🚨 STAKE.COM’S RTP IS A SCAM! MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE!

[noviesol]

Finally you gave the confirmation that the casino deducts the house edge via the total number of bets you have lost.

If you made 1 million 1$ bets and lost 5,000$, that means you lost 5,000 bets a 1$ and 0,5% out of 1 million bets = 5,000 bets.

So the house edge percentage is always the number of bets you are expected to lose per 100 bets.

This is not correct what you're saying here. Since we don't know how Stake calculates Doubles, Splits, and Blackjacks in the Total bets.

In your Total Bets of 180.904 does this include Doubles, Splits, and Blackjack? Does the 78.285 wins already account for Double Down Wins as 2 bets won and Blackjacks as 1.5 bets won same goes for Losses?

If your Total Bets account for Doubles, Splits, and Blackjacks, meaning a Double Down win counts as 2 bets won, and a Double Down loss counts as 2 bets lost, the calculation changes. Also, if both Splits are won, it counts as 2 wins, and if 1 Split is won, it’s a stand-off. Additionally, if you can double after a split, this significantly impacts the results.

This means your calculation doesn't work on the numbers provided by you. Since you don't have to full information.

The calculation would be (Total Wins - Total Losses) / (Total Bets - Standoffs) = House Edge.

This applies only if the situation I explained holds true.

So tell me does your statistic account for Doubles, Splits and Blackjacks?

No shit, Sherlock. Your “analysis” is a textbook example of shallow math that fails to grasp the complexities of Stake’s rigged system. You talk about house edge like it’s as simple as (Total Wins - Total Losses) divided by (Total Bets), but you conveniently ignore the extra layers—Doubles, Splits, Blackjacks—that Stake manipulates to disguise its true profit margin.

Let’s break it down:

• If your Total Bets don’t account for the extra weight of a Double Down or the fractional wins from Blackjacks, then your calculation is nothing more than a wishful formula.
• Stake’s system is engineered to twist these numbers so that even an “optimal” strategy appears to lose more often than it should. Your simplistic approach doesn’t capture the real cost to the player.
• Until you see the unadulterated data—session by session, bet by bet—you’re arguing in the dark. And that’s not just naive, it’s laughable.

Your pseudo-mathematical drivel only reinforces what we all know: the house edge here isn’t a natural probability—it’s a carefully constructed scam designed to drain players’ funds. So spare us the empty equations and focus on the fact that Stake’s data remains hidden, manipulated, and rigged.

KingBJ21 – Exposing the Fraud, One Bet at a Time.

Did you even read what I said?

I specifically mentioned that the Total Bets need to factor in the Double Downs, Splits, and Blackjacks to ensure the calculation is accurate. Additionally, I pointed out that without the full information only Stake has, we can’t draw any conclusions.

You don’t seem to be approaching this reasonably; rather, it comes across as if you might be a gambling addict, especially with nearly 200,000 Blackjack hands played. I consider myself a problem gambler, but even I haven’t played anywhere near that many hands.

I'll refrain from posting further on this topic, as it seems like a waste of time. It's clear you're here just to damage the casino's reputation. If you think Stake is going to refund your money, you're dreaming it's never going to happen.

[BlackyJacky]

Additionally, I pointed out that without the full information only Stake has, we can’t draw any conclusions.

Your claim is false and misleading, for the following reasons:

1) When the advertised house edge is 0,5% and you made 180,900 bets, then the maximal possible experienced house edge is 0,9% according to the law of large numbers.

Compared with my experienced 4,6% house edge, we can conclude that Stake's in-house Black Jack system is rigged!

2) Considering that Stake's Legal Department didn't dispute my experienced 4,6% house edge, we can conclude that their cards dealing system is rigged.

Their cards dealing system is possibly not rigged and their bets statistics calculation is rigged, but based on the available information and documents we can conclude that their cards dealing system is rigged!

For the right of compensation it doesn't bear any relevance whether their cards dealing system or their bets statistics calculation is rigged!

Everyone who played at Stake has the right for compensation, because they are proven criminals!

Their ignore strategy will fail!

It's clear you're here just to damage the casino's reputation.

How can you damage the reputation of a proven illegal and criminal online casino operation?

Your aknowledgement that informing the public about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack system can damage their "reputation" confirms that the accusation is valid!

