Oh my GOD! God d#mn cheaters!

[GaryWatson]

Th, Ill get you up to a green bar eventually.

I've played a lot of BJ at the casinos. I have seen ridiculous streaks both ways. The best strategy is not to bust a hand. I take advantage of all the splits & double downs. I dont fluctuate my betting much. Its rare I go busto in a night, using, say a x50.

I am happy to take flip of the coin odds in a casino but dont fancy it online. My reason? Too easy too throw in crazy bets & think nothing of it till im broke. Automatic shuffling takes away my slight edge.

Maybe its rigged, but I have the reasons above from preventing me playing online. I still play the occassional hand online but dont really give it much thought. I am not a bonus whore so I have never really looked at blackjack as a way to clear a bonus and claim a few $$$

Sites dont need to rig a game. The money will come to them. Those who do rig games should be condemned in hell. Thats just grimey.

Personally I dont trust house games online. I play sometimes for fun but expect the house to win. If I win, its a bonus.

Fruit machines in the pubs are all rigged. everyone knows it, the odds are printed on the machine, ie 82%. I know for a fact, the best way to play them is just to gamble untill you hit the jackpot, no collects, no holds. Once you win, give it another 20% incase the jackpots lands again. The odds are still stacked, thats why im not rich off fruit machines.

To get a true evaluation of blackjack, you need to have someone who knows how to play it with precision. I hear of people splitting 10's then moaning when they land 3 & 4. Some split without taking into consideration the dealers card. It's all reducing your odds.

I have over 16 years experience playing live but only a couple of hours online.

The moral of the story is that people should look at their play before considering the rigged issue.

 

[ThodorisK]

I never gamble i.e. when there is an edge against me. And since the online casinos cheat, I gave up poker about a year ago. It was poker where I lost. I only play cashable bonuses, where even if cheated, I will not lose, because most casinos do not cheat more than 2% of the hands when you bet 1-2$, as this way the cheating will be easily exposed. Fortunatelly, I made a profit from these. But I finished them all except some casinos that there is a danger that they cheat more than 2% or that they dont pay. As for online live dealer, I tried betinternet where there was a bonus. More than this, I could card-cound at blackjack and make huge profits! But ... I suspected cheating (by montage etc). But I got inspiration! I thought that since they cheat, if I play baccarat on the opposite bet of that which a very large bet was staked, then I should have an edge over the house, since they will cheat the players with the huge bets. So I kept betting the minimoum of 5$ this way (e.g. when a player was betting 200-500$ on the banker, I was betting 5$ on the player) and guess what! I won about 400$ within a small number of bets. I stopped because I couldnt find a player with huge bets any more, and soon they would introduce fake players if they found out what I found (and probably others have found as well before me). There was another solution, that I should bet on the opposite bet of that where the more money was staked. But I could not verify this, as the same dealer was dealing many different tables. Anyway, it was fun as I made money exactly because they cheat!

 

[ThodorisK]

I never "gamble" i.e. bet when there is an edge against me. And since the online casinos cheat, I gave up poker about a year ago. It was poker where I lost. I only play cashable bonuses, where even when cheated, I will not lose, because most casinos do not cheat more than 2% of the hands when you bet 1-2$, as this way the cheating will be easily exposed, and because 2% is enough to wipe out the bonus. Fortunatelly, I made a profit from these. But I finished them all except some casinos that there is a danger that they cheat more than 2% or that they dont pay. As for online live dealer, I tried betinternet where there was a bonus. More than this, I could card-cound at blackjack and make huge profits!? No ... I soon suspected cheating (by montage etc). But I got inspiration! I thought that since they cheat, if I play baccarat on the opposite bet of that which a very large bet was staked, then I should have an edge over the house, since they will cheat the players with the huge bets. So I kept betting the minimoum of 5$ this way (e.g. when a player was betting 200-500$ on the banker, I was betting 5$ on the player) and guess what! I won about 400$ within a small number of bets. I stopped because I couldnt find a player with huge bets any more, and soon they would introduce fake players if they found out what I found (and probably others had found as well before me). There was another solution, that I should bet on the opposite bet of that where the more money was staked. But I could not verify this, as the same dealer was dealing many different rooms (actually, I think the same dealer is dealing for rooms of both betinternet and Ladbrokes!) Anyway, it was fun as I made money exactly because they cheat!

