⚖️ Crypto Gambling Foundation ⚖️ - Fair Gambling For All

[joksim299]

Why is Stake still member of Cryptogambling foundation while hosting not provably fair and sketchy slot games?

[joksim299]

I have contacted Cryptogambling foundation via email but nobody responded yet.
It look like its only made for marketing purposes.

[Saint-loup]

Why is Stake still member of Cryptogambling foundation while hosting not provably fair and sketchy slot games?

Why don't you say anything about Onehash for example? They are also hosting third party games AFAIK. If fairness is something you care about, you should ask for all the gambling sites currently listed on CGF, and not for Stake only IMO.

[cwil]

Why is Stake still member of Cryptogambling foundation while hosting not provably fair and sketchy slot games?

Why don't you say anything about Onehash for example? They are also hosting third party games AFAIK. If fairness is something you care about, you should ask for all the gambling sites currently listed on CGF, and not for Stake only IMO.

I will say something about OneHash. I'd like clarification from the CGF on the specifics of what their certification means and how it applies to casinos hosting non-pf third party games, to include Stake and OneHash. A concrete set of requirements to be a member would be great.

I'd also like to better understand the circumstances around BitDice leaving the foundation. Posts in this thread seem to imply that it was due to them hosting non-pf third party games. Is that true? If so, was that their decision or that of the foundation?

[Stunna]

Why is Stake still member of Cryptogambling foundation while hosting not provably fair and sketchy slot games?

Why don't you say anything about Onehash for example? They are also hosting third party games AFAIK. If fairness is something you care about, you should ask for all the gambling sites currently listed on CGF, and not for Stake only IMO.

I can't speak for all members of the CGF but I will say this.

Provably fair gaming is important and maintains a major part of our website. However, we cannot ignore the fact that people want to play games like livedealer and it is simply impossible to compete at a higher level without partnering with the providers that people want. Provably fair has not been embraced by the greater industry because it is not in line with the current game testing required by regulators and providers are not seeing great value in it.

The CGF has been met with great resistance when trying to fight these matters. But I would like to see a reboot of the CGF with all the big crypto gambling players involved to lobby in unison for positive change regarding the legal acceptance of crypto in regulated markets along with a push for provably fair.

All the CGF represents is a group of likeminded people, I cannot say it has been a great success but we will be organizing soon to discuss the future. If other members have issues with Stake/Onehash third party software then I invite them to voice their opinion to have those sites removed.

[DNL]

Which type of control do you actually enforce to the members of your foundation?

[BBMltd]

Great service and much needed - so well done for taking the lead on this.

How would we get in touch with you to discuss your services further?
PS: Have reached out via email with not much success.

Thanks in advance
BBM

[xpolinn]

Why is Stake still member of Cryptogambling foundation while hosting not provably fair and sketchy slot games?

Why don't you say anything about Onehash for example? They are also hosting third party games AFAIK. If fairness is something you care about, you should ask for all the gambling sites currently listed on CGF, and not for Stake only IMO.

I can't speak for all members of the CGF but I will say this.

Provably fair gaming is important and maintains a major part of our website. However, we cannot ignore the fact that people want to play games like livedealer and it is simply impossible to compete at a higher level without partnering with the providers that people want. Provably fair has not been embraced by the greater industry because it is not in line with the current game testing required by regulators and providers are not seeing great value in it.

The CGF has been met with great resistance when trying to fight these matters. But I would like to see a reboot of the CGF with all the big crypto gambling players involved to lobby in unison for positive change regarding the legal acceptance of crypto in regulated markets along with a push for provably fair.

All the CGF represents is a group of likeminded people, I cannot say it has been a great success but we will be organizing soon to discuss the future. If other members have issues with Stake/Onehash third party software then I invite them to voice their opinion to have those sites removed.

Thanks for sharing details with us. Very useful information. I have never issued any probs with stake btw.

[BlackyJacky]

I sent an email to admin@cryptogambling.org and was informed that the email account I tried to reach does not exist.

