Cliffs

AP Casino's keno game is rigged. Its RNG is not at all random. Watch our YouTube video to see it in practice.

The Gist

Absolute Poker has this browser-based Keno client (called "Traditional Keno", found under the other games tab here). It is blatantly not run from a real RNG or even a decent pseudoRNG, but rather from some kind of number generator that produces obvious patterns.

We have no clue if this is the same "R"NG that they use for poker or blackjack or anything else. That seems sort of unlikely because one would hope that someone would've noticed that by now, but given that Cereus ran without encryption for years without anybody noticing, we don't think it would be incredibly surprising to learn that they had an easily crackable "R"NG. So, we would not play any games on Absolute Poker or Ultimate Bet (they're essentially the same) until Cereus clarifies.

There's some reason to believe that this was not done intentionally but rather was simply caused by some extreme combination of laziness and incompetence. In particular, it appears that AP's Keno "R"NG actually leads to better results for the customer. The customer still loses, and because it's not random, the customer has a much much lower chance of profiting, but it does appear that the customer actually loses less than he would to a fair Keno game.

Regardless of whether this "R"NG is used elsewhere or whether this was done intentionally, it still shows that Cereus does not take the fairness of its games seriously enough. After the UltimateBet and Absolute superuser scandals, the encryption debacle, the pot that got shipped the wrong way, and the numerous other security problems that players have discovered on Cereus and their repeated promises to improve player security, this is just completely ridiculous.

The Quick Demonstration That It's Rigged

It's a bit hard to explain in words what's going on, especially since nobody plays Keno. This video should make it clear:

(Click image to view)

More Formal Demonstration

(This is going to be a little less rigorous than I'd like because I think what's going on is fairly obvious, and I thought it was more important to just get it out than to do it perfectly. I'm really tempted to add parentheses after like every sentence in this part explaining that I glossed over some stuff, but suffice it to say that something's up and this explanation is good enough.)

Earlier tonight, I was contacted by a mid/high stakes regular who said that a buddy of his told him that AP Keno wasn't random. He described to me exactly what I've shown you guys and proceeded to play a bunch of Keno while I watched him almost always predict when he would hit. I then confirmed it myself and showed it to Thomas (from our Cake investigation). So, I didn't notice this pattern while I was looking for patterns, I was told what the pattern would be and shown exactly what I was told to expect, and then I confirmed it myself.

In order to confirm it, I decided beforehand that I would run fifty trials of the five-number play ten thing that I showed in the video. I'd record in sequence what "rounds" I hit. I'd then calculate the difference between the first and second round that hit. I'd then count how often different numbers came up and compare the distribution with the expected distribution. Here's that data:



As you can see, five comes up much more often than one would expect. The odds of getting three out of five on any individual round are Choose(5,3)*Choose(75,17)/Choose(80,20) = ~8.4%. So, if the first round that hits is between one and five, the odds that there will be a second round that hits that is five rounds later are the odds that four in a row do not hit and then the next one hits, i.e. (1-.084)^4*.084 = ~5.9%. If rounds one through five do not hit (which should happen (1-.084)^5 = 64.5% of the time, but only happened 4% of the time in my sample), then the next round to hit cannot be five after since there is no such round, so the actual probability should be much lower than 5.9%. However, even if the odds were 5.9%, the odds of something with 5.9% probability actually happening at least 43 times out of 50 are about one in 10^45. So, this is not random.

Other facts about the data are similarly surprising. For example, the fact that one through four never occur. In all fifty trials, the first trial to hit was never later than the sixth rounds, so the odds of the second hit being one through four rounds after the first in an individual trial are 1-(1-.084)^4 = ~29.6%. The odds of never hitting a 29.6% chance in 50 tries are about one in 42 million. I also never saw four or five of my five numbers get chosen. I ran way more than 50 sets of ten and never saw four or five of my numbers chosen, but since I didn't record those, I'll only consider the fifty sets of ten. The odds of getting at least four out of five chosen are Choose(5,4)*Choose(75.16)/Choose(80,20) + Choose(75,15)/Choose(80,20) = ~1.27%. The odds of not seeing this once in 500 trials are about one in 608. I can keep going (for example, in thirty of my fifty trials, both round five and round ten were winners...), but I think the point is clear.

