Online Gaming - Specific Casinos, Software, and Games

Good question. I checked out four casinos using Microgaming, Starnet, Cryptologic, and BossMedia software. Starnet uses the conventional rules. Cryptologic and BossMedia each pay 200 to 1 on a royal flush as opposed to 100 to 1. Microgaming has the following paytable.

Bovada has lots of games you can play for fun, including blackjack. No account required, just one click and you're in. Just go to the Instant Play casino and then then click "practice" for blackjack.

I see from your e-mail address you are with U.C. Santa Barbara. That is where I went to college. BA in mathematics/economics, class of ’88. For a fellow Gaucho, I spent about an hour playing this game, to hopefully help you out. I got up to 426 points one round. For the benefit of other readers the game in question has 17 rounds of jacks-or-better video poker, with a much different pay table than found in the casinos. Most notably a high pair pays 2:1 and two pair pays 4:1.

With the generous pay table of this game, the player should bet the maximum unless the cards are total garbage. With garbage, the expected return is about 0.7X money bet. With a single high card, the return is 0.94X money bet. With a low pair, the return is 1.53X money bet. Betting the maximum on a single high card may sound like a bad bet but in this game you need to be aggressive. Towards the end, the player should bet the maximum, even on garbage, because a long shot is the only hope to get 500. I would not sacrifice pairs for 4 to a straight or flush. It will likely take getting a 4 of a kind at some point to get the 500.

There was a similar question asked in the June 15 column, which I worked out in detail. However, briefly, I estimate the answer to be about 78%. Over a year, you could expect to lose 0.52% (the house edge) of the total initial bets.

I used to be a Gambler's Palace and Sportbet affiliate, as well as some other Unified Gaming casinos. Both Gambler's Palace and Sportbet seemed to pay me on a regular basis. These two had the most prominent positions on my site at the time. However, it was hard to tell from which casino I was being paid. They all issued checks though the Bank of Nevis, without any details about from who or why you were getting the check. Checks based on my own gambling winnings also came without explanation from the Bank of Nevis, making things even more confusing to keep track of.

Here is my Lasseter's basic strategy.

I have seen several free money offers like these. Two that come to mind are the Colosseum Casino and the Grand Opry Casino. Both of these offer $20 for free. Personally, I don't get too excited over these offers. It isn't worth the fuss of downloading the software and the hard disk space it takes up for only $20. However, I have played at the two casinos I mentioned because they also had a deposit bonus in addition to the free money.

I played it in practice mode and it seems to be a legitimate no-zero roulette wheel. There is no system that can either beat or lose to this game in the long run. The more you play the more the ratio of the net win to the total amount bet will get closer to zero.

Update: This casino has since closed.

You can correctly use the Cryptologic basic strategy to play at a GamblingSoftware.com casino.

The only thing I know about Lasseters is that they are from Australia, and based on a presentation they did at an industry convention earlier this year, they are serious about setting a good example in the business. When I choose which casinos to try I give a priority to ones that advertise on my site or that have bonus incentives for the new player. Lasseters doesn't meet either or these criteria.

I figured this was a Microgaming casino based on the fees for a payment. This is news to me so I called three Microgaming casinos to ask about it. The River Belle said they pay any jackpot in its entirety up front. The Golden Palace did as you describe, paying $4000 per week. The English Harbour pays $5000 per week. You have a legitimate complaint about paying the service fee on every payment, as well as the show payment processing time. Unfortunately, there is nothing you can do to change it. As I have said before, there is almost no regulation of most online casinos so they can do whatever they want.

As I work through the various kinds of software for reviews in Casino Player magazine, I am paying more attention to games I normally don't play. At this point, I can only report on three kinds of software as follows.

Microgaming: 95.67% (Based on actual returns at the Golden Palace while they used Microgaming software.)
Cryptologic: 92.42% (Based on actual returns at the Safari Casino. The Sands of the Caribbean and Inter Casino had similar returns.)
Real Time Gaming: 97.1% (Based on the theoretical return at Casino Merlin assuming maximum coins played. Other licensees may select from returns ranging from 95% to 98%.)

