Quote from: BlackyJacky on Today at 11:02:55 AM

Quote from: noviesol on Today at 09:35:12 AM

Quote from: BlackyJacky on Today at 08:04:02 AM

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 Cheesy

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 play breakeven. 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.

These scenarios are highly unlikely, but I trust you have enough brain cells to get my point.

Both of your statements are incorrect. You can't determine the total money lost solely based on hands won and lost because Blackjack has different payouts per hand[/b]. The winnings can range from 1.0x to 1.5x your bet size, or even up to 4x if you split and double which is allowed in Brick and Mortar casinos.

My Stake BETS statistics is about BETS and not hands!

The advertised 0,5% house edge means that you will lose 0,5 BETS every 100 BETS and not hands!

Are you able to see your mistake?

One time you said "bets" and then you switched to "hands":

Quote from: noviesol on Today at 09:35:12 AM

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~~ bets and lose 51 ~~hands~~ bets and still be in profit. U can also win 40 ~~hands~~ bets and lose 60 ~~hands~~ bets and play breakeven. U can also win 60 ~~hands~~ bets and lose 40 ~~hands~~ bets and be at a lose.

Let me explain it for you

If I won 49 ~~hands~~ bets, including 10 Blackjacks, I would have won $390 + $150 = $540. Since I lost 51 ~~hands~~ bets, resulting in a $510 loss, my total profit would be $30.
If I won 40 ~~hands~~ bets , all of which were Blackjacks, I would have won $600. However, losing 60 ~~hands~~ bets would result in a $600 loss, leading to a net profit of $0.
If I won 60 ~~hands~~ bets without any doubles, Blackjacks, or splits, I would have won $600. However, if I lost 40 ~~hands~~ bets, all of which were doubled, I would have lost $800, resulting in a total loss of $200.

These scenarios are highly unlikely, but I trust you have enough brain cells to get my point.

Both of your statements are incorrect. You can't determine the total money lost solely based on ~~hands~~ bets won and lost because Blackjack has different payouts per ~~hands~~ bets . The winnings can range from 1.0x to 1.5x your bet size, or even up to 4x if you split and double which is allowed in Brick and Mortar casinos.

I don't see the difference between 1 bet and 1 hand. If I bet 10$ is this 1 hand or 1 bet Huh