⚖️ Crypto Gambling Foundation ⚖️ - Fair Gambling For All

[BlackyJacky]

LOOKS LIKE STAKE HAS SERIOUS ISSUES WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AND GOVERNMENT BODIES!

Dear Sir/Madam,

Thank you for contacting the Compliance team at Stake.

We have received your email and will endeavor to respond to your inquiry as promptly as possible.

Important Message for all Law Enforcement and Government Bodies.

Going forward all official law enforcement inquiries, please be advised that we do not process these requests via this email inbox.

Kindly submit your request through our dedicated Government Law Enforcement Request System, which can be accessed here:

https://app.kodexglobal.com/stake/requests.

Any requests sent to this email address will not be processed from Thursday 8th of May, 2025.

Once we receive this information, we will promptly review your request and provide the requested documentation in accordance with applicable laws and regulations to legally and securely disclose any relevant information or take appropriate action on the account in question.

For all other compliance-related inquiries, we appreciate your patience and will provide a response, based on the relevance and urgency of your inquiry.

Please follow the link to begin your registration process and submit your request.

You will be able to receive the records through the portal and keep track of your cases.

If you have any issues signing up or logging in, please reach out to help@kodexglobal.com.

[nutildah]

The advertised house edge for Stake's in-house Black Jack is 0,5%, which means long-term I will lose 0,5% of all bets placed.

No, it does not mean that, and it has never meant that, especially as it applies to BlackJack. "House edge" does not equal % of losing bets, because some wins (Blackjacks, double-downs) count as 1 bet but pay more than 1 bet's worth of winnings. This has been explained to you dozens of times already but you continue to repeat the same incorrect assertions. Furthermore, the excerpt you quoted from Stake explains in detail why you will never receive any sort of compensation from them.

[BlackyJacky]

@nutildah

You want to add content in regard to the house edge?

Then you first need to show that you are qualified!

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?


To answer my questions, please use the following format:

Example A)

1) ? bets

2) ? %

Example B)

1) ? bets

2) ? %

Example C)

1) ? bets

2) ? %

[nutildah]

@nutildah

You want to add content in regard to the house edge?

Then you first need to show that you are qualified!

Nobody needs to do anything for you. You're the alt account of the least trusted account on the forum... you have less credibility than a brand new account.

We've done this exercise in futility 10 times already, but:

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?

1) Impossible to determine. It suggests a net 2 bets lost, but also suggests that the player never won a Blackjack (highly unlikely after 100 hands) and that there were never any splits or double downs.

2) There is no such thing as "experienced house edge." It is a term you have made up.

[BlackyJacky]

@nutildah

You want to add content in regard to the house edge?

Then you first need to show that you are qualified!

Nobody needs to do anything for you.

Not for me, for the other users here to show that you are qualified to comment in regard to the house edge.

You're the alt account of the least trusted account on the forum... you have less credibility than a brand new account.

Proven facts don't need any credibility!  

We've done this exercise in futility 10 times already, but:

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?

1) Impossible to determine.

You aknowledge that you aren't able to do very basic math and therefore you aren't qualified to comment in regard to the house edge!

It suggests a net 2 bets lost,

Correct, and 2 bets net loss out of 100 bets made is how much percent?

but also suggests that the player never won a Blackjack (highly unlikely after 100 hands) and that there were never any splits or double downs.

Nice hallucination here!  

2) There is no such thing as "experienced house edge." It is a term you have made up.

The exact house edge applies only after 1 million bets.

The result after 100 or 1,000 or 10,000 bets is your experienced house or player edge.

This isn't something I made up, this is a fact!

Why is it a fact?

Because the casino doesn't reduce the house edge from every bet.

[nutildah]

You aknowledge that you aren't able to do very basic math and therefore you aren't qualified to comment in regard to the house edge!