In my case, Bijan and Edward had the possibility to compensate me during the past 2 years and 3 months!!!

But instead of compensating me, their Legal Department was stating nonsense to their previous license issuer:

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 Legal Department can be to ignore the law of large numbers, which determines the maximal deviation from the expected outcome based on the number of attempts?

If you engage an incompetent Legal Department, sooner or later you will have to pay the price!

The later you will have to pay the price and the bigger the loot has become, the higher will be the price you have to pay!

So while the sickheads ignore and believe the price will become cheaper and cheaper, in reality the price will become higher and higher!  

[BlackyJacky]

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   

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.

[noviesol]

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  

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. 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.

[BlackyJacky]

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  

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":

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.

[noviesol]

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  

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":

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 a bet and a hand. If I bet $10, is that considered one hand or one bet? If you count $10 as one bet and $20 as two bets, then the whole perspective changes.

Also, the house edge is not about how many bets you lose. Take Baccarat and Roulette as examples—the house edge is simply a percentage that gives the casino an advantage over you.

For example, in Baccarat, the house edge on the Banker bet is 1.06%. Does this mean you will lose more hands than you win if you bet on Banco 100 times? No, because Banco has a higher chance of winning than Punto, so you will likely win more hands than you lose.

So why will I still lose money? I won more bets than lost.

[BlackyJacky]

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

At Stake's in-house Black Jack, a dealt hand can have up to 2 bets if you split or double (you can't double after split).

If you won a Black Jack, you win 1,5 bets and not 1.

At brick and mortar casinos, you can split multiple times and after split you can also double, so it is possible that you made 10 bets during a dealt hand.

[noviesol]

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

At Stake's in-house Black Jack, a dealt hand can have up to 2 bets if you split or double (you can't double after split).

If you won a Black Jack, you win 1,5 bets and not 1.

At brick and mortar casinos, you can split multiple times and after split you can also double, so it is possible that you made 10 bets in a dealt hand.

Do you have proof that Stake calculates a double and a split as two separate bets? And that a won Blackjack hand counts as 1.5 bets?

If I look at your wagered amount—186 BTC and 689 ETH—you should have theoretically lost 0.93 BTC and 3.44 ETH based on the house edge. But you want back $30,000? It seems like the amount you lost aligns with the expected house edge. But let's put that aside, how much BTC did you actually lose on 186 BTC wagered, without considering individual bets and plays? Theoretically it should be around 0,93 BTC if u played every hand with the same betsize and used optimal strategy. But I think u don't even know what the perfect strategy would be.



If u can post a graph of the perfect blackjack strategy for Stake in your next post. I will give u some credit since there are many graphs for every kind of Blackjack. Looking forward to see your reaction.

[BlackyJacky]

Do you have prove Stake calculates a double and split as 2 bets? and a won Blackjack as 1,5 bet?

I informed you earlier that I don't know how Stake calculates their bets statistics.

If I look at your wagered amount of 186 BTC and 689 ETH u should have lost in theory 0,93 BTC and 3,44 ETH. But u want back 30k USD?

In theory I should have lost nothing, because 0,5% house edge minus 0,5% rewards = zero.

But u want back 30k USD?

Yes, I want the 30,000 USD I lost back, because their in-house Black Jack system is provably rigged and I lost it unjustifiably.

[noviesol]

Maybe also include a log of your last 50 hands to show that you played them exactly by the book. Otherwise, I find it hard to believe that you played Blackjack perfectly. And if you don’t play perfectly, the house edge increases quickly.

I informed you earlier that I don't know how Stake calculates their bets statistics.

Maybe you should also get the bet statistics straight before accusing Stake of rigging their games, since you don’t know how Stake calculates their statistics. But you're certain it’s rigged simply because you don’t know how it’s calculated?

Look, I'm neither your enemy nor your friend here. I've been scammed by online casinos, and I don’t trust crypto casinos at all. But what you're doing here doesn't make sense. You could be spending your time better.

[BlackyJacky]

Maybe also include a log of your last 50 hands to show that you played them exactly by the book.

Isn't necessary, Stake's Legal Department answered and they don't say that my playing style caused the 4,6% experienced house edge.

They say I experienced a 4,6% house edge because the advertised house edge applies only after 1 million bets:

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.

