Online blackjack manipulation experiment
So I did an experiment: I played 500 hands total (that is a LOT of hands and a good number to reduce the possibility of a chance event). I played the $5 -- $200 online table. 200 hands were played at the minimum ($5), 200 hands at a medium bet level ($25), and 100 hands at a high bet level ($100 -- 200). I started out with a good bankroll and played for real money (with a plan to charge back if I proved my point and lost -- another story for another forum). I played 100 hands to start at just $5, then I jumped around in groupings of 10 hands each at the three different levels. I played with "perfect" basic strategy for the table rules. Here are the results: and I counted splits and doubles as a second individual "hand" played in adding up to 500 total hands:
Win percentage at $5: 55%
Win percentage at $25: 46%
Win percentage at $100-200: 39%
When I looked at it in more detail, I found that I played the first 100 hands at the minimum level at a percentage of 48%, but after playing at the high levels and then dropping my bet back down to the minimum level to play the final 100 hands, my win percentage was 60%. Of course could be a coincidence, but it confirmed what I thought before:
The win percentage certainly decreased as I increased my bet. My win percentage of the lower bet level magically increased after betting big, in an effort to try to get me to bet big again and then lose.
Coincidence? Possibly. But that is a pretty big sample size, and the probability of manipulation might just be more than the probability of chance.
P.S. I lost money in this experiment, but don't plan to pay...
Quote: austintx
So I did an experiment: I played 500 hands total (that is a LOT of hands and a good number to reduce the possibility of a chance event).
I think members on this board might disagree with you on that point.
Quote: austintx
P.S. I lost money in this experiment, but don't plan to pay...
With a chargeback, huh? I hear that's a good way to get blacklisted from nearly every online casino, forever.
Try logging results more discretely:
Money win/lost by betting 5$ hand
Money win/lost by betting 25$ hand
Money win/lost by betting 100$ hand
Low bet level:
112.5 wins -- 91 losses (with higher percent win over time)
Medium bet level:
92 wins -- 108 losses
High bet level:
81.5 wins -- 122 losses
Blackjack was considered a 1.5 win, I didn't include that before I appologize.
Most of the rules were standard, dealer stays on soft 17, can double on any hand, blackjack pays 3:2, split only once. I did not surrender ever, I guess that is a deviation from basic strategy. I never took insurance or even money.
Yes, total losses were over $7000 of a $10,000 deposit. And yes, charged back. And to me, blacklisting is a bit of a myth -- especially with hundreds of available sites, and the fact that I have a very common name and many different credit cards, not quite sure how I can get blacklisted so that I can't play elsewhere. Someone wants my business, or at least someone I trust. Ethically, I wouldn't charge back if I think something is fair. This is leaning towards not being fair.
The question is, how would an online site manipulate in this way? There are obviously programs that legitimately randomize card deals from however many decks, the wizard has one on his site. However, can algorithms be built into the system that track betting patterns, win percentages, bankrolls, etc., and then can manipulate cards dealt based on this? Everyone assumes that casinos do not need to cheat because they have a house edge. That is true -- for large online or land based casinos over the long haul. But for smaller sites, cheating can significantly increase their profits in the short and long run and is very difficult to detect online. Is it possible? I don't know, it just seemed to me that I stumbled on some sort of algorithm that was triggered based on variable bet size on this particular online site. You be the judge...
If you had won, would you have declined to cash out your winnings, and just played until you gave it back to the casino?
You know that cansino games are always rigged. That is what the house edge is. Whilst I accept that with less oversight and control Online Casinos can be less than reputable. But I do not think setting out to intentionally defraud them is the answer.
I would reccomend always playing at reputable sites such as Bodog, to be sure of as fair a game as you can expect.
1. The number of hands you played was FAR too small to prove anything one way or the other, and your results weren't unusual enough to warrant any suspicion.
2. No matter how you dress it up, you committed fraud by doing the chargeback. A chargeback carries with it the assertion that you did not receive the goods or services paid for by the original charge. This was not the case here--you got what you paid for: $10,000 deposited into your casino account. Since your bank/credit card company is, in effect, eating your loss at the casino (THEY are now on the hook for that seven grand), I wouldn't expect them to take this lying down, and they are a good bet to come after you in a civil suit. At the very least, they will trash your credit.
