RTG BJ-unwinnable at higher stakes

[funeral979]

Its been awhile since there has been a post on conspiracy theories and such concerning RTG blackjack, so thought I would share my experience over the past year or so.

The majority of my playtime in 2008 was at RTG casinos, and 95% of that with one of the accredited RTG groups here. If you asked me 5-6 years ago I would have said without a doubt that RTG deals the fairest game online. Well obviously alot has changed since then.

I understand that, over the course of thousands and thousands of hands, you will get some long streaks, some good, and some bad (OK lets not fool ourselves here.....you will get a few decent streaks, and MANY unbelievably bad streaks). I had a run of 23 straight losses, as well as at least 10 runs of losing 15 of 17 hands, 14 of 15, 18 of 20, etc, etc. After going thru thousands of hands of which they so kindly sent me on spreadsheets, you would be hard pressed to find ANY winning streaks over 10.....nothing coming close to 23, or even 15 for that matter. The run of 23 straight losses was composed of bets all between $25-$100...with no pushes between.

Now what I have noticed is....if you keep to relatively small wagers (say $1-$10) you will get a pretty balanced game......higher stakes? Forget about it! Even in fun mode, wagering $200 per hand, you will get slaughtered in short order. I am firm in my belief that there is something in the RTG software that is triggered when you bet over $xx that heavily favors the house.

Well after having some pretty bad BJ sessions at my favorite RTG casino, I asked for my payback % at BJ when playing higher stakes in November & December of last year.....

Dear Mr. xxxxxxx

Thanks for contacting us. It is a pleasure to be of your assistance.

Please receive our apologies for the delay in getting back to you. In regards to your previous messages please allow us to provide you the requested percentages for hands played in Blackjack with bets over $50.



November: 62.56 %



December: 35.48 %



As you expected the percentages are low. Keep in mind that this reflects the result of the entire months. Each session you play has a low number of this bets. This will also affect the odds. We are not trying to justify the software, we agree with you when there are sessions that are way too rough, but please not that it is a fact that the results may be affected just considering the amount of bets with that value played. If you would like an Excel file with he hands for November and December please let us know and we will be more than glad to send them.



We hope that soon you will have sessions in which odds present on your favor, winning all the big bets and loosing the small ones.


Well I can assure you that no sessions exist where I won all the big bets and lost all the small ones. As you can see, the %s are a complete joke, but 100% correct.

Even though I did play a small # of hands at these stakes I think I saw enough....and can you blame me? And this is why the players will keep getting screwed under the disguise of fair software. People will flat bet $1 or $2 to 'test' its fairness....and of course the results will come back close to expected, but no one is willing to risk playing thousands of hands at $50-$100 + to test the software.....and im sure the developers know this and have no fear in altering the software, if they so choose, to heavily favor the house when playing high stakes.

Ok there, I said it, im done.

[winbig]

I'd love to see those excel files if it's not too much trouble

IMO, it's hard to win playing RTG blackjack at low stakes, so I could just imagine what it's like playing at higher stakes. I also remember playing at Geisha Lounge and King Solomons years ago before the UIGEA came to be, and even though RTG's blackjack was still streaky back then, you had just as many good runs as you did bad. Now, it's too lop-sided. In the casino's favor.

It really makes you wonder.

side note: How long did it take you to get your logs?

[funeral979]

The sent me the logs within a few days, along with a $100 free chip (feelin guilty??) Hard to send me %s like that without some sort of consolation prize.

I deleted them awhile ago, but I just requested them again last nite and would be happy to send them to you.

We are talking about blackjack here paying 35% at high stakes (at least as far as online is concerned) over the course of a month from an ACCREDITED casino!!!

[funeral979]

Thought I would post my lovely 23 hand losing streak. Appeared I was wrong there is one push in here. Streak ended up being 28 hands with 26 losers, 1 win and 1 push. Wonder if someone could tell me the odds on this event happening?

Notice the discrepancy on first 2 cards dealt. I managed 1 BJ (the push) and best I could manage on the rest of the hands in the streak was one hard 18!

WTG RTG!

[spearmaster]

I only looked at the first few hands, and I saw at least two occasions where you stood on cards that you shouldn't have. Didn't look further than that though.

Given this scenario, I'd say that a long losing streak like that is not out of the ordinary.

[funeral979]

Im pretty sure that lines 980/981 were the only ones where I didn't follow basic strategy. Sometimes you try to outthink the computer, especially if you know you are in takedown mode. The hands before this were not exactly pretty either.

[spearmaster]

Line 960.

[EasyRhino]

If I'm reading it right (it's small, and not sure if I understand the format):
955, should double A7 v 6
960, should hit 16 v 8 (if that's an 8 I see)
963, did you split 10s? what does that line mean?
981, standing A,8 is actually correct v 10

That's not the point. In just 20ish hands, it's tough to say if those play deviations would have really mattered or not. And I agree that losing 20ish hands in a row is unreal. It's truly a special, horrible, statistical moment for you.

In my experience, playing RTG's blackjack with bets ranging between $5 and 2x$500, the game plays the same at higher stakes as it does at lower stakes. The money just lasts much shorter at higher stakes because it's so much more money.

I'm actually kind of impressed

[spearmaster]

That's not the point. In just 20ish hands, it's tough to say if those play deviations would have really mattered or not.

It stands to reason that any play which is not optimum increases the chance of losing... however small a difference that may be, over any length of time.

Yes, sometimes you win even without optimal play - but don't blame the cards or the casino if you lose more often.

[handkey]

28 hands losing streak!!!!!


Take a break when you have a losing streak(more than 20 hands).

Leave away when you have two consecutive losing streak and never come back again.