God bless stake.com and eddie and take care

[BlackyJacky]

That said, I don’t see the scam by Stake.

Here it is:

Info 1)

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

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

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% from the expected outcome according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additional maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets I can maximal additionally lose = 80% additional maximal possible house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 80% = 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = 0,9% maximal possible house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible house edge = 3,7% additional house edge!

3,7% additional house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,900 bets, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.

Jeez, you are still riding that horse, hahaha. Seriously, I question the functionality of your brain.
0.5% house edge doesn't mean you lose 0.5% of your games, you still think this is right  . It's amazing because you were told numerous times that your calculation is straight up WRONG.
The chance of winning at BJ is just about 42%. Losing is 49% and the rest is for ties. House edge just means that if you win 50 hands and lose 50 hands, with the same bet amount you still lose money in the long run, that's what house edge is.
How about using google for a change?? It sure can help you a lot, your mind would be blown actually!

Wait, I make it easy for you and google it myself:

Here's an overview: The Odds of Winning Blackjack: The player has about a 42% chance of winning a hand, while the dealer wins around 49%. The remaining 9% percentage results in ties (called a push). .

Losing more hands than winning is a natural with these numbers, you can see that right?
Oh well, I am convinced you still think your numbers are right, if so I advise you to seek help, maybe not only mentally but also some financial advisor might be helpful since all this nonsense here is an obvious attempt to got your losses back, talking about a last resort to fix what YOU have done wrong in the past.

[BlackyJacky]

Here's an overview: The Odds of Winning Blackjack: The player has about a 42% chance of winning a hand, while the dealer wins around 49%. The remaining 9% percentage results in ties (called a push). .

So you say the house edge is 49% losing a hand minus 42% winning a hand = 7% house edge?

[tetaeridanus]

Here's an overview: The Odds of Winning Blackjack: The player has about a 42% chance of winning a hand, while the dealer wins around 49%. The remaining 9% percentage results in ties (called a push). .

So you say the house edge is 49% losing a hand minus 42% winning a hand = 7% house edge?

My friend, 9 percent is push; don't you read the end of the sentence? You are destined to lose in blackjack, this is not special to Stake.com.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

Here's an overview: The Odds of Winning Blackjack: The player has about a 42% chance of winning a hand, while the dealer wins around 49%. The remaining 9% percentage results in ties (called a push). .

So you say the house edge is 49% losing a hand minus 42% winning a hand = 7% house edge?

My friend, 9 percent is push; don't you read the end of the sentence? You are destined to lose in blackjack, this is not special to Stake.com.

I even wrote this myself but this guy is just a joke. Not only is he unable to read but also simple math seems to be a big issue for this person. Having played 180000 hand of BJ (so he claims) and doesn't even know the numbers is just insane.
Casinos love players like him obviously. Absolute clueless degen that deposits and whine at the end. 

[tetaeridanus]

Here's an overview: The Odds of Winning Blackjack: The player has about a 42% chance of winning a hand, while the dealer wins around 49%. The remaining 9% percentage results in ties (called a push). .

So you say the house edge is 49% losing a hand minus 42% winning a hand = 7% house edge?

My friend, 9 percent is push; don't you read the end of the sentence? You are destined to lose in blackjack, this is not special to Stake.com.

I even wrote this myself but this guy is just a joke. Not only is he unable to read but also simple math seems to be a big issue for this person. Having played 180000 hand of BJ (so he claims) and doesn't even know the numbers is just insane.
Casinos love players like him obviously. Absolute clueless degen that deposits and whine at the end.  

I don't know what to answer anymore to the OP; you have also mentioned the push factor above. But, I honestly believe that he is in a mind-state that Blackjack is a game found to bankrupt the casinos not the players.

I am still waiting for OP to actually accuse Stake.com with proof (even some video). I will support or oppose it then. I don't understand what is the accusation here? He should sue the guy who found the blackjack game in his grave...

[BlackyJacky]

Here's an overview: The Odds of Winning Blackjack: The player has about a 42% chance of winning a hand, while the dealer wins around 49%. The remaining 9% percentage results in ties (called a push). .

So you say the house edge is 49% losing a hand minus 42% winning a hand = 7% house edge?

My friend, 9 percent is push; don't you read the end of the sentence?

How is the 9 percent push related to the house edge?

I don't understand what is the accusation here?

Which part you are not able to understand?

Info 1)

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

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

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% from the expected outcome according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additional maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets I can maximal additionally lose = 80% additional maximal possible house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 80% = 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = 0,9% maximal possible house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible house edge = 3,7% additional house edge!

