[Rick_UCONN]

Rick,

I agree that these online casinos are rigged in favor of the house. With no regulations in place, they have a license to steal. We are taking a risk whenever we play online.

Exactly. With them having total free will with no rules or regulations in place,they can pretty much do as they want. Which is exact reason why a lot of books have ran off with their money and closed up shop. But a lot of people on here seem to think "Well why does the book need to cheat". It's really amazing how many people actually trust these books with their money and could careless if they died tomorrow. If given the split chance to run with their money and the player never finding out about it, they would do it. They care about you as much as a poor man walking down the street in Costa Rica.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

Exactly. With them having total free will with no rules or regulations in place,they can pretty much do as they want. Which is exact reason why a lot of books have ran off with their money and closed up shop. But a lot of people on here seem to think "Well why does the book need to cheat". It's really amazing how many people actually trust these books with their money and could careless if they died tomorrow. If given the split chance to run with their money and the player never finding out about it, they would do it. They care about you as much as a poor man walking down the street in Costa Rica.

That's a different point though. You're talking here about books running off with the cash, not about the book rigging the casino. As I posted above, the latter is incredibly easy to prove (if >5 standard deviations, it's fixed).

To protect yourself against books going out of business is the same as with sportsbooks: stick with the big names. If you play at some pissant casino nobody's ever heard of, then obviously you are taking a risk of not getting paid.

[Dark Horse]

Exactly. With them having total free will with no rules or regulations in place,they can pretty much do as they want. Which is exact reason why a lot of books have ran off with their money and closed up shop. But a lot of people on here seem to think "Well why does the book need to cheat". It's really amazing how many people actually trust these books with their money and could careless if they died tomorrow. If given the split chance to run with their money and the player never finding out about it, they would do it. They care about you as much as a poor man walking down the street in Costa Rica.

And you decided this after you lost or before?

I would never play online blackjack. I don't even know -with certainty- how many cards are in the deck or how many shoes are in play. That doesn't mean the books are cheating. It means that I don't have enough information to determine my edge.

You, however, didn't have this problem. So for you to turn around and proclaim in retrospect that the books must be cheating is, well, funny. But where it gets hilarious is where you continued to play after discovering they were cheating you. Why on earth would you do that?!

Your argument is nothing but the 20/20 hindsight vision of a loser. And sure, you may get some other losers to agree with you. But until you provide proof you're just guessing and finding excuses for your lack of foresight.

The only reason I'm in this thread is that you said you had proof. That, after all, would be interesting. Why don't you at least give us the names of the cheating books; either to warn others or so they can verify your 'proof'?

For the record, when a player feels cheated by a book, the first thing he does is mention the book in question. Yet this deep into the thread, you haven't mentioned a single book. Weird.

[Dark Horse]

A few years back I got sucked into playing in the casinos after winning some nice cash from the sportsbook. So I was up a few grand and said ah what the hell I will try a few hands of blackjack. Well so happens after several hands a lot of my money was depleted. Sure I should have quit, but I had a plan on how to get my money back. Low and behold that was not possible after looking into the fact the software was rigged.

Carefully read the above paragraph. He lost a lot of money, but had a plan how to get it back, but lo and behold the plan didn't work.

Can you share this plan? Or is it top secret?

So did the player learn his lesson? Especially since he now knew that 'the software was rigged' (or his plan would have worked). Let's see. Excerpt from same opening post:

I have conducted numerous tests at various sites the last six to eight months and my findings are just staggering. So with that, at every book that i have played at with these so called legal casinos, I will be asking for them to refund my money for the losses in the rigged casinos.

Translation. He came back. Oops. He did not learn his lesson.

'my findings are just staggering' = 'I lost all my f*cking money'. But by now he was on a mission to prove that he was being cheated. He was 'experimenting' to see if the books were honest. Paying for this scientific testing with his own cash.

And to keep it all as general as possible, no mention of a single one of the 'various sites'. So nothing to verify by others, or no experiences by others at those books to contradict his evidence.

Prove me wrong, bud. Show us what you got. And from which casinos.

[bigugly]

Get the data yet?

[Tepi01]

So basically what you are saying is from playing 2500 hands, which would be less then a week's worth of blackjack at a total of 3 sportsbooks, You have come to a conclusion that 95% of them are cheating people.

