1. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies .This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
Dismiss Notice
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!

At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.

Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!

RTG BJ-unwinnable at higher stakes

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by funeral979, Mar 31, 2009.

    Mar 31, 2009
  1. funeral979

    funeral979 Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    retail
    Location:
    Texas
    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.
     
    2 people like this.
  2. Mar 31, 2009
  3. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount. webby PABnononaccred

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    I'd love to see those excel files if it's not too much trouble :D

    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?
     
  4. Mar 31, 2009
  5. funeral979

    funeral979 Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    retail
    Location:
    Texas
    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!!!
     
  6. Mar 31, 2009
  7. funeral979

    funeral979 Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    retail
    Location:
    Texas
    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!
     
  8. Mar 31, 2009
  9. spearmaster

    spearmaster RIP Ted

    Occupation:
    Devil's Advocate
    Location:
    Heaven
    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.
     
  10. Mar 31, 2009
  11. funeral979

    funeral979 Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    retail
    Location:
    Texas
    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.
     
  12. Apr 1, 2009
  13. spearmaster

    spearmaster RIP Ted

    Occupation:
    Devil's Advocate
    Location:
    Heaven
    Line 960.
     
  14. Apr 1, 2009
  15. EasyRhino

    EasyRhino Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Analyst
    Location:
    San Diego
    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
     
  16. Apr 1, 2009
  17. spearmaster

    spearmaster RIP Ted

    Occupation:
    Devil's Advocate
    Location:
    Heaven
    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.
     
  18. Apr 1, 2009
  19. handkey

    handkey Dormant account webmeister

    Occupation:
    webmaster
    Location:
    NJ
    28 hands losing streak!!!!!:eek::eek:


    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.
     
  20. Apr 1, 2009
  21. winbig

    winbig Keep winning this amount. webby PABnononaccred

    Occupation:
    Bum
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    He had 13 on #963, then drew an ace and a face to bust..The loss was $25, so there wasn't any splitting involved..
     
  22. Apr 1, 2009
  23. EasyRhino

    EasyRhino Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Analyst
    Location:
    San Diego
    I read the 3 as a J, thanks winbig.
     
  24. Apr 2, 2009
  25. funeral979

    funeral979 Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    retail
    Location:
    Texas
    I think anyone in the midst of a long losing streak will throw out basic strategy every now and then in hopes to break the streak. And these were minor deviations anyway.

    The point is that the software was going to make sure I lost regardless. Just looking at my first 2 cards dealt this should be obvious.

    It should be noted that I was playing on a $1,000 manager bonus (with BJ the WR was 100 x bonus with no max cashout - a token $100,000 in wagers:eek:) Maybe in the back of my mind I was playing a little more reckless than I should have thinking there was no way I could clear the WR. But I still had every intention of cashing out SOMETHING.
     
  26. Apr 2, 2009
  27. EasyRhino

    EasyRhino Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Analyst
    Location:
    San Diego
    Sounds like the casino was being fairly good to you. Managers bonus, CS's running the numbers on your play history, etc.
     
  28. Apr 2, 2009
  29. spearmaster

    spearmaster RIP Ted

    Occupation:
    Devil's Advocate
    Location:
    Heaven
    I cannot agree with that. You should always play according to basic strategy unless you can count cards (which is pointless online).

    Furthermore, your mistakes occurred very early in the streak, and standing on 16 vs. an 8 showing is not a minor deviation.

    In any case, I do think it's a bit much to complain that the software is rigged.
     
  30. Apr 2, 2009
  31. funeral979

    funeral979 Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    retail
    Location:
    Texas
    Oh the CS was great for the most part. I don't blame the casino, which is why I don't mention their name. It's just a shame that the BJ leaves much to be desired.


    And believe me, I lost plenty to get the comps I did at this casino.
     
  32. Apr 2, 2009
  33. funeral979

    funeral979 Senior Member PABaccred

    Occupation:
    retail
    Location:
    Texas
    The hand you are referring to was before the 23 hand losing streak occured. And I made that decision based on patterns I saw in the previous 100 hands or so.