 

[ThodorisK]

Sorry about the double posting, I logged in and thought the first one was not posted. Anyway the second one is different.

 

[GaryWatson]

Poker has ridiculous luck but I would say its probably your safest option. If you cant beat a standard bot, you shouldnt expect to win. An observant player can spot players teaming up on you......thats just a run away case.

Card counting is obsolete online for blackjack, but live I generally raise my bets when low cards are out and drop it when high cards are out early. Its all about bust situations

 

[NASHVEGAS]

To get a true evaluation of blackjack, you need to have someone who knows how to play it with precision. I hear of people splitting 10's then moaning when they land 3 & 4. Some split without taking into consideration the dealers card. It's all reducing your odds.

Assuming (I said assuming) the software is correlated (and a certified fair gaming auditor could not convince me despite my request that this be part of the audit I tried to pay for that BJ software may not be correlated.... By no means I am saying winning is not possible online even if correlated BJ software is assumed but that is another subject), playing perfect basic strategy will ultimately be meaningless in the event the software is correlated other than not playing perfect BS gives the fairness preachers another excuse to divert the proof issue of fair software. I do not think one will ever know the truth pursuant to online BJ fairness as there is too much wiggle room for the so called fair gaming auditors and all the others in bed together which is almost cult like. As the Bible says "the love of money is the root of all evil" (not money is the root but the love of).

 

[GaryWatson]

Assuming (I said assuming) the software is correlated (and a certified fair gaming auditor could not convince me despite my request that this be part of the audit I tried to pay for that BJ software may not be correlated.... By no means I am saying winning is not possible online even if correlated BJ software is assumed but that is another subject), playing perfect basic strategy will ultimately be meaningless in the event the software is correlated other than not playing perfect BS gives the fairness preachers another excuse to divert the proof issue of fair software. I do not think one will ever know the truth pursuant to online BJ fairness as there is too much wiggle room for the so called fair gaming auditors and all the others in bed together which is almost cult like. As the Bible says "the love of money is the root of all evil" (not money is the root but the love of).

I wont disagree with you. The proof aspect is difficult - see the 4million AP threads - bedding together? You have 4million posts to sift through that backs your theory. Im comfortable playing live blackjack only

meaningless? yes I have played basic strategy & it cant beat the random shuffle, if that is what you mean? That was tested over 2million hands

 

[I<3Microgaming]

I never "gamble" i.e. bet when there is an edge against me. And since the online casinos cheat, I gave up poker about a year ago. It was poker where I lost. I only play cashable bonuses, where even when cheated, I will not lose, because most casinos do not cheat more than 2% of the hands when you bet 1-2$, as this way the cheating will be easily exposed, and because 2% is enough to wipe out the bonus. Fortunatelly, I made a profit from these. But I finished them all except some casinos that there is a danger that they cheat more than 2% or that they dont pay. As for online live dealer, I tried betinternet where there was a bonus. More than this, I could card-cound at blackjack and make huge profits!? No ... I soon suspected cheating (by montage etc). But I got inspiration! I thought that since they cheat, if I play baccarat on the opposite bet of that which a very large bet was staked, then I should have an edge over the house, since they will cheat the players with the huge bets. So I kept betting the minimoum of 5$ this way (e.g. when a player was betting 200-500$ on the banker, I was betting 5$ on the player) and guess what! I won about 400$ within a small number of bets. I stopped because I couldnt find a player with huge bets any more, and soon they would introduce fake players if they found out what I found (and probably others had found as well before me). There was another solution, that I should bet on the opposite bet of that where the more money was staked. But I could not verify this, as the same dealer was dealing many different rooms (actually, I think the same dealer is dealing for rooms of both betinternet and Ladbrokes!) Anyway, it was fun as I made money exactly because they cheat!

I agree with you that you are not always getting a perfectly fair game at software casinos and online poker rooms.

For live dealer you seem to be convinced that they cheat, and that's fine, but all the reasons you mention to try to explain how they "cheat" are ridiculous.

