God bless stake.com and eddie and take care

[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.

No, that's not what it means. Here's a few definitions of "house edge":

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/110415/why-does-house-always-win-look-casino-profitability.asp

the “house edge” represent the average gross profit that the casino expects to make from each game.

https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/house-edge/

The house edge is defined as the ratio of the average loss to the initial bet...
For example if a player knows the house edge in blackjack is 0.6% he can assume that for every $10 wager original wager he makes he will lose 6 cents on the average.

https://knowyourodds.net.au/house-edge/

The House Edge is a term used to describe the mathematical advantage that the gambling game, and therefore the commercial gambling venue, has over you as you play over time. This advantage results in an assured percentage return to the venue over time, and for you an assured percentage loss of what you bet.

It has nothing to do with the number of wins vs. losses. Its not really up for debate. You can keep claiming otherwise, but your claims are unfounded and nobody is going to take you seriously.

Can you find a source that supports your claim?

[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.

It has nothing to do with the number of wins vs. losses. Its not really up for debate. You can keep claiming otherwise, but your claims are unfounded and nobody is going to take you seriously.

The difference between bets won and bets lost is the house edge.

If I make 100 bets and will statistically win 50 bets and lose 50 bets, then there is no house edge.

If I make 100 bets and will statistically win 49,75 bets and lose 50,25 bets, then the house edge is losing a half bet per 100 bets = 0,5%.

If I make 100 bets and will statistically win 49,5 bets and lose 50,5 bets, then the house edge is losing 1 bet per 100 bets = 1%.

If I make 100 bets and will statistically win 47,5 bets and lose 52,5 bets, then the house edge is losing 5 bets per 100 bets = 5%.

Can you find a source that supports your claim?

You yourself quoted sources which support my claim:

Example 1)

https://wizardofodds.com/gambling/house-edge/

The house edge is defined as the ratio of the average loss to the initial bet...
For example if a player knows the house edge in blackjack is 0.6% he can assume that for every $10 wager original wager he makes he will lose 6 cents on the average.

When the house edge is 0,6% and the bet amount is $10, the player will statistically lose 6 cents with each bet.

When the player makes 100 times a $10 bet, then he will statistically lose 100 x 6 cents = $6.

That means when the house edge is 0,6%, the player will statistically lose 0,6 bets per 100 bets and 0,6 of $10 = $6.

So the house edge always determines how many bets a player will statistically lose per 100 bets.


Example 2)

https://knowyourodds.net.au/house-edge/

The House Edge is a term used to describe the mathematical advantage that the gambling game, and therefore the commercial gambling venue, has over you as you play over time. This advantage results in an assured percentage return to the venue over time, and for you an assured percentage loss of what you bet.

"assured percentage loss of what I bet"

So if the house edge is 0,5%, the assured percentage loss is 0,5% of the bet amount or every 100 bets I will lose a half bet.

[noviesol]

I didn't receive an answer to the following question: Do you count a won split or double as two wins and a loss as two losses?

Splits and doubles significantly increase the total number of bets placed in the long run. If this isn’t accounted for, the numbers lack a solid foundation, as there will be many instances where doubling is necessary on 9, 10, or 11, and splitting on 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, etc.

[BlackyJacky]

I didn't receive an answer to the following question: Do you count a won split or double as two wins and a loss as two losses?

Splits and doubles significantly increase the total number of bets placed in the long run. If this isn’t accounted for, the numbers lack a solid foundation, as there will be many instances where doubling is necessary on 9, 10, or 11, and splitting on 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, etc.

Of course do they need to count a doubled bet as 2 bets won or lost and a split as 2 bets won or lost.

But as the Stake software counted my total number of bets won and lost, I do not know how they counted it.

[noviesol]

I didn't receive an answer to the following question: Do you count a won split or double as two wins and a loss as two losses?

Splits and doubles significantly increase the total number of bets placed in the long run. If this isn’t accounted for, the numbers lack a solid foundation, as there will be many instances where doubling is necessary on 9, 10, or 11, and splitting on 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, etc.

Of course do they need to count a doubled bet as 2 bets won or lost and a split as 2 bets won or lost.

But as the Stake software counted my total number of bets won and lost, I do not know how they counted it.

But what if the Stake software counts your doubles and splits as a single bet? This means the 78,285 wins don't account for the additional winnings from doubles and splits.

