⚖️ Crypto Gambling Foundation ⚖️ - Fair Gambling For All

[BlackyJacky]

I have noticed that this forum is full of online casino experts, so I have the following question:

Why does Stake's in-house Black Jack shuffle after every bet?

[BlackyJacky]

I have a small brain test for you to check if you know how the casino collects the house edge

You go to a brick and mortar casino with 1,000 USD and make 10 USD bets at a Black Jack table:

Example A)

After 100 bets made you leave the table with 980 USD

1) How many bets did you lose?

2) How much percentage is your experienced house edge?

Example B)

After 100 bets made you leave the table with 1,020 USD

1) How many bets did you win?

2) How much percentage is your experienced player edge?

Example C)

After 100 bets made you leave the table with 1,000 USD

1) How many bets did you lose or win?

2) How much percentage is your experienced house or player edge?

[BlackyJacky]

@Symphonized

You claim that every scam accusation will be analysed very soon:

I'm always forwarding Scam accusations from this section to Staff so they can be handled.

PS: I'm the one in charge of forwarding them, in case Staff misses these topics, therefore every Stake.com Scam accusation will be viewed / analysed very soon.

But this isn't true!

If they would have analysed the info and proof about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack, they would have come to the conclusion that it is rigged!

Instead they made the following nonsense declaration:

The user has reached out to the complaints department more than 30 times for the same inquiry.

We have provided the user with the requested information and guided them on validating the license in accordance with Antillephones' preferred procedures.

The User has also been attempting to claim that the 8048/JAZ license is invalid for cryptocurrencies.

Our system allows users to access their complete bet history from the date of registration, and there is no limit on the data storage.

All data stored under the "bet archive" and other sections of your account, are protected by our License, which we strictly adhere to.

For the Blackjack game, users can easily filter data in their bet archive spreadsheet.

Our licensing information and regulations have been transparently available on our website since Stake's inception.

Upon registration, the User acknowledges and accepts our Terms of Service which provide information the above and also provides this clearly.

Prior to using our services, it's crucial for users to comprehend the inherent risks associated with gambling, as winning cannot be guaranteed.

Regarding RTP, it's important to note that this figure is based on a calculation involving at least 1 million bets.

In short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected, it is impossible to make accurate calculations based on these sessions.

Overall, the frivolous claims made by this User have been explained to them many times by Support and other members of the community:

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=2178857.400.

It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.

How stupid a multi-billion USD profit online casino operation can be?

While the exact house edge applies only after 1 million bets, the law of large numbers determines the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome based on the number of attempts.

And the higher the number of bets is, the lower is the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome!

And after 180,900 bets, the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome is 0,4%.

0,5% advertised house edge plus 0,4% maximal possible deviation = 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge after 180,900 bets!

My experienced house edge 4,6% - 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge = 3,7% ADDITIONAL technically not possible house edge!

[BlackyJacky]

WHY DO BIJAN AND EDWARD BEHAVE IN SUCH A STUPID AND SICKHEADED SHADY STYLE?

Because only recently they went on a hiring spree of legal and compliance staff!

Last year Stake went on a hiring spree of legal and compliance staff to get into the more tightly regulated markets, opening non-crypto operations in the UK, Portugal, Italy and Colombia. In the United States, Stake operates as a “social casino” run on valueless digital coins but they still hope to enter that market, and Australia, where it remains illegal to bet on Stake

Source: https://www.forbes.com.au/covers/magazine/how-ed-craven-and-bijan-tehrani-built-their-5-6-billion-fortune/

[alani123]

Forgive me if this has been asked before, I tried to lurk through the thread and see what's going on and I deducted you gambled on Stake's original blackjack game and feel as though the odds don't add up. Again sorry if I'm repeating something from before but the thread is too large to read in its entirety.

Well, isn't this game provably fair? The history of all the games should be stored in the platform to be able to determine the fairness. So you could request a download to review it with your own tools. If there's anything fishy it would become obvious from this.

For instance it could show that you indeed had a perfect strategy and yet Stake's dealer kept beating you disproportionately from the advertised house edge. Because that's quite the important detail in blackjack. The house edge is as such only when the perfect strategy is played. Since the game involves many player decisions, if you trust your luck more than the strategy you should follow you often play with worse odds.

In my opinion the response I saw somewhere that Stake calculates the RTP between 1 million rolls is stupid because 100k rolls is a very significant sample to demonstrate the randomness too. Any deviation should flatten out in 1000 rolls let alone 100k.

