Since 2 YEARS!!! I demand compensation for the unjustifiably lost 30,000 USD at Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!
Until today, Stake's alleged "Legal Department" is not willing to compensate me, even though they are clearly at fault here!
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%.
Info 4)
The Stake bet transaction history only states 180,900 single bet events and no overview of my experienced house edge.
To get my experienced house edge from the bet transaction history, I would need to take a look at all 180,900 bets and calculate it manually!
If the cards were dealt fair and I lost only 0,5% of all bets placed while the statistics states that I lost 4,6%, then the Stake statistics is rigged!
In either case, the Stake in-house Black Jack system is provably rigged and Stake has to compensate at least the 30,000 USD I lost from my pocket.
Topic: ⚖️ Crypto Gambling Foundation ⚖️ - Fair Gambling For All (Read 25361 times)
Quote from: Stake.com website
Stake is a Crypto Gambling Foundation verified operator with strong policies around Anti-Money Laundering.
Screenshot: https://ibb.co/gZhR31q
Screenshot: https://ibb.co/gZhR31q
Why does a cryptocurrency online casino which claims to have generated a gross gaming revenue in the height of 2,6 billion USD in 2022 refer to the verification by a non-existing Crypto Gambling Foundation?
Does not this expose them as scammers?
The Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) states on its website that they been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector on behalf of the Minister of Finance since March 2020!
On December 7, 2023, 45 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I informed (with proof) the GCB about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene.
6 months later and 51 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they answered the following:
51 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they are not willing to investigate Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system, even though this is a violation of the applicable regulations!
4,5 years! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they accepted a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation" during the license application process, even though 10 months before I informed them (with proof) about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!
On November 11, 2024 and 56 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I sent the following email to the GCB:
The GCB is an authority and not a nameless venture like the 4 master-license holders were!
Are they a new partner in crime?
On December 7, 2023, 45 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I informed (with proof) the GCB about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene.
6 months later and 51 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they answered the following:
Quote
Dear Sir / Madam,
Thank you for your email.
Unfortunately, the Curaçao Gaming Control Board (GCB) is currently not able to handle your request.
The government of Curaçao is actively in the process of modernizing our gambling legislation and setting up our online gaming policies and procedures.
We expect to be of more help as soon as the new legislation enters into force, which we expect to be the case in the second half of 2024.
We kindly point out in advance that the GCB will not investigate all complaints. For example, the GCB does not have the authority to adjudicate disputes between the complainant and the accused party and to settle claims or award damages. Only if a complaint indicates a violation of the applicable regulations, the supervisory task of the GCB entails that this will be investigated further.
For the time being, we kindly suggest, that at all times you seek legal advice for any claims you may have vis-à-vis the license holder or other party or parties. We refer to the following page that contains a list of law firms established in Curacao that may be able to assist you:
http://www.dutchcaribbeanlegalportal.com/legal-contacts/law-firms?sid=102:Law-Firms-Curacao.
Sincerely,
Curaçao Gaming Control Board
Thank you for your email.
Unfortunately, the Curaçao Gaming Control Board (GCB) is currently not able to handle your request.
The government of Curaçao is actively in the process of modernizing our gambling legislation and setting up our online gaming policies and procedures.
We expect to be of more help as soon as the new legislation enters into force, which we expect to be the case in the second half of 2024.
We kindly point out in advance that the GCB will not investigate all complaints. For example, the GCB does not have the authority to adjudicate disputes between the complainant and the accused party and to settle claims or award damages. Only if a complaint indicates a violation of the applicable regulations, the supervisory task of the GCB entails that this will be investigated further.
For the time being, we kindly suggest, that at all times you seek legal advice for any claims you may have vis-à-vis the license holder or other party or parties. We refer to the following page that contains a list of law firms established in Curacao that may be able to assist you:
http://www.dutchcaribbeanlegalportal.com/legal-contacts/law-firms?sid=102:Law-Firms-Curacao.