I also recorded some other data. The guy who originally contacted me said that the pattern applies across play tens as well. In other words, if I run one play ten and the eighth round is a hit, then I should expect the third round to be a hit quite often in the next round, since that happens five after the previous hit. So, I crunched the same numbers except now I counted the number of rounds from the last hit of one play ten to the second hit of the next play ten. Here's that data:


(The expected %s are calculated correctly as (1-.084)^(N-1)*.084, so these aren't approximate at all like the above numbers )

So, as you can see, a difference of five occurred 29 out of 49 times when it should be expected to occur only 5.91% of the time. The odds of this happening randomly are about one in 5 * 10^23. So that's not random either.

If I choose a different 5 numbers, the same thing happens. If I choose 6 numbers instead of 5, a different but similar pattern occurs.

So, their random number generator is flawed in some way. We would like an explanation from Cereus as to what exactly the flaw is and how it got into their keno game. We'd also like to know whether this "R"NG was used for any other games that Cereus spreads. Given Cereus's history, we think it's reasonable to expect not only answers to these questions, but also some evidence to support those answers.

(Again, we think it prudent to note that the game doesn't seem to be quite "rigged" in the house's favor. I actually ran better than expected in the controlled trial that I ran.)

We wanted the OP of this thread to be strictly facts, so we dropped some other stuff in the first (we hope) reply:

Speculation about the Cause

Obviously this is a pretty weird pattern. It's not some really simple rigging that simply makes it much less likely that you hit your numbers. In fact, in my 500 Keno rounds (fifty play tens), I actually did better than a random Keno player would in a fair game, though I still lost ten bets. It's also strange because the pattern that I've shown you is in the distance between winning bets when each winning bet occurs because three of my five numbers get chosen. We have not identified (nor have we really looked for) a pattern in the actual numbers selected. So, a fair question is "WTF is causing this?"

The short answer is that we're not quite sure. It's obvious that the "random" number generator isn't actually random, but it's not quite clear how it's not random and why a lack of randomness could cause this pattern.

However, Thomas and I have some theories. One of these theories is that there is some underlying pattern in the "R"NG that is choosing these numbers, and this pattern happens to become clear through this lens. For an overly simplified example, say the RNG simply repeated every 100 numbers. It's conceivable that you might not notice that if you were just staring at the numbers it outputted or playing Keno one game at a time (or playing poker with it...), but it would be fairly noticeable if you played keno five or ten games at a time since you'd get the same result every time.

To test if the "R"NG was time-seeded in some non-standard way, we logged into Keno with two different accounts and clicked the "Play 10"-button at exactly the same time on both accounts. Here's a video of us doing that. We noticed two things occurring most of the time (note that we have not done too much analysis on this and we're not incredibly good at timing things, so its possible that these are just coincidences):

1. The pattern of X, X+5 still held.
2. The rounds where we hit for the first and second time were the same between the two accounts, most of the time. The numbers that were hit on the board (from 1-100) were however different.

From the first, we can conclude that the random numbers for all 10 games are requested at once: if they were requested every time one of the 10 games started, they would have been interleaved between the two accounts, resulting in different patterns. With this knowledge, the second point is especially weird. This would mean that not only is there some pattern in the RNG, but that you get the same results if you requested the random numbers for two games at the same time. This makes it seem like there is no central RNG that Keno requests numbers from, but that they are somehow based on the current time. For example, they might use a pseudo-random number generator that is seeded with the current time. This however does not explain why the numbers on the board that were hit were different.

This leads to another theory: They might use two RNGs. One of them decides which rounds are winners (this would be the flawed RNG), while the other one (possibly client-side, since it does nothing important) generates a board matching the outcome. This explains why we could have the same outcome when we played "Play 10" at the same time between two accounts, yet different numbers were hit every time.