How can I reach the Crypto Gambling Foundation administration, preferably Chris Butler?

[BlackyJacky]

I ask the administration of the Crypto Gambling Foundation to prove how this is fair?

I made 181 thousand bets at Stake's in-house Black Jack and lost 4,5% of the bets while Stake advertises a 0,5% house edge!

[BlackyJacky]

If no one is reachable at the Crypto Gambling Foundation, how can they verify operators?

Is verifying "provably fair" a one time process?

[Fivestar4everMVP]

Bump

I think you are spamming this thread and it is not healthy, you could get yourself banned if you continue, like I already replied to you on stake's official an thread, if this is an urgent matter you need immediate assistance or attention to, you can try searching the internet, Twitter or better still, visit the CGF forum and try to reach the Admins there, or contact stake's customer support and table your issue before them,  I personally believe they will help you with whatever the issue is..
There are lots of options to choose from, stop spamming this thread so you don't get your account banned.

[BlackyJacky]

I think you are spamming this thread and it is not healthy, you could get yourself banned if you continue, ~snip~

I am allowed to bump this thread once per 24 hours

Forum rules

13. Bumps, "updates" are limited to once per 24 hours per thread. Bumping multiple threads at the same time is allowed if it's not annoying. [2][e]

21. Old bumps should be deleted. [2]

~snip~ you can try searching the internet, Twitter or better still, visit the CGF forum and try to reach the Admins there, ~snip~

Where is the CGF Forum?

[BlackyJacky]

Does Stake monitor office@mebit.io ?


Mebit is Stake's support head quarter company.

[BlackyJacky]

Is provably fair a religion?

[TwitchySeal]

I ask the administration of the Crypto Gambling Foundation to prove how this is fair?

I made 181 thousand bets at Stake's in-house Black Jack and lost 4,5% of the bets while Stake advertises a 0,5% house edge!

Blackjack has some skill involved and the house edge assumes you are playing perfectly.

181,000 hands is a shitload of BJ to play.  Maybe you made some mistakes or aren't using the best strategy.  

Or maybe you just varied your bet size and ran bad when making bigger bets.

Or maybe your math is wrong. 

It's impossible to say without a lot more information.

[BlackyJacky]

I ask the administration of the Crypto Gambling Foundation to prove how this is fair?

I made 181 thousand bets at Stake's in-house Black Jack and lost 4,5% of the bets while Stake advertises a 0,5% house edge!

Blackjack has some skill involved and the house edge assumes you are playing perfectly.

181,000 hands is a shitload of BJ to play.  Maybe you made some mistakes or aren't using the best strategy.  

Or maybe you just varied your bet size and ran bad when making bigger bets.

Or maybe your math is wrong. 

It's impossible to say without a lot more information.

Yes, I played perfectly

Yes, in average around every 1,000 bet I differed from the perfect drawing strategy by mistake, but that is negligible.

In a fair Black Jack game you will lose 0,5% of the bets if the house edge is 0,5% and this totally independent of your bet size

My math is correct:

Statistics

Bets: 180,904 | Wins: 78,285 | Losses: 86,612 = 8,327 more losses

180,904 bets x 0,5% house edge = 904 bets I should lose

8,327 more losses - 904 bets I should lose = 7,423 bets unjustifiably lost

8,327 more losses x 100 : 180,904 bets = 4,6%

[TwitchySeal]

I ask the administration of the Crypto Gambling Foundation to prove how this is fair?

I made 181 thousand bets at Stake's in-house Black Jack and lost 4,5% of the bets while Stake advertises a 0,5% house edge!

Blackjack has some skill involved and the house edge assumes you are playing perfectly.

181,000 hands is a shitload of BJ to play.  Maybe you made some mistakes or aren't using the best strategy.  

Or maybe you just varied your bet size and ran bad when making bigger bets.

Or maybe your math is wrong. 

It's impossible to say without a lot more information.

Yes, I played perfectly

Yes, in average around every 1,000 bet I differed from the perfect drawing strategy by mistake, but that is negligible.