Sincerely,
Curaçao Gaming Control Board
51 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they are not willing to investigate Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system, even though this is a violation of the applicable regulations!
4,5 years! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they accepted a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation" during the license application process, even though 10 months before I informed them (with proof) about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!
On November 11, 2024 and 56 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I sent the following email to the GCB:
Quote
Subject: RE: IMPORTANT: Medium Rare N.V. , stake.com in-house Black Jack system provably rigged!
We are deep into the second half of 2024 and meanwhile you even accepted a license application for Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation", even though I informed you (with proof) already in December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!"
Running a rigged in-house Black Jack system is a violation of the applicable regulations, so do your job and investigate!
Please confirm receipt of this email.
We are deep into the second half of 2024 and meanwhile you even accepted a license application for Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation", even though I informed you (with proof) already in December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!"
Running a rigged in-house Black Jack system is a violation of the applicable regulations, so do your job and investigate!
Please confirm receipt of this email.
The GCB is an authority and not a nameless venture like the 4 master-license holders were!
Are they a new partner in crime?
BlackyJacky, kudos for bringing this to light. If they can’t refute hard numbers, maybe they’ll finally realize it’s time to own up — or face the consequences of failing to do so.
If Stake would have compensated me long time ago, I would not have reported their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system to the Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) in December 2023 and would not have asked them to intervene.
So looks like their alleged "Legal Department" already messed it up, because until they do not give back the unjustifiably taken 30,000 USD, the GCB is not allowed by Curacao laws to give a license to Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com.
If you are a RuneScape player or a chat moderator running the biggest online cryptocurrency casino in the world, what would you do?
1) Compensate the unjustifiably taken 30,000 USD and get a license from the GCB or
2) Persist to not compensate the unjustifiably taken 30,000 USD and do not get a license from the GCB
The previous partner in crime, Antillephone N.V., forwarded to me an email they received from Stake's alleged "Legal Department"
They claim in short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected.
Are not they aware that I made 180,900 bets and not 1,000 bets?
And according to the law of great numbers, after 180,900 bets the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% = 720 additional bets lost on top of the 900 bets I will statistically lose based on the advertised 0,5% house edge.
But when I lose an additional 6,707 bets (7,427 bets - 720 bets) on top of the additional 720 bets I technically can maximal lose, then this is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!
Why are not they able to understand this basic logic?
When you generated a 2,6 billion USD gross gaming revenue in 2022, then you should engage a legal department which is able to understand basic logic, otherwise you put your operation in jeopardy!
Destroying a multi billion USD online casino operation because of a stupid legal department is not really clever, is it?
Is their legal department stupid because Stake is run by 2 RuneScape players and a chat moderator, or why is it?
Should not they do a brain test prior to engaging legal department staff?
Quote from: Stake legal department
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://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2178857.400.
It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.
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://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2178857.400.
It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.
They claim in short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected.
Are not they aware that I made 180,900 bets and not 1,000 bets?
And according to the law of great numbers, after 180,900 bets the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% = 720 additional bets lost on top of the 900 bets I will statistically lose based on the advertised 0,5% house edge.
But when I lose an additional 6,707 bets (7,427 bets - 720 bets) on top of the additional 720 bets I technically can maximal lose, then this is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!
Why are not they able to understand this basic logic?
When you generated a 2,6 billion USD gross gaming revenue in 2022, then you should engage a legal department which is able to understand basic logic, otherwise you put your operation in jeopardy!
Destroying a multi billion USD online casino operation because of a stupid legal department is not really clever, is it?
Is their legal department stupid because Stake is run by 2 RuneScape players and a chat moderator, or why is it?
Should not they do a brain test prior to engaging legal department staff?
