Peach/Crypto single deck blackjack cheating

hip_hop

Dormant account
maybe

I've never been one to throw out accusations of cheating but this rather empty post got me thinking. I decided to go back and check my crypto results and post them no matter what they showed.

To sum up they are better than I had thought but worse than they should be.

I've been playing at assorted Crypto casinos for about three years now. I play the various promotions frequently but not religiously.

Over the last three years I have:
deposited about: $18000
recieved bonus: $10000
played blackjack: $450000
lost at tables: $9200

Much of the play was at multi deck tables and more recently the single deck game. I usually figure on a .5% expectedloss on multi and .1% loss on single deck. Unfortunately I did not differentiate between the games in my records so I'll average out to a .4% expected loss. After $450000 in play I should have lost about $1800 maybe a little less with the single deck game. I lost just over $9000. My bet size has varied greatly over the years so an accurate standard deviation is impossible (well, beyond me anyway). My gut feeling is that these results are within normal expectations. They kind of suck but are still normal.

One thought. Because Intercasino requires a $25 bet for the single deck game you could experience wilder swings if you are normally a $5 bettor. If you get on a bit of losing streak $25 bets can quickly eat up your $180 each and every month. I know that has been happening to me for the last couple of months.

So I will give Crypto the benefit of doubt here. That being said, I don't TRUST any of them. If times turn tough for a casino or software provider they could easily tweak the program. Bigger and more honest corporations and industries have behaved much worse in the past.

Hip Hop
 

dickens1298

Dormant account
hip_hop said:
I've never been one to throw out accusations of cheating but this rather empty post got me thinking. I decided to go back and check my crypto results and post them no matter what they showed.

To sum up they are better than I had thought but worse than they should be.

I've been playing at assorted Crypto casinos for about three years now. I play the various promotions frequently but not religiously.

Over the last three years I have:
deposited about: $18000
recieved bonus: $10000
played blackjack: $450000
lost at tables: $9200

Much of the play was at multi deck tables and more recently the single deck game. I usually figure on a .5% expectedloss on multi and .1% loss on single deck. Unfortunately I did not differentiate between the games in my records so I'll average out to a .4% expected loss. After $450000 in play I should have lost about $1800 maybe a little less with the single deck game. I lost just over $9000. My bet size has varied greatly over the years so an accurate standard deviation is impossible (well, beyond me anyway). My gut feeling is that these results are within normal expectations. They kind of suck but are still normal.

One thought. Because Intercasino requires a $25 bet for the single deck game you could experience wilder swings if you are normally a $5 bettor. If you get on a bit of losing streak $25 bets can quickly eat up your $180 each and every month. I know that has been happening to me for the last couple of months.

So I will give Crypto the benefit of doubt here. That being said, I don't TRUST any of them. If times turn tough for a casino or software provider they could easily tweak the program. Bigger and more honest corporations and industries have behaved much worse in the past.

Hip Hop
I'm assuming your loss is your total net loss, including bonuses.

Your "analysis" is pretty useless given your variance in bet size.

However...I HAVE found that Crypto can be extremely streaky. Case in point - last week I started with $600 at Intercasino (including the bonus), proceeded to lose $20 bet after $20 bet until I reached $310, cashed out, bought in at Sands of Caribbean, then proceeded to win a series of $50 bets until I cashed out a $500 winner. With a $180 bankroll and playing $25 bets, a bad streak can easily wipe you out.
 

hip_hop

Dormant account
dickens1298 said:
I'm assuming your loss is your total net loss, including bonuses.

Your "analysis" is pretty useless given your variance in bet size.

However...I HAVE found that Crypto can be extremely streaky. Case in point - last week I started with $600 at Intercasino (including the bonus), proceeded to lose $20 bet after $20 bet until I reached $310, cashed out, bought in at Sands of Caribbean, then proceeded to win a series of $50 bets until I cashed out a $500 winner. With a $180 bankroll and playing $25 bets, a bad streak can easily wipe you out.
I apologise for providing "useless" information

I am so happy that you have officially determined that Crypto can be extremely "STREAKY". It's terrible when you lose ten bets in one casino and are forced to change casinos to win back four bets. What could the odds of that happening be?
 

dickens1298

Dormant account
hip_hop said:
I apologise for providing "useless" information

I am so happy that you have officially determined that Crypto can be extremely "STREAKY". It's terrible when you lose ten bets in one casino and are forced to change casinos to win back four bets. What could the odds of that happening be?
Nothing quite like the smell of sarcasm in the morning.