Its literally impossible to know for sure how many hands were won and lost. There could have been 49 wins with 0 Blackjacks, there could have been 44 wins with 4 Blackjacks, there could have been 39 wins with 10 pushes and 4 Blackjacks, there could have been 42 wins with 4 Blackjacks, 2 winning splits & 2 losing splits, etc...

You cannot determine a house edge from wins and losses when it comes to Blackjack.

[Hispo]

You aknowledge that you aren't able to do very basic math and therefore you aren't qualified to comment in regard to the house edge!

You cannot determine a house edge from wins and losses when it comes to Blackjack.

Correct me if I am wrong, but from my understanding of statistics, there are games in which it is fairly easy to calculate the actual edge of the house if one is willing to gamble multiple rounds to get enough data. I assume you mean blackjack is increasingly difficult to do it because there is factor of choice by the gambler on whatever option they will take when they first receive their first to cards at the beginning of the round, it is like added entropy.
On the other hand, it comes to my mind games like coin flip, which does not have those factors and added entropy, so one could calculate the real house edge of one plays enough and keeps track on the losses and wins. I could be done with a spread sheet and enough patience.

I am a blackjack player, and sometimes when I feel like burning some time I go for some rounds and end up just wagering a few dollars, but even if I was more dedicated, I could not effectively calculate the edge, is that how it works?

[alani123]

I can't believe this conversation is still going on.

I'm beyond baffled by the attitude of this user. He released his play logs and it was more than obvious that he didn't play the optimal strategy. He was unaware of that. I even pointed out some examples but it flew right above his head.

Blackjack is a game where if you use suboptimal strategy you rely even more on your luck and actually put your odds against you even more. So you can even raise the house edge. Exactly as blackjacky did and lost. Although he disk actually have some lucky streaks too.

Anyway, that should be the end of the discussion. I wonder why stake support didn't include that in their rrsponse too but perhaps they realized it's a stupid case and left it to their lowly support agents for handling instead of wasting the time of an expert.

[Danydee]

Correct me if I am wrong, but from my understanding of statistics, there are games in which it is fairly easy to calculate the actual edge of the house if one is willing to gamble multiple rounds to get enough data. I assume you mean blackjack is increasingly difficult to do it because there is factor of choice by the gambler on whatever option they will take when they first receive their first to cards at the beginning of the round, it is like added entropy.
On the other hand, it comes to my mind games like coin flip, which does not have those factors and added entropy, so one could calculate the real house edge of one plays enough and keeps track on the losses and wins. I could be done with a spread sheet and enough patience.

I am a blackjack player, and sometimes when I feel like burning some time I go for some rounds and end up just wagering a few dollars, but even if I was more dedicated, I could not effectively calculate the edge, is that how it works?

Exactly !

Below is proof that the Stake in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

Info 1)

The advertised house edge for Stake's in-house Black Jack is 0,5%, which means long-term I will lose 0,5% of all bets placed.

However, if you take a look at my Stake bets statistics here https://ibb.co/Hxf8NpR you can see the following total numbers: ...

When it comes to Blackjack RTP depends very much on the game and the regularity of the player, so to score a 0.5% house edge on BlackJack you should manage to always play with perfect basic strategy.. making the mathematically correct move on every hand.

Instead, think of RTP like your casino gaming “batting average” stretched across thousands of hands. It tells you what you’d get back, on average, if you always played with perfect basic strategy—making the mathematically correct move on every hand. Hit a detour from those optimal plays, and that generous RTP number starts shrinking faster than a stack of chips during a cold streak.

4% isn't bad play BTW !





* To PROVE any provably fair system is rigged/fallacious,  just review the system (if there are flaws inside it) and the verification tools / (The maths behind!).. + eventually make some trial bets enssuring saving all the PF data and review/verify them.

[nutildah]

BlackyJacky (aka game-protect) is a remorseless liar that will say anything in an attempt to discredit a casino. They are just hoping nobody will counter their insanity so that way they can make their target "look bad." As hard as it is to believe, I can't help but think that somebody is paying them to do this, because my god, what an utter waste of lifetime, pushing the same flawed arguments day in and day out, over and over in the face of overwhelming contradictory evidence.

