Aviator predictor and crash bots: can any predict the next round?

A bot, app or signal group can predict the next result.

Not true

Reviewed 8 Oct 2026

Short answer

No. Games are designed so each round is independent of the last; the lab will test this. Past results should therefore carry no information about the next one. Predictor apps show their hits and hide their misses; some are marketed alongside referral links.

Why

Games are designed to generate each outcome from a random source (RNG or seed hashes) that does not depend on previous rounds; the lab will test this.

How the lab will test this

Lag-1 autocorrelation of consecutive outcomes and the hit rate of any published 'signal' against recorded rounds.

Why no app can read the next round

A predictor app needs one of two things: information about the next round that the game has not shown yet, or a link between past rounds and the next one. Crash and instant games are designed to deny both.

Each outcome is drawn from a random source. In a certified RNG game such as Spaceman, that source runs on the provider's server and is never shown to players. In a seeded game such as Aviator or Mines, the outcome comes from a secret server seed combined with other seeds, and the provider publishes a fingerprint of the server seed, its hash, before the round. The seed itself is revealed only after the round ends.

That is commit-reveal. The hash commits the provider to its seed, which it cannot change later, and tells you nothing about the outcome. Working a seed back out of its hash is not something a phone app can do: no practical method for it is publicly known.

Past rounds do not help either. Games are designed so each round is independent of the last; the lab will test this by measuring how strongly each recorded round is linked to the one before it. If the design holds, a list of past results carries no information about the next one, however it is charted.

A hash commitment, worked through

Suppose a provider's secret server seed for a round is the text below. Before the round it publishes only the seed's SHA-256 hash. Change one character of the seed and the hash changes beyond recognition.

Server seed, secret until the round ends: example-server-seed-7f3a
Hash published before the round: 003c5eb116f2a1808eb3223a7d3c28cd39affba134038f220351a20cc62c1b16
The same seed with one character changed: example-server-seed-7f3b
Its hash: ae321a6307ff1da27eee353c01f56eb9e877ea60e83d6c0ca7bd0287058be67d

This is why a provider cannot swap the seed after seeing the bets: the revealed seed would no longer match the hash everyone saw before the round. It is also why the hash gives a predictor nothing to read.

A matching hash shows that a result was fixed before the round. It does not reveal the next seed, and it does not show that the game's long-run return matches its claim; that is what the lab measures. Once a seed is revealed, you can check the match yourself in your browser.

Check a hash commitment

Aviator predictor and Aviator hack apps

Aviator is provably fair: before each round the game shows the hash of the server seed, and the crash point is computed from that server seed combined with client seeds. An Aviator predictor would need the server seed before it is revealed, and the hash does not give it away.

An Aviator hack that claims to read the server or change the multiplier makes a different promise, and meets the same answer: the result is committed before the round, so any change would break the match between the revealed seed and the published hash.

Signals can look accurate without knowing anything. Take Aviator's stated 97% return, a provider claim we have not yet sourced first-hand, and assume it holds at every cash-out. A round then reaches 1.5x with probability 97% ÷ 1.5 = 0.6467, so a signal that always says 1.5x is right about 65 times in 100 with no information at all. Apps sold under these names show those hits and hide the misses.

Spaceman predictor and bot apps

Spaceman is a certified RNG game: Pragmatic Play's random number generator sets where each round ends, and no seed or hash is shown to players. There is nothing for a Spaceman predictor or bot to read before the round, and nothing published after it that would let anyone recompute a round.

So the only check is statistical, and it is the one the lab will run: count many rounds and test whether one round's result is linked to the next. A bot that reads past rounds would need that link to exist. The game is designed so it does not, and the lab will publish its test of that link once it has run it.

Mines predictor apps, tested against the maths

Spribe's Mines fixes the mine positions on its 5×5 grid before the first pick, from seeds whose hash is shown in advance. With 3 mines there are 22 safe tiles out of 25, so the first pick is safe with probability 22/25. Each safe pick removes one safe tile and one unopened tile, which gives the table below.

Chance each pick is safe with 3 mines, assuming the mines are placed at random as the provider states
Pick	Safe, given the picks before were safe	All picks so far safe	As a decimal
1	22/25	22/25	0.8800
2	21/24	77/100	0.7700
3	20/23	77/115	0.6696
4	19/22	133/230	0.5783
5	18/21	57/115	0.4957

The visible board adds nothing. Every unopened tile is as likely to hide a mine as any other: with 3 mines and two safe picks made, each of the 23 unopened tiles hides a mine with probability 3/23. No corner, edge or diagonal is safer, and the last round's board says nothing about this one.

That is also why a Mines predictor looks convincing. An app that marks 3 tiles as safe at random is right on all three with probability 77/115, or 0.6696: about 67 times in 100. One that marks 5 tiles is right with probability 57/115, or 0.4957, just under half the time. Players remember the rounds it got right.

To judge a Mines predictor, compare its hit rate with these numbers. Any app's hit rate should match them, because that is what guessing produces: an app that is right 22 times in 25 on a first pick with 3 mines is doing exactly what chance does.