So what I'm trying to say here is that since this game is provbably fair then stake should be retaining the full data of all games. It already should be accessible to you via stake.com in your history. If they're so confident they might as well give you the full raw data so you can analyse it offline.

[BlackyJacky]

Forgive me if this has been asked before, I tried to lurk through the thread and see what's going on and I deducted you gambled on Stake's original blackjack game and feel as though the odds don't add up.

No, I don't feel that the odds don't add up, it is a proven fact that the odds don't add up.

Feelings and facts are 2 different things.

Again sorry if I'm repeating something from before but the thread is too large to read in its entirety.

No problem.

Well, isn't this game provably fair?

I have not seen any proof that it is fair, but I have proof that it is not fair!

The history of all the games should be stored in the platform to be able to determine the fairness.

My Stake bets statistics, showing how many bets I won and lost, shows that it is not fair!

Yes, the history of all games is stored in the platform and I already downloaded it.

So you could request a download to review it with your own tools. If there's anything fishy it would become obvious from this.

I don't have own tools to analyse my betting history.

For instance it could show that you indeed had a perfect strategy and yet Stake's dealer kept beating you disproportionately from the advertised house edge. Because that's quite the important detail in blackjack. The house edge is as such only when the perfect strategy is played. Since the game involves many player decisions, if you trust your luck more than the strategy you should follow you often play with worse odds.

In my betting history you can see that I played a perfect strategy.

In my opinion the response I saw somewhere that Stake calculates the RTP between 1 million rolls is stupid because 100k rolls is a very significant sample to demonstrate the randomness too. Any deviation should flatten out in 1000 rolls let alone 100k.

You are right, to check if a system is fair you don't need to place 100,000 bets, let alone 1 million bets.

Always when the experienced deviation is higher than technically possible, this is proof that it is rigged.

Yes, Stake makes the stupid claim that until you didn't place 1 million bets, every deviation can happen.

This claim is of course absolute nonsense, because the law of large numbers determines the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome, depending on the number of bets.

And the more bets you made, the lower is the possible deviation from the expected outcome.

And after 180,900 bets, a 4,6% experienced house edge is technically not possible when the advertised house edge is 0,5%.

Maximal possible is a 0,4% deviation = 0,9% experienced house edge.

If a result is technically not possible, then this is proof that the system is rigged!

So what I'm trying to say here is that since this game is provbably fair then stake should be retaining the full data of all games.

I have proof that the game is rigged, so it is proven unfair and not provably fair!

If they're so confident they might as well give you the full raw data so you can analyse it offline.

Stake doesn't give the full raw data.

But this is also not necessary, because they give my bets statistics, which proves that the game is unfair.

Why would I analyse 180,900 bets manually?

[alani123]

I wrote the above because I think it could help support your accusation with evidence that would be irrefutable.

If you get the full data, you could parse it with a program like excel and a few formulas or python and a little bit of code. Once you have the code/formulas it may only take a few minutes.

If you PROVE you played the perfect strategy and still lost by the rate you say, then Stake's excuse that 100k rolls are not enough to determine randomness has absolutely no ground in reality. Maybe 100k rolls are not enough to determine the randomness for chances that are 1/10000. But we're talking about blackjack here, where odds of winning are close to 1/2.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be critical here. But reading what you wrote I think you'd have a stronger case with the evidence presented publicly.

[BlackyJacky]

Here is my Stake Black Jack bet archive:

https://we.tl/t-XUsYgN4cnS

(The link expires in 3 days)

[alani123]

I wrote the above because I think it could help support your accusation with evidence that would be irrefutable.

If you get the full data, you could parse it with a program like excel and a few formulas or python and a little bit of code. Once you have the code/formulas it may only take a few minutes.

If you PROVE you played the perfect strategy and still lost by the rate you say, then Stake's excuse that 100k rolls are not enough to determine randomness has absolutely no ground in reality. Maybe 100k rolls are not enough to determine the randomness for chances that are 1/10000. But we're talking about blackjack here, where odds of winning are close to 1/2.

Anyway, I'm not trying to be critical here. But reading what you wrote I think you'd have a stronger case with the evidence presented publicly.

You're absolutely right—concrete data would be the best way to dismantle their excuses. The problem? Stake refuses to provide the full betting history needed for verification.

They love to throw around the "100k rounds isn't enough" argument, but conveniently, they also withhold the exact data that could confirm or debunk it. If they were truly fair, they'd encourage transparency, not suppress it.

