: playing multiple games affects the RNG

March 9, 2015

I haven't paid much attention to the Casinomeister forum of late. I may have been missing out, because a recent visit revealed a jaw-dropping excuse on the part of a casino for not honouring a €11,000 win, and one I'd certainly never come across before: playing more than one game at the same time affects their random number generator.

Full details in the Paradise Win Casino voided €11,000 thread.

After cashing out the €11,000 win, the player received an email from the casino, quoted in part below:

We have checked your betting history and noticed that you had multiple games opened at the same time.

According to ParadiseWin Casino Terms & Conditions, point 7.17 This is strictly forbidden.

"7.17 Player is allowed to have only one game open at one time. Should the player have more the one game open at once, all winnings will be removed from the account."

Your winnings will be removed from your account.

The player opened additional slot games to play without closing previously open games. If this is classed as illegal activity you might as well disallow drinking a cup of tea while playing, as there is no possible advantage to be gained by playing one game, then moving to another before closing the previous game.

Anyway, the rule is there, and as the player was cashing out a substantial amount of money it's not surprising that a possibly low-funded casino would look to enforce any rule, however absurd, to avoid the debt.

However, the casino went on to justify the term in a subsequent email with this rather astonishing claim:

3rd February 2015, 10:53 PM

We have explained the situation to you before. When player opens multiple games it may affect RNG (Random Number Generator). Our casino created this rule to prevent a possibility of any fraudulent activity and leave more chances to win all other players.

It's hard to know where to start with this statement.

Playing a game while another game is open in another window doesn't affect the RNG, unless the RNG is so hopelessly inadequate and compromised that it somehow falls apart on a whim for no reason whatsoever. This casino uses NetEntertainment software, which is generally regarded as reputable. It cannot be affected in this way. The casino has pulled this excuse out of the ether. It is fantasy.

However, they say that multiple game tags don't necessarily always have this affect, but that they "may" do, which suggests an even more wretchedly inadequate software product that sometimes fails and sometimes doesn't.

In addition, even if it were the case that random player behaviour, be it the opening of multiple tabs or taking frequent toilet breaks, had an affect on the RNG, on what basis is the assumption made that this affect would be positive for the player? If the RNG falls apart on a whim in this manner, why is this advantageous? Any departure from random on the part of an RNG is universally bad for the player as the game is no longer behaving the same as its real-world counterpart. The suggestion that this apparent occasional RNG departure from the norm is a player-friendly eventuality is as bogus as the suggestion that the RNG breaks down in the first place.

In the second part of the statement, "Our casino created this rule to prevent a possibility of any fraudulent activity and leave more chances to win all other players" - which is so poorly worded as to leave it somewhat open to interpretation - they seem to be suggesting that fraudulent activity on the part of certain players leads to less opportunities for winning for others. Is this because those players successfully pulling a heist on the casino so drain the casino's resources that they can no longer afford to pay anyone else? Or are they suggesting a correlation between the apparently "fraudulent" activity of opening multiple game tabs and the playing experience of others? That when the RNG goes into "player positive overdrive", it goes into a kind of compensatory mode which short-changes the less fraudulent types who stick to single game windows?

The other, and far more plausible interpretation of all this, of course, is that the casino concocted the lamest of excuses for not honouring a €11,000 payout.

Paradise Win Casino is one you may consider avoiding.

Post a Comment

May 2005 | June 2005 | July 2005 | September 2005 | October 2005 | November 2005 | December 2005 | January 2006 | February 2006 | March 2006 | April 2006 | May 2006 | August 2006 | October 2006 | January 2007 | February 2007 | March 2007 | May 2007 | June 2007 | July 2007 | January 2008 | February 2008 | March 2008 | April 2008 | June 2008 | July 2008 | September 2008 | October 2008 | December 2008 | January 2009 | February 2009 | March 2009 | May 2009 | June 2009 | July 2009 | August 2009 | September 2009 | October 2009 | November 2009 | December 2009 | January 2010 | February 2010 | March 2010 | April 2010 | May 2010 | June 2010 | July 2010 | August 2010 | October 2010 | November 2010 | December 2010 | January 2011 | February 2011 | March 2011 | April 2011 | May 2011 | June 2011 | July 2011 | August 2011 | September 2011 | December 2011 | February 2012 | May 2012 | July 2012 | August 2012 | March 2016 | April 2016 | June 2016 | November 2016 | December 2016 | March 2017 | May 2017 | June 2017 | August 2017 | August 2021 | October 2021 | May 2022 | December 2023 | May 2024 | Atom feed