Statistical Analysis: Concerning Patterns in Stake.com Game Outcomes
Introduction
Today, I want to bring an important issue to the forefront for anyone involved in online gambling. For those who have spent time and money on Stake.com, recent interactions with their legal team have raised serious concerns about the integrity of their games—particularly their Blackjack and other original games.
The Data
Let's examine the betting statistics from two high-volume players:
Player 1 (@BlackyJacky)
- Total Bets: 180,900
- Expected Losses (0.5% house edge): 904.5
- Maximum Statistical Deviation (0.4%): 723.6
- Maximum Possible Losses: 1,628.1
- Actual Recorded Losses: 7,427
- Deviation Beyond Maximum: 5,798.9
Statistical Analysis
Several key points warrant attention:
1. **Sample Size**: Both players have executed a statistically significant number of bets (>100,000 each), which should, according to the law of large numbers, show results closer to the expected mathematical outcome.
2. **Deviation from Expected**: The actual losses significantly exceed not just the expected losses, but also the maximum statistically possible losses based on standard deviation calculations.
3. **Combined Sample Size**: Together, these cases represent nearly 300,000 bets, providing a substantial dataset for analysis.
Official Response and Concerns
Stake.com's official response to these statistical anomalies stated:
> "Regarding RTP, it's important to note that this figure is based on a calculation involving at least 1 million bets. In short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected, and it is impossible to make accurate calculations based on these sessions."
This response raises several concerns:
1. **Sample Size Dismissal**: The response characterizes hundreds of thousands of bets as "short sessions," despite this being a statistically significant sample.
2. **Scale of Operations**: Given Stake.com's reported gross gaming revenue of $2.6 billion in 2022, there should be ample data to provide transparent RTP statistics.
3. **Data Access Issues**:
- Level 3 verified users report difficulties obtaining their complete betting data
- Additional verification requirements imposed despite existing high-level verification
Marketing and Promotion Concerns
Additional observations about platform practices:
1. **High-Risk Game Promotion**:
- Heavy promotion of live games and Plinko during weekend streams
- Marketing emphasis on potential for large wins
- Promotion of high-risk betting strategies
2. **Account Restrictions**:
- Multiple users report account restrictions after raising questions about game outcomes
- Restrictions implemented without clear explanation of specific violations
Reasonable Expectations
As players on a platform of this scale, we should expect:
1. Transparency:
- Detailed RTP statistics for all games, especially Stake Originals
- Regular independent audits with public results
- Clear communication about game mechanics and risks
2. Data Access:
- Straightforward access to personal betting data
- Clear explanation of verification requirements
- Transparent handling of statistical anomalies
3. Responsible Operations:
- Clear risk warnings on high-volatility games
- Transparent handling of user concerns
- Evidence-based responses to statistical queries
Community Call to Action
1. Share Your Data
- Long-term betting statistics
- RTP experiences across different games
- Account restriction experiences
2. Document Interactions
- Keep records of all platform communications
- Track and share statistical anomalies
- Report promotional practices that concern you
Disclaimer
This post presents statistical analysis based on documented betting records. All figures are verifiable through betting logs. I encourage others to share their experiences and data for a broader understanding.
---
*Note: Please share only factual, verifiable information in responses. This thread aims to collect data and experiences, not speculate about causes.*