Hey BlackyJacky,
It’s almost comical — Stake’s legal “explanation” is like a bad joke. They throw around numbers like “one million bets” as if anyone with a calculator would believe that’s an answer here. If only Stake’s legal team could count, they'd see your 180,900 bets is well beyond “a few hundred or thousand.” But clearly, they’d rather muddy the waters with excuses than face the facts.
Basic Math for the Math-Challenged:
With a 0.5% house edge, you should statistically lose around 904.5 bets. Add a 0.4% maximal deviation (720 bets lost), and at most, 1,628.1 bets could be expected as losses. Yet, they leave you with an excess of 6,707 bets lost over this maximum. If their legal team could grasp this elementary math, they'd realize how ludicrous their “frivolous” dismissal is. This isn’t variability; this is just rigging dressed up in a poorly tailored legal defense.
Corporate Logic 101:
Stake’s 2022 revenue was a cool $2.6 billion, but somehow they think it’s a sound business move to let a clueless legal team tank their reputation. If Stake’s founders truly believe in their product, they might want to replace the RuneScape reject squad they currently have in legal with people who can actually read statistics.
Lesson in Transparency:
Stake, here’s some advice: if you’re going to operate a multi-billion-dollar casino, at least pretend to have a grip on basic math and honesty. Sweeping obvious statistical anomalies under the rug as “frivolous” complaints only highlights how little respect you have for the players who made that $2.6 billion possible.
BlackyJacky, kudos for bringing this to light. If they can’t refute hard numbers, maybe they’ll finally realize it’s time to own up — or face the consequences of failing to do so.
The previous partner in crime, Antillephone N.V., forwarded to me an email they received from Stake's alleged "Legal Department"
They claim in short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected.
Are not they aware that I made 180,900 bets and not 1,000 bets?
And according to the law of great numbers, after 180,900 bets the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% = 720 additional bets lost on top of the 900 bets I will statistically lose based on the advertised 0,5% house edge.
But when I lose an additional 6,707 bets (7,427 bets - 720 bets) on top of the additional 720 bets I technically can maximal lose, then this is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!
Why are not they able to understand this basic logic?
When you generated a 2,6 billion USD gross gaming revenue in 2022, then you should engage a legal department which is able to understand basic logic, otherwise you put your operation in jeopardy!
Destroying a multi billion USD online casino operation because of a stupid legal department is not really clever, is it?
Is their legal department stupid because Stake is run by 2 RuneScape players and a chat moderator, or why is it?
Should not they do a brain test prior to engaging legal department staff?
Quote from: Stake legal department
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://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2178857.400.
It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.
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://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2178857.400.
It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.
They claim in short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected.
Are not they aware that I made 180,900 bets and not 1,000 bets?
And according to the law of great numbers, after 180,900 bets the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% = 720 additional bets lost on top of the 900 bets I will statistically lose based on the advertised 0,5% house edge.
But when I lose an additional 6,707 bets (7,427 bets - 720 bets) on top of the additional 720 bets I technically can maximal lose, then this is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!
Why are not they able to understand this basic logic?
When you generated a 2,6 billion USD gross gaming revenue in 2022, then you should engage a legal department which is able to understand basic logic, otherwise you put your operation in jeopardy!
Destroying a multi billion USD online casino operation because of a stupid legal department is not really clever, is it?
Is their legal department stupid because Stake is run by 2 RuneScape players and a chat moderator, or why is it?
Should not they do a brain test prior to engaging legal department staff?
No, I did not open a scam accusation thread, but everyone can click on the screenshot of my statistics and I have more screenshots of my statistics during the course of my play.
You weren't cheated. You lost.
I liked your design for game-protect.com better. Very surprised that it was such a failure after it turned out the people you were "trying" to help needed more protection from you.
Do you have a scam accusation thread?
No, I did not open a scam accusation thread, but everyone can click on the screenshot of my statistics and I have more screenshots of my statistics during the course of play.
[email protected] is aware about my posts here.
