How Many Online Casinos Cheat?

[ThodorisK]

Theodoros Kiriakopoulos
Athens, Greece

After having played many thousands of blackjack hands (yes, I am a poor bonus hunter), and considering my overall stats and my stats in each particular casino, I consider more and more probable the obvious and common sense conclusion: Since some casinos have the ability, the software to cheat, then they all do HAVE this CAPABILITY to cheat, they all have cheating software as a tool ready to use IF and WHEN they decide to do so. If small casinos have this weapon, don’t the large and “reputable” casinos have it too? Now when they use it, is a matter of superior management decisions. So I think that when they decide to cheat, they usually cheat by adding a small or large percentage to the house edge of any game, e.g. when they confront too many "bonus abusers" or when a high roller is on a winning streak, etc.

No software provider is safe, as the initial program that the software provider gives to the casinos might be ok, but a cheating program can be added afterwards. It might be that the software provider company has nothing to do with these cheating programs.

But casinos are hesitating to cheat because even if they cheat 1 out of 100 hands, this is shown statistically in a few thousands of hands (which happens to be the wagering requirement for a bonus). So indeed, large “reputable” casinos who aim at increasing their market share and have no cash flow problems, are less likely to cheat than smaller casinos who have a hit-and-run plan and a chance to run out of cash when a high roller has a winning streak. Also, more dangerous are the casinos which offer bonuses with which one can make a considerable profit if played appropriately. I also think that some casinos want to attract exactly the “bonus abusers” ! And then of course, cheat them.

I will focus in the problem of proving cheating with statistical analysis. In this thread I will post some stats regarding some casinos, some statistical analysis of these data, and other theoretical considerations in this. I present many theoritical considersations of this problem, also in my posts in the thread: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...lack-jack.html

[ThodorisK]

BLACKJACK HEAVEN

Stats from 09/08/07, 06:37 to 15/08/07

The first hand of sample No2 is the next hand played after the last hand of sample No2. Therefore these 2 samples can also be regarded as one sample

Sample No1 09/08/07, 06:37

Hands = 290
Average bet = 1.124$ (260 hands*1$, 28 hands*2$, 1 hand*4$, 1 hand*6$)
Loss = 57.5$

Departures from basic strategy that lost = 2, plus 2 stands on a 16 against a dealers 10

(I lost all my bankroll after this sample was completed)

Sample No2 (15/08/07)

Hands = 75
Average bet = 1$ (75 hands*1$)
Loss =22$

Departures from basic strategy that lost = 1

(I lost all my bankroll after this sample was completed)

Having lost my deposited bankroll in both above samples, it is applicable (regarding sample No1, and sample No2, and the combined sample of No1 and No2), to use the risk of ruin probability, and it is not applicable to use a hypothesis test, in order to prove cheating (see theoretical considerations that discuss this at: http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...lack-jack.html).

Ignoring the hand in which I violated basic strategy, reganding sample No2, the risk of ruin of losing 21$ in 74 hands by placing 1$ on each hand, is 3.336%.
(using the calculator: http://www.card-counting.com/blackja...culator-c3.htm) The value of “standard deviation per 100 hands” I put is 11.3)

I e-maled some of the above stats to Blackjack Heaven. They answered:

“Theodoros,
Thanks for those stats, but they just seem to measure your number of hands played and your loss (over only 365 hands), and therefore I remain slightly confused as to what you are claiming. Are you trying to say our software is in someway unfair? I can assure you that this is not the case. What it appears you have experienced is a run of bad luck and, while frustrating, this is something which happens from time to time while gambling.
Do you have any other comments or stats?
Thanks,
Neil”

I answer here: Very powerful counter-argument indeed. You are saying that I won in some other casinos, so the overall results might fall close to the statistically expected losses.

First of all, the results of any NEW sample OF THE LAST HANDS PLAYED, (according to today’s science) are INDEPENDENT from the previous ones, and therefore they should fall close to the average-expected values.

But yes, the more one wagers, the higher the probability of meeting a very long run of bad luck. But the counter-argument to this is that what is the number of hands that should be taken in account? Would that be the whole amount of gambling I have played since I was born? Perhaps also the amount of gambling I played in my previous lives? Therefore you are saying that in order for cheating to be proved or at least indicated, one must present a run of bud luck that had less than 1 in a trillion to happen?

It does not matter if the sample is small or large. What it matters is the probability that is derived from it. The demand for a large sample can only be justified when connected to the argument "yes, but you have had an enormous amount of gambling". So I have to consider the whole amount of gambling I have made since I was born?

Therefore, perhaps, the amount of wagering that should be taken in account for judging the fairness of a casino, is the total number of hands that I played in every particular casino.

Well, since I started playing in your casino, and before the above samples, I had lost another 200$, mostly playing blackjack. So you cannot claim that these previous results counterbalance somehow the above samples.
We can have a further detailed analysis of my results in your casino since the day I started playing there. But this is almost an impossible fact for many reasons, e.g. the boss media hand history is not so helpful in this.