2. I feel that 500 hands is too small an event for any certainty, but hopefully it was enough to wake you up.
3. More power to you if you can get away with the $7000 "chargeback". If the credit card company is stupid & blind enough to run such a large $10k authorization through to one of those places, then they are taking a chance themselves. Feed 'em some of the same medicine you had to swallow. They'll never bother you with a lawsuit and there's no guarantee your credit will take a hit either. You do a dispute, and there's no way the casino can prove it was YOU who played and lost your money, IF they can prove you and only you ran the charge in the first place. Banks stick it to us; go stick it to them.
Quote: JerryLogan3. More power to you if you can get away with the $7000 "chargeback". If the credit card company is stupid & blind enough to run such a large $10k authorization through to one of those places, then they are taking a chance themselves. Feed 'em some of the same medicine you had to swallow. They'll never bother you with a lawsuit and there's no guarantee your credit will take a hit either. You do a dispute, and there's no way the casino can prove it was YOU who played and lost your money, IF they can prove you and only you ran the charge in the first place. Banks stick it to us; go stick it to them.
I agree--banks have come up with a lot of different and unfair ways to grind extra $$ out of simple transactions, but the way they'll recover this $7,000 (and all of the other money lost or stolen) is by keeping interest rates at higher levels for ALL of their customers than the prevailing interest rates dictate. Consider part of your interest a "tax" to cover loss/theft...
Quote: RonCI agree--banks have come up with a lot of different and unfair ways to grind extra $$ out of simple transactions, but the way they'll recover this $7,000 (and all of the other money lost or stolen) is by keeping interest rates at higher levels for ALL of their customers than the prevailing interest rates dictate. Consider part of your interest a "tax" to cover loss/theft...
Yes I know. They will never just let it go by the wayside, that's for sure. We should all respect the rules but learn how to play their game well, and if an unfortunate event happens to come your way whether it's your doing or not, and YOU as an individual get an opportunity to make it right for YOU, then you do it (but I'd never be blabbing about it anywhere).
Quote: austintxI However, can algorithms be built into the system that track betting patterns, win percentages, bankrolls, etc., and then can manipulate cards dealt based on this?
No, this is way too complicated for an algorithm. They never got passed guiding transatlantic missiles and landing robots on Mars. Cheating in cards? Nah, impossible.
Quote: RonCI agree--banks have come up with a lot of different and unfair ways to grind extra $$ out of simple transactions, but the way they'll recover this $7,000 (and all of the other money lost or stolen) is by keeping interest rates at higher levels for ALL of their customers than the prevailing interest rates dictate. Consider part of your interest a "tax" to cover loss/theft...
No, they won't. That's not how chargebacks work. They will just charge the money back from the casino's merchant account.
If there is a victim in this scheme, it's the casino, not the bank.
I doubt the chargeback will work btw. If it does, I really want to know what bank the OP is using, to try and get their card too.
What happens is that money from a credit card doesn't actually get to the merchant for quite some time. If you dispute the charge soon after, the merchant never gets their money. The credit card company holds the payment until their investigation is done. During an investigation, the credit card company will ask the merchant to "prove" that you authorized such charge and that you received a good or service from such a charge. These random third party "fronts" will not want to be exposed as such, so they will always state that such a charge was indeed not appropriate, and all is done. What else could they say? If they were to be exposed, or try to fight the credit card company on any individual charge, then they would risk their entire business, as Visa or MasterCard would not allow them to charge anyone anymore. And the third party wants to operate under the radar and not have too many chargebacks as that in themselves can expose themselves if they get over a certain percentage, so they quickly resolve it. Really, the casino site and the customer have nothing to do with a chargeback -- it is between the third party and the credit card company. What I don't know is whether or not the third party has to pay the casino site anyway, but I have a feeling they don't. But if the third party gets to many chargebacks then the casino site may go with another third party, so perhaps they do pay the casino site something. Who knows.
Per your own agreement that you sign with your credit card company, you are NOT liable for anything if the credit card company rules in your favor. If the credit card company (particularly a debit card) did pay the merchant and cannot recollect from them, then you are not responsible for that either, it is eaten by the credit card company. But as I said, the merchant will pay back to the credit company even if they did collect as they want to stay in business with Visa or MasterCard for the future. If for some reason the credit card company rules in favor of the merchant (very unlikely), then your liability is just to pay the charge to MasterCard as you always would. I am not sure how your credit would be ruined or how a civil suit could be filed against you if you pay your bill. The merchant can't sue you directly -- you are protected by your credit card agreement, that is why you use credit cards. And the merchant is bound by their credit card agreement that they sign saying they CANT file suit against you directly if they can't collect from the credit card.