Additionally, the number of Blackjacks significantly affects your total wins. I don't think the Stake software counts a Blackjack win as 1.5 wins. Could you separate the number of regular wins from Blackjack wins? This has a substantial impact on your Expected Value (House Edge), especially since you mentioned that the total wins also include Blackjack wins multiplied by 1.5

I don't think the numbers you crunched can be used for directly calculating the house edge.

[BlackyJacky]

I didn't receive an answer to the following question: Do you count a won split or double as two wins and a loss as two losses?

Splits and doubles significantly increase the total number of bets placed in the long run. If this isn’t accounted for, the numbers lack a solid foundation, as there will be many instances where doubling is necessary on 9, 10, or 11, and splitting on 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, etc.

Of course do they need to count a doubled bet as 2 bets won or lost and a split as 2 bets won or lost.

But as the Stake software counted my total number of bets won and lost, I do not know how they counted it.

But what if the Stake software counts your doubles and splits as a single bet?

Then the Stake software and my Stake statistics is rigged and they have to give back the around 30,000 USD I lost!

This means the 78,285 wins don't account for the additional winnings from doubles and splits.

You think the 78,285 wins don't account for the additional winnings from doubles and splits and the 86,612 losses account for the additional losses from doubles and splits?

Additionally, the number of Blackjacks significantly affects your total wins. I don't think the Stake software counts a Blackjack win as 1.5 wins.

If the Stake software does not count a Black Jack win as 1,5 bets won, then the Stake software and my Stake statistics is rigged and they have to give back the around 30,000 USD I lost!

Could you separate the number of regular wins from Blackjack wins?

I could if I take a look at all 180,900 bets in the alleged bets history I have downloaded, but I will not.

This has a substantial impact on your Expected Value (House Edge), especially since you mentioned that the total wins also include Blackjack wins multiplied by 1.5

The total wins should include Black Jack wins with 1,5 bets won, but I don't know if it does.

I don't think the numbers you crunched can be used for directly calculating the house edge.

I don't understand what you mean with the numbers I crunched?

The numbers in my Stake statistics are crunched by the Stake software and if they can not be used to calculate my experienced house edge, then the Stake software and my Stake statistics is rigged and they have to give back the around 30,000 USD I lost!

According to Stake's answer to their previous license issuer, the Stake statistics is not rigged:

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, they don't dispute that my experienced house edge is 4,6%.

The law of great numbers, which determines the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome, does not exist in Stake's separate fantasy world and they say that I lost 4,6% of my bets instead of the advertised 0,5%, because only after 1 million bets the advertised house edge applies!

That does not mean that the Stake statistics is not rigged, but for my compensation claim it anyway does not bear any relevance whether the Stake statistics is rigged or the cards dealing system!

[BlackyJacky]

That means when the house edge is 0,6%, the player will statistically lose 0,6 bets per 100 bets

No, you lost it again. You're once again equating "cents" with "bets", which doesn't make any sense seeing as you are playing Blackjack and not all payouts are equal relative to the starting bet.

No, I don't equate "cents" with "bets".

I say that your experienced house edge is physically realised by how many bets you won or lost per 100 bets.

So if you made 100 bets and won 60 and lost 40, then your experienced player edge is 20%.

You refer to articles where they speak about the mathematical / statistical house edge and you say players lose the house edge from every bet amount!

But this is obviously not true, because the casino does not reduce the house edge from every bet amount.

Do you know what percent means?

In mathematics, a percentage (from Latin per centum 'by a hundred') is a number or ratio expressed as a fraction of 100.

So the house edge percentage is always a fraction of 100 and that means if the house edge is 0,6% I will statistically lose 0,6 bets per 100 bets.

So the house edge always determines how many bets a player will statistically lose per 100 bets.

Again, wrong. If you read the sources I posted carefully, you will see that none of them say this.

Why do you post sources which don't explain how the house edge is physically realised?

Additionally, the number of Blackjacks significantly affects your total wins. I don't think the Stake software counts a Blackjack win as 1.5 wins.

If the Stake software does not count a Black Jack win as 1,5 bets won, then the Stake software and my Stake statistics is rigged.

Why would they count a single bet as 1.5 bets? You only need to bet once to win a Blackjack.

