⚖️ Crypto Gambling Foundation ⚖️ - Fair Gambling For All

[TwitchySeal]

Syndicate by criminals? Nice

When the Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) accepts a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com while I inform them (with proof) since December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene, then yes, it looks like the GCB is member of a syndicate of criminals!

If the GCB will give a license to the proven criminal online casino operation Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, then the GCB will be a proven member of a syndicate of criminals!

The GCB already gave a "Certificate of Operation" to Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com, means the GCB allows Medium Rare N.V. to operate stake.com during the license application process, while it did not issue a license yet!

The problem is your proof only proves how confused you are.

Your math is wrong and even if it weren't wrong you based on the assumption that in every hand of black jack you can only ever lose your entire bet, push, or double your bet when in reality if you're dealt a black jack (that means an  Ace and a face card or ten) you get paid 3-2.  And you also have the option of increasing your bet by doubling down or splitting your hand into 2 or more hands.  

All this means the player only wins 42% of hands on average.  But because they often win more than double their money, it's not the same as flipping a coin for even money that only wins 42% of the time.

You lost because you're a losing online black jack player.  You think you can beat the game, but that's only because you don't know how to do the math.  Don't feel bad, nobody is beating stakes blackjack - the truth hurts.  Crying only makes it worse.

[TwitchySeal]

9 in a row isn't even interesting.  It should happen every 5 or 600 hands. If you play often enough it will happen regularly because math.  

[TwitchySeal]

Twitchyseal has no idea what he is talking about

9 in a row isn't even interesting.  It should happen every 5 or 600 hands. If you play often enough it will happen regularly because math.  

It happens quite often, because stake has rigged all the og games. They will be caught and eddie will face prison, mark my word.

Yes, quite often.  About every 500 or 600 hands on average.

If they rigged them they'll definitely be caught as soon as someone plays that understands how it works and verifies their bets.  Provably fair also means provably unfair.

Most likely you're going through the same thing as blackyjacky though.  Upset that you lost and convinced yourself that you're a victim because accepting responsibility yourself is too hard.

[BlackyJacky]

Since 23 months!!! I demand compensation for the unjustifiably lost 30,000 USD at Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and all responsible parties like the alleged Stake "Legal Department", managing director Xecutive Corporate Management B.V., and the Curacao Gaming Control Board ignore me!

Partner in crime, the 8048/JAZ license holder Antillephone N.V., meanwhile went out of business and the Curacao Gaming Control Board appears to be a new partner in crime!

Below is proof that the Stake in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

Info 1)

The advertised house edge for the Stake in-house Black Jack is 0,5%, which means longterm I will lose 0,5% of all bets placed.

However, if you take a look at my statistics here https://ibb.co/Hxf8NpR you can see the following total numbers:

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% from the expected outcome according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additional maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets I can maximal additionally lose = 80% additional maximal possible house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 80% = 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = 0,9% maximal possible house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible house edge = 3,7% additional house edge!

3,7% additional house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,900 bets, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.


Info 4)

The Stake bet transaction history only states 180,900 single bet events and no overview of my experienced house edge.

To get my experienced house edge from the bet transaction history, I would need to take a look at all 180,900 bets and calculate it manually!

If the cards were dealt fair and I lost only 0,5% of all bets placed while the statistics states that I lost 4,6%, then the Stake statistics is rigged!

In either case, the Stake in-house Black Jack system is provably rigged and Stake has to compensate at least the 30,000 USD I lost from my pocket.

[BlackyJacky]

Do you have a scam accusation thread?

No, I did not open a scam accusation thread, but everyone can click on the screenshot of my statistics and I have more screenshots of my statistics during the course of play.

complaints@stake.com is aware about my posts here.

[TwitchySeal]

No, I did not open a scam accusation thread, but everyone can click on the screenshot of my statistics and I have more screenshots of my statistics during the course of my play.

You weren't cheated.  You lost.  

https://stakeexposed.com

You can send me messages now.

I liked your design for game-protect.com better.  Very surprised that it was such a failure after it turned out the people you were "trying" to help needed more protection from you.

