The choice between groups of decks or cards come out randomly

I was discussing the number of decks at an online casino with a friend, and my general belief is that playing and counting as the number of cards decreases can increase one's chances of winning with a 4, 6, or 8 deck setup. However, since online casinos are virtual, there are no physical limitations, and it's possible to randomly generate cards without setting a deck or to set up a deck of 1,000 or more. So, do players have an advantage in a casino with a deck or a casino that randomly generates cards?

That's an interesting question!

I believe that any kind of card counting is almost impossible without knowing the number of decks used. So, it makes me also believe that for a decent guess, I need to find out how each virtual studio approaches the deck setups.

I must admit, I have no clue 🤔

In traditional land-based casinos, implementing Random Number Generators (RNGs) is not feasible due to physical constraints. However, online casinos can readily incorporate RNGs. Each casino and player may have their preferences, as the return rate will vary depending on their perspective. Because some players employ different strategies based on the number of decks involved.

Another crucial factor is that casinos should be able to demonstrate the use of a verified RNG algorithm. It is uncertain whether all casinos can achieve this, leading some users to advise against patronizing casinos that utilize RNGs.

Just a detail I'd like to add.

I'd say, the game provider's name indicates whether the software used is reputable enough.

Plz let me know how.

You mean game provider's name can guarantee the reputation of software? how?

I'd like to know, really.

It's simple I'd say. If the software is provided by a reputable company mostly used in bigger reputable casino brands, I would believe its trustworthiness.

It's the same with slots for example.

Is it better? 🤔

It seems like you're suggesting players rely on the integrity and security of the software provided by big reputable casino brands. That's not a bad approach, but it doesn't seem ideal.

While the odds may be low, consider for instance that a game provider like IGT, blueprint could engage in unfair practices.(I do know they won't.) Just because it's used by large casinos doesn't automatically make it trustworthy.

If casino.guru can't evaluate the technical aspects, perhaps I think it could be best to leave this to the judgement of the players.

But realistically, given that the player can't know everything, there's really no other option apart from your suggestion.

Allow me to say I've asked our data specialists, and the response was quite straightforward. As I said, no provider has been caught cheating on players by using graphic software to enhance live table games. This is a business standard nowadays, not a scamming practice. Hence well-established and proven casinos allow such software to be used under their roofs.

This is what I was told, I take it as a fact. But I also accept players' opinions. On the other hand, there is a certain difference between judgment and emotional feelings when someone is on the losing streak - for instance. I'm trying to say that trust is crucial.

I can't personally imagine how any casino proves or "demonstrates the use of a verified RNG algorithm". I'd say this is the topic for the software of the game provider. Casinos usually only borrow the product via license or contract.

It would be awesome to see something similar to a validity seal placed on each casino game. 👌

Regarding the use of graphics-enhancing software, I can agree it's an industry norm aimed at improving the user experience, not duping the player. However, I also understand the skepticism that might come from players, hence the need for more transparency.

So I think your idea of a validity seal is a fascinating one. It could certainly add an additional layer of trust and assurance, fostering transparency and fairness in the gaming world.

But I think the players should ask 'HOW', and industry should solve the issue.

I agree, questions are important. I honestly admit I understand the skepticism too. Maybe you're right, I spend too much time on the forum dealing with occasional criticism and somehow losing the player's perspective, from time to time.

It's unintentional, I assure you.