Maybe you should also get the bet statistics straight before accusing Stake of rigging their games, since you don’t know how Stake calculates their

I have my Stake bets statistics: https://ibb.co/Hxf8NpR

I don't need to know how Stake calculates my bets statistics!

They have to calculate it properly, and if they don't, it is rigged and they have to compensate me.

Also, I informed you earlier that Stake's Legal Department isn't blaming their bets statistics calculation (see above).

But you're certain it’s rigged simply because you don’t know how it’s calculated?

No, it isn't certain that it is rigged because I don't know how Stake calculates my bets statistics!

It is certain that it is rigged because after 180,900 bets the maximal possible experienced house edge is 0,9%, while my experienced house edge is 4,6%!

You could be spending your time better.

You will see in the foreseeable future that my time is very well invested!  

[nutildah]

Nobody should bother taking you seriously after this:

• Forced Hits & Busts: Their system can pressure you into hitting more often, increasing busts.

OK, how? You can't just spout nonsense claims with nothing to back them up and then expect anybody to believe you.

• No Counterplay: When you bust, the house doesn’t even need to draw—your bet is already lost.

No shit sherlock. That is how Blackjack has always worked.

• Winning Streaks Don’t Offset Losses: Even an 8-win streak can’t outpace the built-in advantage of you busting first.

True, that's part of the house edge. This has been known for 70+ years.

Then you responded with this:

You can dismiss talk of “house edge” or “AI posts” all you want

You're the one that brought up house edge. Then when I asked you to explain how their system pressured you into taking hits to increase the house edge, you ignored it to bring up totally unrelated matters.

Another reason nobody should believe you is you cannot present an honest argument to save your life:

The attached session data shows a 94.44% RTP, meaning even with correct play, the return is well below the expected 99.5% for blackjack. Are you seriously suggesting I misplayed 438 hands straight to justify that drop? That’s absurd.

No, he is not, and you know he is not.

The RTP decreases significantly if you are not playing perfect hands. You are also changing the size of your bet pretty regularly, which can decrease the RTP more rapidly if higher-bet hands aren't played perfectly. Furthermore, you haven't presented enough information for anyone to come to a conclusion about your gameplay.

I know you think you are somehow damaging Stake's reputation by continuing to post your hard-headed AI drivel, but the fact is, in over 300 posts, you haven't actually said a goddamn thing.

[nutildah]

The only thing the evidence you've shown suggests is that you're a shit BlackJack player. 

You don't actually have any evidence that supports any of your claims.

If you did, you'd have taken it somewhere where somebody can do something about it. Instead, you're just like an AI-assisted infant, using Grok to scream for you and smear shit over any walls within your reach, hoping for a payday from Stake in exchange for your silence. And you'll never get it, because everyone with half of an honest brain can see what you're doing.

[noviesol]

What worries me is OP's mental state, as this has been going on for over two years now, based on their history. The quick responses to every message suggest OP is are very focused on posting about this. A normal person would have stopped ranting and dwelling on this a long time ago.

[nutildah]

@nutildah – If you had even a shred of intellectual honesty, you’d address the **actual evidence** instead of resorting to personal attacks. 

Like I just said, you didn't produce any actual evidence. What you provided could not be used by anyone attempting to make an objective statistical evaluation of your gamplay. None of what you presented means anything as we don't know how you played the hands in question. Even if we did, you could be manipulating the screenshots, so none of it means a damn thing.

If you did have evidence, you would have taken it to somebody who can do something about it. But you don't. So you just repeat the same fallacious arguments over and over, throwing a never-ending, AI-driven temper tantrum.

Nobody here is going to be persuaded by your nonsense. Not forum members who know a thing or two about statistics or online gambling, nor casual readers just happening to come across this thread.

[BlackyJacky]

Even if we did, you could be manipulating the screenshots, so none of it means a damn thing.

Stake's Legal Department confirmed that I experienced a 4,6% house edge, confirming that my Stake bets statistics screenshot is accurate.

Everyone claiming that my screenshots are manipulated is a psychological abuser!

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.

For those too dumb to understand basic things, their excusation why I experienced a 4,6% house edge is that only after 1 million bets the advertised house edge applies!

While the exact house edge applies only after 1 million bets, the higher the number of bets made the lower is the maximal possible deviation.