[BlackyJacky]

The previous partner in crime, Antillephone N.V., forwarded to me an email they received from Stake's alleged "Legal Department"

The user has reached out to the complaints department more than 30 times for the same inquiry.

We have provided the user with the requested information and guided them on validating the license in accordance with Antillephones' preferred procedures.

The User has also been attempting to claim that the 8048/JAZ license is invalid for cryptocurrencies.

Our system allows users to access their complete bet history from the date of registration, and there is no limit on the data storage.

All data stored under the "bet archive" and other sections of your account, are protected by our License, which we strictly adhere to.

For the Blackjack game, users can easily filter data in their bet archive spreadsheet.

Our licensing information and regulations have been transparently available on our website since Stake's inception.

Upon registration, the User acknowledges and accepts our Terms of Service which provide information the above and also provides this clearly.

Prior to using our services, it's crucial for users to comprehend the inherent risks associated with gambling, as winning cannot be guaranteed.

Regarding RTP, it's important to note that this figure is based on a calculation involving at least 1 million bets.

In short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected, it is impossible to make accurate calculations based on these sessions.

Overall, the frivolous claims made by this User have been explained to them many times by Support and other members of the community:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2178857.400.

It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.

They claim in short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected.

Are not they aware that I made 180,900 bets and not 1,000 bets?

And according to the law of great numbers, after 180,900 bets the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% = 720 additional bets lost on top of the 900 bets I will statistically lose based on the advertised 0,5% house edge.

But when I lose an additional 6,707 bets (7,427 bets - 720 bets) on top of the additional 720 bets I technically can maximal lose, then this is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

Why they are not able to understand this basic logic?

When you generated a 2,6 billion USD gross gaming revenue in 2022, then you should engage a legal department which is able to understand basic logic, otherwise you put your operation in jeopardy!

Destroying a multi billion USD online casino operation because of a stupid legal department is not really clever, is it?

Is their legal department stupid because Stake is run by 2 RuneScape players and a chat moderator, or why is it?

Should they not do a brain test prior to engaging legal department staff?

[BlackyJacky]

BlackyJacky, kudos for bringing this to light. If they can’t refute hard numbers, maybe they’ll finally realize it’s time to own up — or face the consequences of failing to do so.

If Stake would have compensated me long time ago, I would not have reported their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system to the Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) in December 2023 and would not have asked them to intervene.

So looks like their alleged "Legal Department" already messed it up, because until they do not give back the unjustifiably taken 30,000 USD, the GCB is not allowed by Curacao laws to give a license to Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com.

If you are a RuneScape player or a chat moderator running the biggest online cryptocurrency casino in the world, what would you do?

1) Compensate the unjustifiably taken 30,000 USD and get a license from the GCB or

2) Persist to not compensate the unjustifiably taken 30,000 USD and do not get a license from the GCB

[BlackyJacky]

The Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) states on its website that they been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector on behalf of the Minister of Finance since March 2020!

On December 7, 2023, 45 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I informed (with proof) the GCB about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene.

6 months later and 51 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they answered the following:

Dear Sir / Madam,

Thank you for your email.

Unfortunately, the Curaçao Gaming Control Board (GCB) is currently not able to handle your request.

The government of Curaçao is actively in the process of modernizing our gambling legislation and setting up our online gaming policies and procedures.

We expect to be of more help as soon as the new legislation enters into force, which we expect to be the case in the second half of 2024.

We kindly point out in advance that the GCB will not investigate all complaints. For example, the GCB does not have the authority to adjudicate disputes between the complainant and the accused party and to settle claims or award damages. Only if a complaint indicates a violation of the applicable regulations, the supervisory task of the GCB entails that this will be investigated further.

For the time being, we kindly suggest, that at all times you seek legal advice for any claims you may have vis-à-vis the license holder or other party or parties. We refer to the following page that contains a list of law firms established in Curacao that may be able to assist you:

http://www.dutchcaribbeanlegalportal.com/legal-contacts/law-firms?sid=102:Law-Firms-Curacao.

Sincerely,

Curaçao Gaming Control Board

51 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they are not willing to investigate Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system, even though this is a violation of the applicable regulations!

4,5 years! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they accepted a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation" during the license application process, even though 10 months before I informed them (with proof) about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!

