Betfair's Zero blackjack rigged?

So. I had this strange experience with Betfair's Zerolounge blackjack.

Starting with 125€ and risking 2.5-3% every bet, playing perfect strategy I got to 449€ after 1200 hands. So far so good. But today after just 154 hands (12€ per bet) I got down to 41 EUR and from that to 5€ (6€ bet) in additional 33 hands. That's losing about 0.2€ for every 1€ betted. That doesn't seem like just a bad streak to me.

Is it possible? Sure. Probable? I don't think so. The game is powered by external software provider, so it shouldn't be rigged.

What do you think? What would you do? Do I have a chance of getting my money back if I confronted them?

Zero chance of getting your money and zero chance you were cheated. They have one of the best reputations in the market. I cannot see any scenario where it is worth their rep to rig the game. Besides, if they were doing anything dodgy, why even offer a zero edge game in the first place.

I would say its less likely to be up to 449 after 1200 hands than it is to blow it all betting 12eur a hand over 154 hands.

Hey kravinec, and welcome to the forums. I think you could benefit a lot from the forums as it appears as though you've fallen to some of the stereotypical 'hype' around "that's just not probable!" events and such. These things are easy to calculate and thus you can know where you stand fairly easily/quickly. To come on here and cry "rigged" after 30 hands, 1,000 hands, or even 10,000 hands would be mathematically insignificant.

Average Bet, Number of Hands, and Average HE will tell you your EV and your Standard Deviations to let you know just how probable it is... There's a lot of information on this site about how to calculate/use/understand this information.

Avg Bet: You said 125 BR risking 2.5-3% every hand... 125*.0275 = 3.44/hand as your average bet.
Number of Hands = 1233
House Edge = 0%? What are the rules and are you sure you have BS for "those rules" down 100%? You realize basic strategy CHANGES when the rules change (h17 to s17, etc, etc) right? Otherwise you're probably playing with a very small house edge, like .15% or something.

EV = TotalAction*HE = [(1233)*(3.44)]*(-.0015) = -6.36

SD(1 hand) = 1.1*AvgBet = 1.1*3.44 = 3.78

SD(1233 hands) = SD(1 hand) * Sqrt(1233) = 3.78 * Sqrt(1233) = 132.73

So what does all this mean? This means with an average bet of 3.44 euros, after playing 1233 hands at a minimal .15% HE, you can expect to lose only 6.36 euros, but with a standard deviation (realm of possibility) of PLUS or MINUS 132.73 euros. This is also for 1 Standard Deviation (68% confidence). To be 99% confident of your results you'll want to use 3SD, which would be 398.19 euros.

Thus, I can conclude, with 99% confidence, that after 1233 hands, with an average bet of 3.44 euros and an average HE of .15% you can expect to lose 6.36 euros PLUS or MINUS 398.19 euros. So if you were up OR down a few hundred euros that would be normal.

Lastly, you absolutely can NOT look at "streaks" and what's "probable" over a span of 33 hands, let alone 1,000 hands. To get an accurate idea you need a large sampling size of tens of thousands of hands, minimum. Anything can happen in 30 hands and you absolutely can't say one way or the other.

Hello Romes,
I played with 2 euro bet in the beginning, increasing my bet up to 12 euro with bigger account. I played according to the Wizard's hand calculator from his site.

Fair enough, 30 hands is not a significant sample size, 187 hands however already is a fair share of hands. And if you look at it from the perspective of the last 187 hands, I don't think it went in borders of the standard deviation. If so, please prove me wrong.

Quote: Romes

Anything can happen in 30 hands and you absolutely can't say one way or the other.

How about losing 30 hands in a row?

Quote: kravinec

Hello Romes,
I played with 2 euro bet in the beginning, increasing my bet up to 12 euro with bigger account. I played according to the Wizard's hand calculator from his site.

Fair enough, 30 hands is not a significant sample size, 187 hands however already is a fair share of hands. And if you look at it from the perspective of the last 187 hands, I don't think it went in borders of the standard deviation. If so, please prove me wrong.

lol... You should probably do some reading up on statistics and standard deviations... 187 hands is a joke. It's laughable. It's not ever something to even be considered mathematically relevant.

In order to have a good solid statistical idea of what's going on you need (as I said before) a MINIMUM of TENS OF THOUSANDS of hands. Most every basic strategy engine/game simulation runs HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of hands to come up with the real numbers / optimal play.

Take a look at KewlJ, he's a professional blackjack player and very well known on these forums. In years past he had upwards of SIX MONTHS of losing, while playing a winning game! The variance in blackjack, in the short run, could fly both ways. The SMALLEST number of hands I'd consider before saying the word "cheated" would be like a couple thousand hands. And even then my results would have to definitely fall outside of 3 Standard Deviations.

