question about online blackjack

I have been playing online blackjack with the same company for the last 3 years and I am 100% convinced it is rigged. I have over 30,000 hands which I would like to analyze and I would like to know the best way to do this, which particular statistics should I be gathering, and is there any software which will let me enter previous hands and help me analyze them? I have checked my last 1000 hands for some basic stats, for example the dealer was dealt a 2 card 20 on 143 occasions (124 of which won), compared to my 91 (68 of which won). I have also found that the dealer has much more success with hitting on 15/16 than I do, I often bust more on 12 than the dealer does on 16. I only ever double down when I am on 11 and the dealer has 5 or 6, in the last 26 times I have done this I have got the 10 only 6 times, but the dealer has made 21 14 times! Also, my win % dramatically reduces when I increase my stakes, every time without exception, and I believe that analyzing my entire history will show that as well as having much better cards than me in general, the dealer has more success if I bet bigger stakes. I once went 83 games without winning 2 hands in a row, I regularly go 15-20 games without a win, I have never had a run of more than 6 or 7 wins, and only with small stakes.

Granted, I am not great at blackjack but the things I see online are nothing like what I see in casinos. I go to the casino, sometimes I win, sometimes I lose. I've often gone home feeling p****d off but never felt cheated. Online I always lose, and I always feel cheated. Maybe I am a fool for playing a game which I believe to be fixed but that is not the point, I should be able to play a fair game and I don't think it is.

Anyway, back to my question, I'm planning to analyze my blackjack history as I believe it will show unfair bias, what is the best way to do it?

thanks for any help

Quote: m1918

I only ever double down when I am on 11 and the dealer has 5 or 6, in the last 26 times I have done this I have got the 10 only 6 times, but the dealer has made 21 14 times!

I am not the math expert, but this alone seems to me to be proof enough that you are playing a rigged game. I think the chances of the dealer getting exactly 21 when starting witha 5 or 6 is certainly less than 15%, and to have that happen 14 out of 26 times seems so unlikely as to be a 'never' event in an unrigged game. The rest of your misfortunes seem implausible with a fair game, too.

However, someone playing that many hands after experiencing such ridiculous 'bad luck' is implausible, too. I find your story hard to believe, but it costs me nothing to answer.

If you are interested in a fair online blackjack game, our host, the Wizard, vouches for Bovada, so if finding such a game is what you are looking for, you know where to go.

Firstly, is there a place you can go on your account that shows ALL your previous hands? If so, then I would highly doubt it's fixed because it would be too easy for someone to figure out..

Also, is it a standard six deck shoe, or does it play like a continuous shuffle machine? If its continuous, that will scew results compared to a brick and mortar casino..

If you actually have game logs confirming all 30k hands, you might want to contact Eliot Jacobson who also posts on this forum under the name Teliot, who is a specialist in this field. Not certain what his fees would be.

Personally, it’s all a waste of time and money to research. 30K hands should be more then enough to confirm your own instincts, but in the world of online gaming hardly enough.

Regardless what the actual statistics may be, denial till death is the normal online protocol. There are a bunch of phony handshake regulators, but absolutely no regulation enforcement in the slightest is being done. If you want an example of this, try taking your complaint to the regulator who licensed the casino you’re complaining about.

Online gaming forums have complaint sections but are mostly filled with problem gamblers who don’t want to hear about rigged games, simply because they want to convince you and themselves that everything is on the up and up. These forums are full of petty slot players and advantage players trying to pound out a +EV from ridiculous bonuses who don't care or know much about other games that require skill when trying to gain an advantage. Most of the talented serious table players and video poker players are long gone. You could also try bringing your complaint to the Casinomeister Forum. They offer a free one time arbitration system. If you do, be certain to let us know how that all goes.

All forum owners / affiliates that promote certain casinos can only be a direct result of personal financial gain; since there is no way possible of them knowing for fact what goes on within the back-end of any online casino. They could only make a call based on word of mouth or whatever deal best suits their pockets. They certainly have no access to any bookkeeping or any gaming results. Their recommendation to play any casino is no different then my recommendation not to play any of them. Gambling on the gamble is not a good place to risk money trying to have some fun. Entertaining yourself with gambling is expensive enough even when knowing for fact your getting a fair game. Sites like Casinomeister recommend over a hundred different casinos. That fact alone should scare the shit out of anyone when you consider today's dangerous online gaming environment.