    And you can try and discredit my posts if you like, but I think Its a bit much that when I raise my bets to $50+ my payback % falls to 35% over the course of a month (on a game that should bring a payback over 98%). And this was verified by CS.

    There have been dozens of threads here over the years complaining of 'rigged" BJ games.....so obviously there are many others who have similar experiences. I never said, "look at this, this is RIGGED" I simply want other players to think twice when they start upping their bets.
     
  34. Apr 2, 2009
  35. EasyRhino

    EasyRhino Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Analyst
    Location:
    San Diego
    To disclaim, I want to emphasize that 20 losses in a row (or 23 without a win) is amazingly unlucky. I don't think I've come even close to a streak that long (maybe 13 or so). It's just mind-bottling. I'm not sure how many blackjack players you'd have to poll until you find someone else who's had that streak anytime in their life. And you have my sympathies, it totally sucks.

    But note that if you're accusing the RTG software of being rigged in general, then it would be a problem at EVERY RTG casino, not just the one store you're playing at. And I've played at some incredibly douchey RTG casinos, and still won money big bets at blackjack (and lost the expected amount, as well). It just doesn't add up.

    But the RNG just doesn't care about what patterns you see while playing. In fact, even if it was rigged, your hypothesis would have it waiting to pounce only when you raised your bets... not based on previous play history. In your streak of doom, you were losing large and small bets with equal ferocity, changing bets did nothing.
     
  36. Apr 2, 2009
  37. Kenny Lingus

    Kenny Lingus Tard Counter

    Occupation:
    Mortgage Industry
    Location:
    Near Chicago, Illinois
    Yeah, what right do you have to complain, just because you have been getting screwed up the backside?

    Just realize that if you complain too much in a public forum such as this one, then some people might not gamble as much, and then the casinos and their affiliates (such as the ones who dominate this forum) might not make as much money. Did you consider this before you started this thread? Or is it all about you and your unrealistic loses?

    Some people!:rolleyes:
     
  38. Apr 2, 2009
  39. Janek12

    Janek12 Senior Member

    Occupation:
    Translator
    Location:
    Europe
    I personally think that the payout percentage for higher bets at around 30-40 % over the course of a month is much more alarming than a single long streak of losses. The mathematic minds here might calculate the odds of this happening - I would estimate that the probability might be much lower than the probability of the 20+ losses in a row.

    And there can be various ways, IMHO, in which software may be rigged.
    Remember that the software providers depend on the casinos, so it is vital for them that the casinos do not go bankrupt. For example, if the casino is making the expected profit, then the software might be in "fair mode"; if the casino had incurred a heavy loss due to variance, then the software might go to a "recovery" mode :) (i.e. "player losing mode") and use the higher bets (of which most players will not place sufficient number to be statistically significant, so the risk of a valid complaint by a player is low for the casino) to get back to the level of the needed profit. The possibilities are endless, IMO...:D But only the insiders know the truth; we can only speculate.

    My take on this is that at the end of the day, the total payout for a month/year must conform more or less to the statistical expectations otherwise it would be obvious that the software is rigged. So actually, IMO, the player is still facing a random game in any case - but it might be random in the sense that it might be a matter of luck when the switch of the "losing mode" is on or off. The difference from a game in a land-based casino is, IMO, that some mathematical approaches might not work online (I do not mean card counting) because the outcomes of the game do not depend on pure randomness but on the current profit/loss of the specific casino.

    I think this theory would conform to reality at least in some respects - because this might be the reason why some players encounter statistically "impossible" occurences. But these players seem to be quite few - and the reason might be that after all there is the house edge so perhaps most of the time the casinos do not have to switch on the "player losing mode", only in real emergency situations - and this could also be automated and the casino might be completely unaware of this, etc., and this might only be a "safeguard" of the software provider to keep the money flowing in - for the casinos and ultimately for the software provider. As I said, I think the possibilities are endless. :)

    But, of course, these are only my speculations about what might be possible, IMO.
     

Share This Page