So the only way a civil suit can be filed against you is by the MasterCard itself if you don't pay the credit card if they find against you and for the merchant that this is a legitimate charge -- but as I said, this is unlikely to find against you, and if it does happen, well just pay it. No loss to you for trying. The only way your credit is affected in any of this is if you don't pay your credit card charges, or if the credit card cancels you if you are considered "high risk," with lots of fraud and chargebacks that you report even if they all are in your favor. That actually could happen if you always chargeback. But once or twice or three times, no they wont cancel you. Every week, perhaps yes they will. But even if they cancel you, your credit would only be affected slightly as a decrease in total available credit and a recent closed account on your credit statement -- maybe a few points at the most. But then just go and open another credit card.
Anyway, chargebacks cannot be done routinely. But occasionally when you think you got screwed or cheated, as in this case -- not much downside for trying. And blacklisting? Another myth. I cannot see how that could be used effectively. If you can't get on a couple of sites, try another one if you really want.
But I agree that I will never use online sites again. It is easy and convenient, but I think that the way I play -- higher risk, varying my bet size, betting close to max often, using progressive betting systems (for whatever that is really worth per the Wizard, but at least it is more fun that way), etc., seem to be triggering cheating by the site in blackjack. No, I can't ever prove it, and I certainly don't want to "lose" any more money in trying to prove it. I will stick to the real thing.
Quote: austintxWhat happens with chargebacks is that you have to sign a form stating that you did not make or authorize the charges by the merchant listed on your credit card statement. This is where it becomes questionable -- as you did authorize deposits into your casino account, but did not specifically authorize some random third party to charge your card, state that you are receiving random furniture or tellepone services, and then funnel money into your casino account.
Actually, yes, you did authorize it when you hit that 'I Agree' button/
Quote:It is splitting hairs, but technically you can say that you didn't authorize such transaction in the way it is stated on your card.
Yeah, you can say whatever you want, but technically, it will be a lie.
Quote:During an investigation, the credit card company will ask the merchant to "prove" that you authorized such charge and that you received a good or service from such a charge.
It is very easy to prove that you did authorize the charge. These payment processing companies keep webserver logs and record user ip addresses, which is considered sufficient proof for internet transactions.
As for the quality of the service, they (the bank) will ask you to explain and document which service you received and why you believe it to not be fit for its purpose.
Quote:These random third party "fronts" will not want to be exposed as such, so they will always state that such a charge was indeed not appropriate, and all is done. What else could they say?
They can (and do) say that they are payment processing company for such-and-such place. It is not illegal, and there is no reason for them to not want to be exposed, because that's their business. The bank knows it anyhow.
Quote:And the third party wants to operate under the radar and not have too many chargebacks as that in themselves can expose themselves if they get over a certain percentage,
You got it backwards. This is exactly the reason why they will fight every single chargeback. It is not their fault when you file a frivolous one, but their merchant account may get closed if it gets too many approved chargebacks on it.
Quote:Really, the casino site and the customer have nothing to do with a chargeback -- it is between the third party and the credit card company.
If the payment-processing company does lose the dispute, the casino will pay them back. That's how these contracts work.
Quote:Per your own agreement that you sign with your credit card company, you are NOT liable for anything if the credit card company rules in your favor.
You are not liable to the credit card (obviously, since it ruled in your favor), not to other parties (especially to the casino, that, as you said yourself, has nothing to do whatsoever with your credit card).
Quote:If the credit card company (particularly a debit card) did pay the merchant and cannot recollect from them, then you are not responsible for that either, it is eaten by the credit card company.
You can rest assured, the main consideration in their ruling (in your favor or not) will be whether or not they can recover the money.
Quote:And the merchant is bound by their credit card agreement that they sign saying they CANT file suit against you directly if they can't collect from the credit card.
Except, that the casino is not the merchant in this case, so there is nothing preventing them from suing you.
There is also a chance (it happened before) that the US Attorney's Office will bring criminal charges against you if they suspect fraud.
Quote:But even if they cancel you, your credit would only be affected slightly as a decrease in total available credit and a recent closed account on your credit statement -- maybe a few points at the most. But then just go and open another credit card.
Not just total credit, but also utilization, number of accounts, average account age etc. Also, account closed by bank is generally considered an "adverse action", and is negative by itself. Get canceled once or twice for chargebacks, and your chance to get another card get really slim. Applying for a loan will be kinda problematic too.