When you win a Black Jack, you win 1,5 bets and the Stake software should add 1,5 bets won to the bets wins statistics.

@noviesol thinks that when a player won a Black Jack, the Stake software adds only 1 bet won instead of 1,5 bets won to the bets wins statistics.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

LOL, he still doesn’t get it. House edge doesn’t determine how many bets you are losing, it’s how much money you will lose even if you win 50% of your bets. How hard is that for your brain to comprehend?

Honestly, you have been told the same thing a million times and still you close your eyes when being faced with straight facts.

Pure entertainment in this thread! And by the way, your argument will only bring you more laughs so you might want to change your "strategy“ when blackmailing stake. 

Ahoy, the professional clown for Stake, still dancing around the real issue.

Your little lecture on house edge is cute, but let’s talk real facts:

Stake’s blackjack is provably rigged, which means house edge isn’t the only factor—manipulated RNG and unfair gameplay seal the deal.
Stake is banned in India for money laundering and illegal UPI deposits, yet here you are running damage control like a loyal puppet.
Your “high-roller” privileges come at the cost of silencing victims, but keep collecting those breadcrumbs while the real players expose the truth.
If you think this is "blackmail," you clearly don’t understand the difference between whistleblowing and fraud exposure. But that’s expected from someone whose only strategy is bootlicking Stake for scraps.

What I write is not pro or con stake, it's straight up con you because you are too stupid to understand the difference between basivally everything surrounding betting.
Oh and by the way, didn't you claim you played book perfect BJ?

What about this hand then? Posted by you in the stake forum in one of your silly rants. Ah and btw, you also claimed you never changed the bet size. 

https://postimg.cc/HchXhbgS
https://postimg.cc/fVYngc6B
https://postimg.cc/56MZQYHz

Guess you don't play that perfect then when you stand on a hard 15 vs 10.

[BlackyJacky]

LOL, he still doesn’t get it. House edge doesn’t determine how many bets you are losing, it’s how much money you will lose even if you win 50% of your

Do you know what percent means?

In mathematics, a percentage (from Latin per centum 'by a hundred') is a number or ratio expressed as a fraction of 100.


How is the house edge physically enforced?

If the advertised house edge is 0,5 percent, I will statistically lose 0,5 bets per 100 bets.

As the casino does not deduct the house edge from each bet amount, the house edge is realised by the number of bets you lose per 100 bets.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

LOL, he still doesn’t get it. House edge doesn’t determine how many bets you are losing, it’s how much money you will lose even if you win 50% of your

Do you know what percent means?

In mathematics, a percentage (from Latin per centum 'by a hundred') is a number or ratio expressed as a fraction of 100.


How is the house edge physically enforced?

If the advertised house edge is 0,5 percent, I will statistically lose 0,5 bets per 100 bets.

As the casino does not deduct the house edge from each bet amount, the house edge is realised by the number of bets you lose per 100 bets.

Cute how you post the exact same nonsense twice in different threads.
You know what your main problem is? I mean aside from the obvious problems you have you are thinking you can treat BJ like a coin flip game. That's not how it works. Coin flip, with a 0.5% house edge is an easy game. You chose side A or B and win 1.98x, simple. Yet BJ is different because your chance of winning is only 42%. Why then is there a different house edge advertised you always scream. Easy answer, pushes, doubles and blackjacks. In coinflip you can't double your hand when the cards are in your favor ( like 10 or 11 against 5 or whatever). Also you can't get 2.5x which you get for blackjack. This all goes into the house edge calculation but it has no impact on the winning %.
In other words, the chances to win are smaller (42%) but occasionally the payout possibility is higher (3x when winning a double or 2.5x when hitting BJ) than just doubling your money in those other 0.5% house edge games.

Is that really that hard to understand?

Blackjack is not heads or tails or roulette betting red or black!!

[BlackyJacky]

LOL, he still doesn’t get it. House edge doesn’t determine how many bets you are losing, it’s how much money you will lose even if you win 50% of your

Do you know what percent means?

In mathematics, a percentage (from Latin per centum 'by a hundred') is a number or ratio expressed as a fraction of 100.


How is the house edge physically enforced?

If the advertised house edge is 0,5 percent, I will statistically lose 0,5 bets per 100 bets.

As the casino does not deduct the house edge from each bet amount, the house edge is realised by the number of bets you lose per 100 bets.