Since 23 months!!! I demand compensation for the unjustifiably lost 30,000 USD at Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and all responsible parties like the alleged Stake "Legal Department", managing director Xecutive Corporate Management B.V., and the Curacao Gaming Control Board ignore me!
Partner in crime, the 8048/JAZ license holder Antillephone N.V., meanwhile went out of business and the Curacao Gaming Control Board appears to be a new partner in crime!
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%.
Info 4)
The Stake bet transaction history only states 180,900 single bet events and no overview of my experienced house edge.
To get my experienced house edge from the bet transaction history, I would need to take a look at all 180,900 bets and calculate it manually!
If the cards were dealt fair and I lost only 0,5% of all bets placed while the statistics states that I lost 4,6%, then the Stake statistics is rigged!
In either case, the Stake in-house Black Jack system is provably rigged and Stake has to compensate at least the 30,000 USD I lost from my pocket.
Partner in crime, the 8048/JAZ license holder Antillephone N.V., meanwhile went out of business and the Curacao Gaming Control Board appears to be a new partner in crime!
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%.
Info 4)
The Stake bet transaction history only states 180,900 single bet events and no overview of my experienced house edge.
To get my experienced house edge from the bet transaction history, I would need to take a look at all 180,900 bets and calculate it manually!
If the cards were dealt fair and I lost only 0,5% of all bets placed while the statistics states that I lost 4,6%, then the Stake statistics is rigged!
In either case, the Stake in-house Black Jack system is provably rigged and Stake has to compensate at least the 30,000 USD I lost from my pocket.
Twitchyseal has no idea what he is talking about
9 in a row isn't even interesting. It should happen every 5 or 600 hands. If you play often enough it will happen regularly because math. 
It happens quite often, because stake has rigged all the og games. They will be caught and eddie will face prison, mark my word.
If they rigged them they'll definitely be caught as soon as someone plays that understands how it works and verifies their bets. Provably fair also means provably unfair.
Most likely you're going through the same thing as blackyjacky though. Upset that you lost and convinced yourself that you're a victim because accepting responsibility yourself is too hard.
Twitchyseal has no idea what he is talking about
9 in a row isn't even interesting. It should happen every 5 or 600 hands. If you play often enough it will happen regularly because math. https://talkimg.com/images/2024/11/03/bMWuJ.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2024/11/04/bRlI5.png
It happens quite often, because stake has rigged all the og games. They will be caught and eddie will face prison, mark my word.
Syndicate by criminals? Nice
When the Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) accepts a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com while I inform them (with proof) since December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene, then yes, it looks like the GCB is member of a syndicate of criminals!If the GCB will give a license to the proven criminal online casino operation Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, then the GCB will be a proven member of a syndicate of criminals!
The GCB already gave a "Certificate of Operation" to Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, means the GCB allows Medium Rare N.V. to operate stake.com during the license application process, while it did not issue a license yet!
The problem is your proof only proves how confused you are.
Your math is wrong and even if it weren't wrong you based on the assumption that in every hand of black jack you can only ever lose your entire bet, push, or double your bet when in reality if you're dealt a black jack (that means an Ace and a face card or ten) you get paid 3-2. And you also have the option of increasing your bet by doubling down or splitting your hand into 2 or more hands.
All this means the player only wins 42% of hands on average. But because they often win more than double their money, it's not the same as flipping a coin for even money that only wins 42% of the time.
You lost because you're a losing online black jack player. You think you can beat the game, but that's only because you don't know how to do the math. Don't feel bad, nobody is beating stakes blackjack - the truth hurts. Crying only makes it worse.
Why are you quoting me with some other member who has nothing to do with me? All these crypto casinos are rigged and funded by criminals and thieves. Supporting them makes you look like an idiot, just saying.
https://talkimg.com/images/2024/11/03/bMWuJ.png
Syndicate by criminals? Nice
When the Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) accepts a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com while I inform them (with proof) since December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene, then yes, it looks like the GCB is member of a syndicate of criminals!If the GCB will give a license to the proven criminal online casino operation Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, then the GCB will be a proven member of a syndicate of criminals!