At this point, it's not about proving whether their blackjack is rigged—we already know it is. The real challenge is getting Stake to release the raw data, which they never will because it would expose the truth.

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=5524433

How do you mean? I can see a detailed archive of all the bets I've made on Stake. Did you delete your account or lose access to it? Because if not, you should be able to recover your bets on your own.

Getting your betting data through a GDPR request seems like unnecessary butreocracy when you can just download it on your own. Sure Stake could make it easier to get but it's definitely easy compared to other casinos.

Here is my Stake Black Jack bet archive:

https://we.tl/t-XUsYgN4cnS

(The link expires in 3 days)

Nice, some substance finally. I'll check it, although I'm no expert myself. Others may be able to analyse it better.

[BlackyJacky]

Here is my Stake Black Jack bet archive:

https://we.tl/t-XUsYgN4cnS

(The link expires in 3 days)

Nice, some substance finally. I'll check it, although I'm no expert myself. Others may be able to analyse it better.

A seven year old can compare the optimal playing strategy with how I played.

That doesn't require to be an expert.

[alani123]

Tell you what, I glanced over many of your bets and your strategy is far from perfect.
Yes, you're above a no-knowledge player but in order to achieve the lowest house edge against the casino you need to be 100% perfect.

Meanwhile I saw many bets where you asked for another card when you had an ok hand yourself. In other instances the optimal strategy would have been to double but you didn't etc.

In some days you were way above the projected win rate because of luck and decent play, in some others you just didn't play well and got a bad overall win rate.

That's normal when you play thousands of hands unless you utilize some tool to achieve the perfect strategy. I don't think that's Forbidden for stake original games. But for you to say that you played the perfect strategy over tens of thousands of MANUAL bets is quite bold. Put simply: you didn't. And probably that's the only reason you didn't get a good winrate.

Since you have the data it would be easy to prove otherwise if your case is as clear as you say. But I don't think it'll get far. Maybe you could say that this money was your life savings and it'd make a better story than saying you're certain you were robbed by rigged odds.

[BlackyJacky]

@alani123

Point 1)

I used the optimal playing strategy and making a slight drawing deviation every 1,000 or 2,000 bets doesn't bear any relevance.

Point 2)

The criminal online casino Betfury pays a stupid liar and criminal to lie about a Stake victim for getting cents!

Point 3)

Stake didn't say that my playing strategy caused the 4,6% experienced house, so Stake itself confirmed that I used the optimal playing strategy:

The user has reached out to the complaints department more than 30 times for the same inquiry.

We have provided the user with the requested information and guided them on validating the license in accordance with Antillephones' preferred procedures.

The User has also been attempting to claim that the 8048/JAZ license is invalid for cryptocurrencies.

Our system allows users to access their complete bet history from the date of registration, and there is no limit on the data storage.

All data stored under the "bet archive" and other sections of your account, are protected by our License, which we strictly adhere to.

For the Blackjack game, users can easily filter data in their bet archive spreadsheet.

Our licensing information and regulations have been transparently available on our website since Stake's inception.

Upon registration, the User acknowledges and accepts our Terms of Service which provide information the above and also provides this clearly.

Prior to using our services, it's crucial for users to comprehend the inherent risks associated with gambling, as winning cannot be guaranteed.

Regarding RTP, it's important to note that this figure is based on a calculation involving at least 1 million bets.

In short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected, it is impossible to make accurate calculations based on these sessions.

Overall, the frivolous claims made by this User have been explained to them many times by Support and other members of the community:

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=2178857.400.

It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.

Their nonsense excusation is that the RTP applies only after 1 million bets, totally unaware that the law of large numbers determines the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome depending on the number of attempts.

Why does your little sickhead feels the necessity to lie contradictory to Stake's statement?


Point 4)

I have some very interesting info for your little sickhead!

Stake claims a 0,5% house edge for its in-house Black Jack without saying that you need to use a certain playing strategy to reach the 0,5% house edge!

In this case, I can draw the cards however I want and Stake has to compensate everything above the advertised 0,5% house edge!  

This is called contract law obligations.  

In some days you were way above the projected win rate because of luck and decent play,

How insane are you?

The advertised house edge is minus 0,5%, so I have a projected loss rate of 0,5% and no projected win rate!  

in some others you just didn't play well and got a bad overall win rate.

Oh, I was playing days bad, which has caused the bad overall loss rate!  

But curiously Stake doesn't say that I was playing days bad and even doesn't say that I was playing bad at all!