[BlackyJacky]

I can't believe this conversation is still going on.

As long as desperate signature spammers are desperate to place their hallucinated nonsense to get some cents, the conversation will go on!

I'm beyond baffled by the attitude of this user.

I crushed the scam artists Bijan and Edward, no wonder you are baffled by my attitude.  

Let us see how baffled you will be when the handcuffs click on Bijan and Edward?  

He released his play logs and it was more than obvious that he didn't play the optimal strategy.

Ahh, so you claim that it is more than obvious that I didn't play the optimal strategy, but why don't you publish the proof?

He was unaware of that.

Correct, I am unaware that my optimal drawing strategy caused a 4,5% house edge, instead of the advertised 0,5%.

I even pointed out some examples but it flew right above his head.

You did not publish the proof of my drawing strategy, even though you are in the possession of it!

So you mean, you posted some examples of your hallucinated nonsense?

Blackjack is a game where if you use suboptimal strategy you rely even more on your luck and actually put your odds against you even more.
So you can even raise the house edge. Exactly as blackjacky did and lost.

Why don't you show the proof that my drawing strategy caused a 4,5% house edge instead of the advertised 0,5%?

Publishing hallucinated nonsense is only proof that you are mentally severly insane, but isn't proof of what you claim!

Although he disk actually have some lucky streaks too.

Proof?

Anyway, that should be the end of the discussion.

No, as long as desperate signature spammers are desperate to place their hallucinated nonsense to get some cents, the conversation will go on!

I wonder why stake support didn't include that in their rrsponse too but perhaps they realized it's a stupid case and left it to their lowly support agents for handling instead of wasting the time of an expert.

Let me guess, the Stake Legal Department is wrong and the mentally severly insane nonsense hallucinator is right?

Oh wait, the Stake Legal Department didn't say my drawing strategy caused my experienced 4,5% house edge, because I used optimal drawing strategy!

It is your hallucinated nonsense against the Stake Legal Department 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.

[gunhell16]

You cannot determine a house edge from wins and losses when it comes to Blackjack.

How did Stake calculate the 0,5% advertised house edge?


Kind reminder:

It suggests a net 2 bets lost,

Correct, and 2 bets net loss out of 100 bets made is how much percent?

I don't know what else you're fighting about here, but according to what I've read, the reasons you're giving here don't seem to make sense, dude.

It's true what others are saying here that it's better to just end the discussion here because you've become an issue here so there's nothing left for you. I can tell you frankly.

[nutildah]

I just realized BlackyJacky has been repeating the same nonsense for 2.5 years now! The exact same nonsense. They really have refused to learn a single thing. Haven't budged an inch. Its extraordinary.

Whats funny is TwitchySeal tried to set them straight about house edge on Day 1:

0.5% house edge doesn't mean 99.5% of your best will be winning bets.  It means the house averages a profit of 0.5% of each wager (assuming the player makes optimal strategy).

Each blackjack hand has a ~42% chance of winning, ~8.5% chance of pushing and ~49.5% chance of losing.  That means over 180,000 hands you should expect around 89,000 of them to be losing bets. 

They've done nothing but say "no, no, no" and repeat the same incorrect assertions ever since. WOW.

[BlackyJacky]

@nutildah

Why did you skip the primary school?

I will inform about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system until the handcuffs will click on Bijan and Edward!

Whether you like it or not.

[Shishir99]

@nutildah

Why did you skip the primary school?

I will inform about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system until the handcuffs will click on Bijan and Edward!

Whether you like it or not.

Oh, look who is here criticising nutildah
Look at your own profile, mate, before you criticize anyone. Don't think people are dumb enough to understand who is the stupid one here. We just don't feed the trolls. I wish you better luck proving Stake's rigged games and I hope you will success one day

To others - I think it is fine not to argue with stupid people. Just tell them you are right and move on so they can be satisfied.