56 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I sent the following email to the GCB:

Subject: RE: IMPORTANT: Medium Rare N.V. , stake.com in-house Black Jack system provably rigged!

We are deep into the second half of 2024 and meanwhile you even accepted a license application for Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation", even though I informed you (with proof) already in December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!"
 
Running a rigged in-house Black Jack system is a violation of the applicable regulations, so do your job and investigate!
 
 
Please confirm receipt of this email.

The GCB is an authority and not a nameless venture like the 4 master-license holders were!

Are they a new partner in crime?

[BlackyJacky]

Stake is a Crypto Gambling Foundation verified operator with strong policies around Anti-Money Laundering.

Screenshot: https://ibb.co/gZhR31q

Why does a cryptocurrency online casino which claims to have generated a gross gaming revenue in the height of 2,6 billion USD in 2022 refer to the verification by a non-existing Crypto Gambling Foundation?

Does not this expose them as scammers?

[BlackyJacky]

Since 2 YEARS!!! I demand compensation for the unjustifiably lost 30,000 USD at Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!

Until today, Stake's alleged "Legal Department" is not willing to compensate me, even though they are clearly at fault here!

Below is proof that the Stake in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

Info 1)

The advertised house edge for the Stake in-house Black Jack is 0,5%, which means longterm I will lose 0,5% of all bets placed.

However, if you take a look at my statistics here https://ibb.co/Hxf8NpR you can see the following total numbers:

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% from the expected outcome according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additional maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets I can maximal additionally lose = 80% additional maximal possible house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 80% = 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = 0,9% maximal possible house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible house edge = 3,7% additional house edge!

3,7% additional house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,900 bets, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.

[BlackyJacky]

Since 2 YEARS and 1 month!!! I demand compensation for the unjustifiably lost 30,000 USD at Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!

Until today, Stake's alleged "Legal Department" is not willing to compensate me, even though they are clearly at fault here!

Below is proof that the Stake in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

Info 1)

The advertised house edge for the Stake in-house Black Jack is 0,5%, which means longterm I will lose 0,5% of all bets placed.

However, if you take a look at my statistics here https://ibb.co/Hxf8NpR you can see the following total numbers:

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% from the expected outcome according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additional maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets I can maximal additionally lose = 80% additional maximal possible house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 80% = 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = 0,9% maximal possible house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible house edge = 3,7% additional house edge!

3,7% additional house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible house edge = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,900 bets, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.

[BlackyJacky]

THE RIGGED IN-HOUSE GAMES BUSINESS IS FLOURISHING!

A New Era at Easygo

As 2024 comes to a close, it’s been a year of transformation and progress. Behind the scenes, we’ve made significant changes across Easygo to prepare our verticals for high performance in 2025 and beyond.

From unveiling a new brand image to evolving our leadership structure, everything we’ve done this year has been focused on preparing us for long-term success and solidifying our position as industry leaders.

Bijan and I started Easygo with a simple vision: to reimagine the online gaming industry. What began as a four-person team has grown into a global operation with over 1,000 members. This growth isn’t just about team size. It’s about scale, ambition, and aligning our team while maintaining a lean, focused approach.

Our global presence spans offices in:

Australia: Melbourne (2 offices), Sydney

Serbia: Kragujevac, Trstenik (2 offices), Belgrade, Lopaš
    
Colombia: Bogotá
  
Peru: Lima
  
Brazil: São Paulo

Soon, we’ll expand to Rome, Italy, and Ontario, Canada, symbolising our scale and commitment to delivering ultra-localised, entertaining experiences in every market.

At its core, Easygo is a technology company. We’ve consistently led the industry, and maintaining that leadership is more important than ever. We must continue to raise the bar and adapt as we grow.

As part of this transition, Easygo unveiled a refreshed brand image this year. In the new year, we’ll introduce our renewed mission, vision, and values with a big reveal for our team, which I’m excited to share.

These principles will serve as our north star, embodying the essence of Easygo’s commitment to everyone involved in our journey, from team members to fans, creators, and partners.