Why is your hallucinated nonsense not in accordance with what Stake says?

Do you need to increase your medication dose to get closer to the reality?

[alani123]

Man, so you think that making it personal helps your case?

I give time from my day to you to look into your own data and suddenly I'm a criminal for giving it to you straight?
I just told you that you're not a robot. Blackjack is a strategy game and aside of having a house edge players aren't perfect. So usually the RTP is much lower than the max advertised. The case doesn't seem much different based on your file. Don't be surprised.

If you can somehow analyse your file and come up with definitive proof that I was wrong in my random sampling you're more than free to do so. But the burden of proof is upon you.

And also the advertised house edge was never MINUS 0.5%. The house edge is ~0.5% and you may get some rakeback based on the house edge. Not based on your total wagger. So if there's 20% rakeback that means you get back 20% of 0.5% of your bets. Ofc there's no scenario under which there's negative house edge because that's a money tree scenario.

[BlackyJacky]

Man, so you think that making it personal helps your case?

Informing the public that you are a criminal and stupid little sickhead publicly lying about me doesn't make my case personal.

Despite of this, I don't need help from criminal and stupid little sickheads to get compensated.

In fact, I will get compensated totally independent from hallucinated nonsense posted on Bitcointalk.

I give time from my day to you to look into your own data and suddenly I'm a criminal for giving it to you straight?

Yes, you are criminal because you are intentionally publicly lying about a fraud case committed by Stake!

That makes you a partner in crime!

If you didn't lie, post screenshots of the first 50 bets of the day of March 17, 2022?

I just told you that you're not a robot.

I never claimed that I'm a robot!  

Blackjack is a strategy game and aside of having a house edge players aren't perfect.

I never claimed that players are perfect!  

So usually the RTP is much lower than the max advertised.

This is your criminal strategy!

Publicly false and misleading claiming that I played days bad, which has caused the much lower experienced house edge!

The case doesn't seem much different based on your file. Don't be surprised.

Post screenshots of the first 50 bets of the day of March 17, 2022, then everyone can see if I used the perfect playing strategy?

If you can somehow analyse your file and come up with definitive proof that I was wrong in my random sampling you're more than free to do so.

Wait a moment, stupid little sickhead:

1) I used the perfect playing strategy with small deviations every 1,000 or 2,000 bets, which doesn't bear any relevance

2) Stake confirmed that my playing strategy didn't cause a higher house edge than the advertised 0,5%

3) A criminal and stupid little sickhead chimes in and claims that I was playing days bad, which has caused my experienced 4,6% house edge, without showing proof of it!

4) And now the criminal and stupid little sickhead believes that it is my burden to prove that the criminal and stupid little sickhead is lying?

But the burden of proof is upon you.

I gave you the proof that I used the perfect playing strategy, confirmed by Stake.

If your criminal and stupid little sickhead hallucinates that I was playing days bad, which has caused my experienced 4,6% house edge instead of the advertised 0,5% house edge, then your criminal and stupid little sickhead has the burden of proof to back up your claim!

And also the advertised house edge was never MINUS 0.5%.

When the house edge is 0,5%, does that mean

A) MINUS 0,5% for me or

B) PLUS 0,5% for me?

When the RTP is 99,5%, does that mean

A) MINUS 0,5% for me or

B) PLUS 0,5% for me?

[alani123]

Even if stake support said you have the perfect strategy I'm inclined not to trust their word because whoever wrote that email to you also said some other things to make it clear to me that they either didn't attention or were illiterate about stats.

You can't just use their word in your favour only when it suits you. Indeed them saying randomness shows on 1m bets and not 100k for ~50% odds games is complete bullshit. But then you can't take them seriously if they say you had a perfect strategy. You didn't.

If you want to categorically prove you had the perfect strategy hire a programmer to write you a script parsing the data. It may take the programmer 5hrs at most. I'll even cover the programmer's salary if that proves you indeed played perfectly. I'm only saying that because I'm sure deep inside you know you're full of shit and that's why you resort to personal attacks, but feel free to take me up on it.

[BlackyJacky]

Even if stake support said you have the perfect strategy I'm inclined not to trust their word because whoever wrote that email to you also said some other things to make it clear to me that they either didn't attention or were illiterate about stats.

The Stake Legal Department sent this email to the license issuer Antillephone and Antillephone forwarded it to me.

If my playing strategy would have caused my experienced 4,6% house edge, the Stake Legal Department would have written in the email to Antillephone that my playing strategy has caused the 4,6% experienced house edge.