Proof, even though your 187 hands is a joke
Average Bet: 6 euro
Number of Hands: 187

Average Advantage: Let's give you the benefit of the doubt, though clearly you think you can "count" online games which you can't... Even if it's an "online live" game they always cut off 50% of the cards (or 3 out of 6 decks, 4 out of 8 decks). Penetration is the #1 rule in card counting and is the most important aspect of the game. 50% penetration games will yield such low variances in the counts that it would take a monstrous spread (like 2 euro to 400 euro) to overcome it. And when you're spreading that hard you'd need an insane bankroll to go with it... thus these online live 50% penetration games ARE NOT BEATABLE.

Now, with all that said, we KNOW you're not getting an average 1% advantage, but let's round WAY UP and pretend you're getting 1% average advantage...

EV(187 hands) = AvgBet*NumHands*AvgEdge = (6)*(187)*(.001) = 11.22... so in 187 hands you can expect to make 11.22 euros. Do you see now why getting tons and tons of hands is important? Your small edge only adds up to a lot over time and MANY hands.

SD(1 hand) = 1.1*AvgBet = 1.1*6 = 6.60

SD(187 hands) = SD(1 hand) * Sqrt(187) = 6.6 * Sqrt(187) = 90.25

To be 99% confident you're not being cheated you need 3SD = 270.76

So, with 99% certainty, rounding your avg advantage UP to 1% (which you are NOT getting), over 187 hands with an average 6 euro bet you could expect to make 11.22 euros, PLUS or MINUS 270.76 euros. Thus, if you were DOWN 250 euros that would be WITHIN THE REALM OF NON CHEATING POSSIBILITY.

Let's put the cherry on top and not forget that this is 187 measly joke hands. This is so short term that it shouldn't even be considered relevant statistical data (and I don't consider it relevant but you wanted mathematical proof).

I actually wrote 3 articles that discuss counting in blackjack A-Z. In them it discusses EVERYTHING I've shared with you in this thread and so much more (including penetration, standard deviations, expectations, etc, etc). Please give them a read, and a re-read, as you're playing a losing game for sure:

Article 1
Article 2
Article 3

Quote: teliot

How about losing 30 hands in a row?

.48^30 =P.

Quote: Romes

.48^30 =P.

Naw. 0.48^30=
;)

Quote: HeyMrDJ

Zero chance of getting your money and zero chance you were cheated. They have one of the best reputations in the market. I cannot see any scenario where it is worth their rep to rig the game. Besides, if they were doing anything dodgy, why even offer a zero edge game in the first place.

While I agree that the game is almost certainly not rigged, Betfair has a terrible reputation. Google "Betfair Happy Hour" or "Betfair retroactive premium fees" or "Betfair ASA ruling" to see some of their behavior.

Quote: Pokeraddict

While I agree that the game is almost certainly not rigged, Betfair has a terrible reputation. Google "Betfair Happy Hour" or "Betfair retroactive premium fees" or "Betfair ASA ruling" to see some of their behavior.

Yeah the promotion rules are bit tight, but so are promotion rules in almost every other casino.

Romes, thank you for the calculations. If I was a computer, I wouldn't have problem playing millions of hands in just a few minutes, however I am a human who can play about 200 hands an hour. That's quite a difference.

If I take 11 euro as my average bet (which is closer, get the 3SD of +-486, am I right? And I got -444, that's suspiciously close to that for me.

Quote: kravinec

Yeah the promotion rules are bit tight, but so are promotion rules in almost every other casino.

It wasn't promotion rules that were tight. They ran a scam where they enticed people to deposit with a great bonus. After players accepted the terms and played -ev games that were offset by the bonus, Betfair decided it didn't want to pay the players the bonus. They didn't just return the deposits, which would have been bad enough, they stuck players with the casino losses when the players would not have otherwise given action had they not been offered the bonus.

Casinomeister rogue warning:

http://www.casinomeister.com/rogue/betfair.php

Wizard talks about it briefly at the bottom of the review where it mentions over $10m was stolen from players:

https://wizardofodds.com/online-gambling/casino-reviews/betfair/

Why would anyone give action to a site that has a history of enticing players to lose money on a phantom bonus? That doesn't even touch the retroactive premium fees or the ASA rulings.

I have played blackjack online and in land based casinos. Playing basic strategy I am slightly ahead against land based casinos. I have never ended up winning playing online casinos.

No reason to rig it. If you win just refuse to pay you.