# which is the probability the dealer have 19 followed hands of 20s and 21s in BJ?

#### ximo

##### Dormant account
That's the question.
Which is the probability the dealer have 19 followed hands of 20s and 21s in BJ?

That's the question.
Which is the probability the dealer have 19 followed hands of 20s and 21s in BJ?

Depends on how many 20's and 21's that follow in successive hands.

If you're just talking about 3 hands of 19,20,21 in succession, it's quite common and nothing that would indicate a non-fair game.

This was the succession

20,20,20,20,21,21,21,20,20,20,20,21,21,21,21,20,20,20,20

There is roughly a 0.3 chance of the dealer ending at 20 or 21. The probablity of 19 sequential dealer hands with 20+ is roughly 0.3^19 = 1 in 9 billion.

At which casino did this occur?

Almost sounds like my run at BoDog! Man they're games have been tight as anything lately.

20,20,20,20,21,21,21,20,20,20,20,21,21,21,21,20,20,20,20

holy shite!

That's DEFINITELY improbable.

wtf? Seems to me it's a very unfair game.

Can you post the game logs? I smell a rigged game. And as asked before, PLEASE post the casino where this happened.

PS: .3^17 = .00000000129140163

Last edited:
Ok let me explain a bit more the succession.

Dealer

QS,10H-- 20
QS,10H-- 20
4C,9D,7C-- 20
4C,9D,7C-- 20
JH,4C,AD,6S-- 21
JH,4C,AD,6S-- 21
JH,4C,AD,6S-- 21
8C,5C,7C-- 20
8C,5C,7C-- 20
QH,JD-- 20
QH,JD-- 20
7D,4S,KC-- 21
7D,4S,KC-- 21
JH,AD-- 21
JH,AD-- 21
QH,JD-- 20
QH,JD-- 20
QS,JD-- 20
QS,JD-- 20

you'll notice that most bets were multiplayer BJ from RTG.

And then I will show you another session dealer bj from the same casino the day before.

Dealer rtg % rtg

21----26----14,2
20----46----25,14
19----22----12,02
18----18----9,84
17----22----12,02
<17----6----3,28
PASS--45---23,5
TOTAL 186 100

Just bad luck or you think there is something more?

Last edited:
Multiplayer BJ? You mean that the you played multiple hands while the dealer had one hand, and the hands listed with identical cards above were a single dealer hand?

If that is the case, then it is really 9 20+ in a row instead of 19. That changes the odds dramatically -- 1 in 50,000.

I was down the pub last night playing in a local poker league. Anyway in two hands in a row the flop was 777. The first time I bet on the flop (no river or turn seen) and the second time the turn happened to be 7.

One of the guys remarked that if this was online we would all be swearing it was rigged. Improbable things happen and this in one off examples is not neccisarily significant.

If you were to say what were the odds of the dealer getting these hands in the following sequence they would be very low. This does not mean much though

bust on 23
bust on 24
17
18
19
20
17
18
19
20
21
21
17
26
24
24
18
18

This doesnt mean its not worth reporting. Occasionally sites are rigged and if people report their dubious logs and lots of people are facing similar issues then its worth investigating further.

It is worth considering whether the site might be "streaky" rather than rigged and if you do a search on the forum you will see an excellent debate about what being streaky may or may not be, whether it exists and whether it means a site is rigged or not.

When I encounter what appears to be a negative streak I lower my bet to the minimum and then when I start winning again I up my bets. On some casinos that I feel are streaky I seem to make \$\$ following these patterns in blackjack. The notion of streakiness is that the %ages for all the outcomes is as it should be BUT rather than being equally / randomly split you can get more of a certain outcome in sequence at a particular time.