And after 180,900 bets, the maximal possible deviation is an additional 0,4% experienced house edge.

So after 180,900 bets, the maximal possible experienced house edge is 0,9% (0,5% + 0,4%), while my experienced house edge is 4,6%!

Everyone defending Stake is either too dumb to understand basic things or is a psychological abuser becoming a partner in crime!


Yes, if you defend a proven illegal and criminal online casino operation, then you became a partner in crime!

Below is a list of Bitcointalk Stake partners in crime:

@AHOYBRAUSE

@Casino Guru - The self-proclaimed online casino dispute mediation expert psychological abuser

@HolyDarkness - The self-proclaimed online casino dispute mediation expert psychological abuser

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5481683.msg65133380#msg65133380

@noviesol

@nutildah

@ryzaadit

@Symphonized

@TwitchySeal - Stake Legal Department refers to his hallucinated nonsense

@Zwei

Feel free to quote the list and add more Bitcointalk Stake partners in crime.

[BlackyJacky]

Take a look at the self-proclaimed online casino mediation expert master psychological abuser:

Hallucination 1)

Hmm... must be fun to live in the world inside your head where you're always right and when someone pointed out that you're not, either ignore the fact

Hallucinates that someone pointed out that the experienced house or player edge is not caused by the total number of bets a player has won or lost!

Hallucinates the hallucinated nonsense that the experienced house or player edge is not caused by the total number of bets a player has won or lost as a "fact"!


Hallucination 2)

[because you're always right, so you shouldn't address the matter where they show that you're not]

Hallucinates that I am always right, while I am not, but in regard to how the casino collects the house edge I am indeed right!

Hallucinates that the nonsense hallucinators showed to me that the experienced house or player edge is not caused by the total number of bets a player has won or lost!


Hallucination 3)

like when you try to point out my "fun fact" that stake routinely scan this board, which I then show the full statement made by the rep herself, which prove that the "fun fact" is actually a, well, "fact",

Hallucinates that I tried to point out his "fun fact" (whatever that means?)!

Here is the post I made:

Some interesting info from @holydarkness

Info 1)

Stake scans this board!

Though they barely address matters here, this board is routinely scanned by one of their representative who then forward the matter to their complaint team. So, quite likely, their team has been made aware of this thread. Hopefully, they can overturn what "can't be overturn" by their live support.

Info 2)

If you did nothing wrong, Casino Guru will make a fair ruling Stake will follow!

Otherwise, as you've escalate to CG, and if you did nothing wrong, you can rest assured that CG will find and made a ruling that Stake's decision is unacordingly, and most likely than not, Stake will comply to CG's ruling.

Wait, Casino Guru closed my complaint about Stake's provably rigged in-house Black Jack!  

Hallucination 4)

or, when an ADR refuse to mediate due to the lack of evidence, they're stupid.

Hallucinates that I didn't submit substantial and sufficient proof to Casino Guru that Stake's in-house Black Jack is rigged!

Only because someone doesn't know or isn't able to understand that the experienced house or player edge is caused by the total number of bets a player has won or lost, doesn't mean there is a lack of evidence!

In such a case there is more likely a lack of intellect!  


Hallucination 5)

Try to go to the police and accuse someone without concrete evidence, see if they'll take your case seriously.

Repeats his hallucination that I didn't submit concrete evidence to Casino Guru, while in fact I did!


Hallucination 6)

By "your concrete evidence", I believe we all [but you] understand that what you served them --if we compare to what you tried to serve to CG on your thread there, as well as here in those wall of text and numbers-- are not valid as a compelling prima facie

Repeats his hallucination and additionally false and misleading pretends that "my concrete evidence" isn't valid as a compelling prima facie, while in fact it is!

Only because someone doesn't know or isn't able to understand that the experienced house or player edge is caused by the total number of bets a player has won or lost, doesn't mean "my concrete evidence" isn't compelling!


Hallucination 7)

because well, your understanding of how the system works is wrong,

Hallucinates that my understanding of how the system works is wrong, while in fact it is right!


Hallucination 8

but then again, in the world you're living inside your head, you're the one who always right.

Repeats his hallucination that I am always right, while I am not, but in regard to how the casino collects the house edge I am indeed right!

[holydarkness]

[...]