The GCB already gave a "Certificate of Operation" to Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, means the GCB allows Medium Rare N.V. to operate stake.com during the license application process, while it did not issue a license yet!
The problem is your proof only proves how confused you are.
Your math is wrong and even if it weren't wrong you based on the assumption that in every hand of black jack you can only ever lose your entire bet, push, or double your bet when in reality if you're dealt a black jack (that means an Ace and a face card or ten) you get paid 3-2. And you also have the option of increasing your bet by doubling down or splitting your hand into 2 or more hands.
All this means the player only wins 42% of hands on average. But because they often win more than double their money, it's not the same as flipping a coin for even money that only wins 42% of the time.
You lost because you're a losing online black jack player. You think you can beat the game, but that's only because you don't know how to do the math. Don't feel bad, nobody is beating stakes blackjack - the truth hurts. Crying only makes it worse.
Syndicate by criminals? Nice
When the Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) accepts a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com while I inform them (with proof) since December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene, then yes, it looks like the GCB is member of a syndicate of criminals!If the GCB will give a license to the proven criminal online casino operation Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, then the GCB will be a proven member of a syndicate of criminals!
The GCB already gave a "Certificate of Operation" to Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, means the GCB allows Medium Rare N.V. to operate stake.com during the license application process, while it did not issue a license yet!
Syndicate by criminals? Nice
The 2 RuneScape players and the chat moderator applied for a license from the Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) for the website stake.com
But as I inform (with proof) the GCB since December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system, the GCB is not allowed to give a license for the website stake.com, otherwise they would become partner in crime!
But as I inform (with proof) the GCB since December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system, the GCB is not allowed to give a license for the website stake.com, otherwise they would become partner in crime!
The 8048/JAZ license, the website stake.com claims to operate under, goes out of business on November 1st, 2024.
If you are a RuneScape player or a chat moderator, for which license would you apply and why?
If you are a RuneScape player or a chat moderator, for which license would you apply and why?
I noticed that some sites featured on the Crypto Gambling Foundation homepage are no longer active:
In some cases, they went offline after debatable changes related to their token (KONG), officially due to "ownership transitions".
It might be a good time to update the homepage, and perhaps consider adding BCH.games.
We've maintained a perfect track record over the past four years (though I may be a bit biased!).
- onehash.com
- luckydice.com
- bitkong.com
- simpledice.com
- cyberdice.net
In some cases, they went offline after debatable changes related to their token (KONG), officially due to "ownership transitions".
It might be a good time to update the homepage, and perhaps consider adding BCH.games.
We've maintained a perfect track record over the past four years (though I may be a bit biased!).
You are really asking that Stake who runs a provably rigged in-house Black Jack system adds you to their fake "fair gambling" for all website?
The meanwhile defunct casinos are not removed, because the fake "fair gambling" website is not monitored since years!!!
I noticed that some sites featured on the Crypto Gambling Foundation homepage are no longer active:
In some cases, they went offline after debatable changes related to their token (KONG), officially due to "ownership transitions".
It might be a good time to update the homepage, and perhaps consider adding BCH.games.
We've maintained a perfect track record over the past four years (though I may be a bit biased!).
- onehash.com
- luckydice.com
- bitkong.com
- simpledice.com
- cyberdice.net
In some cases, they went offline after debatable changes related to their token (KONG), officially due to "ownership transitions".
It might be a good time to update the homepage, and perhaps consider adding BCH.games.
We've maintained a perfect track record over the past four years (though I may be a bit biased!).
I don't think it's good to shill your own platform on another project thread regarding its problems, don't you think?
As I've seen, you've got your own thread, so why you won't do it from the perspective of the user at least?
Not that I am complaining, but it just seems non-organic a bit.
You are right.
Jump to: