jokerfly says he won $70k in blackjack, but the limit is $100/hand

raiders72002 · 11-09-07, 08:38 PM

Forums should not be used for extortion. Take most of the complaints with a grain of salt.

raiders72002 · 11-09-07, 08:41 PM

I think that there should be a separate forum for complaints until they can be verified by SBR. It's not right for a poster to defame a book without evidence.

raiders72002 · 11-09-07, 09:21 PM

jokerfly

I requested a payout of $40,000. I was using their sportsbook (football) and casino (blackjack), but all of my winnings came from the casino

louis · 11-10-07, 04:38 PM

The limit was $1000 at the time that he played; Of course they have dropped the limit now, while they are investigating his issue.

operaman · 11-10-07, 06:01 PM

x

SBR Lou · 11-10-07, 07:50 PM

Originally posted by louis

The limit was $1000 at the time that he played; Of course they have dropped the limit now, while they are investigating his issue.

OMG what do we do our rigged casino software got its ass kicked.

Rollins08 · 11-12-07, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by raiders72002

Forums should not be used for extortion. Take most of the complaints with a grain of salt.

Raiders, why have you taken such a big interest in this case?

Justin7 · 11-12-07, 11:20 AM

I don't know the facts here, but I have seen new casinos open up a game that gives the player an edge initially... Then a player beats them out of 70k, and they fix it

That said, I wouldn't judge either side until we have hard facts from both.

Rollins08 · 11-12-07, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by Justin7

I don't know the facts here, but I have seen new casinos open up a game that gives the player an edge initially... Then a player beats them out of 70k, and they fix it

That said, I wouldn't judge either side until we have hard facts from both.

No way BOL gives the edge to anybody. They will reel off 10 hands of 20/21 in a row all the time.

jjgold · 11-12-07, 11:42 AM

He must of been cheating

Rollins08 · 11-12-07, 11:49 AM

Originally posted by jjgold

He must of been cheating

Its just funny that if someone wins that much, the book freezes the account because they know he must have cheated. I can just picture them behind the scenes trying to figure out how somebody beat there rigged software. I want to see how this plays out.

louis · 11-12-07, 12:14 PM

In this case the game has been around a long time

I don't think the blackjack game is rigged. The house edge is what it is for a reason. A fair game provides a balanced house edge against the average player. Make the edge too high, noone plays. Make the edge too low, the house doesn't make any money. Since BOL is using a software purchased from someone else, the rigging would have to be across the board not just at BOL. The software developer does not give the source code to BOL, as they want BOL to pay them for changes. It is not in the interest of the software developer to get the reputation of cheating software, and people like the Wizard of odds are ready to test software products, and their tests are outstanding. It is fair; You lose because even as a fair game the house has the edge.

This is the same casino, and same game, offered by Greek, Jamaica, Bookmaker. He played perfect basic strategy, which eliminates almost all of the house edge. The management of BOL does not understand basic strategy, or they would not have allowed a game with a $1000limit like they did.

According to wizard of odds, the edge on a game like this playing perfect basic strategy offering S17, DAS, and late surrender is around 3/10 of 1%. I do not think it was wise of him to then play for a bonus of 1/10 of 1%, leaving him with a theoretical loss of 2/10ths of 1%, so he really isn't a professional player, in my opinion, although he is a better player than the vast majority.

His basic strategy did eliminate almost all the house edge, which is usually 2% over the average player, so BOL is sitting there baffled how after $3 million in action, he is up $70K. BOL, and my guess their software company as well, just may not get it: basic strategy and an enormous amount of play can sometimes create huge wins on fair blackjack games.

The variance after $3 million in action is enormous. If everyone here played as much as he did, playing perfect basic strategy, there are going to be a good number of wins and losses of plus and minus $50K. That's why books like Jamaica limit their max bet to $100. I think Bookmakers limit is $250 on this game.

I wouldn't recommend anyone here try what jokerfly did, because it is slightly more likely, playing like he did, to lose than to win. This is because basic strategy still leaves a small house edge in a multi deck game with these rules. Even if basic strategy and the bonus did give the player a small edge, I doubt many here have the bankroll to play $1 million in action to get their high roller bonus, let alone $3 million.

pavyracer · 11-12-07, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by louis

I don't think the blackjack game is rigged. The house edge is what it is for a reason. A fair game provides a balanced house edge against the average player. Make the edge too high, noone plays. Make the edge too low, the house doesn't make any money. Since BOL is using a software purchased from someone else, the rigging would have to be across the board not just at BOL. The software developer does not give the source code to BOL, as they want BOL to pay them for changes. It is not in the interest of the software developer to get the reputation of cheating software, and people like the Wizard of odds are ready to test software products, and their tests are outstanding. It is fair; You lose because even as a fair game the house has the edge.

This is the same casino, and same game, offered by Greek, Jamaica, Bookmaker. He played perfect basic strategy, which eliminates almost all of the house edge. The management of BOL does not understand basic strategy, or they would not have allowed a game with a $1000limit like they did.

According to wizard of odds, the edge on a game like this playing perfect basic strategy offering S17, DAS, and late surrender is around 3/10 of 1%. I do not think it was wise of him to then play for a bonus of 1/10 of 1%, leaving him with a theoretical loss of 2/10ths of 1%, so he really isn't a professional player, in my opinion, although he is a better player than the vast majority.

His basic strategy did eliminate almost all the house edge, which is usually 2% over the average player, so BOL is sitting there baffled how after $3 million in action, he is up $70K. BOL, and my guess their software company as well, just may not get it: basic strategy and an enormous amount of play can sometimes create huge wins on fair blackjack games.

The variance after $3 million in action is enormous. If everyone here played as much as he did, playing perfect basic strategy, there are going to be a good number of wins and losses of plus and minus $50K. That's why books like Jamaica limit their max bet to $100. I think Bookmakers limit is $250 on this game.

I wouldn't recommend anyone here try what jokerfly did, because it is slightly more likely, playing like he did, to lose than to win. This is because basic strategy still leaves a small house edge in a multi deck game with these rules. Even if basic strategy and the bonus did give the player a small edge, I doubt many here have the bankroll to play $1 million in action to get their high roller bonus, let alone $3 million.

You couldn't have said it any better!