Cute how you post the exact same nonsense twice in different threads.

What is nonsense?

That the casino collects the house edge through the number of bets you lose per 100 bets?

If you hallucinate this as nonsense, please explain how the casino collects (not mathematically / statistically) the house edge?

You know what your main problem is?

Yes, the 2 RuneScape players and the chat moderator are sickheaded criminals, otherwise they would simply compensate me and move on with their provably rigged in-house games!

I mean aside from the obvious problems you have you are thinking you can treat BJ like a coin flip game. That's not how it works.

No, I am not thinking that Black Jack is a coin flip game!

In a coin flip game there is no house edge.

Coin flip, with a 0.5% house edge is an easy game.

Coin flips don't have a 0,5% house edge!

Coin flip means your chance to win is 50% and your chance to lose is 50% = zero house edge.  

A 0,5% house edge means your chance to win a bet is 49,75% and your chance to lose a bet is 50,25%.

Are you able to see the difference between a coin flip and a 0,5% house edge game?

You chose side A or B and win 1.98x, simple.

If the payout is 1.98x, then it is not a coin flip and a coin flip requires a payout of 2.0x.

Yet BJ is different because your chance of winning is only 42%.

My chance of winning a hand is only 42%, but at Black Jack the house edge is not determined based on the chance to win a hand!

Why do you speak about the chance to win a hand, while it is not the house edge?

Why then is there a different house edge advertised you always scream. Easy answer, pushes, doubles and blackjacks.

So you say my experienced house edge in the height of 4,6% is different to the advertised house edge in the height of 0,5%, because there are pushes, doubles and Black Jacks?

You explanation because of pushes in nonsense, because pushes are value neutral!

In coinflip you can't double your hand when the cards are in your favor ( like 10 or 11 against 5 or whatever). Also you can't get 2.5x which you get for blackjack. This all goes into the house edge calculation but it has no impact on the winning %.

Black Jack bets are not coin flips at Stake, because the casino has an advertised 0,5% house edge!

In other words, the chances to win are smaller (42%) but occasionally the payout possibility is higher (3x when winning a double or 2.5x when hitting BJ) than just doubling your money in those other 0.5% house edge games.

When you win a double, the payout is 4x and not 3x.

Is that really that hard to understand?

Yes, I am not able to understand your hallucinated nonsense!

[nutildah]

What is nonsense?

That the casino collects the house edge through the number of bets you lose per 100 bets?

Yes, that is nonsense. Nobody thinks that except for you. Nobody is going to be compelled into accepting your definition over the time-established definition, which doesn't have anything to do with the number of bets won or lost.

If you hallucinate this as nonsense, please explain how the casino collects (not mathematically / statistically) the house edge?

Several people have already provided you with this information, and you ignored it to continue repeating your same incorrect definition. Its pretty obvious what you're doing here, and its a massive waste of time for you to think you'll get anything out of it.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

What is nonsense?

That the casino collects the house edge through the number of bets you lose per 100 bets?

Yes, that is nonsense. Nobody thinks that except for you. Nobody is going to be compelled into accepting your definition over the time-established definition, which doesn't have anything to do with the number of bets won or lost.

If you hallucinate this as nonsense, please explain how the casino collects (not mathematically / statistically) the house edge?

Several people have already provided you with this information, and you ignored it to continue repeating your same incorrect definition. Its pretty obvious what you're doing here, and its a massive waste of time for you to think you'll get anything out of it.

The retardation is big with that one, guess we are wasting our time with this fool. He only believes what he wants to believe, he might still wait for Santa and the easter bunny as well. 
Yet, it's cute how he deflects any well explained facts just because he is so bitter. Classic unemployed loser behavior.

[BlackyJacky]

What is nonsense?

That the casino collects the house edge through the number of bets you lose per 100 bets?

Yes, that is nonsense. Nobody thinks that except for you. Nobody is going to be compelled into accepting your definition over the time-established definition, which doesn't have anything to do with the number of bets won or lost.

How does the casino collect the house edge?

If you hallucinate this as nonsense, please explain how the casino collects (not mathematically / statistically) the house edge?

Several people have already provided you with this information, and you ignored it to continue repeating your same incorrect definition.

Who and where?

@AHOYBRAUSE hallucinated only nonsense so far!  