Shared Consciousness

I’m more committed than ever to staying deeply involved in the day-to-day. This hands-on approach is what made Easygo, Stake, and KICK the success stories they are today. Staying close to the action is a principle I hold at the core of leadership, and it’s how we all remain connected.

We’ve built a culture rooted in shared consciousness, where we’re all ‘all-in.’ Everyone, from our C-suite to our operational teams, is expected to roll up their sleeves because we believe that relentless attention to detail is key to delivering the bigger picture.

As we scale, it’s essential to preserve this ‘all-in’ mindset that got us here. Watching our teams and leaders step up, take on challenges, and grow their skills has been one of the most rewarding parts of my journey as a founder. Every individual plays a powerful role in driving Easygo’s continued success.

Stake's Global Expansion

We’re working hard to expand our tech infrastructure to be more agile and ready to enter additional regulated markets. This year, we solidified our presence in Colombia and Peru, making significant strides in LATAM. Shortly, we’ll launch in Brazil under its new regulatory framework. We’ve also announced plans to enter Italy, setting our intention to apply for the new licence tender following an acquisition earlier this year.

Colombia marked its first anniversary with a celebration, as Diana Otalora, our General Manager of LATAM, was recognised as ‘Leader of the Year.’ Her leadership, along with our senior team of women, continues to drive our expansion across LATAM.

Looking ahead, we remain focused on entering regulated markets, as highlighted in our interview with Forbes. While Stake has been widely recognised as a crypto casino, we’ve expanded payment options to meet player preferences and adapt to regulatory frameworks in new markets. With ambitious plans for Stake, we aim to further localise our offerings in 2025, ensuring we continue to meet the unique demands of players worldwide.

iGaming Innovation

Twist and Massive, our two game studios, have completed their first full year of operations, and their contributions have been astonishing. They’ve played a crucial role in delivering unique and exclusive gaming experiences to Stake.

But that’s just the beginning. We’re focused on further enhancing our content by investing in innovative companies, putting more resources into our game studios, and elevating our proprietary RGS, Carrot, into something the iGaming industry has never seen.

We’re also excited to bring back Stake Originals, crafting a new wave of games that recapture the spirit of what first set Stake apart: fast-paced, easy-to-understand mechanics and simple, engaging designs. This fresh collection of Originals will remind players of our early days while delivering innovative experiences that redefine the excitement of iGaming.

Source: https://medium.com/@edcraven22/a-new-era-at-easygo-488caf84a443

[BlackyJacky]

Now we understand why stake makes so much money, they just attract people that don't even understand the simplest math behind casino games every child would understand.  

You mean house edge has absolutely nothing to do with the chance of winning, right?  

It doesn't matter what the winning percentage is, it has nothing to do with house edge, absolutely NOTHING.

Thank you for confirming that Stake's in-house games are rigged, because in this case (and only in this case), the advertised house edge has indeed absolutely NOTHING to do with the chance of winning!  

If the games are fair, then the house edge determines the chance of winning = RTP = Return To Player: 100 minus house edge = RTP

[BlackyJacky]

The Curacao Gaming Control Board (GCB) states on its website that they been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector on behalf of the Minister of Finance since March 2020!

On December 7, 2023, 45 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I informed (with proof) the GCB about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system and asked them to intervene.

6 months later and 51 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they answered the following:

Dear Sir / Madam,

Thank you for your email.

Unfortunately, the Curaçao Gaming Control Board (GCB) is currently not able to handle your request.

The government of Curaçao is actively in the process of modernizing our gambling legislation and setting up our online gaming policies and procedures.

We expect to be of more help as soon as the new legislation enters into force, which we expect to be the case in the second half of 2024.

We kindly point out in advance that the GCB will not investigate all complaints. For example, the GCB does not have the authority to adjudicate disputes between the complainant and the accused party and to settle claims or award damages. Only if a complaint indicates a violation of the applicable regulations, the supervisory task of the GCB entails that this will be investigated further.

For the time being, we kindly suggest, that at all times you seek legal advice for any claims you may have vis-à-vis the license holder or other party or parties. We refer to the following page that contains a list of law firms established in Curacao that may be able to assist you:

http://www.dutchcaribbeanlegalportal.com/legal-contacts/law-firms?sid=102:Law-Firms-Curacao.

