Re: 🚨Exposing Stake Originals: "PROVABLY FAIR" Statistical Evidence of Manipulation
What causes the experienced house or player edge?
Go to a brick and mortar casino and make 100 bets a 10$:
A) The croupier doesn't reduce a house edge from every bet
B) After you have wagered 1,000$, the croupier also doesn't say that you have to give him now the house edge for the 1,000$ you have wagered
When you end the session, the total number of bets won is your experienced win or the total number of bets lost is your experienced loss, simple.
Go to a brick and mortar casino and make 100 bets a 10$:
A) The croupier doesn't reduce a house edge from every bet
B) After you have wagered 1,000$, the croupier also doesn't say that you have to give him now the house edge for the 1,000$ you have wagered
When you end the session, the total number of bets won is your experienced win or the total number of bets lost is your experienced loss, simple.
I told myself to not react anymore on this nonsense but what u state is simply incorrect.
When u go to a brick and mortar casino and make 100 bets of 10$ u could win 49 hands en lose 51 hands and still be in profit. U can also win 40 hands and lose 60 hands and still be in profit. U can also win 60 hands and lose 40 hands and be at a lose.
Let me explain it for you
If I won 49 hands, including 10 Blackjacks, I would have won $390 + $150 = $540. Since I lost 51 hands, resulting in a $510 loss, my total profit would be $30.
If I won 40 hands, all of which were Blackjacks, I would have won $600. However, losing 60 hands would result in a $600 loss, leading to a net profit of $0.
If I won 60 hands without any doubles, Blackjacks, or splits, I would have won $600. However, if I lost 40 hands, all of which were doubled, I would have lost $800, resulting in a total loss of $200.
Both your statements are incorrect. Since you cannot calculate how much money lost based on hands won and lost since Blackjack has different payout per hand.