Post
Topic
Board Scam Accusations
Re: 🚨Exposing Stake Originals: "PROVABLY FAIR" Statistical Evidence of Manipulation
by
foxymethoxy
on 21/04/2025, 08:01:26 UTC
@foxymethoxy

I have to admit you are a funny clown, but facts say more than thousand hallucinations!  Wink

Why not speak about facts instead of hallucinated Stake's in-house Black Jack simulations?

You can of course simulate how Black Jack should be, but what has this to do with Stake's in-house Black Jack?

Only the scam artists Bijan and Edward know what code is running on their backend server!

The Curacao Gaming Control Board doesn't care that Stake's in-house Black Jack is provably rigged!



Hi,

I explained that yes, that is exactly Stake's implementation- it is 1:1.

If you use the same seed pair, and nonce, you will get the same result- you can double check that by checking on stake's site, or stakestats.

Therefore, my simulator is simulating what would be genuine, real games, if those seeds were used. You can try to diminish that by saying it's just a simulation, but that's exactly how the game is coded- the visuals and frontend are just there to animate the mechanics, which are core and are indeed open source and reproducible.

If my code can replicate the results of every hand you ever play, given the same inputs (hmac(secret=unhashedserverseed, message=clientseed:nonce:round)) independent of their site, then it is the same game.

Your analysis was flawed because you were miscounting natural blackjacks, improperly using doubles and splits, and this skews your RTP down.

Stake Stats uses similar code to reproduce your bets- they are not connected to the house, or anything like that. They have no idea whether you won or lost, and yet, they can still reproduce specific nonces. Have you ever considered why, or tried to do it yourself? I guess not.