In a fair Black Jack game you will lose 0,5% of the bets if the house edge is 0,5% and this totally independent of your bet size

My math is correct:

Statistics

Bets: 180,904 | Wins: 78,285 | Losses: 86,612 = 8,327 more losses

180,904 bets x 0,5% house edge = 904 bets I should lose

8,327 more losses - 904 bets I should lose = 7,423 bets unjustifiably lost

8,327 more losses x 100 : 180,904 bets = 4,6%

0.5% house edge doesn't mean 99.5% of your best will be winning bets.  It means the house averages a profit of 0.5% of each wager (assuming the player makes optimal strategy).

Each blackjack hand has a ~42% chance of winning, ~8.5% chance of pushing and ~49.5% chance of losing.  That means over 180,000 hands you should expect around 89,000 of them to be losing bets. 

[BlackyJacky]

0.5% house edge doesn't mean 99.5% of your bets will be winning bets.

No, it means 49.75% of my bets will be winning bets.

It means the house averages a profit of 0.5% of each wager (assuming the player makes optimal strategy).

The house averages a profit of 0,5% of each wager is exactly the same like the house averages a profit of a half bet per 100 bets:

So if you bet 100 times 1 Euro, you will lose in average 100 x 0,5% of 1 Euro = 50 cents

And after you made 100 bets, you will have lost in average a half 1 Euro bet = 50 cents

Each blackjack hand has a ~42% chance of winning, ~8.5% chance of pushing and ~49.5% chance of losing.  That means over 180,000 hands you should expect around 89,000 of them to be losing bets.

You mix hands with bets, but hands won and bets won is not the same!

When I get a Black Jack, I win 1 hand, but win 1,5 bets.

Also, in 1 hand I can win up to 4 bets, because I can split 1 time and double up to 2 times

Now you can say ok, when I can win 4 bets in a hand I can also lose 4 bets in a hand = balanced

But the difference is when I split or double a hand according to the perfect strategy I have a higher winning percentage, so long term splitting and doubling brings much more additional bets won than the number of hands won.

Hence, you can not use the hands 42% win / 8,5% push / 49,5% loss statistic to explain the 4,6% difference I experienced between bets won and bets lost.

If there is a 4,6% difference between bets won and bets lost, then the house edge is 4,6% and not 0,5% as advertised by Stake!

[TwitchySeal]

0.5% house edge doesn't mean 99.5% of your bets will be winning bets.

No, it means 49.75% of my bets will be winning bets.

It means the house averages a profit of 0.5% of each wager (assuming the player makes optimal strategy).

The house averages a profit of 0,5% of each wager is exactly the same like the house averages a profit of a half bet per 100 bets:

So if you bet 100 times 1 Euro, you will lose in average 100 x 0,5% of 1 Euro = 50 cents

And after you made 100 bets, you will have lost in average a half 1 Euro bet = 50 cents

Each blackjack hand has a ~42% chance of winning, ~8.5% chance of pushing and ~49.5% chance of losing.  That means over 180,000 hands you should expect around 89,000 of them to be losing bets.

You mix hands with bets, but hands won and bets won is not the same!

When I get a Black Jack, I win 1 hand, but win 1,5 bets.

Also, in 1 hand I can win up to 4 bets, because I can split 1 time and double up to 2 times

Now you can say ok, when I can win 4 bets in a hand I can also lose 4 bets in a hand = balanced

But the difference is when I split or double a hand according to the perfect strategy I have a higher winning percentage, so long term splitting and doubling brings much more additional bets won than the number of hands won.

Hence, you can not use the hands 42% win / 8,5% push / 49,5% loss statistic to explain the 4,6% difference I experienced between bets won and bets lost.

If there is a 4,6% difference between bets won and bets lost, then the house edge is 4,6% and not 0,5% as advertised by Stake!

Ok I misunderstood what you meant by bets.

Were you using a bot to play all these hands and record the data?  Or could you explain how you were able to play 180,000 hands perfectly and record the data?