Your math is correct. For every 100 bets at $10 you make, you could expect to make $5.70 assuming you follow my basic strategy. Keep in mind this is a long-term return and in the short run you could easily lose. There is also a problem with broken connections with Unified Gaming casinos, which slows down the number of hands playable per hour. Somebody told me that turning off the sound card can take care of this problem. Whatever your gambling bankroll is, I would recommend dividing that by 100 and bet in those units. So to bet $10 a hand you should have $1000 to risk.

Most online casinos shuffle after every hand. Others shuffle at random times but do not indicate exactly when to the player. I have noticed Microgaming casinos flash the word "shuffling" about one hand in four.

However, if you track the cards between these announcements you will sometimes see the same card twice, which is impossible in a single-deck game, assuming you believe them about when they shuffle. As far as I know, they actually shuffle after every hand, but for reasons I do not understand, only indicate a shuffle occasionally. If I remember correctly, Cryptologic casinos do indeed indicate when they are shuffling their eight-deck shoe.

Somebody else asked this is a past column. The book Finding the Edge presents a paper titled 'An Analysis of Caribbean Stud Poker' by Peter Griffin and John Gwynn Jr. There they state that if seven players colluded perfectly they would enjoy a 2.3% player advantage. However, they don't state what the edge would be in a five-player game. I suspect that the odds would swing back to the house.

For the benefit of those who don't know, Battle Royale is what Starnet calls Casino War. However Starnet pays 3 to 1 on the total amount bet. Perhaps what you mean to ask is what if they pay 7 for 1 on the original wager only, which would equate to the same thing. The house edge under these rules is 0.66%, as indicated in my Starnet review.

Casino on Net follows typical U.S. blackjack rules with the curious exception that if you split tens and draw an ace it pays 3:2 (I only know this because I saw it happen to another player in muli-player mode). However splitting tens is still a bad idea. The basis strategy is the same as for Cryptologic.

I have never played at the Vegas Palms. However, I have a lot of faith in the fairness of Microgaming and believe that it is just chance you are having streaky games. Cyberstud poker is the same thing as Caribbean Stud Poker, with a slightly more generous pay table. The expected return is 5.01%, as opposed to the usual 5.22% with Caribbean Stud. The probability of two flushes is (4*(combin(13,5)-10)/combin(52,5)) * (3*(combin(13,5)-10)/combin(47,5)) = 1 in 203,725.

I lost 98 units there overall. If every hand was an even money win or a loss then I would have won 170 hands and lost 268.

You should keep the 10, J, and Q in the right positions unless you have a pat straight flush or a deuce. The expected value of this hand is about 28 times your bet, depending on the discards.

The house edge, based on the money wagered, is 5.88%. Either way the house edge is 5.88% but with the half double you are only betting half as much. I would advise declining this bet.

Atlantic Interbet has full pay deuces wild (return of 100.77%). I think their highest coinage is 50 cents in that game.

First let me say that eWorld is okay as far as I know. I’ve played them and had no problems. I’m think they will pay you and this is just ordinary inconvenience most players suffer with. Unfortunately Internet casinos in general are not known for paying winners quickly. I’ve seen the range myself from 3 days (Net Club) to 33 days (Casino on Air) of those times I kept track. I would say 2 weeks is about average. After two weeks I would ask about it every 3-5 days until they pay. Perhaps they will tire of the nagging and expedite the payment. Don’t get threatening or abusive until it seems there is no other hope. I would wait until 45-60 days have gone by before getting to this stage. Once you do get tough they may shut off all communication. However if you feel things are hopeless give a final strongly worded warning. Wait a few days and then do your best to get some justice by warning others of your experience at the bulletin boards. This advice is not specific to eWorld but all Internet casinos. Keep in mind most of these casinos operate out the Caribbean and Central America where people take their sweet time to do anything.

Although I address this kind of question in my FAQ and in past columns I’ll still comment. You need to give me some hard numbers to have this taken this seriously. For example if you played 1000 hands you would expect the dealer to have a 10 or face card up about 308 times. The probability of the actual number being within 50 of 308 is 99.93%. If you were outside of 50 then we could raise our eyebrows and if you were outside even more we could really get serious. However I can’t do much with "the majority." I indicate how to gather data a test for online cheating in my FAQ. Finally, I want to say that I strongly feel that Boss Media is playing a fair game.

They used to allow early surrender against an ace.