Anyway, if I had to bet my life on the possibilty that you cheated me or on the possiblity that you did not cheat me, I would definatelly bet it on the first possibility.

[ThodorisK]

BETFAIR

I deposited 70euros and started the wagering for the 75euros bonus. I played single deck blackjack and without ever by balance exceeding my initial deposit, I kept losing. Lost my deposit and had to reload. Results after I completed wagering:

hands=893
average bet=1.38 euros
profit/loss=-76.5 euros

Also, when I had completed about 750 hands, I was 98 euros down.

I did bet about 10 euros once and lost. If I remember well, all the other bets were of 1 or 2 euros. I also violated basic strategy a few times, but I think this had a small effect. Anyway, for these and other reasons, I do not provide statistical analysis for this casino.

[ThodorisK]

VICTOR CHALDER

(see my posts at http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...lack-jack.html)

[winbig]

To sum it all up for you:

They all cheat.

Quit gambling online.

Save your money and take a trip to Vegas, or any other casino that is somewhat local for you.

I don't know about anyone else, but this is getting very old.

[BBKPoker]

Originally Posted by ThodorisK

BETFAIR I also violated basic strategy a few times, but I think this had a small effect. Anyway, for these and other reasons, I do not provide statistical analysis for this casino.

So you are a bonus abuser who has an actual gambling problem because you don't play optimally, play way more than the established number of hands to clear a bonus, and your upset that you are losing money?

You sound like a whale of a customer to me. If I was a casino, I'd keep offering you bonuses to keep you around, and I'd keep sending you very nice apologies about your luck (along with a few small free bonuses) every time you sent me a laughable email about why the software is supposedly rigged.

Many of the casinos you've named here run on gaming software provided by companies that do not let you edit payout tables. We know RTG lets providers edit slot returns, but I doubt any software provider that is remotely reputable allows you to edit blackjack returns.

So far, you've named casinos that run on:

Chartwell (VCCasino, Betfair)
and
Boss Media (Blackjack Heaven).

Extremely reputable sites such as Bodog, Paradise Poker, Sporting Bet, Wall Street Casino etc, have used Boss. VCCasino is about as reputable as a casino can be without being an eCograd'd Microgaming site.

I think you just need to take a time out from gambling until you can discipline yourself to play properly if your goal is to make money from bonuses.

[paul02085]

26 1/2 (one only cheats half the time).

[ThodorisK]

GLOBAL PLAYER

I was playing single deck blackjack, a game where using the well known particular basic strategy, gives the player an 0.1% -0.15% edge. But I was not 100% faithful to the basic strategy, so I cannot really give a statistical analysis with the below data. However, the results of my LAST hands in that casino were:

2,175 hands played
4,324 euros wagered
average bet = 2 euros
profit/loss result = -198 euros.

Now (according to the risk of ruin calculator at http://www.card-counting.com/blackja...culator-c3.htm), if I had used 100% faithfully the basic strategy for Boss Media single deck blackjack, and I was flatbetting 2 euros on each hand, then after 2,175 hands the probability that I would lose these 198 euros, would be 5.58% If my departure from basic strategy resulted in a 1% house edge, then the corresponing risk of ruin probabilty would be 12.3% And if my departure from basic strategy resulted in a 2% house edge, then the corresponding risk of ruin probability would be 22.2%. But I don’t think that the particular basic strategy violations I made, costed me that much.

[ThodorisK]

"...… there are sites using rogue software that must be exposed. I list some of which I am aware on my On-Line Casino Blacklist.” I had read a couple of his warnings with particular interest. One warning concerned a company offering the chance to establish your own casino. Its advert reveals a nasty can of worms:
“Our proprietary random number generator is calculating profit before the winning /loosing (sic) number is sent back to the game. You can set a minimum profit that’s always kept for you. This also ensures that you will not wake up with $20,000 debts! ”
This same company boasts on its own site:
“The software is very good, with great control over the profit/winnings. It has the ability to change the winning % per game/table in real-time. Also you can withdraw the profit and limit player's winnings. Games are completely random, if the winning is within the limit. If the bet is causing winning over the set limit, the generator is generating another number until the winning is within the limit (or player loses).”
Note the words in italics! This is precisely the experience I have suffered. Having been encouraged by winning, suddenly whatever I do is wrong. I road-tested the game to (my) destruction. Having started playing even chance positions (18 numbers) and losing whatever chance I backed, I kept on increasing the numbers played till I was playing thirty-three a spin. The four other numbers kept hitting! I was then cleaned out. My experience was a precise fit with the boasted ability of the software. ..."

Michael Shackleford (http://wizardofodds.com/general/mortoninterview.html)

[uungy]

Whats that to do with it? its a different software provider and has been named and shamed here about 2 years ago