I have one question for you and I want your honest answer with all your other bs aside, How can someone know that 95% of casino's are cheating them without playing 95% of casino's....?

[St.Aquinas]

Rick Uconn=Stiff

[bigugly]

Waste my time reading this crap and you never come to backup your claims ...never submit any data. Thanks.

[mojomaker11]

Check out Linesmaker.com blackjack. If every hand is a random independant event, the dealers up card should be an A, 10, or Face card less than 40% of the time. This is not the case. I have played hundreds of hands and the dealer shows A or 10 value up 65-80% of the time. If polls can be accurate with 500 participants, my calculations on this blackjack can be as well. BTW I am a statistics and math major and am trained in statistical software. I also frequent casinos and able to make a slight profit by counting cards in blackjack. While it is impossible to prove that the combination of hands in a row is statisically impossible, I can be 99% sure these cards are not fair.

[St.Aquinas]

Check out Linesmaker.com blackjack. If every hand is a random independant event, the dealers up card should be an A, 10, or Face card less than 40% of the time. This is not the case. I have played hundreds of hands and the dealer shows A or 10 value up 65-80% of the time. If polls can be accurate with 500 participants, my calculations on this blackjack can be as well. BTW I am a statistics and math major and am trained in statistical software. I also frequent casinos and able to make a slight profit by counting cards in blackjack. While it is impossible to prove that the combination of hands in a row is statisically impossible, I can be 99% sure these cards are not fair.

I am 100% sure he's a stiff.

[mojomaker11]

I am 100% sure he's a stiff.

I guess if you have that certainty you beat my 99%.

[mojomaker11]

Means nothing.

What was your total wagers placed, net loss, total number of hands, which casinos, and which game types?

That's all that matters - with the house edge and standard deviation known, it's easy to calculate the range of reasonable outcomes, probability of a particular level of loss etc.

I mean no offense by the following, i am just stating my opinion and knowledge of statistics.

I don't see how you state having the hand histories means nothing?? You could be winning every hand and the casino could still be rigged. While the house edge is based on certain play types, the odds of certain cards appearing over a pattern of time is NOT. All you need is the cards that come up and compare that with the probability of each of these cards coming up. For instance, the odds of a blackjack occurring for the dealer is roughly less than 2.5% meaning the dealer should hit a blackjack once every 40 hands. Now if the dealer hits blackjack 5-6 times during this period you might not want to continue playing at this site. If you lost only 8% a session don't you still find it strange if you notice the dealer is having a 10 or A up over 65% of the time?

[Nguyen]

It's obvious that casino programs are designed and programmed in the house's favor to win more hands than losses. If you really think about it, most books are willing to give 50%, 100%, or even over 200% matching bonus deposited into the casino plays. Why? Because the house has nothing to lose. They give give us free cash all day, so long as we deposit in a nickle, and still win that nickle from us. Don't be too naive. I've played enough BJ and online Poker to assert this.

[20Four7]

It's obvious that casino programs are designed and programmed in the house's favor to win more hands than losses. If you really think about it, most books are willing to give 50%, 100%, or even over 200% matching bonus deposited into the casino plays. Why? Because the house has nothing to lose. They give give us free cash all day, so long as we deposit in a nickle, and still win that nickle from us. Don't be too naive. I've played enough BJ and online Poker to assert this.

The game is set up that way regardless. In a casino the game is set up so the house wins more than they lose. That's the rules of the game. If you bust in BJ and the house then busts who wins? You both busted. Let the dealer go first then let the players decide what to do, and see who wins......

Dealer has 16 dealer hits 10 busts...... All plays stand and win........

Dealer shows a 10 ...... all players hit and bust....... dealer flips over a 6 ...... guess who wins even if they didn't take another card......

I love these threads..... NOT

[Peeig]

OP is Rob Singer IMO

[Dunder]

Well I just took the time to read all of the posts in regards to this topic. I love the guys that are responding or referring to me as a stiff.

Anyone who plays Blackjack (or roulette) EXPECTING to win is a stiff IMHO.

With a genuine random number generator, over time it is a mathematical certainty that the house will win, no matter how "skillful" the player is.

I have no doubt whatsoever that there are some "backstreet" online casinos which use tampered software, but for any reputable house why on earth would they need to?

[blix177]

First thing i do when I join a sportsbook is msg them to disable the casino =)