I am not saying this risks aren't worth 7K (although, I really doubt you'll get it back, but still worth a try), just don't do it again.
Quote: weaselmanActually, yes, you did authorize it when you hit that 'I Agree' button/
Yeah, you can say whatever you want, but technically, it will be a lie.
It is very easy to prove that you did authorize the charge. These payment processing companies keep webserver logs and record user ip addresses, which is considered sufficient proof for internet transactions.
As for the quality of the service, they (the bank) will ask you to explain and document which service you received and why you believe it to not be fit for its purpose.
They can (and do) say that they are payment processing company for such-and-such place. It is not illegal, and there is no reason for them to not want to be exposed, because that's their business. The bank knows it anyhow.
You got it backwards. This is exactly the reason why they will fight every single chargeback. It is not their fault when you file a frivolous one, but their merchant account may get closed if it gets too many approved chargebacks on it.
If the payment-processing company does lose the dispute, the casino will pay them back. That's how these contracts work.
You are not liable to the credit card (obviously, since it ruled in your favor), not to other parties (especially to the casino, that, as you said yourself, has nothing to do whatsoever with your credit card).
You can rest assured, the main consideration in their ruling (in your favor or not) will be whether or not they can recover the money.
Except, that the casino is not the merchant in this case, so there is nothing preventing them from suing you.
Not just total credit, but also utilization, number of accounts, average account age etc. Also, account closed by bank is generally considered an "adverse action", and is negative by itself. Get canceled once or twice for chargebacks, and your chance to get another card get really slim. Applying for a loan will be kinda problematic too.
I am not saying this risks aren't worth 7K (although, I really doubt you'll get it back, but still worth a try), just don't do it again.
That's just a lot of bad information.
1. There is no legally binding agreement with an entity that tries to take your money yet cannot produce documented evidence that they themselves are running a legit organization. Their deception is more than enough reason for you to lie back to them. That is all part of the game being played with these illegal on-line casinos.
2. A webserver log & IP address means absolutely nothing for any individual transaction's proof. Once they have that info then any and all the info can be manipulated any way they want to show it to a 3rd party, rendering it useless as proof. Further, an on-line casino's "word" that it was YOU who played and lost the money is irrelevant and they know it. They have complete control over how the data will appear if sent to a bank and the BANK knows that. My wife's brother works for Mastercard, and while he sees many disputes from people who say they either never approved a certain charge to an on-line casino or made the deposit but did not PLAY it yet even though it was somehow lost, he's never seen an on-line casino prevail. But what does happen is the attending bank who issued the Mastercard immediately shuts down any more charges to on-line casinos or their servicing centers for all cardholders (which should have been done in the first place).
When you chargeback, all you do initially is sign a form stating that you don't recognize the charges. Not that you authorized it or not, just that you don't recognize it. You are not going to be arrested or be in trouble for not recognizing something. When you attempt to deposit in an online casino www.onlinevegascasino.com or whatever, and get a charge on your credit card www.18662938489sdfhsdifhsduiopfh.com, then you can legitimately say that you don't recognize that merchant.
Then that is it for you when you start a chargeback. Period. You at that point don't have to "prove" anything at that point. Then the credit card company contacts the merchant to "prove" that you authorized the payment and that they delivered the goods that you authorized. Now if it were Amazon.com, thats when Amazon.com produces the IP address, UPS statement that the goods were delivered, etc. that you state. But shady offshore third parties processing transactions for offshore "illegal" internet gambling sites? Come on, as soon as these third parties get any bit of an inquiry from MasterCard about any question of their charges, they immediately acquiesce. Why? Because they don't want to be exposed. Even if they can prove that you did authorize the charge (and trust me, they wouldn't even take it that far), then what can they state that you actually received from that charge? Deposits into an offshore gambling account? Wow, that third party will lose their MasterCard rights in a heartbeat. So it doesn't even get that far. As soon as these third parties get an inquiry from Mastercard, they give up. If you were them, what would you do? What could you say? If you could answer that question, then you would be a rich man. Because I am sure all third parties/casino sites have this a major problem and there aren't many good options. They would pay you millions to figure that one out -- how to respond to the credit card companies and actually win. All they can do is scare future people from doing it, which seems to be what you are doing. But do you really believe what you are saying?
Everything you state is correct, but these third party sites are a lot more shady then I am. And trust me, they don't want to be exposed. They acquiesce. They may be correct -- but the whole shindig is set up to "fool" MasterCard in the first place, and MasterCard would not be all that happy about that. What could they possibly say? If you knew, trust me, you would be a rich man.
