we really need to look into this or stop playing

**lucky21** · 26th October 2008, 05:51 AM

Hi folks.
Over the time i have been registered here, there seems to be more and more people complaining that BJ online does not reflect a bricks and morter game, and in my experience that is absolutley true.

My latest session this afternoon 238wins, 325losses, ok a small sample, but this is constantly the case, the figures never go into a positive variance, I count hands with 2 clickers and would really like some software to monitor it for me so as to get a larger sample.

I dont trust the logs i get sent, there are dates, times, and game numbers that seem suspicious.

I think an individual account can be set by the casino to maintain an percentage win/loss and over time still look like it is within the realms of random play, I.e. Losses when upping a bet. I just had $50 in a casino and was betting 10cents lol i had 10 losses in a row, so upped to $5 bet that five dollar bet then took me to $0 after 10 losses in a row, I did not have 20 losses in a row but only seperated by 1 or two wins.

Its not a one off, this is constant, its always like this,

So how do we do something about it?

All the people here and on other forums that complain of Bad BJ cannot be completely wrong, a lot of people have put a lot of math into asertaining if they are getting a fair go if it looks, smell, feels like a rat ...........

for the people that log into a site and say i checked it out free play, seems fine then come play my account run your stats through it.

the software providers argue that there needs to be like 10 million hands before any sort of unfair play can be diagnosed.

If thats true then why do we have tables giving us probs of loss, variations etc starting from 100 hands.

its beyond frustrating,

Dont play i here you say! then some other poor bastard or 1000 gets caught in the same loop,

we need to have this sorted, the casinos, regulators, software providers need to come clean (like yeah) and tell us the real stats for online blackjack.

thats unlikely to happen
So what do we do to get our point to these guys?

**Pocketdiggers77** · 26th October 2008, 05:19 PM

I stopped playing BJ online when they started shuffling after every hand. I think that has something to do with it. When I was allowed to play at Sands of Caribbean I could play BJ in multiplayer mode without the shuffle after every hand. Why is that so hard to find these days? In fact the last times I remember actually winning at BJ were at S.O.C. and casino-on-net.

I agree with you, I feel like the bad runs are worse and the good runs dont exist.

PD

**uungy** · 26th October 2008, 05:27 PM

Not going to really join this debate, as its probably pointless, however I think you should change your username to UNlucky21

**aka23** · 26th October 2008, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by lucky21

So what do we do to get our point to these guys?

You need to post numerical results that are not within normal variance. Your results above, with 238 wins and 325 losses or 10 losses in a row, are not outside of normal variance.

You don't need millions of hands to do this. When games have been proven to be unfair, the supporting data rarely involved huge numbers of hands.

**Jasminebed** · 26th October 2008, 09:34 PM

Originally Posted by Pocketdiggers77

I stopped playing BJ online when they started shuffling after every hand. I think that has something to do with it. When I was allowed to play at Sands of Caribbean I could play BJ in multiplayer mode without the shuffle after every hand. Why is that so hard to find these days? In fact the last times I remember actually winning at BJ were at S.O.C. and casino-on-net.

I agree with you, I feel like the bad runs are worse and the good runs dont exist.

PD

Pocket, I think you hit the nail bang on the head with regards to the shuffle. And if you are shuffling multiple decks every hand, it gets worse and worse for the player. I understand why online casinos do it. Landbased casinos can see you counting cards with a clicker, or using an handheld calculator, but online ones base their assumptions based on your play.

A disturbing growing trend with Online Casinos is accusing players who use perfect strategy, and worse yet "near perfect play" to ban from bonuses, from the casino, or *gasp* deny winnings. These "perfect play" strategies are widely available in casino gift shops in a playing card laminated format. It does not take long to learn them, and I have yet have a problem with referring to one at a table, or hear a dealer suggest another patron put it away.

The last factor in the difference in online blackjack in the simple speed of play. The more you play, the more the house gets, and more hands mean streaks appear more often.

It is not a game I play online.

**lucky21** · 26th October 2008, 11:36 PM

Hi folks

Hi AkA, with regards to my results being within variance, i used your are my results fair calc and if i am using it right i had a sd of 3.3, or 1 in 2294 of happening.

Possible of coarse, but my point is if i do another sample it will be similar, i have thousands of these samples all with variance negative or off the scale and it never goes the other way, I never get a good run or "winning streak" which the math says should happen.

I have recently joined 2 casinos from meisters site and same ol same ol thing happened, in that both casinos started out handing out good cards but soon turned to mush.

I am not that UNlucky, i have won $150,000 playing blackjack of which the casino paid .

**lucky21** · 26th October 2008, 11:36 PM

i meant to say of which the casino paid Zero

**tombee** · 27th October 2008, 12:26 AM

Originally Posted by lucky21

Hi folks

Possible of coarse, but my point is if i do another sample it will be similar, i have thousands of these samples all with variance negative or off the scale and it never goes the other way, I never get a good run or "winning streak" which the math says should happen.

It is true... 9 out of ten times the results are very negative. Losing way more hands then you should. If there's a winning streak it seldom lasts long. If there's a losing streak it can go on for ages. You begin to think "I must be lucky sometime!" but no, it doesn't happen..

**aka23** · 27th October 2008, 01:36 AM

Originally Posted by Jasminebed

Pocket, I think you hit the nail bang on the head with regards to the shuffle. And if you are shuffling multiple decks every hand, it gets worse and worse for the player.

Shuffling after each hand reduces house edge for a basic strategy player.

**aka23** · 27th October 2008, 01:42 AM

Originally Posted by lucky21

Hi folks

Hi AkA, with regards to my results being within variance, i used your are my results fair calc and if i am using it right i had a sd of 3.3, or 1 in 2294 of happening.

Possible of coarse, but my point is if i do another sample it will be similar, i have thousands of these samples all with variance negative or off the scale and it never goes the other way, I never get a good run or "winning streak" which the math says should happen.

I have recently joined 2 casinos from meisters site and same ol same ol thing happened, in that both casinos started out handing out good cards but soon turned to mush.

I am not that UNlucky, i have won $150,000 playing blackjack of which the casino paid .

1 in 2000 is certainly a rare result, but by itself it is not rare enough to show unfair software. However, if your other trials (or other players' trials) showed similar rare results, then it would be concerning. What software did you use?