3,7% additional house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,900 bets, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

snip this nonsense

Go back to school and take some math class. Or simple use google like pretty much everybody advised you to do. Your calculation and you understanding of house edge is WRONG. How many times do you need to be told that?

How ignorant can one be not to understand what basically everybody here tells you??

But whatever, it's best to not comment here anymore and push this useless thread. I will unwatch it as well since it's a total waste of time and energy even trying to explain it to this clown. What a sad world we live in when people like this one can post whatever they want even though it's the biggest bs imaginable. Glad he is broke though, because he obviously deserves it.

[BlackyJacky]

Kind reminder:

Here's an overview: The Odds of Winning Blackjack: The player has about a 42% chance of winning a hand, while the dealer wins around 49%. The remaining 9% percentage results in ties (called a push). .

So you say the house edge is 49% losing a hand minus 42% winning a hand = 7% house edge?

[Zwei]

...

no one is going to read your wall of texts, just stop with your explanations already.
you have been going on and on and on with your "math" for over a month now, and you are yet to prove any real evidence that stake originals are rigged.

maybe you are just wrong? did that idea ever cross your mind?

[BlackyJacky]

no one is going to read your wall of texts, just stop with your explanations already.

I read it and enjoy it!  

Though people who make nonsense posts and attack online casino victims must be disappointed by the truth!  

When hallucinations meet reality, there are unfortunately tensions!

you have been going on and on and on with your "math" for over a month now,

Were you able to understand the math, after month long reading?

Oh, and it is not his math!

You appear to be confused with the owner of the applicable math?

1) The by Stake advertised 0,5% house edge is Stake's math

2) The law of great numbers is the math by international recognized mathematicians and statisticians

and you are yet to prove any real evidence that stake originals are rigged.

Here is the real evidence:

Info 1)

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

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

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% from the expected outcome according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additional maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets I can maximal additionally lose = 80% additional maximal possible house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 80% = 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = 0,9% maximal possible house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible house edge = 3,7% additional house edge!

3,7% additional house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,900 bets, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.

maybe you are just wrong? did that idea ever cross your mind?

He can not be wrong, because it is not his math.

If, then the international recognized mathematicians and statisticians are wrong with their law of great numbers.

Are you able to prove that the law of great numbers is wrong?

[BlackyJacky]

AHOYBRAUSE still did not explain why he quoted the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand, but he meanwhile informed us that he is severe insane!

He hallucinates things and then publicly false and misleading declares his hallucinations as facts!

I make it easy for you. You basically said it several times in all your posts that it's the same. You say you should have lost 900 out of 180000 bets, because of the advertised 0.5% house edge. This means you think chance of winning and house edge is the same.   And you still want to deny it?

When the house edge is 0,5%, then logically the chance of winning 49,75%.

This is what I think and I never, ever said that I think house edge and chance of winning is the same!
 

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

As everyone can see, not one word where I say house edge and chance of winning is the same!

This is what your brain has hallucinated!  


My question is still not answered, so let me try again:

What is your message of saying that the chance of losing a hand is 49% and the chance of winning a hand is 42%?

The chance of winning is 99.5%?? Nice! Guess I will play BJ and get rich then.

How can you get rich when you statistically lose 0,5% of each bet?

How insane are you?

Why does whale.io engage insane people to represent its brand?

[tetaeridanus]

Happy New Year to all players and gambling truth-seekers!

While most are celebrating, Stake.com continues to operate a house of cards—a fraudulent empire built on lies and rigged games, ready to collapse under the weight of truth. Let’s shake this crooked facade to its very foundation.

Stake Originals: A Crumbling Façade

Stake aggressively promotes its “Stake Originals,” games they fully control. Why? Because these games are their playground of deception, where RTP, house edge, and outcomes are manipulated at will.

The Evidence Speaks for Itself:

Player 1 (@BlackJacky):

Total Bets: 180,904
Wins: 78,285
Losses: 86,612
Net Loss: 8,327 bets
Deviation Beyond Max: 9.3x higher than statistically possible.

Player 2 (KingBJ):

Total Bets: 119,156
Expected Loss (0.5%): $7,392
Actual Loss: $60,000
Deviation Beyond Max: 24.66σ.

These numbers don’t just stretch the truth—they annihilate it. Even in gambling, randomness has rules, and Stake.com blatantly violates them to rob its players blind.