Anyway, this is just speculation. We're quite sure that something is wrong, but proving exactly what is wrong and why is difficult and maybe impossible. We thought it wise to show that there is a plausible explanation for this. We hope that Cereus clarifies for us exactly what is wrong with this game.

Some Miscellany

1) I should note that outside of the controlled trial I ran, I did see some things that did not happen in the trial. For example, twice I saw three rounds hit in one set of ten, and a few times I saw the nth and then the nth+4th round hit. We don't believe that this changes anything about our study, but we thought we'd mention it.

2) While Absolute Poker Casino is hosted on their main absolutepoker.com domain, the actual games like Keno seem to be hosted on http://lobby.ap.betsoftgaming.com/. It seems likely that Absolute is using a 3rd party solution from Betsoft Gaming for their casino games. However, since AP is known to use shell companies in various ways, this might just be another sub-company/shell/whatever. Betsoftgaming has anonymized their domain records.

NoahSD coming through in the clutch again

**** cereus.

Edit: good work sir.

lol @ this company

****, up until now this seemed like a great idea

Great job once again, NoahSD. I can't understand why some people still play on these sites.

Wow, amazing work again Noah!

It amazes me how people still find the need to play at AP/UB

lol @ people who still do business with that site.

Please let this be the final nail in the coffin.

play money?

make people feel like they are winning / see a pattern, deposit, try to win?

I'm trying to think of something similar that would qualify this. There's a bingo hall out here on an Indian res that is a certain class, whatever is below their main casino across the street where they offer pretty much everything, but anyway they have bingo and pull tabs.

They also have these machines that look like slot machines but are based on some sort of "pull tab" or "bingo" type theory, or are pull tabs but with a graphical interface. These show similarities in that when you spin them they are pre determined.

To explain that, the main screen has what looks like the newer style slot machines, animated, bonus rounds, and even some user inout (in the bonus rounds). At the top right they have a bingo grid and when you "pull" the lever or start a new bet by touching the screen, that bingo grid then fills with numbers. It's finishes it's "draw" a split second before the animation on the main screen has run it's course.

Basically, you can tell weather your spin will be a winner or not before the main part or the slot has finished. I pointed this out to a friend and it ruined his experience (because not only does he now know early when he loses but the animation doesn't matter and gives it a pre determined feel and ruins any excitement by watching the reels)

This is clearly NOT the same thing as what is happening on AP because although it may be pre determined, there is no pattern to the winning and non winning in the example I've mentioned.

I guess I'm trying to find how a pre determined "draw" could excuse what AP is doing here in the "spin ten". Perhaps the ten different spins don't matter, are not separate spins, are counted as one single bet and it doesn't matter how they are displayed but the initial bet is predetermined and the graphical sequence of ten spins after that is just bells and whistles?

There does seem to be a difference in what you can win on each set of spins (amount wise) correct? From the video's, witch are a small sample obv, it seems you hit 2 sets of winning 3 out of five numbers. (edit: they've not hit anything better then 3/5)

I guess I just need to think about this more and learn some about how this stuff works but I've bolded my main thought that I'm trying to follow at this time.

I've read both OP's and I don't see this stuff mentioned.

Was this pattern only shown in the sets of ten? If not, couldn't this be exploited by playing single games and betting the minimum in the games that are losers, then the maximum in games that are winners? Sorry, I don't have an AP account to see betting structures or payouts. (edit: learned it's 0.10c to $5)

Also, regarding payouts, does this game have a jackpot and do we know if it's ever been hit by anyone?

It was only in sets of 10. We did try working together: one person would run a set of 10, the other person woudl run it once exactly when another hit was expected, but this did not work. We think this is because all 10 outcomes are generated at once, when the "10 times" button is clicked.

No jackpot.

Also:
After decompiling the Keno swf file, I found the following things:

• When you click the "Play 10" button, the client sends the message "onPlay10" to the server (as opposed to requesting one game at a time, when the previous one has finished). This means that the server is aware of the fact that 10 games will be played, supporting our theories for causes in the OP.
• The client can receive multiple boards (=results, set of numbers that are hit) at once. This probably means that the server responds to the onPlay10 message with 10 games that are generated at once, further supporting our theories in the OP.
• The client does receive the full board of numbers from the server: it does not just receive if it's a win/loss and then generate random numbers to match it offline.