To clarify - I lost a net ten bets in one...then won a net ten bets in the other. The difference is that in the latter I had upped my bet by 2.5 times, resulting in a net win.

I have not "officially" done anything, save share my observations. Perhaps others feel differently - after all, how would one quantify "streakiness"? - but I simply play within the boundaries of what I know.

I considered your analysis "useless" because you - by your own admission - varied your bets "greatly". Hence while the actual number of wins and losses may correlate with the given house edge, the actual MONIES lost would not since they are not evenly distributed.

You posed the - albeit rhetorical - question of the probability of me winning x number of hands after losing y number of hands. I have no idea, especially given that each hand is a "random walk". I WILL say that if I ever came across a casino - or series of casinos - that would cause ME to lose over $9000, I would likely just stop playing there. Or if you really feel that the casino is "cheating" you, then do something more constructive about it.
 

hip_hop

Dormant account
The sarcasm primarily comes from the fact that while you flamed my observations you yourself did exactly the same thing on a much much smaller scale. There are useless observations and then there are really useless observations.

Secondly, the word streakiness is a catch all thrown around by persons who do not understand randomness.

I did not say they were cheating nor do I think so. I have no evidence of that.

Your suggestion that you would not play at a casino where you have lost some amount of money further illustrates a lack of understanding of probability. These casinos offer up an advantageous situation and without other evidence of cheating it would be silly to stop playing. Sometimes players lose. I have won more than expectation at other places, however I don't think for a moment that they are cheating for my benefit.

You had two choices to make before participating it the thread. Contribute some useful information (which you didn't do) or keep your mouth shut (which you also didn't do).

Now, I refuse to participate in some useless (there's that word again) flame war so I am disengaging from this thread. You have fun now.


dickens1298 said:
Nothing quite like the smell of sarcasm in the morning.

To clarify - I lost a net ten bets in one...then won a net ten bets in the other. The difference is that in the latter I had upped my bet by 2.5 times, resulting in a net win.

I have not "officially" done anything, save share my observations. Perhaps others feel differently - after all, how would one quantify "streakiness"? - but I simply play within the boundaries of what I know.

I considered your analysis "useless" because you - by your own admission - varied your bets "greatly". Hence while the actual number of wins and losses may correlate with the given house edge, the actual MONIES lost would not since they are not evenly distributed.

You posed the - albeit rhetorical - question of the probability of me winning x number of hands after losing y number of hands. I have no idea, especially given that each hand is a "random walk". I WILL say that if I ever came across a casino - or series of casinos - that would cause ME to lose over $9000, I would likely just stop playing there. Or if you really feel that the casino is "cheating" you, then do something more constructive about it.
 

dickens1298

Dormant account
We all agree on some givens -

(1) blackjack is - without card counting - a negative expectation game.
(2) Bonuses are never truly "free". Casinos obviously expect a net profit from any bonus offer, lest why would they offer them?

You began to participate in this thread by noting that you lost roughly $9000, when you "should" have lost only $1800 based on percentage return.

So - if your point is NOT that they are cheating...what IS your point? That this three-year cumulative result is highly improbable? And thus how DID you contribute to this thread?

As for my comment about not playing - I only mentioned that if I had the luck (or streak, or problems, or issues - or whatever you wish to call your losses) that you had at Crypto casinos (namely - losing $3000 per annum, or $250 per month on the average), then I'd stop playing at Crypto casinos.

hip_hop said:
The sarcasm primarily comes from the fact that while you flamed my observations you yourself did exactly the same thing on a much much smaller scale. There are useless observations and then there are really useless observations.

Secondly, the word streakiness is a catch all thrown around by persons who do not understand randomness.

I did not say they were cheating nor do I think so. I have no evidence of that.

Your suggestion that you would not play at a casino where you have lost some amount of money further illustrates a lack of understanding of probability. These casinos offer up an advantageous situation and without other evidence of cheating it would be silly to stop playing. Sometimes players lose. I have won more than expectation at other places, however I don't think for a moment that they are cheating for my benefit.

You had two choices to make before participating it the thread. Contribute some useful information (which you didn't do) or keep your mouth shut (which you also didn't do).

Now, I refuse to participate in some useless (there's that word again) flame war so I am disengaging from this thread. You have fun now.
 
Top