Inside Asian Gaming

INSIDE ASIAN GAMING | June 2009 36 T he inner workings of casino slot machines rarely make the headlines of the general press. When they do, it’s usually related to an unusually large jackpot, or because the jackpot was won in unusual circumstances. A self-proclaimed billionaire from Mainland China hit the headlines after winning HK$5 million (US$640,000) on a slot machine at Wynn Macau—reportedly the second highest jackpot payout ever made by a Macau-based machine. That was newsworthy in its own right. It turned out though that the lady concerned wasn’t entirely satisfied. She complained she had spent more than ten times that amount— US$6.8 million—on chasing a big Macau jackpot in the previous two years and according to local media reports threatened to sue the casino, claiming the payout rates on its machines were too low. Such high profile disputes between players and operators are extremely rare, but lower level niggles can happen in any casino on any machine from time to time. In all cases, a successful resolution depends on high quality and methodical forensic procedures to track back through every interaction between player and machine, machine and service engineer and machine and management system, says BMM Compliance, a leading global provider of compliance and testing services to the gaming sector. In the case of the disgruntled lady patron, BMM says it’s worth pointing out that before any gaming product is allowed on a casino floor it is evaluated by an authorised gaming testlaboratory.Thisistoverifythatitperforms in compliance with the rules enforced by the local regulatory body. Where a patron makes claims about the overall performance of a game, a full history of the game has to be evaluated to determine if the random number generator and game play are in compliance with technical expectations at the time the game payout percentage was first calculated. In all forensic evaluations, one key goal is to examine the evidence and determine whether the game has performed in amanner consistent with the documented test results. Secure the scene “Just like a police forensic investigation, it’s very important that the operator restricts physical access to the area of the gaming floor where an incident or alleged incident occurred,” says Moosad Sreedharan, BMM’s Senior Vice President Technical Compliance. “The only people who should have access are those who have authority under predetermined forensic procedures,” adds Mr Sreedharan. The advantage of clear procedures, he says, is to enable operators to gather evidence of sufficient standard that it can withstand scrutiny by lawyers in the event of any litigation linked to the event. Limit access Depending on the departmental structures within the casino’s management, those authorised to have access to the scene would usually be from slot operations and security under the direction of the regulatory authority. A representative of the regulator and a person who has detailed knowledge of the gaming equipment in question will attend as the impartial witness. “It is extremely important to collect as much information as possible from the equipment under investigation from the gaming floor since a lot of evidence may be lost once the equipment is power cycled and moved to a laboratory for further detailed analysis” says Mr Sreedharan. “An independent witness is very ‘CSI Asia’ Effective forensics are key to successful resolution of gaming floor disputes says BMM Compliance BMM