It is my understanding they shuffle after every hand in the single deck game. When I have played the six-deck game you can hear a shuffling sound and the bottom of the screen says "shuffling" from time to time. Perhaps you were only playing the single deck game. It seems like they do this at random times. The lost connection is a known annoyance with Unified Gaming software. I mention it myself in my review. Some people say if you disable your sound card it helps with this problem.

The Crucial Casinos web site presents an analysis of this game, in which the writer claims the break even point is at $53,000. You can read all about it at www.crucialcasinos.com/progressive_slots/supajax.

Here you go...

Good question. "Triple Sevens Blackjack" is played with five decks with a $1 mandatory side bet. Following is the side bet return table, based on a meter of $41,227 (the amount on August 31, 2002).

If the player splits two sevens the connectivity is lost and the player begins each hand with one seven for purposes of the side bet. The player should never split sevens in this game at low bet levels ($40 or less). The house edge on the side bet is 37.94%, less 3.45% for every $10,000 in the meter. When I checked at the Golden Tiger casino on August 31, 2002, the meter was at $41,227, for a return of 76.30%, or a house edge of 23.70%. For the side bet to have no house edge the meter would need to reach $109,862. This does not consider the 0.0057% cost of deviating from basic strategy by not splitting two sevens. Assuming the player is betting $2 on the blackjack hand (the minimum) the meter would need to reach $113,196 for the combined game to have no house edge.

Two questions from Brooklyn in a row, what are the odds of that? The best video poker odds are with Microgaming and Real Time Gaming. It depends on your specific game of choice. Of these two I prefer the Real Time Gaming interface better.

There are two software programs that can produce near optimal strategies for almost any video poker game. One if Video Poker Strategy Master by Tom Ski and the other is Frugal Video Poker by Jean Scott. Winpoker 7.0 promises to offer this feature as well but as of this writing it is not out yet. I don’t like to give away too many video poker strategies for free because other experts have to make a living selling video poker software or strategy cards.

From what I know of the business the major software companies deal the cards in a fair and random way. I personally have examined the log files of Odds On, Infinite Casino, and IQ Ludorum and found them to be fair. The laws of mathematics state that the more hands are dealt the more the actual return will approach the theoretical return. If you want to prove otherwise I would suggest keeping track of the cards and putting the results through statistical tests. See my blacklist for more about that.

Although I don’t remember saying that it is true. The probability of the dealer’s hole card being a ten is the same whether it was dealt up front (as in Microgaming casinos) or after the player’s turn (as in European casinos). In your example, yes, the dealer’s chance of getting a blackjack does go up, but it would go up either for the next card in the deck or a hole card. An unseen card is an unseen card, much in the same way the effect is the same whether the dealer burns a card or deals one less card out of the shoe. I hope this answers your question.

This is interesting. Normally the house edge is lower betting on the favorite, as I explain in my sports betting appendix 3. However at Pinnacle they evidently set the money lines so that each has the same house edge. Let d be the money line on the dog and f be the money line on the favorite. For example if the money lines were +130 and -150 then d=130 and f=-150. The house edge on both bets at Pinnacle would be:

1-(1+(d/100))*(1-(100/f))/(2+(d/100)-(100/f))

The amount you must bet to get back one unit is 1/[(d/100))*(1-(100/f))/(2+(d/100)-(100/f))].

For example with money lines of +130 and -150 the house edge on both bets would be 3.3613% and the expected return on a bet of 1.034783 units would be 1 unit.

At a land casino, I would assume the fair set of money lines to be +140 and -140 in this example, resulting in a house edge of 2.78% on the favorite and 4.17% on the dog. All other things being equal this would suggest that Pinnacle is a good place to bet on underdogs.

It is bad practice to look back at past play and ask about the odds. Rather, I prefer to state a hypothesis and then gather data to prove or disprove it. However, if we must, I would phrase your question this way: "I played the banker bet 68 times and lost 25.95 units (44-0.95*19). What is the probability of losing this much or more?"

To answer this question we must first find the variance of a single bet on the banker. Here are the possible outcomes and their probabilities, as found in my baccarat section, based on the Microgaming single-deck rules.

Win: 45.96%
Loss: 44.68%
Push: 9.36%

So the variance on a single wager is .4596*(.95)² + .4468*(-1)² +.0936*0² - (-0.010117)²= 0.861468877.

