Is Omni rigged?

chop-choi

Dormant account
Last night I had a really bad experience at Omni's no download blackjack game. It only took me about 100 $3 bets for my $100 stack to get down to $12. But then I had a run, and after 250 more bets, I was back to $71.50. I was reluctant to leave the table, because I figured the switch was off, but if I came back later it might be on. But it was late, I was tired, and I told myself that the whole switch schpeil was crock of B.S, and that I just had a bad run.

I went back this morning, and of my first 19 bets, I lost 17 and pushed 2. It only took 33 bets for my stack to go down to $2.50.

So now I'm in a predicament. I need to place 451 more $3 bets to earn my hundred dollar bonus. If the game is rigged, I'd rather just cut my losses and walk away. If, however, it was just bad luck, then I'd like to keep going.

What do you guys think?
 

Stanford

Dormant account
"What do you guys think?"

There is no way to know for sure. But I think you are experiencing variance.

Now Omni is a place I like. There is no bonus hassle with their new system. If you wager enough, you are awarded a bonus. If you don't you are not. You can withdraw your money at anytime.

So if you thought the wagering was worth the requirements at the beginning, then now it is even a better deal. You have less wagering to do.

To cut varience you would want to keep your wagering flat and you would want the maximum number of trials. I am not afraid of losing so I tend not to do that. But if you are concerned, then small and flat is the way for you.

I am a bit concerned that you are letting the bonus determine your gaming budget. There is a lot of varience in gambling. You should make sure you can lose what you wager - bonus or not.

Stanford
 

chuchu59

gambling addict
PABnonaccred
CAG
chop-choi said:
Last night I had a really bad experience at Omni's no download blackjack game. It only took me about 100 $3 bets for my $100 stack to get down to $12. But then I had a run, and after 250 more bets, I was back to $71.50. I was reluctant to leave the table, because I figured the switch was off, but if I came back later it might be on. But it was late, I was tired, and I told myself that the whole switch schpeil was crock of B.S, and that I just had a bad run.

I went back this morning, and of my first 19 bets, I lost 17 and pushed 2. It only took 33 bets for my stack to go down to $2.50.

So now I'm in a predicament. I need to place 451 more $3 bets to earn my hundred dollar bonus. If the game is rigged, I'd rather just cut my losses and walk away. If, however, it was just bad luck, then I'd like to keep going.

What do you guys think?
There are 2 games that I dont play now at wagerlogic casinos,one is single player baccarat when I lost 10 games in a row and single player blackjack whjere I lost 12 games in a row. Real streaky. Think about that though I dont dare say the game is rigged.
 

Vesuvio

Dormant account
I don't really understand this enthusiasm for the new Omni bonus (I nearly replied to KasinoKing on another thread). It just means if someone's trying to get the bonus they're likely to risk more money than they would if the bonus was given up front (not to mention going bust when they might have hung on with the bonus as a buffer).

Cryptologic BJ is notoriously 'streaky', so your results are just normal & another reason why this type of bonus can be dangerous. Not to mention that Omni & Sands ban players from receiving bonuses with no warning, so you might finish the wagering, lose money & still not receive the bonus.

Semi-rant over :D
 

jerseyguy11

Dormant account
i dunno if crypto is rigged. Id have to say no. But i did have some bad experiences at intercasino. I think i lost like 9 straight hands, all for a couple hundred a hand. I dont play at crypto anymore, mostly because of the "streakyness".
 

Stanford

Dormant account
Vesuvio said:
I don't really understand this enthusiasm for the new Omni bonus (I nearly replied to KasinoKing on another thread). It just means if someone's trying to get the bonus they're likely to risk more money than they would if the bonus was given up front (not to mention going bust when they might have hung on with the bonus as a buffer)...

Semi-rant over :D
I think you make a good point. I was a little concerned about the same that the player was playing over his recreational budget.

Now this used to be a 30% bonus. So if one didn't want to commit much money, they could just take a smaller bonus and have smaller wagering requirements. They didn't have to take the full 100. But if they wanted the full $100 they had to make the whole deposit of 334 in one swoop.

In this case, the player does have to meet the wagering for the full $100. But he doesn't have to put up $334 to start.

I found a formula at the Wizard of Odds that help with these decisions. It is =normsdist((r+t*h+0.5)/(t^0.5*SD)). Copy this into an excel sheet and substitute for the variable. R is the number of units won or loss, in this case (-33) units. T is the number of hands, in this case at $3 per hand it is 834 hands. H is the house edge, I will use -.5%. SD is the Standard Deviation which you can get for different games at the Wiz's website. I will use 1.2.

The chance of a player losing his entire $100 is 21%.

The poster said he lost it all in 100 hands. The chance of busting out a $100, betting $3 flat in 100 hands is about 4%.

Here is the link and this formula is about 3/4 down the page. Feel free to check my math and interpretation.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.


Stanford
 

lanidar

Dormant account
jerseyguy11 said:
i dunno if crypto is rigged. Id have to say no. But i did have some bad experiences at intercasino. I think i lost like 9 straight hands, all for a couple hundred a hand. I dont play at crypto anymore, mostly because of the "streakyness" .
"streakyness"
That's putting it mildly. I've played at William Hill and won 10 hands out of 43 and that's just ONE example. I have saved ALL the sessions from WH.
You can't believe the amount of hands that I've lost in a row.
You want to see them...let me know and I'll email them to you.​
 

cipher

Banned member - being a jerk
lanidar said:
"streakyness"
That's putting it mildly. I've played at William Hill and won 10 hands out of 43 and that's just ONE example. I have saved ALL the sessions from WH.
You can't believe the amount of hands that I've lost in a row.
You want to see them...let me know and I'll email them to you.​
John: how many compiled sessions are we talking about total? Have a good one.
 

lanidar

Dormant account
cipher said:
John: how many compiled sessions are we talking about total? Have a good one.
441 sessions. Many thousands of hands. Much too many to count.
I sent you a PM with a break down.
 

DealerBusts

Dormant account
I've had a 14 hand losing streak at a crypto casino. It was actually an 18 unit streak loss including doubles and splits. The thing is, i never play negative progression and i've found crypto casinos to be very profitable and the long term results to be fair.

I lost 66 units in 500 hands (was down 76 at one point making it more than 1 in 200 event) at Spinroom casino which use Chartwell software. You will not believe some of the hands the dealer was getting on their Single Deck game. Three times in a row, the dealer beat my 20 with 21. It felt a bit like the old MG single deck BJ all over again.
 

chop-choi

Dormant account
I decided to take Standford's advice, and gave it another go. I lost another $25, but earned my $100 bonus, so I'm glad I went back.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top