AHOYBRAUSE: The Jester of Lies

This delusional Stake puppet had the audacity to claim a 0.5% house edge means a 99.5% chance of winning. 🤡 Do you even understand what you're saying? Your math is as shaky as Stake’s fraudulent foundation.

You’ve failed to provide any credible defense, instead hiding behind petty insults and childish banter. How much does Eddie pay you to peddle this nonsense? Here’s a tip: Instead of trolling forums, sign up for a statistics course. You’re embarrassing yourself.

HolyDarkness: Another Piece of the Farce

Joining AHOYBRAUSE is HolyDarkness, symphonizing Stake’s lies as if we’re all too stupid to notice. Guess what? Your fake confidence and hollow arguments are as transparent as the rigged blackjack games you defend.

Eddie and Stake.com: The Cracks Are Showing

Stake’s CEO, Eddie, admitted in chats that RTP can be modified without notifying players. Translation:

Your chances of winning are whatever Stake wants them to be.

The advertised RTP is a smokescreen—they pull the strings behind the curtain.

Big players are targeted for higher losses during recovery bets.

Stake’s empire of deceit is crumbling. Their manipulation is no longer a secret, and their failure to comply with GDPR requests further exposes their shady practices.

Your House Is Shaking, Eddie

Eddie and Stake, your carefully crafted facade is cracking under the weight of truth. The players are waking up, and your days of deception are numbered.

AHOYBRAUSE and HolyDarkness, you’re nothing but court jesters in Eddie’s crumbling castle. Your hollow arguments are as weak as the house of cards you represent.

Call to Action

Players, it’s time to fight back against this fraud:

Demand transparency: Force Stake to release unaltered betting data for public scrutiny.

Report Stake: File complaints with gambling regulators, particularly the Curacao Gaming Control Board.

Expose the truth: Share your experiences, evidence, and this post far and wide.

Final Blow:

AHOYBRAUSE, HolyDarkness, and Stake.com—your facade is shaking, your foundation is cracking, and the truth is roaring through the cracks. 2025 will be the year we bring down this house of lies.

Happy New Year to all truth-seekers. To Stake.com and its puppets: Your time is up. The storm is coming. 🌪️

I ROFL’d on ‘The Jester of Lies’

[AHOYBRAUSE]

AHOYBRAUSE still did not explain why he quoted the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand, but he meanwhile informed us that he is

Yes he did, several times, with links:

https://www.winstar.com/blog/blackjack-odds/#:~:text=The%20player%20has%20about%20a,cents%20in%20the%20long%20run.
https://www.onlinegambling.com/blackjack/odds/
https://www.mrgreen.com/blackjack/strategies/blackjack-odds
https://www.gamblingzone.com/uk/blackjack/odds/

I could post 10000 more sites that ALL tell you that chance of winning a BJ hand are 42.2%. But hey, since reading and understanding basic math is not your forte I can understand that this must be very confusing for you.
Guess you better ask someone in person to explain this to you and your "friend". 

[BlackyJacky]

AHOYBRAUSE still did not explain why he quoted the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand, but he meanwhile informed us that he is

Yes he did, several times, with links:

https://www.winstar.com/blog/blackjack-odds/#:~:text=The%20player%20has%20about%20a,cents%20in%20the%20long%20run.
https://www.onlinegambling.com/blackjack/odds/
https://www.mrgreen.com/blackjack/strategies/blackjack-odds
https://www.gamblingzone.com/uk/blackjack/odds/

I could post 10000 more sites that ALL tell you that chance of winning a BJ hand are 42.2%. But hey, since reading and understanding basic math is not your forte I can understand that this must be very confusing for you.

Why did you quote the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand?

What is your message with quoting the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand?

Answer draft: I quoted the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand, because ... (hint: here you need to explain why you quoted the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand).

Guess you better ask someone in person to explain this to you and your "friend".  

Only the one who quoted the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand can explain why he did it!

[nutildah]

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

That's incorrect. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what House Edge means.

House Edge has nothing to do with percentage of winning vs. losing hands -- it has to do with the percentage of a player's original bet that goes to the casino on average.

https://math.info/Misc/House_Edge/

A meaningful analysis would involve knowing the total $$ amount of winning hands vs. the total $$ amount of losing hands. This is because blackjacks pay 2-to-1, so the actual house edge is misrepresented by assuming all winning bets are the same $$ amount as all losing bets.

Oh, I see this was addressed in the 2nd post:
 

What has house edge to do with expected losses in a win/lose ratio??
House edge will be accounted for wins and losses profit wise, not for the game outcome  :: .

Nobody is going to take this thread seriously. Not sure how it continued on this long.