The variance on 68 of these bets is simply 68 times the variance of one bet, or 68*0.861468877= 58.57988361. The standard deviation of the 68 bets is simply the square root of the variance, or 58.57988361^1/2 = 7.653749644.

The house edge on the banker bet in a single deck game is 1.01%. So over 68 bets you could expect to lose .67 units. You lost 25.95 units, which is 25.28 more than expectations. So your results were 25.28/7.653749644 = 3.30 standard deviations below expectations. You then use a normal distribution table to find the probability of this. Excel has a feature to do this calculation, simply put: =normsdist(-3.30) in any cell and the result is 0.000483424, or 1 in 2069. So this is the probability of losing as much as you did or more. I appreciate that you didn’t make any accusations about foul play. However, if you had, I don’t think this rises to the level to prove anything. It could easily be explained as simple bad luck.

Everything you need is right here!

There is my video poker game to play, which will correct you when you make mistakes.

There is my hand analyzer to analyze how to play any hand.

There is my game return calculator to determine the return of any game and pay table.

Finally, there is my strategy maker to create a strategy for any game.

Note: This answer was updated Nov. 13, 2013.

Thanks for the compliment. Ordinarily the return would be 97.107% in normal mode and 287.6532% in Shockwave mode, using Cindy Liu's Video Poker Calculator (no longer online). Ignoring the rule about one four of a kind per Shockwave Mode the expected value of Shockwave Mode is 10*(2.876532-1) = 18.76532. Adding this to the value of a four of a kind in the regular game we get an expected return of 101.43%.

As I'm sure you know this game is offered by Lucky Chance casino. Using the appropriate basic strategy for these rules the player advantage is 7.2%! Wait it gets even better. You can bet three hands at once of $5 or more each and if you get a blackjack on all three you win a progressive jackpot that is currently at $18095. The probability of getting three blackjacks in three hands is 1 in 10552. So the progressive is worth an extra $1.71 per hand. On two days while I played they also offered 15% rebate on losses, calculated whenever you exited the game. So I simply exited after every hand, except on a push.

However I'm suspicious if the player advantage is too high. I checked Winner Online and found they allegedly used to offer a video poker game with a 120% return, although they use a normal pay table now. That is two red flags. Lucky Chance offers a 100% immediately bonus up to purchases of $500, so I put them to the test. It was my goal to either make a fortune on their Double Exposure game or prove the game was not fair. Following are my results:

• 313 of single hands: net win of 32 units.
• 1959 hands of 3 spots at once: net loss of 29 units.
• 2272 total hands: net win of 3 units.

Given a 7.2% advantage my expected win was 163.6 units. The probability of only winning 3 or less is 12.4%. This is using a standard deviation of 1.17 for a single hand and 2.68 per hand for playing three at time. My source of the 1.17 is a random simulation using Stanford Wong's Blackjack Count Analyzer and I multiplied that by 2.28 for 3 hands, based on the standard deviations for regular blackjack for 1 and 3 hands as found in my blackjack appendix 4.

This certainly does not rise anywhere near enough to make any accusations. In addition I recorded results all sorts of ways but every test came out looking normal. I would have played longer but the game play is extremely slow and I went broke. The reason I went broke is I did worse on larger bet sizes and my first few hours I didn't record results but they were not good.

So I failed on both my goals. I was too skeptical to deposit again and already wasted several hours on the game. However, if you wish to take a crack at it then be my guest.

I’m sure they still make money on the game due to player mistakes. There are also forms of video poker here in Vegas that return over 100% with optimal strategy. Again, the casino counts on player mistakes to bring them under 100%. With most games that do pay over 100% the edge is so small it isn’t worth ones time to play the game as a living. However if you are going to play anyway you may as well get the best odds possible.

Thanks for the compliment. The probability of that the flop will all be the same of a particular color is combin(26,3)/combin(52,3) = 2600/22100 = 2/17 = 11.765%. The expected return on this bet is (2/17)*7 - (15/17) = -1/17 = -5.882%.

Yes, if you give your e-mail address to a casino they will certainly send you e-mail. However the reputable ones will stop if you ask. The less reputable casinos will not only market themselves but also share your address with others. The NetGaming casino sold me out to pornography spammers. Bodog lets you play without surrendering your email address, as do the Wager Works casinos, such as at the Hard Rock Casino. Incidentally, Casino Meister has a new page about combatting casino spam. My webmaster tells of his own problems with casino spam at VegasClick.com. I've never seen Cleopatra online. It's rare for an online casino to have the same slots found in land casinos.