Picture a building (B&M) for every online casino on the market today. The Las Vegas strip would extend clear across the entire country. Just think how ridiculous that actually is. There's just not enough players to satisfy all of their expectations. It's no wonder 10 to 1 of them are rogue. They have no fn choice, and without regulation enforcement reeling in the crooks they have no dire consequences to fear. It's not just the games that might be skewed, it's the homemade T&C's and banking transactions their free to have their way with due to no regulation enforcement that really puts a player at risk.

Remember, there are ten listed rogue casinos to every one that’s alleged to be honest. That one that is considered honest is usually only honest till a player (never a regulator) can confirm their rogue. Unfortunately, the rogue list gets bigger and bigger every year. The only way to prevent yourself from becoming a victim of the billions being stolen, is to stay clear. After 15 years you would think it would be safe today, but it's a multi billion dollar industry being controlled by -------- nobody really knows??

Until online gaming achieves serious regulated enforcement similar to B&M's in serious regulated enforced jurisdictions, (L.V. - A.C.) it's just foolish to be willing to risk your money on unconfirmed and unknown possibilities, even if someone is trying to convince you otherwise.

The only chance of an honest online game will be if the USA gets involved. And if they do, that fact would still remain and need to be confirmed.

Unregulated Online Gambling has a way of bringing out a shady bunch of operators, and software providers. Without confirmed regulation enforcement - Well, enough said.

This is what real regulation looks like... The link below is from a previous post of mine. If you want current results go to the NJ gaming commissions web site and you could pull them up.

http://www.nj.gov/oag/ge/docs/Financials/MGR2013/201304revenue.pdf

Quote: m1918

Granted, I am not great at blackjack...

What does this mean?

FWIW, I tested the Betfair zero game a while back. I was convinced I'd spotted two anomalies, so I studied them in detail. Turned out I was wrong.

Perceptions are a weird thing.

Quote: m1918

Also, my win % dramatically reduces when I increase my stakes, every time without exception, and I believe that analyzing my entire history will show that as well as having much better cards than me in general, the dealer has more success if I bet bigger stakes.

Go to a multi-player table and bet only when another player at the same table as you has raised his bet. If your theory is correct, you can make millions...

Quote: m1918

Anyway, back to my question, I'm planning to analyze my blackjack history as I believe it will show unfair bias, what is the best way to do it?

Which software is the casino running? Some software is rigged, most is not.

Quote: teliot

Which software is the casino running? Some software is rigged, most is not.

Most software is not proven to be rigged. That's a very different thing to proven not to be
rigged.

If the cheating is subtle, then it won't be detectable by statistical analysis or any other
method.

Quote: GBV

Most software is not proven to be rigged. That's a very different thing to proven not to be
rigged.

If the cheating is subtle, then it won't be detectable by statistical analysis or any other
method.

As usual, your advice and wisdom is invaluable. For 7 years I've been doing this type of work through my auditing service, Certified Fair Gambling, and these points never occurred to me.

Quote: teliot

As usual, your advice and wisdom is invaluable. For 7 years I've been doing this type of work through my auditing service, Certified Fair Gambling, and these points never occurred to me.

Good response teliot! Made me laugh.

Quote: teliot

As usual, your advice and wisdom is invaluable. For 7 years I've been doing this type of work through my auditing service, Certified Fair Gambling, and these points never occurred to me.

7 years is about half the time I've been involved with online gambling on a professional level.

If you actually understood what I wrote, then you are saying that you are a crook.

Here's how the audit scam works: the auditor receives data from gambling website, in exchange for payment for their services. The auditor gives the casino a clean bill of health. The casino then publishes the audit so that potential customers believe the game is honest.

There's an obvious conflict of interest here. In many cases I suspect no actual audit takes place and money changes hands.

If auditing does occur it is no protection from cheating even if it is honest. Say, a blackjack game is listed with a payback 99.5%. The auditor looks at the data, determines the numbers are roughly where they should be. This, however, is very far from saying the game is honest.
Say that casino cheats high-rollers, or AP's. The numbers won't significantly affect the payback % below the level of normal expected fluctuation, however millions of dollars are being stolen. All you have to do to get past an audit is think of a way to cheat which won't show up in the tests you are asking that person to perform-that is really trivial.

If this is ever uncovered the auditor will say "I was only asked to check the payback %, I never said the game was honest". Of course, the only reason they were paid by the casino in the first place is to make gamblers think the game was honest. The whole system is bent, an informal conspiracy to cheat online casino gamblers, one that Eliot Jacobson makes money by perpetuating.

