crypto-games SCAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[maska_ta]

crypto-games is SCAM do not deposit there!!!!!!!!!

[DarkStar_]

Provide some actual proof? What exactly happened to make you accuse them of scamming? Let me guess - you lost a bunch so your accusing them to be rigging large rolls to cause you to lose, while letting small rolls win?

[Lutpin]

Provide some actual proof?

Hard to do, the user doesn't have any.

What exactly happened to make you accuse them of scamming?

Well, I muted them on chat, which brought the response of "You can't mute me on bitcointalk".

* Lutpin muted Keyon485 permanently.

Let me guess - you lost a bunch so you're accusing them to be rigging large rolls to cause you to lose, while letting small rolls win?

Something going along that lines, yes.
Fun fact: The user currently holds a little under 1 btc invested into the bankroll of the site.

[marlboroza]

crypto-games is SCAM do not deposit there!!!!!!!!!

Relax, take deep breath and than write what happened and why do you thing crypto-games is scam. You can't come to scam section and write "crypto-games is scam" and that's it! Luptin explained nicely what happened, if that's it i don't know why did you even bother to write your post.

[firecasey]

This site is by far the most RIGGED blackjack site I have ever seen. Bet big; lose. Bet small; win. It is so obvious it's almost laughable.

   

[DebitMe]

Someone seems a little butthurt

Did a witle baby lose some money and now wants to bwame everyone but themselves?

[firecasey]

Someone seems a little butthurt

Did a witle baby lose some money and now wants to bwame everyone but themselves?

I played here for two straight weeks. Every time i would bet .03 or less, win. .03 or greater = dealer 20. always

[Lutpin]

I played here for two straight weeks. Every time i would bet .03 or less, win. .03 or greater = dealer 20. always

And you didn't take the time to verify your provably fair bets?

[firecasey]

I played here for two straight weeks. Every time i would bet .03 or less, win. .03 or greater = dealer 20. always

And you didn't take the time to verify your provably fair bets?

Provably fair means nothing.

[Lutpin]

And you didn't take the time to verify your provably fair bets?

Provably fair means nothing.

Make sure you don't provide any references, any proofs, anything other than your very own opinion to support that stance.

[DebitMe]

And you didn't take the time to verify your provably fair bets?

Provably fair means nothing.

Make sure you don't provide any references, any proofs, anything other than your very own opinion to support that stance.

Please backup how probably fair means nothing.  By definition, provably fair means that you can verify the site cannot screw you over.

[firecasey]

And you didn't take the time to verify your provably fair bets?

Provably fair means nothing.

Make sure you don't provide any references, any proofs, anything other than your very own opinion to support that stance.

Explain why your card verifier has random results? Some accurate. Some not.

Example #1, Player had 12, dealer had 17. Verifier Hand image incorrect. This shows player had 10...not 12:

https://i.imgur.com/gQkYIaF.png

Unless you say that the player actually is step 4 and 5. But that doesnt make sense. In winning hands; player is always step 1. This would only make sense, if you changed the better hand to be the dealers, since it had the better chance winning. What say you?

Example #2, player had 16, dealer had 18. Player hand is less favorable; so their step is Step 1 and Step 2. Verifier Hand image is correct:

https://i.imgur.com/FawiOpL.png

[Lutpin]

Example #1, Player had 12, dealer had 17. Verifier Hand image incorrect. This shows player had 10...not 12:

first two cards go to the player, 3+7=10; second set of cards goes to the dealer 10+7=17; now the player hits once, gets dealt a 2, 7+3+2=12, here they stand.
Result of the game: Player has 12 with 3 cards; dealer has 17 with 2 cards. Where does that differ from what you said?

Example #2, player had 16, dealer had 18. Player hand is less favorable; so their step is Step 1 and Step 2. Verifier Hand image is correct:

https://i.imgur.com/FawiOpL.png

The player gets dealt the first 2 cards, in this case, 7+9=16; the dealer gets dealt the second set of cards, in this case 10+6=16; As the dealer has to hit on a 16, he gets another card, a 2.
Result of the game, the player has 16 with 2 cards and the dealer has 18 with 3 cards.

[roadcrap]

Make sure you don't provide any references, any proofs, anything other than your very own opinion to support that stance.

It still just looks like a screen shot and someone crying wolf..

Are there Bet Id's that go with that?

[nekomimi]

A cry baby posted in scam accusation and accusing crypto games which is a reputable site without some proofs.
Don't get some sentiments by being a crybaby.

[Lutpin]

It still just looks like a screen shot and someone crying wolf..Are there Bet Id's that go with that?

A cry baby posted in scam accusation and accusing crypto games which is a reputable site without some proofs. Don't get some sentiments by being a crybaby.

Based on their lack of response to my explanation of the examples they had provided, I would guess the user recognized their mistake by now.
In any case, if you got further questions about the provably fair implementation, feel free to contact me about it, and I'll try to help you out as far as I can.