Figures read 20 October 2026 Publisher’s card, weigh-in 1
One figure, taken through every step of the method in public
Every other card here does this to an offer. This one does it to the method itself, on a single credit of £20.00, so that a reader can see which number came from where before deciding whether to believe the £6.84 at the end of it. Four kinds of number go into that answer and they are not equally good. Telling them apart is the whole skill, and the cards mark which is which so nobody has to guess.
What the machine states 96.71 per cent Claim 20 of the game sheet, which took it from the maker’s own page for the title, and claim 21, which found the same figure in the data the game hands a browser. Two sources, one figure, and the only reason this card can start. What the offer states £20.00 at 20 times A credit asking no deposit, with staking of twenty times the credit before a withdrawal. Nobody publishes this and nobody has to: it is the shape such terms commonly take, written down as a worked example and not quoted from any account. What the two make when multiplied £6.84 The house formula applied once, and the only figure of the three that nobody else in the world publishes. It exists because the other two were multiplied together, and it is worth exactly what they are worth.
1
Four kinds of number, and how a card marks them
A figure read off the machine comes first and carries the most weight. The return, the stake range, the ceiling on a win, how often the top prize lands: each of those sits on a sheet behind a numbered claim naming where it was found and the day it was read. A reader can go to the same place and see the same thing, which is the only kind of trust worth asking anybody for.
A figure read off an offer comes second and carries less, not because anybody is lying but because terms are rewritten whenever whoever owns them decides, and nothing records the moment. A figure taken off a rule book comes third: durable, precise, and about what a licensee must do rather than about what any machine does. An assumption of this publisher’s own comes fourth, and the only honest thing to do with one is to name it in the sentence that spends it, every time, so that nobody forty paragraphs down mistakes it for a measurement.
The cards mark the four apart rather than describing them. A reading sits beside the figure it belongs to, and the four readings differ in the stroke drawn under them as well as in colour, so somebody who cannot separate slate from madder can still separate a published figure from an assumed one.
2
The sum itself, step by step
Start with the credit, £20.00, and the staking asked of it, twenty times, so £400.00 has to cross the reel before anything can leave. That part is arithmetic on the offer alone and any site could do it. The machine enters next: a return of 96.71 per cent means 3.29 per cent of everything staked is expected to stay behind, so the £400.00 carries an expected toll of £13.16 as it goes through. Deduct the toll and £6.84 is where the credit lands.
In one line, with the weighting a slot carries towards the requirement written as g:
E = B × (1 − W × (1 − RTP) ∕ g)
Here B is the credit, W the staking multiple, RTP the published return and g the weighting, which is one wherever terms count a slot in full. The useful property is that it fails loudly: put a return low enough or a multiple high enough and the answer goes below nought, which is the arithmetic saying the credit cannot survive its own conditions. Several cards on this domain end there, and that is a finding rather than a mistake.
£400.00 of staking is asked of a £20.00 credit, and the 3.29 per cent the reel is expected to keep turns that into £13.16 of expected cost
One figure in that chain is nobody’s measurement: the stake per turn, which decides how long £400.00 of staking takes but not what it costs. Where a card needs it, 10p is assumed and the sentence spending it says so. The published range runs from 0.10 to 250.00, so a reader setting a different stake changes the clock and not the answer.
3
Where the method runs out
Expectation is an average over a great many turns and says nothing about one evening. What decides an evening is the spread, and no figure for the spread is published anywhere for this family. Not one of the maker’s pages carries such a figure, and nothing the game hands a browser has anywhere to put one. So the cards work with what is published instead: the paytable, a top prize arriving about once in 3,880,481 turns, and a hard ceiling at 2,100 stakes. That the figure everybody quotes has no publisher is itself one of the findings here.
The second limit is the one this domain is most careful about. The trade says everywhere that this maker builds its titles to more than one return and leaves the choice to whoever installs them. The sheet went looking. Thirty-six titles, thirty-six pages, exactly one return printed on each and not a word anywhere about that figure varying; and the maker’s own server, asked from seven jurisdictions in turn, answered with the same number every time. Everything pointing the other way is somebody quoting somebody, and no two of those agree on what the figures would instead be. So no card asserts it, no card denies it, and no card prints one of those other figures without naming who says so and adding that the maker does not publish it.
What the method does not do at all is tell anybody what to do. Terms of use sets out what may be relied on here, How this site is paid sets out the arrangement that funds it, and Who weighs this counts the claims the whole thing rests on.