When I find a casino is not playing fair I don't generally go back to check if they've stopped. Sometimes I do if requested by the casino and I feel the problem may have been accidental. Following is a basic strategy, based on infinite decks, where the dealer stands on soft 17 and deals seconds. What I mean by dealing seconds is that if the third card, and only the third card, would break the dealer it is skipped and the next card is played, whatever it is. Otherwise play continues normally. The house edge under this game would be 9.3%. I used to ask for donations but got so few I quit asking. Now the site is comfortably supported by advertising revenue anyway.

I just updated my Sport Betting Appendix 4 to include the Millennium teasers, as well as using more recent data. Here are is the house edge on teasers including the Millennium odds and whether the pick is on a team or the total.

To answer your question, to beat the 6-point teaser you would need an overall probability of winning of greater than 50%, so per pick the probability of covering the tease would need to be the square root of 0.5, which equals 70.71%. To beat the 6.5-point teaser the probability per bet would be 52.38%, or 0.5238^0.5=72.37% per pick.

Perhaps you misunderstood the point I was trying to make in my blackjack appendix 10. The bottom line is that unless you are a card counter shuffling after every hand, as opposed to using a cut card, is a good thing. The house edge is reduced 0.02% in a 6-deck game, to 0.11% in a 1-deck game, by shuffling after every hand.

Yes. Assuming the commission is paid only on a win then it should be applied to the bet amount, not the win amount.

A $10 buy bet on the 3 or 11 would pay $29.50, and on the 2 or 12 it would pay $59.50. The house edge on the 3 or 11 is 1.25%, and on the 2 or 12 it is 0.71%.

Burning cards has no effect on the basic strategy player. They probably are doing this to discourage card counters. However, they may as well just shuffle earlier. For card counting purposes what is important is the number of cards seen, it doesn’t matter whether the unseen cards are burned or behind the cut card.

Thanks for the compliment. The answer depends on how the jackpot is determined by the bingo site. If it is a percentage of total cards sold, which is usually the case, then it wouldn’t make any difference. However, if there is a fixed prize for the winner, then it would be better to play one game at a time, lest you compete against yourself.

There are two significant rules changes to the Microgaming pontoon game. First, the dealer stands on soft 17, which is worth 0.47% to the player. Second, there is no drawing to or resplitting of aces, which is worth 0.49% to the dealer. So these two rules almost offset each other. Overall the house edge is 0.39%, with correct strategy, which is indicated in my Microgaming section.

Thanks for considering them. Bodog has their corporate headquarters in Vancouver. They feel it legally questionable whether they can take bets from their fellow Canadians, so they choose to be beyond reproach and not do so.

Yes, Bodog does indeed pay 9 to 1 on the tie. Assuming eight decks, that lowers the house edge from 14.360% to 4.844%.

You’re welcome. That is a damn clever game. Basically, the player plays conventional Texas Hold’em against two bots, except there is no betting after the river. In the player’s favor is being last to act. In the casino’s favor is that the two bots are colluding. Basically, the bot with the weaker hand will fold, and the player will be left to play against only the stronger bot. I haven’t analyzed this game yet, so I’m afraid you’re on your own.

Yes, there must be. Cryptologic Internet casinos have been offering the game, under the Vegas rules, for years. They also offer the version where you turn over the cards in the tableau one at a time, but can only run through it once. As under the Microsoft Vegas rules, the player gets back fives time the bet per card for each one he puts in the stacks. I would bank that game all day long, if I could.

They also have zero house edge baccarat and roulette, so that can’t be entirely the reason. My theory is that it is a way to get players through the door. Their main casino has many more games and higher bet limits. I’m sure some of the Zero Lounge players wander into the regular casino eventually.

The probability of an event with probability p happening x times, out of a possible n, is combin(n,x) × p^x × (1-p)^(n-x). In this case, p=4/9, x=4, and n=20. Here is the probability for all possible number of number of field rolls out of 20:

Taking the sum for 0 to 4, the probability is 2.12%. So, this could have easily happened in a fair game.

I agree with your math. The average of those cases is 95.46, for a house edge of 4.54% over the $100 bet. There is absolutely no strategy that will either help you or hurt you. You may as well fly by the seat of your pants.