Its pretty obvious what you're doing here, and its a massive waste of time for you to think you'll get anything out of it.

I inform about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack and I will get compensated.  

[BlackyJacky]

@AHOYBRAUSE

How does the casino collect the house edge?

[Zwei]

How does the casino collect the house edge?

this question once again shows the dum dum you are.
the casino doesn't "collect" anything, the house edge is a statistical advantage that guarantees profit for the casino over many many many bets.

with how many times this has been explained to you, even a rock would understand by now.

[BlackyJacky]

How does the casino collect the house edge?

the casino doesn't "collect" anything,

If the casino does not collect anything, then nothing goes to the casino and there is no house edge.

the house edge is a statistical advantage that guarantees profit for the casino over many many many bets.

How does the casino collect the statistical advantage from the players?

[Zwei]

How does the casino collect the house edge?

the casino doesn't "collect" anything,

If the casino does not collect anything, then nothing goes to the casino and there is no house edge.

please, go ahead and explain how exactly do you think the casino "collects" the house edge.

the house edge is a statistical advantage that guarantees profit for the casino over many many many bets.

How does the casino collect the statistical advantage from the players?

others already explained this to you MULTIPE TIMES.
i could explain it to you again, but you are too dump to understand, so why should i bother?

if you can't handle losing like an adult, don't gamble.
an entire thread filled with bs, just because you and the other you gambled, lost, and are now crying about it.

[noviesol]

I think this discussion is pretty much over. It's OP against everyone else.

However, there are some flaws in your calculations. For example, you claimed to have played an optimal strategy, but I saw a screenshot where you stood on a hard 15 against a dealer’s 10. Plays like that significantly increase the house edge.

Additionally, it's unclear how Stake handles Blackjacks, doubles, and splits in your win/loss calculations. If these factors aren’t properly accounted for in the statistics, any conclusions drawn from them are unreliable.

Lastly, playing such a high number of hands guarantees losses over time. If you're truly into statistics and probabilities, why would you play so many hands of Blackjack when you know it’s a -EV game? The best way to maximize your chances is to bet big and play as few hands as possible—letting luck work in your favor.

If you had bet $50 per hand for 180,000 hands, you would have lost approximately $45,000 if you played optimal strategy and maintained the same bet size. However, if you always stood on a hard 15 or 16 against a dealer's 10, the house edge would increase to over 2.0%, meaning your total losses in the same scenario would be around $180,000.

[BlackyJacky]

I think this discussion is pretty much over. It's OP against everyone else.

Declaring hallucinated nonsense as facts is not a discussion!

However, there are some flaws in your calculations. For example, you claimed to have played an optimal strategy, but I saw a screenshot where you stood on a hard 15 against a dealer’s 10. Plays like that significantly increase the house edge.

Are there flaws in my calculation?

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

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%.

Additionally, it's unclear how Stake handles Blackjacks, doubles, and splits in your win/loss calculations.

Your statement contradicts itself, because as Stake handles Black Jacks, doubles and splits, it is their win/loss calculation and not mine.

I simply draw the data from their statistics.

If these factors aren’t properly accounted for in the statistics, any conclusions drawn from them are unreliable.

If these factors are not properly accounted for in their statistics, then this entitles to a full compensation of all money lost!

However, Stake says their in-house statistics is working fine:

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.

Lastly, playing such a high number of hands guarantees losses over time.

Placing such a high number of bets guarantees to lose the 0,5% advertised house edge, but not 4,6%!

If you're truly into statistics and probabilities, why would you play so many hands of Blackjack when you know it’s a -EV game?

The -EV is the 0,5% advertised house edge, not 4,6%!

Despite of this, the rewards I received were around 0,5%, so it was not supposed to be a -EV game.

The best way to maximize your chances is to bet big and play as few hands as possible—letting luck work in your favor.

If the system is rigged, it does not matter how you play!

If you had bet $50 per hand for 180,000 hands, you would have lost approximately $45,000 if you played optimal strategy and maintained the same bet size.

I should have lost zero, because -0,5% advertised house edge plus 0,5% rewards = zero loss.

However, if you always stood on a hard 15 or 16 against a dealer's 10, the house edge would increase to over 2.0%, meaning your total losses in the same scenario would be around $180,000.

Against a dealer's 10, I never stood on a hard 15 and on a hard 16 it does not matter if you stand or draw.