In a licensed implementation with published fairness data — no, and you can verify individual rounds yourself. The reasons people suspect otherwise deserve a straight answer anyway.
Each drop is fixed by a seed pair before the ball moves, and on provably fair implementations you can confirm it afterwards. The game does not react to your stake, your history or your balance. How verification works.
Because on high risk the most likely outcome is losing most of the stake, and it repeats. A run of thirty disappointing drops is entirely ordinary — the probabilities say so — but it reads like interference. The game is not adjusting; the distribution is doing what it always does.
These cannot work, and the reason is structural rather than a matter of quality. The result is determined before the animation begins. There is no state to read, no pattern in past drops that informs the next, and nothing on screen revealing the seed. What such tools reliably do is take a payment, request account access, or install something unwanted.
Fairness of the game is irrelevant if withdrawals are not honoured. Check the licence.
A clone on an unknown site need not use the published payout table at all.
Not rigging — disclosed, unavoidable, and the reason the game exists.