At BetInternet (CasinoWebcam, Ladbrokes) first of all the blackjack rules are so bad and the game is so slow that the game is not profitable when counting, even if you "wonged" (watched multiple tables at once and chose when to place your bets when the true count was above 1). I know I have ran a simulation on it using this software:

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

That's nothing new anyway, why would they want to offer a game that people can count in the comfort of their own homes and make thousands. Your experiment of "counting" was so short run that anything could have happened, you could have won big or lost big (but you lost).

As for baccarat, well you said it yourself, the dealer is dealing for many different tables in many different sites, so the fact that you or won in a small number of betting the opposite of one large bet on your table proves absolutely nothing.

What's this guy saying? That it is impossible to cheat us at the live dealer?

Not at all. But for blackjack, for example, I think that most who have substantially played software and live dealer versions would agree on this:

(probability that software blackjack is rigged + house edge at software blackjack) > (probability that live dealer blackjack is rigged + house edge at live dealer blackjack)

And this is why I would choose MG/PlayTech/CasinoWebcam's live dealer BJ anytime over Boss Media's Single Deck BJ with "up to a 0.11% player edge", for example.

 

[GaryWatson]

I had a simulator back in the early 90's. it's nothing new. if a casino had a single deck, I would destroy it, guaranteed. If an online casino has a single deck with an automatic reshuffle, it would defeat the purpose. 0.11%? It sounds good pumping out the facts, but it is a false statement. Explain it in more detail

 

[I<3Microgaming]

I had a simulator back in the early 90's. it's nothing new. if a casino had a single deck, I would destroy it, guaranteed. If an online casino has a single deck with an automatic reshuffle, it would defeat the purpose. 0.11%? It sounds good pumping out the facts, but it is a false statement. Explain it in more detail

Not false sir.

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

(see Single Deck Blackjack)

(It's actually up to 0.15% by the way, not 0.11%.)

 

[GaryWatson]

Not false sir.

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

(see Blackjack)

OK, I disagree. Fair enough, its from a reputable source, but a single deck scenario cannot be legitimate. it goes against all laws of gambling, ie house edge. its a myth. As a poker player, you will understand how 5stud becomes difficult

 

[I<3Microgaming]

I know, that is exactly what I am saying. I think "too good to be true" applies here!

 

[NASHVEGAS]

the random shuffle

Even a casino exec. admited to me (I think) therein lies the problem whether only a problem of perception or a problem of actuality. That leaves the issue how does the online industry address this root (npi) of the problem so the player is assured fairness online in BJ. Are there ways we can sit at home with our minds,computers et al and not have an unfair advantage over the casino if the onlines can rid the reshuffle? Hopefully, the real wizs are at work but like you my play will be very limited online as in the past unless an adequate solution becomes available. (Maybe onlines do not want knowledgable BJ players as they have to know their achilles heel eventhough they et al try to convince us otherwise). Regardless of whether live may be a fair solution or not to the player, the game is slower than a turtle so eff that solution for now.

 

[GaryWatson]

I know, that is exactly what I am saying. I think "too good to be true" applies here!

Single Deck Blackjack

Kudos to Boss Media for offering a game with a player advantage, although not all Boss casinos opt to offer it. The single-deck blackjack game has the same rules as the six-deck except only one deck is used. Also, only one hand may be played at a time. This game has a player edge of 0.11% using the total dependent basic strategy below. To bring the advantage up to 0.15% see my

I got it. Its nothing more than a sales pitch. Misleading to say the least. One hand, new shuffle, offers no advantage. 5 handed with 6 packs would offer similar, but use 5 packs for simplicity. Now I would say the player edge is totally false & the stats are not remotely accurate. It all goes back to the reshuffling after ever hand. They need to rewrite or omit

 

[GaryWatson]

playing live I am usually playing against six packs. Ive seen dealers tucking in the plastic devil 2/3rd but if he just cuts a pack off, my odds are better. There is no online advantage, and the 0.15% stats is created, it has no substance "RANDOM SHUFFLE"

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Shackleford as I have posted in the past lost credibility with me when he chose to endorse one online casino (enuff said there) which I see as a conflict of interest for the love of money,,,,,,Otherwise, I have no issues with this most trusted resource and individual.