And an offshore casino account suing me directly in a US court to collect internet gambling debts which are in violation of US laws in the first place? After a credit card company has already determined that it is fraud? Come on, what planet are you on. I would like to see that one.
Not quite sure what the "risk" is in a chargeback once or a couple of times per credit card that you have. I agree, you can't do it all the time. And it is not a good way to endeer yourself to the world of online casinos. But a $7000 loss that I thought was a bit questionable? I'd do it over again in a heartbeat.
Quote: JerryLogan
1. There is no legally binding agreement with an entity that tries to take your money yet cannot produce documented evidence that they themselves are running a legit organization.
Now, this is *really* "bad information".
You do not have to *prove* you are not a fraudster to be able to run a business, and provide services to someone.
If somebody feels they have been defrauded by you, the burden is on them to prove it.
Any agreement you sign (physically or electronically) is legally binding until you prove that it is invalid.
Quote:Their deception is more than enough reason for you to lie back to them.
That's a moral question that everyone has to decide for themselves. I'll obstain from commenting on that.
Quote:2. A webserver log & IP address means absolutely nothing for any individual transaction's proof.
Yes, they do. FTC has established about a decade ago that properly obtained, collected and stored electronic information is a valid substitute for customer signature in online credit card transactions.
Quote:Once they have that info then any and all the info can be manipulated any way they want to show it to a 3rd party, rendering it useless as proof.
That would be fraud, that is easily discovered, proven (ISP logs) and prosecuted. Way less return an higher risk, then simply cheating at blackjack.
Quote:Further, an on-line casino's "word" that it was YOU who played and lost the money is irrelevant and they know it.
It does not have to be "you". It is enough to prove that it was somebody on a computer that you have control over.
ISP logs can prove that. If you claim somebody broke into your house to play blackjack, you'll need a police report to indicate that.
Quote: austintx
And an offshore casino account suing me directly in a US court to collect internet gambling debts which are in violation of US laws in the first place? After a credit card company has already determined that it is fraud? Come on, what planet are you on. I would like to see that one.
I don't see how you expect the fraud you are committing to become less of such because of the fact you did something else illegally as well.
Quote: weaselmanNow, this is *really* "bad information".
You do not have to *prove* you are not a fraudster to be able to run a business, and provide services to someone.
If somebody feels they have been defrauded by you, the burden is on them to prove it.
Any agreement you sign (physically or electronically) is legally binding until you prove that it is invalid.
That's a moral question that everyone has to decide for themselves. I'll obstain from commenting on that.
Yes, they do. FTC has established about a decade ago that properly obtained, collected and stored electronic information is a valid substitute for customer signature in online credit card transactions.
That would be fraud, that is easily discovered, proven (ISP logs) and prosecuted. Way less return an higher risk, then simply cheating at blackjack.
It does not have to be "you". It is enough to prove that it was somebody on a computer that you have control over.
ISP logs can prove that. If you claim somebody broke into your house to play blackjack, you'll need a police report to indicate that.
Man are you misled about the real world of banking.
Mastercard has never found in favor of an on-line casino in a dispute. Why? Because those casinos are in foreign countries, and since their financial regulation is of the same nebulous description as their games, their "proof" is always worthless. And when a person isn't supposed to be playing on-line and the bank isn't supposed to be AUTHORIZING such charges under the law, the dispute is going the cardholder's way every time. Look at it this way: The player has zero recourse with the on-line casino if a dispute arises about game fairness; so the on-line casino has zero recourse if a dispute arises about a financial transaction with a US bank. Sounds fair to me!
Um...that FTC finding is valid only for events that occur within the US. Again, what goes around comes around for these crooked casinos.
Quote: JerryLoganLook at it this way: The player has zero recourse with the on-line casino if a dispute arises about game fairness; so the on-line casino has zero recourse if a dispute arises about a financial transaction with a US bank. Sounds fair to me!
This is not a question of fairness.
Quote:Um...that FTC finding is valid only for events that occur within the US. Again, what goes around comes around for these crooked casinos.
First, you are wrong, it does not have to be within the US, and second the processing company that has obtain the transaction authorization, most likely, *is* within the US, so the point is moot anyhow.
In fact, this is their only recourse against chargebacks -- to scare folks from not doing it. Or to not accept credit cards (but lose all that business). And to blacklist those folks from other casinos (which is fine, it is their right to refuse players, if such a blacklist could work and is followed).
