In a licensed implementation with published fairness data, no — and you can verify individual rounds yourself. The reasons people suspect otherwise are worth taking seriously anyway.
The outcome of each drop is fixed by a seed pair before the ball moves, and on provably fair implementations you can confirm this after the fact. The game does not react to your stake, your history or your balance. See how verification works.
Because the most likely outcome on high risk is a loss of most of the stake, and that outcome 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 simply 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 that reveals the seed. What such tools reliably do is take a payment, request account access, or install something unwanted.