HolyDarkness once said people here are just “bots posting the same things.” Seems like that applies perfectly to you—just another Stake PR account responding only when it’s convenient.

Remind holydarkness again exactly what holydarkness said, where, and when?

Because, far as holydarkness's memory served him, he don't think he ever said people here are just pots posting the same things. So... kindly quote holydarkness's post referenced above, here, to make it clear. Lest people think you manipulate statements and mislead with misinformation?

[holydarkness]

[...]

HolyDarkness once said people here are just “bots posting the same things.” Seems like that applies perfectly to you—just another Stake PR account responding only when it’s convenient.

Remind holydarkness again exactly what holydarkness said, where, and when?

Because, far as holydarkness's memory served him, he don't think he ever said people here are just pots posting the same things. So... kindly quote holydarkness's post referenced above, here, to make it clear. Lest people think you manipulate statements and mislead with misinformation?

@HolyDarkness – Oh, so now you wanna talk? The ignore button was working just fine until your name got called. Now suddenly, you need “exact quotes” like this is some courtroom drama? Nah, let’s not play games—you walked straight into this one.

🎭 The Act is Over – Time to Answer for Real

🕵️ 1️⃣ If you have NO contact with Stake, why do you constantly insert yourself into their cases?

You claim neutrality, yet you always show up when Stake is being exposed.
Why don’t I see you mediating for users scammed by other casinos? Why does your “independent curiosity” only trigger when Stake is the one under fire?
⚡ 2️⃣ My case was escalated to Eddie & the tech team in DAYS through YOU—now you suddenly have “no influence”?

You had no problem getting my case to the top of Stake’s chain of command. Now you expect people to believe you had nothing to do with it?
Either you have pull with Stake, or you’re lying—which one is it?
🔎 3️⃣ Why is Syztmz handling Stake customer accounts if you’re all just “independent mediators”?

If you’re neutral, how does someone from your circle end up handling Stake customer issues?
Are we supposed to believe this is just another coincidence? That a casino being exposed for fraud just happens to have “independent” people managing accounts?

🚨 You’ve walked right into the real trap.

💡 You demand proof from victims but never ask why Stake refuses to release full betting history under GDPR.
💡 You claim neutrality but have never once outright called Stake a scam.
💡 You act uninvolved, yet you’ve escalated cases faster than Stake’s own support team.
💡 You expect everyone else to provide full transparency—except Stake.

📢 So, tell us, HolyDarkness—what’s the truth? Because you can’t keep playing both sides. If you really have no stake in this game, then why are you acting like a referee for a team you don’t play for?

🎤 Clock’s ticking. Let’s see you talk your way out of this one.

About how the ignore button worked, it's been explained somewhere on your multi-thread. I ignore you, so your post won't show to me by default and I, as stated numerous time too,  have to click the "show/hide" adds-on button to read your hidden posts every now and then so I can get the gist of the development without having to dive into the drama.

About the ignore button worked until my name being mentioned, yes, this has also been explained. As I use TG bots, when my name being mentioned, it still notifies me, though I usually just glanced at it and upon realizing that certain names are the one who mentioned me, I either straightly ignore it or [if I have some time to spare and wanted to be amazed] click on it, click the show/hide button, and get myself ready to be perplexed by reading the content, much like what I did to your post above.

This has been explained several times, I am not sure how this concept is still hard to penetrate your understanding of how certain things work.

Now, I address matters that I deemed important enough that it needs to be addressed and clarified, like a smear campaign of my reputation. So, I'll ask again for you to point out where and when did I say such words, "people here are just “bots posting the same things.”". Otherwise, it can be perceived by a lot of overseers as an attempt to paint certain color to my reputation.

Interestingly, at a later post you said,

[...]🚨 You’ve walked right into the real trap.[...]

It is safe to assume you with above statement that you deliberately fabricated the statement? You made a completely false statement, with full awareness, to push certain agenda?

📢 So, tell us, HolyDarkness—what’s the truth? Because you can’t keep playing both sides. If you really have no stake in this game, then why are you acting like a referee for a team you don’t play for?

Nope, I am not playing both sides, I've withdrawn myself. I simply didn't play and only take the spectator seat, jumping in every now and then when certain statements needs to be clarified [like this one].

[nutildah]

^^^
more likely he withdrew because you're a robot that is completely full of shit and immune to comprehension