But individual chargebacks, you will win every time. Yes, if you do it a lot then you will start finding less and less sites to play on, and your credit card companies may get annoyed at you. But so what, just go to a US casino where you can be more confident that you are not getting cheated anyway. Maybe in other countries where there isn't a casino within driving distance of any city in the US, then online makes sense. But I can't see any reason for US players to play anything more than pocket change for fun on these sites. Or perhaps poker. Any real playing on slots or blackjack or craps is a joke. Go ahead and blacklist me...
Quote: weaselmanThis is not a question of fairness.
First, you are wrong, it does not have to be within the US, and second the processing company that has obtain the transaction authorization, most likely, *is* within the US, so the point is moot anyhow.
Not a question of fairness? Tell that to the player seeking documented regulations & testing procedures for the on-line casino they're playing at.
Isle of Man is not within the US; ECASH is not within the US; Canada is not within the US, and the FTC only regulates US transactions period. How do I know this? Because I went through it all several years ago when I was too stupid to realize gambling on-line was nothing but a big mistake. I disputed a $2500 CC transaction after playing and getting cheated out of it by the casino, the casino tried every trick in the book to get my bank to disallow the dispute including all those ISP and web server angles you pointed out, but they lost and I won because the other party where the money ended up at was an unregulated on-line casino in another country, and whatever they presented for evidence simply could not be trusted. Neither my credit or I took a hit. The charge just disappeared, and other than a nasty e-mail from some foreign yuppie who's pissed that he was out-gunned by an American, along with a note from my bank that they would no longer honor transactions with on-line casinos or their financial agents, it's a non-issue 4 years later. And I still have and use that card with a credit limit more than double what it was back then. If anyone feels they've been cheated by any of these crooked places (which should be anyone who plays table games or machines at them) first wise up, then do what I did and help teach them a lesson.
One other thing: I read earlier about some type of Internet casino Black List? I've got an on-going account with one that I make sports bets at now and then, and I got it 2 years ago. I don't believe there's a black list of any kind.
Unfortunately you live in one of the last big places on Earth that isn't within 3 hours of a live blackjack game...Quote: austintxBut so what, just go to a US casino where you can be more confident that you are not getting cheated anyway. Maybe in other countries where there isn't a casino within driving distance of any city in the US, then online makes sense. But I can't see any reason for US players to play anything more than pocket change for fun on these sites. Or perhaps poker. Any real playing on slots or blackjack or craps is a joke. Go ahead and blacklist me...
Quote: RonCI agree--banks have come up with a lot of different and unfair ways to grind extra $$ out of simple transactions, but the way they'll recover this $7,000 (and all of the other money lost or stolen) is by keeping interest rates at higher levels for ALL of their customers than the prevailing interest rates dictate. Consider part of your interest a "tax" to cover loss/theft...
So ultimately, the person that steals from the bank actually steals from all the bank's customers. Kind of lets the air out of the stick-it-to-the-man rationalization for being a thief.
Quote: mkl654321So ultimately, the person that steals from the bank actually steals from all the bank's customers. Kind of lets the air out of the stick-it-to-the-man rationalization for being a thief.
That's dumb. Obama makes us who have it give to those who don't. That's stealing. However, that $7000 will not be the bank's debt and that's already been explained.
They're all run by crooks.
I've had an online casino refuse to pay, and recently had a very nasty back off at a B&M casino, for the crime of winning.
I think what you're doing with the chargeback is probably illegal, but screwing a casino out of money is NEVER unethical in my opinion.
If you disagree with this statement, go be a middle to high limit advantage player, get thrown out of a few places, and we'll see if you still hold the same opinion.
Quote: sunrise089When the Wizard tested Casino Bar's blackjack program he was able to figure out the likelihood of his results matching a fair game. Can't the same thing be done for the results from the OP here? I agree the charge back plan is very shady, but it might be helpful to see the probability that the casino was cheating here.
With Casino Bar case, wizard had the advantage of knowing exactly HOW the casino was supposed to be cheating (dealing seconds to the dealer). Then wizard could test whether actual results match the hypothesis of dealing seconds and they did. But if you don't have this extra bit of information of HOW the cheating might take place, then you pretty much just have to do every possible statistical test imaginable and hope that one of those shows impossible statistics. In other words proving cheating when you don't know the exact algorithm how it might take place is very difficult.