If your stupid little sickhead isn't able to follow this logic, that is your personal problem and not mine.

You can't just use their word in your favour only when it suits you.

Yes, I can. Everything a defendent states can be used against it.  

Indeed them saying randomness shows on 1m bets and not 100k for ~50% odds games is complete bullshit.

Yes, it is complete bullshit, which I also can and will use against them!

But then you can't take them seriously if they say you had a perfect strategy.

Bijan and Edward are criminal stupid little sickheads like you and I of course don't take them serious!

But this is a criminal case and whether or not I take them serious doesn't bear any relevance.

Relevant is that I can use their statements against them.  

You didn't.

I asked you to post screenshots of the first 50 bets of the day of March 17, 2022, where are they?

If you want to categorically prove you had the perfect strategy hire a programmer to write you a script parsing the data.

If you want to prove that I playing days bad has caused my experienced 4,6% house edge, hire a programmer to write you a script parsing the data.  

It may take the programmer 5hrs at most. I'll even cover the programmer's salary if that proves you indeed played perfectly.

If you will cover the programmer's salary, perfect!

Then you can simply hire a programmer to write you a script parsing the data.  

I'm only saying that because I'm sure deep inside you know you're full of shit and that's why you resort to personal attacks, but feel free to take me up on it.

Publicly calling out a criminal stupid little sickhead isn't personally attacking and I have the right to defend myself against your attacks.

[alani123]

Man, here you are cursing at the only guy that took you seriously.

If I hadn't seen the data myself I wouldn't have been saying anything against you, as you saw I took you at your word initially. But you're just in denial at this point.

You're just hurling stupid insults against anyone that disagrees with you even a little but. But many of us have your interest in mind too. Me saying you didn't play a 100% optimal strategy isn't somethig against you but something you too should acknowledge if you want to make your case stronger.

Some things are just logical. If your blackjack strategy isn't optimal obviously you are not going to get the theoretical maximum return to player over an extended array of hands. Still MAYBE your strategy's optimization wasn't 100% but still the missed optimization MAYBE is not comparable to how much you lost in RTP. This can be proven with a simple statistical analysis as I explained. I even gave several details how this can be done because I'm not against you and would rather see a point against a big casino proven in a definitive way.

Hell, do you realise how much of a blow it would be against stake if you proved that their provably fair system is in fact rigged? So long as you don't bother with that, I don't think you'll be taken seriously though.

[BlackyJacky]

Hell, do you realise how much of a blow it would be against stake if you proved that their provably fair system is in fact rigged?

It is 100% proven, only because your stupid little sickhead isn't able to understand it, doesn't mean it is not 100% proven!

Your stupid lies and hallucinated nonsense also will not make it unproven!

Explain to the community why you don't post screenshots of the first 50 bets of the day of March 17, 2022?

[God Of Thunder]

Oh, this thread got bumped again. Is this still operating? I don't think so.
I don't know when they removed the forum. The forum should have been on http://forum.cryptogambling.org/ this URL. But it seems removed already. They had 14 verified operators, and at least five of them no longer operate their businesses. The website is outdated. So, I assume complaining in this thread is not going to help at all. Stunna has been inactive for a long time. He did not even log in to his account.

[BlackyJacky]

@God Of Thunder

Stake is aware about my posts in this thread:

The user has reached out to the complaints department more than 30 times for the same inquiry.

We have provided the user with the requested information and guided them on validating the license in accordance with Antillephones' preferred procedures.

The User has also been attempting to claim that the 8048/JAZ license is invalid for cryptocurrencies.

Our system allows users to access their complete bet history from the date of registration, and there is no limit on the data storage.

All data stored under the "bet archive" and other sections of your account, are protected by our License, which we strictly adhere to.

For the Blackjack game, users can easily filter data in their bet archive spreadsheet.

Our licensing information and regulations have been transparently available on our website since Stake's inception.

Upon registration, the User acknowledges and accepts our Terms of Service which provide information the above and also provides this clearly.

Prior to using our services, it's crucial for users to comprehend the inherent risks associated with gambling, as winning cannot be guaranteed.

Regarding RTP, it's important to note that this figure is based on a calculation involving at least 1 million bets.

In short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected, it is impossible to make accurate calculations based on these sessions.

Overall, the frivolous claims made by this User have been explained to them many times by Support and other members of the community:

https://asktom.cf/index.php?topic=2178857.400.

It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.

As you can see, in their answer to their previous license issuer Antillephone, they even referred to this thread.