So after decompiling the Keno swf file, I found the following things:

• When you click the "Play 10" button, the client sends the message "onPlay10" to the server (as opposed to requesting one game at a time, when the previous one has finished). This means that the server is aware of the fact that 10 games will be played, supporting our theories for causes in the OP.
• The client can receive multiple boards (=results, set of numbers that are hit) at once. This probably means that the server responds to the onPlay10 message with 10 games that are generated at once, further supporting our theories in the OP.
• The client does receive the full board of numbers from the server: it does not just receive if it's a win/loss and then generate random numbers to match it offline.

We emailed Absolute Poker asking for a response.

I've talked to a friend of mine who has played some slots there.

He says that in games where he is required to collect sets of 3 (jewels lets say) in order to get to a bonus round that the third one is exponentially harder to get then the first two. After he's collected all 3 and finished his bonus round, he will collect the first "jewel" within the first couple spins and the second shorty after.

I don't know if their slots are supposed to be run on a RNG but if they are then it sounds as though their whole casino,–>other games are messed up.

Are slots excluded from having to use a RNG and accepted as pre determined? This I just don't know enough about as the ones that are pre determined that I have heard of, are only pre determined after their spin, as far as what will be displayed and given out but use an RNG before determining the payout.

This also depends on what kind of slot you play and where it is because I thought there were still places where a slot was truly random but that it's reels were set up in a way where the higher payouts were the harder combination's to achieve and were based on that as far as the odds of getting that combination and the odds it would pay out if you did, witch are obv structured so that they can pay less odds then the actual odds (for profit).

IDK, but I find this interesting. I also would like to know everything before AP pulls this stuff from being able to be tested and hides behind some explanation that we can't cross check.
lol, wtf! Really looking forward to hearing people's input on this whole thing, especially AP's obv. gl

Have either hit 4 or 5 numbers?

Doesn't supprise me from this shady company

I just don't see how anyone who played keno with even the slightest bit of consistency failed to see this. Running ten spins seems like an automatic here for any keno player. I understand this forum doesn't play slots or keno but surely there's some sort of forum that does.

These types of players are either so degenerate that they will accept this and just don't care or they move on to another site without making any stink of it. Maybe AP's keno is just so lightly trafficked that this was never noticed? Regardless I find it unfathomable.

I'm gonna search for some sort of keno/slot forum that is not just spam.

While awaiting the response from Cereus, would be interesting to see if the same patterns can be noted in other games. Before they get a chance to adjust anything!

Btw it sucks that their payout is lower on the 10 spin than it is on the single spins.

Neither of us ever plays such casino games, so we did not "check AP/UB casino hours and hours". Noah was contacted by another poker player, who had a friend who played Keno and noticed the pattern. We simply verified it was true and published it.

AP wasn't rigging it in "their favor" (read the OP) and sites are free to make return % as low as they want, so there is really no reason to do it either. Online casinos are allowed to make games with 30% return, but they are not allowed to make rigged games and advertise them as random. Why would they do it, there is nothing to gain from it.

There is absolutely nothing to be gained from rigging the casino games, it's just a big sign of ridiculous incompetence, so why would any sites do that on purpose?

You're a Cereus fanboy!

From your posts you are more or less suggesting that AP/UB are getting undue attention.

The fact of the matter is, every aspect of their operations should be scrutinised with a fine comb.

But thanks for continually bumping the thread up to the top of the forum

Cereus shills outplaying themselves.

Cereus in jail for life.

I didn't read the OP, but it's very common knowledge that at casino games the house has an edge.
Afaik, such operations need to get licensed from any kind of gambling authority and in this process they have to clarify how much the house edge is.

Now my question. Is Cereus cheating on that? Or is it just that in the OP it was clarified how they "cheat" on their customers to gain that same edge as everybody else does?

I mean, it's pretty obvious and no secret that these games are rigged. Is there now something more rigged than it should be?