Quote: GBV

The whole system is bent, an informal conspiracy to cheat online casino gamblers, one that Eliot Jacobson makes money by perpetuating.

You really know your stuff. I am sure you have enlightened many people on my character with your post.

Sigh. Teliot is being sarcastic.

I deal with auditors regularly in my line of work, and man, they are pains in the ass. Mind you, the auditors I work with usually come from Deloitte, Price-Waterhouse, or E&Y, but they are auditors nonetheless. Most auditors are young, fresh, accounting graduates who are not soured from bias and are not susceptible to bribes. Auditing is very hard work with tons of hours. I'm glad that I avoided that path in my career.

The software that they use also is capable of finding bias in the data given to them. Auditors typically find out which software the company is using and designs tests that prevent the company from delivering a biased set. That said, a smart operator can get around this by delivering an unbiased set. The accounting company can get around this by asking for direct access to the production database and order past sets of data. This is typical. In my most recent audit that I dealth with, the accounting company delivered a script that they ran directly against the production database which would have been very difficult to trick.

Now, of course, if you elect to play at a casino that was audited by "GBV's accounting service" I would be suspect. But if the casino was audited by a big firm with a reputation, it should be quite trustworthy. Companies who perform audits can be held accountable if their audits are faulty.

Quote: boymimbo

Sigh. Teliot is being sarcastic.

I deal with auditors regularly in my line of work, and man, they are pains in the ass. Mind you, the auditors I work with usually come from Deloitte, Price-Waterhouse, or E&Y, but they are auditors nonetheless. Most auditors are young, fresh, accounting graduates who are not soured from bias and are not susceptible to bribes. Auditing is very hard work with tons of hours. I'm glad that I avoided that path in my career.

The software that they use also is capable of finding bias in the data given to them. Auditors typically find out which software the company is using and designs tests that prevent the company from delivering a biased set. That said, a smart operator can get around this by delivering an unbiased set. The accounting company can get around this by asking for direct access to the production database and order past sets of data. This is typical. In my most recent audit that I dealth with, the accounting company delivered a script that they ran directly against the production database which would have been very difficult to trick.

Now, of course, if you elect to play at a casino that was audited by "GBV's accounting service" I would be suspect. But if the casino was audited by a big firm with a reputation, it should be quite trustworthy. Companies who perform audits can be held accountable if their audits are faulty.

Utter bullshit.

Here's a list of recent, major accountancy scandals:

MicroStrategy 2000[17] PricewaterhouseCoopers United States Michael Saylor
Unify Corporation 2000[18] Deloitte & Touche United States
Computer Associates 2000[19] KPMG United States Sanjay Kumar
Lernout & Hauspie 2000[citation needed] KPMG Belgium Fictitious transactions in Korea and improper accounting methodologies elsewhere
Xerox 2000[20] KPMG United States Falsifying financial results
One.Tel 2001[21] Ernst & Young Australia
Enron 2001[22] Arthur Andersen United States Jeffrey Skilling, Kenneth Lay, Andrew Fastow
Swissair 2001 McKinsey & Company Switzerland
Adelphia 2002[23] Deloitte & Touche United States John Rigas
AOL 2002[20] Ernst & Young United States Inflated sales
Bristol-Myers Squibb 2002[20][24] PricewaterhouseCoopers United States Inflated revenues
CMS Energy 2002[20][25] Arthur Andersen United States Round trip trades
Duke Energy 2002[20] Deloitte & Touche United States Round trip trades
Dynegy 2002[20] Arthur Andersen United States Round trip trades
El Paso Corporation 2002[20] Deloitte & Touche United States Round trip trades
Freddie Mac 2002[26] PricewaterhouseCoopers United States Understated earnings
Global Crossing 2002[20] Arthur Andersen Bermuda Network capacity swaps to inflate revenues
Halliburton 2002[20] Arthur Andersen United States Improper booking of cost overruns
Homestore.com 2002[20][27] PricewaterhouseCoopers United States Improper booking of sales
ImClone Systems 2002[28] KPMG United States Samuel D. Waksal
Kmart 2002[20][29] PricewaterhouseCoopers United States Misleading accounting practices
Merck & Co. 2002[20] Pricewaterhouse Coopers United States Recorded co-payments that were not collected
Merrill Lynch 2002[30] Deloitte & Touche United States Conflict of interest
Mirant 2002[20] KPMG United States Overstated assets and liabilities
Nicor 2002[20] Arthur Andersen United States Overstated assets, understated liabilities
Peregrine Systems 2002[20] KPMG United States Overstated sales
Qwest Communications 2002[20] 1999, 2000, 2001 Arthur Andersen 2002 October KPMG United States Inflated revenues
Reliant Energy 2002[20] Deloitte & Touche United States Round trip trades
Sunbeam 2002[31] Arthur Andersen United States
Tyco International 2002[20] PricewaterhouseCoopers Bermuda Improper accounting, Dennis Kozlowski
WorldCom 2002[20] Arthur Andersen United States Overstated cash flows, Bernard Ebbers
Royal Ahold 2003[32] Deloitte & Touche United States Inflating promotional allowances
Parmalat 2003[33][34] Grant Thornton SpA Italy Falsified accounting documents, Calisto Tanzi
HealthSouth Corporation 2003[35] Ernst & Young United States Richard M. Scrushy
Nortel 2003[36] Deloitte & Touche Canada Distributed ill advised corporate bonuses to top 43 managers
Chiquita Brands International 2004[37] Ernst & Young United States Illegal payments
AIG 2004[38] PricewaterhouseCoopers United States Accounting of structured financial deals
Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC 2008[39] Friehling & Horowitz United States Massive Ponzi scheme.[40]
Anglo Irish Bank 2008[41] Ernst & Young Ireland Anglo Irish Bank hidden loans controversy
Satyam Computer Services 2009[42] PricewaterhouseCoopers India Falsified accounts
Lehman Brothers 2010[43] Ernst & Young United States Failure to disclose Repo 105 transactions to investors
Sino-Forest Corporation 2011[44] Ernst & Young Canada-China
Olympus Corporation 2011[45] Ernst & Young Japan tobashi using acquisitions
Autonomy Corporation

No big names in accountancy there, obviously. We can trust the big firms, as we can trust the banks. I have a bridge to sell you if you are interested. Yes, I'm being sarcastic.

Now, given that these scandals were only uncovered by governments in countries with effective law enforcement, with access to limitless resources, what is the chance that online casinos, which are not regulated to any real extent and beyond the jurisdiction of any effective law enforcement, are also working scams? You'd have to be born yesterday to believe they are clean.

Your comment that the companies can be held to account is just fucking stupid. Who is going to hold an online casino to account?

thanks for your replies, it is interesting reading.

ewjones80, all the details of my hands are recorded, although until recently it was only the stake and result. I also believe it is a continuous shuffle machine rather than a 6 deck shoe.

It is a daunting task to analyze 30k hands, especially all of the dealer's hits, which are simply unbelievable. I think I will just take Soopoo's advice and try Bovada

Thanks for the list. Most of these occcurred before Sarbanes-Oxley was passed in 2003. After 2003, it became more difficult to publish false results. Auditors are only responsible to account for current regulations and laws.

Banks are trustworthy in Canada. They're not trustworthy in the US due to the loopholes in regulations that allow them to operate in a murky area.

That said, I wouldn't trust ANY online casino, but i would have a level of trust of casinos who were audited by worthy companies.

Quote: GBV

The whole system is bent, an informal conspiracy to cheat online casino gamblers, one that Eliot Jacobson makes money by perpetuating.

Woops. If you want to have a go at Eliot, I'm afraid you'll have to get by me first.

Chris

Quote: GBV

Eliot Jacobson makes money by perpetuating.

Although you bring up interesting topics that could add to the mystery of how online gaming actually operates; trashing Eliot Jacobson, one of only three technical gaming specialists I know of not afraid to back facts, is a big mistake.

Eliot Jacobson, Christopher Colby, and the Wizard, are important allies to have in the war to fix online gaming. Online gaming, a multi-billion industry still operating unenforced is still seriously broken.

Dear 4ofaKind & Binary, thanks for your your support, but let me remind you, I am the World's Greatest Gaming Authority.

Quote: teliot

Dear 4ofaKind & Binary, thanks for your your support, but let me remind you, I am the World's Greatest Gaming Authority.

Quite a jab, but I couldn't help but chuckle with the animations. And why the hell is "Bill Spivey" playing in the Excalibur? lol

Quote: boymimbo

That said, I wouldn't trust ANY online casino, but i would have a level of trust of casinos who were audited by worthy companies.