Sincerely,

Curaçao Gaming Control Board

4,5 years! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they accepted a license application by Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation" during the license application process, even though 10 months before I informed them (with proof) about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!

56 months! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, I sent the following email to the GCB:

Subject: RE: IMPORTANT: Medium Rare N.V. , stake.com in-house Black Jack system provably rigged!

We are deep into the second half of 2024 and meanwhile you even accepted a license application for Medium Rare N.V. / stake.com and even gave them a "Certificate of Operation", even though I informed you (with proof) already in December 2023 about their provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!"
 
Running a rigged in-house Black Jack system is a violation of the applicable regulations, so do your job and investigate!
 
 
Please confirm receipt of this email.

5 years! after they have been tasked with the licensing for and supervision of the online gaming sector, they are not willing to investigate Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system, even though this is a violation of the applicable regulations!

The GCB is an authority and not a nameless venture like the 4 master-license holders were!

Are they a new partner in crime?

[AGULIS]

Hey guys, I was just wondering in Crypto Gambling Foundation is still functioning?
Just noticed there a lot of dead casinos presented on the website.

Please advise

[BlackyJacky]

Since 2 YEARS and 2 months!!! I demand compensation for the unjustifiably lost 30,000 USD at Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!

Until today, Stake's alleged "Legal Department" is not willing to compensate me, even though they are clearly at fault here!


Below is proof that the Stake in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

Info 1)

The advertised house edge for the Stake in-house Black Jack is 0,5%, which means longterm I will lose 0,5% of all bets placed.

However, if you take a look at my statistics here https://ibb.co/Hxf8NpR you can see the following total numbers:

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the technically maximal possible deviation is 0,4% from the expected outcome according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additionally maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets I can maximal additionally lose = 80% additional maximal possible deviation from the house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 0,4% (80% additional maximal possible deviation) = 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge = 3,7% additional experienced house edge!

3,7% additional experienced house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible deviation = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because they are neutral and you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,000 coin flips, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.


Below is Stake's deliberate deception answer:

The user has reached out to the complaints department more than 30 times for the same inquiry.

We have provided the user with the requested information and guided them on validating the license in accordance with Antillephones' preferred procedures.

The User has also been attempting to claim that the 8048/JAZ license is invalid for cryptocurrencies.

Our system allows users to access their complete bet history from the date of registration, and there is no limit on the data storage.

All data stored under the "bet archive" and other sections of your account, are protected by our License, which we strictly adhere to.

For the Blackjack game, users can easily filter data in their bet archive spreadsheet.

Our licensing information and regulations have been transparently available on our website since Stake's inception.

Upon registration, the User acknowledges and accepts our Terms of Service which provide information the above and also provides this clearly.

Prior to using our services, it's crucial for users to comprehend the inherent risks associated with gambling, as winning cannot be guaranteed.

Regarding RTP, it's important to note that this figure is based on a calculation involving at least 1 million bets.

In short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected, it is impossible to make accurate calculations based on these sessions.

Overall, the frivolous claims made by this User have been explained to them many times by Support and other members of the community:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2178857.400.

It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.

[BlackyJacky]

Since 3 months and one week, the Curacao Gaming Control Board allows the website stake.com to operate under its "Certificate of Operation" (not a license), even though I already informed them (with proof) in December 2023 about the provably rigged in-house Black Jack system on the website stake.com!

How is this possible?

[BlackyJacky]

What does percent mean?

In mathematics, a percentage (from Latin per centum 'by a hundred') is a number or ratio expressed as a fraction of 100.


How is the house edge physically enforced?

If the advertised house edge is 0,5 percent, I will statistically lose 0,5 bets per 100 bets.

As the casino does not deduct the house edge from each bet amount, the house edge is realised by the number of bets you lose per 100 bets.

[BlackyJacky]

Since 2 YEARS and 3 months!!! I demand compensation for the unjustifiably lost 30,000 USD at Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system!

Until today, Stake's alleged "Legal Department" is not willing to compensate me, even though they are clearly at fault here!