[internetional]

The fact that CGF doesn't answer when you use their contact form and that they haven't updated any information about themselves in this thread for years and that they have taken their own forum off-line all indicate a likelihood that they no longer operate. The fact that nobody from CGF has replied to your persistent spamming of this thread is another clue.

I just came across this thread. After reading through it, I realized that for a very long time now the discussion has been focused entirely on the same conflict, while the organization this topic was originally about seems to have stopped operating long ago.

But here’s what I’m curious about: I’m actually one of the kinds of people mentioned in the very first post. I carry a negative bias toward online casinos. I suspect that many of them operate dishonestly.

An organization like CGF could, in theory, be very useful for the industry. Why didn’t such an initiative “take off”? Is it because there’s no real problem to solve, or because the businesses involved simply aren’t interested in transparency?

[Zwei]

To others - I think it is fine not to argue with stupid people. Just tell them you are right and move on so they can be satisfied.

you just can't help it sometimes, lol.

An organization like CGF could, in theory, be very useful for the industry. Why didn’t such an initiative “take off”? Is it because there’s no real problem to solve, or because the businesses involved simply aren’t interested in transparency?

imo, there was just no need for it anymore.
at some point it became standard for crypto casinos to offer transparent provably fair games if they wanted to compete in the original games market.

and anyone who plays on a casino that offers provably fair games can verify for themselves whether a game is fair or not. so there is no point having a foundation do it for you.

[BlackyJacky]

An organization like CGF could, in theory, be very useful for the industry. Why didn’t such an initiative “take off”? Is it because there’s no real problem to solve, or because the businesses involved simply aren’t interested in transparency?

The "provably fair" system as such is nonsense!

1) When you don't change the client seed after evey bet, the casino knows your client seed for the next bet and can calculate a server seed that is favorable for the casino.

When you made 100,000 bets and changed the server seed 100,000 times, then you need to check the outcome 100,000 times!


2) Stake's in-house Black Jack system is provably rigged, so whatever effort you put in with changing the client seed after every bet and check the results, it does not prevent you from getting scammed.


3) Checking if your betting statistics is within the deviation limit of the law of large numbers is not only much much more quicker, but it also gives usable proof that a system is rigged when your result is outside the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome.

[Shishir99]

The "provably fair" system as such is nonsense!

1) When you don't change the client seed after evey bet, the casino knows your client seed for the next bet and can calculate a server seed that is favorable for the casino.

When you made 100,000 bets and changed the server seed 100,000 times, then you need to check the outcome 100,000 times!


2) Stake's in-house Black Jack system is provably rigged, so whatever effort you put in with changing the client seed after every bet and check the results, it does not prevent you from getting scammed.


3) Checking if your betting statistics is within the deviation limit of the law of large numbers is not only much much more quicker, but it also gives usable proof that a system is rigged when your result is outside the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome.

You are right. 
So I suggest you leave Stake.com and play elsewhere because their games are rigged. There is no reason to play in a rigged casino knowing they cheat you. We appreciate that you took the time to write your report here, and we think you have been helpful all the time. Let's move forward and stop playing at stake 

To others, this guy was helpful in reporting a potential scam. We should appreciate him so he can stop playing at Stake.com, Good luck BlackyJacky. Please do not make another deposit on Stake and do not complain again.

[internetional]

The "provably fair" system as such is nonsense!

Yes, I find it hard to believe as well. Personally, my biggest fear is that the casino might refuse to pay out my winnings or even return my deposit. "Provably fair game" doesn't necessarily mean "provably fair casino".

Maybe we don't need an organization if there are casinos that operate on publicly accessible smart contracts. But for Bitcoin gambling, that can still be a bit complicated. That's why something like an auditing organization would be very appropriate.