Unfair Blackjack | Bitcointalksearch.org

Alvin Fahriza

sr. member

Activity: 350

Merit: 250

Quote from: waterpile on June 27, 2015, 05:41:19 PM

Quote from: yoloer808 on June 27, 2015, 01:46:53 AM

How are the results unrealistic? But ok, I think he should just come out and name the site here.

Don't take newbie's post seriously, he didn't provide any proofs and he didn't named which site it is

Quote from: shogdite on June 27, 2015, 03:48:17 PM

So guys.. Who has the best blackjack for bitcoins going on?

For me its CoinRoyale.com

ok i Try

waterpile

hero member

Activity: 602

Merit: 500

Quote from: yoloer808 on June 27, 2015, 01:46:53 AM

How are the results unrealistic? But ok, I think he should just come out and name the site here.

Don't take newbie's post seriously, he didn't provide any proofs and he didn't named which site it is

Quote from: shogdite on June 27, 2015, 03:48:17 PM

So guys.. Who has the best blackjack for bitcoins going on?

For me its CoinRoyale.com

shogdite

hero member

Activity: 798

Merit: 1000

LIR Dev. www.letitride.io

So guys.. Who has the best blackjack for bitcoins going on?

lexuz

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

Me, myself and I

Quote from: Malin Keshar on June 26, 2015, 10:30:36 AM

Quote from: apriyani420 on June 26, 2015, 10:09:46 AM

Quote from: damiano on June 26, 2015, 09:39:54 AM

Maaan you played just 69 hands and call it unfair and to stay away, you never played even 1% of what you needed to make the claim of unfairness. Your test was flawed as you never got a proper average just a few bad hands. Come back with them unfair and cheat claims after playing 2000+ hands not 69

Was the site you played provably fair?

i agree only 69 hands can have too much coincidence to call it already unfair, you should have played at least 1000

1000 hands in a not provably fair casino just to prove they are not fair? And spend at least 1BTC in your experiment?

No, thanks. I would prefer be forever in doubt

agree with your argument, for me first 5 hand arrow in blackjack for show this casino provably fair or not. no need much balance for to know fair or not. just need in 5 game

yoloer808

full member

Activity: 288

Merit: 113

Web dev for hire

Quote from: ajareselde on June 27, 2015, 01:41:04 AM

Quote from: damiano on June 26, 2015, 09:39:54 AM

Maaan you played just 69 hands and call it unfair and to stay away, you never played even 1% of what you needed to make the claim of unfairness. Your test was flawed as you never got a proper average just a few bad hands. Come back with them unfair and cheat claims after playing 2000+ hands not 69

Was the site you played provably fair?

So what you are saying is that he should loose 30 times more money before he is allowed to say something? He said it multiple times that the sample range is small,
it's not like he doesn't realize that,but the thing is how the results are unrealistic.

@op stay away from non-provably fair gambling sites

cheers

How are the results unrealistic? But ok, I think he should just come out and name the site here.

ajareselde

legendary

Activity: 1722

Merit: 1000

Satoshi is rolling in his grave. #bitcoin

Quote from: damiano on June 26, 2015, 09:39:54 AM

Maaan you played just 69 hands and call it unfair and to stay away, you never played even 1% of what you needed to make the claim of unfairness. Your test was flawed as you never got a proper average just a few bad hands. Come back with them unfair and cheat claims after playing 2000+ hands not 69

Was the site you played provably fair?

So what you are saying is that he should loose 30 times more money before he is allowed to say something? He said it multiple times that the sample range is small,
it's not like he doesn't realize that,but the thing is how the results are unrealistic.

@op stay away from non-provably fair gambling sites

cheers

yoloer808

full member

Activity: 288

Merit: 113

Web dev for hire

Quote from: BKT217 on June 26, 2015, 02:37:13 PM

Quote from: FanEagle on June 26, 2015, 01:15:06 PM

Please OP, are you being sarcastic with those 69 hands? or you wanted to refer it as sexual like BJ can appear to mean.
I've played so many hands like for days both on live dealing and software one, and I prefer the live dealing ofc but still, 69 hands is relatively extremely small to compare a % of busting or something.

I disagree, % to bust or % of dealer upcards are fixed percentages, when a game deviates from expectations to a significant extent it can signal that there is something WRONG and it can be proven in FAR fewer hands then would be believed.

For example: If I had a bag with 99 red marbles and 1 blue marble and drew the blue marble 20 times in a row you could prove something to be statstically wrong in that game in very few trials!

I may run some more tests this weekend, I don't expect much to come from it, there is no accountability in a "bitcoin" casino.

Even look at casinos such as 5Dimes(reputable casino) they ran rigged craps for 2 years before someone decided to test it.. Roll Eyes

Only takeaway from this thread is to stick to live or provably fair casinos and always change client seed Wink

How would this manifest itself in blackjack? There are no extremely high or low probabilities for getting any of the cards. Apart from a situation where the dealer get blackjack 69 times in a row, I really fail to see what could give away that it is manipulated in so few hands.

subSTRATA

legendary

Activity: 1288

Merit: 1043

:^)

Quote from: grendel25 on June 26, 2015, 06:50:42 PM

Yep, to get a fair statistical analysis requires playing millions of rounds and is best left to tailorable simulation computers. Plus, there are games with better odds and lower house edge compared to Blackjack and there is a lot less risk of human betting errors to optimize the result. Baccarat is one example but even that still has a house edge and it's not uncommon to get 25+ losses in a row despite having nearly 50/50 odds.

people need to understand that there is something called probability; too many people fall to gambler's fallacy and consider something like this "impossible" when its just a series of bad picks.

grendel25

legendary

Activity: 2296

Merit: 1031

Yep, to get a fair statistical analysis requires playing millions of rounds and is best left to tailorable simulation computers. Plus, there are games with better odds and lower house edge compared to Blackjack and there is a lot less risk of human betting errors to optimize the result. Baccarat is one example but even that still has a house edge and it's not uncommon to get 25+ losses in a row despite having nearly 50/50 odds.