Yes, you would have thought so, wouldn't you? But thirteen years of advantage gambling do not bear that out.

The scenario I describe above with the auditor claiming a narrow remit in the face of obvious fraud is not a hypothetical, it is pretty much the rule.

Quote: 4ofaKind

Eliot Jacobson, Christopher Colby, and the Wizard, are important allies to have in the war to fix online gaming. Online gaming, a multi-billion industry still operating unenforced is still seriously broken.

You can't trust people who get paid by casinos to audit casinos, whoever they are. We've been here with Casinomeister. It is just too easy when someone is writing you big cheques to rationalize it with your conscience somehow.

I've very often defended Jacobson on forums like bj21 for his eccentricity and "creative" mind. He is very widely detested in the AP community for selling players out to the casinos, something that doesn't sit too well with me either, so that wasn't easy. I wish I hadn't bothered.

I can't speak for the online casino industry. (Indeed, I frequently speak "against" the online casino industry.) However, I can speak (at length) about my small part of it.

There is not a human being on the face of the planet (including my mother) that I cannot look square in the eye and speak about the quality, reliability and integrity of our product(s), our company and our people. Eliot Jacobson is one of "our" people.

I would be thrilled to submit our product to any conceivable test that anyone can design. The problem with such tests - regardless of the results, the cynic (and I am proud to call myself a cynic) can always come up with a "what if" that throws doubts on those results.

I would open up our product(s) to the forum members in general. Individual game play results could be sent to any contributing member privately (in a very easy to analyze CSV format). The same results could be sent to Eliot anonymously, with a cross-identifier that only Mike would know.

Tests could be run by the Player on their game play results. The same tests could be run by Eliot. Mike could compare the results.

(I apologize up front for volunteering the services of Eliot and Mike. Obviously, we would want to keep both the Player count, and the test count, down so that as little time as possible is required.)

Again, I can't speak for the industry, but I can speak for, and stand behind, my small part of it. After 9 years of operation, over 4 of those years under the watchful eye of Eliot, I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever.

Chris

Quote: binary128

I would be thrilled to submit our product to any conceivable test that anyone can design. The problem with such tests - regardless of the results, the cynic (and I am proud to call myself a cynic) can always come up with a "what if" that throws doubts on those results.

The "what if" here is simply that the data provided is a selective known random snapshot, the real player logs being kept out of view of the auditor. Then you can cheat all you want with impunity.

For credible auditing the auditor would have to have access to flip out any and all data he wanted directly from the software for testing. The auditor would also have to be trustworthy. Obviously, payment represents a potential conflict of interests, but there's not much way around that.

Another way to definitively nail this one is to develop a software product that verifies the numbers as random directly at the client end. This was attempted many years ago, but vanished without trace. Obviously the gambling industry would never willingly participate in this, because some sections know they cheat, and the vast majority of the remainder would not be sufficiently confident they don't.

Quote: Caruso

The "what if" here is simply that the data provided is a selective known random snapshot, the real player logs being kept out of view of the auditor. Then you can cheat all you want with impunity.

That one can be dealt with as follows:

The Player records the precise data and time, with all game details, for 10, or 20 or whatever count they want. (The exact date and time is available in the in-game Play Log.) When the Player receives their game play logs, they find those 10, 20 or whatever games they recorded, confirm that they are there, and that the game data in the log exactly matches what they recorded.

Quote: Caruso

For credible auditing the auditor would have to have access to flip out any and all data he wanted directly from the software for testing. The auditor would also have to be trustworthy. Obviously, payment represents a potential conflict of interests, but there's not much way around that.

(Emphasis mine.)

Paying for auditing services is common throughout the business world - PWC, D&T, etc. I thus agree with your statement - "The auditor would also have to be trustworthy."

Quote: Caruso

Another way to definitively nail this one is to develop a software product that verifies the numbers as random directly at the client end. This was attempted many years ago, but vanished without trace. Obviously the gambling industry would never willingly participate in this, because some sections know they cheat, and the vast majority of the remainder would not be sufficiently confident they don't.

I remember that Jufo and I had a LONG thread conversation about this subject awhile ago on Casinomeister. By the end of that conversation, Jufo had designed "The Perfect Game". As I recall, the downside was that it really made it a pain in the ass if all you wanted to do was kill some time playing Pontoon.

Chris