[pologq]

Originally posted on 05/23/2021:

Here's a summary of my position: Nothing is "mathematically impossible". Instead events can be increasingly more mathematically improbable as is obviously the case here. Regardless, it is the Book's responsibility to prove this "exploit" as you call it, if they decide to withhold payment from the players. Did My Bookie do this? Not to my satisfaction, and certainly not to that of the players affected. But you and others have been quick to support this shiit Book from the start. How about the countless times that Books use rigged casinos to drain players' balances? When some poor degenerate loses 15-20 straight hands of Blackjack, where are you and the math police to defend the improbability of this? This seems to happen all too often, with Books using an"exploit" to curb a hot casino player and basically steal their winnings and then some. Basically it's the wild wild west for casino players. There's little to no regulation, so Books can do to you whatever they want. Why someone would willingly participate in this -Ev situation is beyond me.

To summarize: Casino players should not expect to win, and when they do, Books need not pay. And that seems to be ok with you.

your blackjack point is a good analogy to make it here. regardless of what happened, casinos only like when things happen in their favor. since this costs them money, they are quick to shut it down.