BKT217

newbie

Activity: 18

Merit: 0

Quote from: FanEagle on June 26, 2015, 01:15:06 PM

Please OP, are you being sarcastic with those 69 hands? or you wanted to refer it as sexual like BJ can appear to mean.
I've played so many hands like for days both on live dealing and software one, and I prefer the live dealing ofc but still, 69 hands is relatively extremely small to compare a % of busting or something.

I disagree, % to bust or % of dealer upcards are fixed percentages, when a game deviates from expectations to a significant extent it can signal that there is something WRONG and it can be proven in FAR fewer hands then would be believed.

For example: If I had a bag with 99 red marbles and 1 blue marble and drew the blue marble 20 times in a row you could prove something to be statstically wrong in that game in very few trials!

I may run some more tests this weekend, I don't expect much to come from it, there is no accountability in a "bitcoin" casino.

Even look at casinos such as 5Dimes(reputable casino) they ran rigged craps for 2 years before someone decided to test it.. Roll Eyes

Only takeaway from this thread is to stick to live or provably fair casinos and always change client seed Wink

FanEagle

legendary

Activity: 2884

Merit: 1117

Please OP, are you being sarcastic with those 69 hands? or you wanted to refer it as sexual like BJ can appear to mean.
I've played so many hands like for days both on live dealing and software one, and I prefer the live dealing ofc but still, 69 hands is relatively extremely small to compare a % of busting or something.

trafficolaa

legendary

Activity: 1008

Merit: 1000

What OP want to prove about blackjack because he did not name it any website there where he tested that method or he want to prove that all website that have blackjack games are rigged, in my opinion i am playing blackjack at live casino and till now i have made very good profit from that site with this games so if some sites are rigged than OP must named it and it can be helpful for new players to stay away from this scam site.

jambola2

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1038

Well, if the minimum bet is small enough, 0.0001 to 0.0005, you could try a few hundred at without a large loss and try to get a good sample size.
The question is though, why not reveal the casino?
If it is a scam, others will know.
If it isn't a scam, people can defend it, or the casino owner could try to justify.

yoloer808

full member

Activity: 288

Merit: 113

Web dev for hire

If you have concerns about a site, why not just name it? I think it would put your accusations in context, because now you're not saying anything with you small sample size.

anderson00673

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

I think it is better to only play at online casinos with a good reputation. There are some pretty well established ones, and they stand to earn far more from their customers by having a fair system in place. These small guys might just be in it for a quick buck.

Speaking of fair, does anyone think the dice is rigged at yobit? I do, but I only play with their free coins anyway, so its not a big deal.

Malin Keshar

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 500

Quote from: apriyani420 on June 26, 2015, 10:09:46 AM

Quote from: damiano on June 26, 2015, 09:39:54 AM

Maaan you played just 69 hands and call it unfair and to stay away, you never played even 1% of what you needed to make the claim of unfairness. Your test was flawed as you never got a proper average just a few bad hands. Come back with them unfair and cheat claims after playing 2000+ hands not 69

Was the site you played provably fair?

i agree only 69 hands can have too much coincidence to call it already unfair, you should have played at least 1000

1000 hands in a not provably fair casino just to prove they are not fair? And spend at least 1BTC in your experiment?

No, thanks. I would prefer be forever in doubt

Dennis7777

hero member

Activity: 640

Merit: 500

Quote from: apriyani420 on June 26, 2015, 10:09:46 AM

Quote from: damiano on June 26, 2015, 09:39:54 AM

Maaan you played just 69 hands and call it unfair and to stay away, you never played even 1% of what you needed to make the claim of unfairness. Your test was flawed as you never got a proper average just a few bad hands. Come back with them unfair and cheat claims after playing 2000+ hands not 69

Was the site you played provably fair?

i agree only 69 hands can have too much coincidence to call it already unfair, you should have played at least 1000

Nope he shouldn't try to play on that site, not even 1 hand, since he knows it is not provably fair and there are multiple provably fair BJ sites out there for him to choose from.

muhrohmat

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 250

well as we can see if the blckjack was something to be lost for the house wouldnt be there would it? its just a 40% change to doulbe and 60% of losing like most of casino schemes.

apriyani420

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

Quote from: damiano on June 26, 2015, 09:39:54 AM

Maaan you played just 69 hands and call it unfair and to stay away, you never played even 1% of what you needed to make the claim of unfairness. Your test was flawed as you never got a proper average just a few bad hands. Come back with them unfair and cheat claims after playing 2000+ hands not 69

Was the site you played provably fair?

i agree only 69 hands can have too much coincidence to call it already unfair, you should have played at least 1000

damiano

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1000

103 days, 21 hours and 10 minutes.

Maaan you played just 69 hands and call it unfair and to stay away, you never played even 1% of what you needed to make the claim of unfairness. Your test was flawed as you never got a proper average just a few bad hands. Come back with them unfair and cheat claims after playing 2000+ hands not 69

Was the site you played provably fair?

Topic: Unfair Blackjack (Read 1782 times)