 

[I<3Microgaming]

GaryWatson, can you explain your reasoning?

The Wizard established a chart based on "total dependent basic strategy" which includes anomalies like standing on 7,7 vs. 10. I don't get how he gets the player advantage either.

 

[I<3Microgaming]

Shackleford as I have posted in the past lost creditiblity with me when he chose to endorse one online casino (enuff said there) which I see as a conflict of interest for the love of money,,,,,,Otherwise, I have no issues with this most trusted resource and individual.

Agreed, that move was surprising, yet as long as there is no bias in his analysis' it's fine with me (the man get I don't know how many hits a day from gamblers worldwide...)

 

[GaryWatson]

GaryWatson, can you explain your reasoning?

The Wizard established a chart based on "total dependent basic strategy" which includes anomalies like standing on 7,7 vs. 10. I don't get how he gets the player advantage either.

All I can say is random shuffling takes away any player advantage. Playing one hand is practically negligable.

basic strategy only works when you take into account cards previous. Infact, im not sure what basic strategy is but if its going with the table, ill guess at a 98.5% payout. So it is a losing strategy on the one deck stated. The advantage comes when you take into account previous cards. On top of that you need to maximise your splits and double downs

 

[chuchu59]

Well, this also seems to apply to Baccarat at MGs. When playing hands at $10 or $20 the results were quite even, winning some and losing some. Okay, I tried 6 hands at $50 and lost $300 just like that. What the heck. In the final hand I bet on the banker got 7 against the player's 4 and out came another 4. So that was how I lost 6 in a row.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Bump for AKA!

 

[aka23]

I got it. Its nothing more than a sales pitch. Misleading to say the least. One hand, new shuffle, offers no advantage. 5 handed with 6 packs would offer similar, but use 5 packs for simplicity. Now I would say the player edge is totally false & the stats are not remotely accurate. It all goes back to the reshuffling after ever hand. They need to rewrite or omit

The single deck BJ numbers are legitimate. A player edge of 0.11% assumes shuffle after each hand and basic strategy. A player edge of 0.15% assumes composition dependent exceptions to basic strategy. Unfortunately almost all Boss Media casinos that have offered single deck BJ with an expected player edge have either dropped the game or closed. I believe that the only one left is Casino Club.

VueTec BJ also has an expected player edge of ~0.07% (the computerized games, not the live ones), but you need to use a unique early surrender strategy to achieve this player edge. I suspect hardly anyone uses optimal strategy on this game.

 

[aka23]

Just curious before I make any other comments, HOW MANY?

It depends on what you are trying to show and how far results are from normal. It could be less than a hundred hands or it could be millions. For example, in the casino bar experiment described at

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

, a few hundred hands was enough to show odds of well under 1 in 100 billion. But when I run a sim to measure the house edge of a blackjack game to the hundreds place, I usually need to play millions of hands before getting a stable result. Winning only 2 out of 17 hands as mentioned a few pages back is definitely not enough data to show unfair results.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

It depends on what you are trying to show and how far results are from normal. It could be less than a hundred hands or it could be millions.

Very aware of that, I wanted the poster's answer before I proceeded with some of the info. your post contains.

 

[GaryWatson]

VueTec BJ also has an expected player edge of ~0.07% (the computerized games, not the live ones), but you need to use a unique early surrender strategy to achieve this player edge. I suspect hardly anyone uses optimal strategy on this game.

I know insurance on Aces is a wasted bet.

Surrender? Im not sure about that. It's never been part of the rules where I play but assuming you are losing 50% of an undetermined bet, it looks a bad option.

You are taking a 50% loss which seems a big swing to save 1/2 a bet.

The dealer is sitting on 10 & you are on 5. Should you surrender? I would say no. I would say the best option is to play & avoid busting out. Allow the dealer the option of busting.

Taking the surrender, you are losing every hand, eliminating the dealers option to bust.

By not taking the surrender option, you have the opportunity to improve your chances on the next card without busting. Fail to hit and let the dealer take his chances. Anything fro 2-6 would be good for the player but bad for the dealer.

By using the surrender option, you are taking the biggest player advantage away & that is for the dealer to bust his hand. And for what? 50% automatic loss?