Let’s start with the Joker Poker game at level 4. I pre-multiplied the wins by 8, for the 8x multiplier in level 4. The lower right cell shows a return of 8.36 times the bet per level. That means if you can get to level 4, it is worth 8.36 times your bet for that level.

The next table is for the Deuces Wild game in level 3. The wins in the column for "this level" have been pre-multiplied by 4, for the 4x multiplier in level 3. The "future levels" column shows the value of advancing to level 4. The "total value" shows the combined value, current and future. The lower right cell shows a return of 8.00 times the bet per level. So, if you can get to level 3, the rest of the game (levels 3 and 4 combined) is worth 8 times the bet per level.

The next table is for the All American game in level 2. The wins in the column for "this level" have been pre-multiplied by 2, for the 2x multiplier in level 2. The "future levels" column shows the value of advancing to level 3. The "total value" shows the combined value, current and future. The lower right cell shows a return of 5.63 times the bet per level. So, if you can get to level 2, the rest of the game (levels 2-4 combined) are worth 5.63 times the bet per level.

The final table is for the Jacks or Better game in level 1. The “future levels” column shows the value of advancing to level 2. The “total win” shows the combined value, current and future. The lower right cell shows a return of 3.60 times the bet per level.

So, this game is worth 3.603417 units, assuming optimal strategy. However, you have to bet 4 coins to play, making the return 90.1%.

According to VPfree2.com, the best game at the Suncoast is 99.92% two pair or better joker wild. The game normally pays 1000x for a royal, so every other royal would pay 2000x. I’m going to assume that time is not a factor, and the player could do this over and over, as many times as he wished. Granted, this is not a realistic assumption, because Suncoast rules required the second royal to be hit within 24 hours of the first, but it would get too complicated to factor that rule into this.

At first I thought the player should play a more aggressive strategy when going for the 2000x royal than the 1000x royal. However, that is not correct. The idea of using a single intermediate strategy for both the first and second royals was suggested to me by video poker expert, Bob Dancer. Bob tells me he thought of employing this strategy back when Flush Attack games were common. Smart players used the same intermediate strategy in both regular mode and flush attack mode, rather than switching strategies between modes. Once he made the suggestion, I ran the analysis to see if he was correct.

Let’s look at the overall expected return if the player played based on a 1000x royal for the first one and 2000x for the second one. Using my video poker calculator, we find the probability of a royal flush with a strategy based on a 1000x royal is 1 in 43,617, with a return of 0.999205. The probability of a royal flush with a strategy based on a 2000x royal is 1 in 40,776 hands, with a return of 1.022934. The overall return after two royals is (0.999205×43,617 + 1.022934×40,776)/( 43,617+ 40,776) = 1.010670.

Now let’s do the same thing, but with a strategy based on a 1500x royal the entire time. With a 1500x strategy, but with an actual royal win of 1000, the royal probability is 1 in 42,209, and the return is 0.998969. With a 1500x strategy, but with an actual royal win of 2000, the royal probability is still 1 in 42,209, but the return is 1.022661. The overall return after two royals is (0.998969×42209 + 1.022661×42209)/( 42209 + 42209) = 1.010815. 101.08% is greater than the 101.07% with the two separate strategies, confirming that a balanced strategy is the way to go. The same principle of assuming an average win of 1.5 times the normal win will apply to any video poker game under this promotion.

Cryptologic Internet casinos have such a game, called Bonus Video Poker, where discards are put back in the deck. The 40-20-9-6 Jacks or Better pay table in that game returns 95.2642%, before considering the redraw bonus feature, which I won’t get into here. In conventional video poker, that pay table would return 98.2534%. So, in this example, putting the discards back in the deck costs the player almost 3%. However, I highly doubt that actually happened on a machine in Atlantic City.

This question was raised and discussed in the forum of my companion site Wizard of Vegas.

Using my blackjack house edge calculator, I get a house edge of 0.82%, before factoring the 2-1 on blackjacks and no doubling. 2-1 on blackjacks is worth 2.26% to the player. No doubling is worth 1.37% to the dealer.

So I show the player edge is 0.82% -2.26% + 1.37% = 0.07%.

This question was raised and discussed in the forum of my companion site Wizard of Vegas.