[BlackyJacky]

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

That's incorrect.

That is 100% correct!

If I placed 5 x 100 USD, then I statistically will lose 5 x 0,5% from 100 USD = 2,5% from 500 USD = 12,5 USD.

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what House Edge means.

YOU have a fundamental misunderstanding of what house edge means!

House Edge has nothing to do with percentage of winning vs. losing hands --

Correct!

But the clownfish AHOYBRAUSE quoted the percentages of winning and losing a Black Jack hand!

it has to do with the percentage of a player's original bet that goes to the casino on average.

https://math.info/Misc/House_Edge/

Correct!

Like I always say, when the house edge is 0,5%, then statistically 0,5% of every bet amount goes to the casino.

Practically, every 201 bets, 1 bet goes to the casino.

Oh, I see this was addressed in the 2nd post:
 

What has house edge to do with expected losses in a win/lose ratio??
House edge will be accounted for wins and losses profit wise, not for the game outcome  :: .

I see only nonsense questions and declarations!

What has house edge to do with expected losses in a win/lose ratio??

The house edge determines the win/loss ratio!

So if the house edge is 0,5%, then the win/loss ratio is 49,75% / 50,25%

House edge will be accounted for wins and losses profit wise, not for the game outcome  :: .

What are wins and losses "profit" wise  

Are there also wins and losses "losses" wise?

Because when you play a game with a house edge, long-term you should have wins and losses losses wise and not profit wise!

Though clownfish AHOYBRAUSE is the one who will become rich when he loses 0,5% of every bet amount!  

What is the game outcome  

Is the percentage of winning and losing a hand the game outcome?

Because clownfish AHOYBRAUSE quoted the percentages of winning and losing a hand, but until today refuses to explain why he did!

Or is the percentage of winning and losing a bet the game outcome?

Maybe he is confused with his hallucinations, or maybe the next day he does not remember what he hallucinated the day before?

[memehunter]

I have read it all and one of the wise members @Eternad already pointed out the obvious mistake in all the data provided by OP;

But you should input the winning percentage set on the game to determine the win/loss ratio if it will match to the outcome or not. 300K is indeed a good size for sample imho which can already use to check the math.

Look how he wasted the opportunity to get some sincere attention. Instead of specifically answering he used the word 'flawlessly' .

I played the game flawlessly and therefore should have experienced the advertised 0,5% house edge.

Now let me tell you why knowing this information matters;
Let's say you have a winning chance of 'one in a million' so you will lose on an average of around one million bets before winning one bet and your data will look like the following;
Total bets: 1 million
Lost:         1 million
Won:         0
and now you can mislead others by claiming it is impossible with a 1% house edge.            

[BlackyJacky]

I have read it all and one of the wise members @Eternad already pointed out the obvious mistake in all the data provided by OP;

What is the obvious mistake in all the data provided by OP?

But you should input the winning percentage set on the game to determine the win/loss ratio if it will match to the outcome or not.

If we input the 49,75% winning percentage it will determine the win/loss ratio = 49,75% / 50,25%

Problem is that I lost 10 times more than the advertised 50,25% losing percentage = 52,3% losing percentage!

180,900 bets is indeed a good size to prove rigged games!

[nutildah]

Though clownfish AHOYBRAUSE is the one who will become rich when he loses 0,5% of every bet amount!  

I don't think he ever said this. Nobody thinks this, and if you don't like the concept of a house edge then you shouldn't be playing blackjack. But I also realize you are just trolling. I honestly can't believe attacking casinos with such easily disprovable fud was ever actually a profitable endeavor. Seems like a ridiculous waste of time on planet earth. Sure, there's a lot of shady casinos out there, but you should be attacking actual fraud, not based around your reimagined definition of house edge.

For example, its impossible to take this seriously:

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

That's incorrect.

That is 100% correct!

If I placed 5 x 100 USD, then I statistically will lose 5 x 0,5% from 100 USD = 2,5% from 500 USD = 12,5 USD.

You are still equating "bets placed" with "bet amount returned", assuming an equal payout for each win, and an equal amount lost for each loss. Because Blackjacks pay 2-to-1, it is likely that the # of losing bets will be greater than 0.5%, because Blackjacks pay double but only count as one bet.

Also claims like this:

Problem is that I lost 10 times more than the advertised 50,25% losing percentage = 52,3% losing percentage!

180,900 bets is indeed a good size to prove rigged games!

As your screenshot is, no one but Stake to verify this is your account, and that the numbers displayed on the screen aren't altered.