Below is proof that the Stake in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

Info 1)

The advertised house edge for Stake's in-house Black Jack is 0,5%, which means long-term I will lose 0,5% of all bets placed.

However, if you take a look at my Stake bets statistics here https://ibb.co/Hxf8NpR you can see the following total numbers:

Bets: 180,904

Wins: 78,285

Losses: 86,612

If we reduce the number of wins from the number of losses, we can see that I lost 8,327 bets (86,612 minus 78,285 = 8,327)

Losing 8,327 bets out of 180,904 bets placed = 4,6% of the bets lost.

0,5% house edge out of 180,900 bets placed I should lose 900 bets + a possible small deviation.

8,327 bets lost - 900 bets I should lose = 7,427 bets too much lost.


Info 2)

Bets

After 180,900 bets, the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome is 0,4%, according to the law of large numbers (See Info 3) below).

180,000 bets x 0,4% = 720 bets I could maximal additionally lose on top of the 900 bets I will lose based on the 0,5% house edge.

7,427 bets too much lost minus 720 bets I can additionally maximal lose = 6,707 bets = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

House edge

0,5% house edge = 900 bets plus 720 bets maximal possible deviation = 80% additional maximal possible deviation from the house edge.

0,5% house edge plus 0,4% (80% additional maximal possible deviation) = 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge!

Experienced house edge 4,6% minus 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge = 3,7% additional experienced house edge!

3,7% additional experienced house edge : 0,4% additional maximal possible deviation = additional 9,3 times on top of the maximal possible deviation!

Stake's own bets statistics is 100% proof that their in-house Black Jack system is rigged!


Info 3)

When the house edge is 0,5% and you placed 180,900 bets, you will lose 900 bets and the remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips.

The remaining 180,000 bets are coin flips, because you will win 50% = 90,000 bets and lose 50% = 90,000 bets.


Now let's take a look at the technically maximal possible deviation for 180,000 coin flips:

A) Standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 212 coin flips = 0,12% (In 68% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0,12%)

B) 3 times standard deviation for 180,000 coin flips = 0,36% (In 99,7% of all attempts, the deviation is up to 0.36%)
 
What does 99,7% mean?

When you make 333 times a serie of 180,000 coin flips, then 332 times the deviation from the expected outcome will be up to 0,36% and only one time the deviation will be higher than 0,36%.

I was not able to find how much the deviation could be in this one case where it is higher than 0,36%, but likely not more than 10% of the 0,36% = 0,4%.


Below is Stake's deliberate deception answer:

The user has reached out to the complaints department more than 30 times for the same inquiry.

We have provided the user with the requested information and guided them on validating the license in accordance with Antillephones' preferred procedures.

The User has also been attempting to claim that the 8048/JAZ license is invalid for cryptocurrencies.

Our system allows users to access their complete bet history from the date of registration, and there is no limit on the data storage.

All data stored under the "bet archive" and other sections of your account, are protected by our License, which we strictly adhere to.

For the Blackjack game, users can easily filter data in their bet archive spreadsheet.

Our licensing information and regulations have been transparently available on our website since Stake's inception.

Upon registration, the User acknowledges and accepts our Terms of Service which provide information the above and also provides this clearly.

Prior to using our services, it's crucial for users to comprehend the inherent risks associated with gambling, as winning cannot be guaranteed.

Regarding RTP, it's important to note that this figure is based on a calculation involving at least 1 million bets.

In short sessions with a few hundred or thousand bets, variability is expected, it is impossible to make accurate calculations based on these sessions.

Overall, the frivolous claims made by this User have been explained to them many times by Support and other members of the community:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2178857.400.

It is clear to us that there are no ground for reimbursement.

How stupid a multi-billion USD profit online casino operation can be?

While the exact house edge applies only after 1 million bets, the law of great numbers determines the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome based on the number of attempts.

And the higher the number of bets is, the lower is the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome!

And after 180,900 bets, the maximal possible deviation from the expected outcome is 0,4%.

0,5% advertised house edge plus 0,4% maximal possible deviation = 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge after 180,900 bets!

My experienced house edge 4,6% - 0,9% maximal possible experienced house edge = 3,7% ADDITIONAL technically not possible house edge!