Casinos

Casinos By Status

Popular Filters

By Banking Options

Games

All Games

Bonuses

Popular Bonus Filters

Forums

Popular Forums

Forum User Features

Complaints

Submit A Complaint (PAB)

PAB Rules and Guidelines

Browse PABs

Gambling News

Popular News Sections

About Us

About Us

external image

Resolved Casino LaVida

R

Rens1990

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Location
Kaatsheuvel
Hey guys.. This is my first post on the board and I wish I didn't have to make it.. I've been reading on the board for the while but never really took the effort to sign up. This story made me do so anyway.

I spotted Casino LaVida in the Baptism by Fire section on the main website and decided to give it a chance. I made my deposit of EUR 100,- and got a 111 euro's bonus for making a succesfull first deposit. I played blackjack, multihanded and slots. These are the only games I played..

After making my withdrawal of EUR 677.20 I received an email with a request for documents. I send them in and got the response that they had been sent to the relevant department. After that.. silence.. So a few hours ago I decided to go into the livechat and ask about my withdrawal. Here are the most important parts of the chat, upon request I can post the entire chat history..

So they confiscate my winnings which sucks, but the why is actually fun.. Please read..


So why did they confiscate my winnings? What discrepencies did they find?!?

Jeremy: 12. Observations of playing patterns such as the playing for deliberate minimum risk, equal, zero margin or hedge betting may not be considered as playing in the appropriate spirit for the purposes of meeting bonus wagering requirements. Should the Casino deem that these practices have been utilized for the specific purpose of meeting wagering requirements the casino reserves the right to withhold any cashins and/or confiscate all winnings.
Rens van Os: that is bullshit..
Rens van Os: I didn't play zero margin games
Rens van Os: I didn't hedge my bets
Jeremy: Unfortunately this was the discovery done by our Security Team i am afraid Rens
Click to expand...

As I told before, I'd only been playing blackjack and slots.. I told them that I would post the story on CasinoMeister.. They're in the baptism by fire section so I thought it might help.. I was connected to the pitboss, Craig.


Now all of a sudden they refer to a different part of the T&C which could mean anything.. It's no reason to deny me my withdrawal..


The last part is absolutely rediculous.. I know what hedge betting is so I did it.. Everybody knows what murder is.. Does that make every person a killer? :confused::confused:

Also.. How is hedge betting on blackjack even possible.. Just a lot of bullshit being played in order not to pay me..

I was hoping to get some help on the board.. Didn't PAB yet.. Should I?
 
I am sorry this is happening to you but I do have a strong gut feeling that the casino is going to say since you knew what a hedge bet was that you admitted you were hedge betting. I think this because he actually stated that to you in the chat.

I can only hope I am wrong, and for yoursake I hope to god I am wrong. Please keep us posted on this, I am very interested in knowing how they have proof and if you actually get paid.

Good Luck, rooting for ya all the way.

LH
 
I told him that I know what hedge betting is.. Doesn't make me quilty of doing it.. You know what hedge betting is right? Does that make you guilty of doing so?

Besides it's totally irrelevant since it's not even possible to do on the games I palyed..
 
I know what hedge betting is and I know you can't do it on the games played. I am sure you were not doing it, but it is relavent here because they (the casino) are acusing you of doing it. I am very curious to see what proof they have if blackjack and slots were the only games you played.

Your first chat session the reason was a discrepencies in your account, did anyone ever bother to tell you what those discrepencies were? Then in the next chat session they state that it was because of hedge betting. What the hell is up with that, why wasn't that stated in the first chat session?

Somthing is not right here, imop. Maybe you should e-mail the casino and ask for an explination of what is going on with your account. If you don't get an asnwer then maybe you should consider a PAB. Your not getting a straight answer from support maybe Max can.

LH
 
This is all just one chatsession. I just posted the most important part. Total chatsession is 4 pages in Microsoft Word.

When I asked what the problem was they pointed me to point 12 of there bonus T&C which is also in the chat session I posted above, about the hedge betting.

When I asked how it's even possible to do that on the games I played, the pitboss simply answered "anything is possible"... I stated him like 5 times that it's not even possible to do what I'm accused of.. I think emailing won't help since I allready spoke to the pitboss?
 
You spoke to the pitboss and he said "anything is possible"? What the hell is that? Doesn't say much for the pitboss if he thinks you can hedge bet on slots and blackjack.

Maybe it is time to read up on the PAB process. I think this maybe the only other alternative.

LH
 
Clause 12, particularly the vague way it is being used to void winnings is against the latest standards for accreditation, so this DOES need looking into. The term is basically one whereby the management can simply decide not to pay because "they didn't like how you played". Standards for accreditation now stipulate that clear rules governing play on bonuses MUST be given, rather than this vague bullshit that flits from "discrepancies in the account" to "hedge betting" like a butterfly in a spring meadow.

Other casinos have defined max bet rules for bonus play, and list games that cannot be played. How has LaVida managed to get away with keeping the vague rules.

ONLY IN CASES OF FRAUD is it acceptable for a casino to keep it's reasons secret from a player, yet this does NOT look like LaVida has made a fraud accusation, and any betting pattern itself is available in Playcheck, so what's the big deal with this secrecy.

If the player made a bet the casino didn't like, maybe too big for the bonus awarded, they should TELL THE PLAYER, so that they don't make the same mistake again, and if it is something they read about on an affiliate site they will learn that casinos don't like it, and that using directions from that particular site is not such a good idea.

As for "A certain pattern was picked up this pattern was not only Hedge Betting but we have specified individuals who can pick up certain trends with online gaming." What IS he smokin':eek: Yet AGAIN we have the "Heroes argument" being implied, that "certain players" can outwit the RNG in the online Blackjack game. It's BULLSHIT, and was once tried by the notorious "Cipher" who wrote and distributed a piece of software that allowed you to record your past play, and it would PREDICT when to lay out a MASSIVE bet against the house, of the order of recording at, say, $10, and laying out $1000 when his software said "now, go for it". It supposedly worked because you won 100 times as much per single winning $1000 bet than you could POSSIBLY lose on the $10 bets used for recording results. The software supposedly analysed the recorded results for patterns, and generated predictions of when it was massively in your favour to lay out the $1000 bet (not ALL the predictions came true, but were supposed to be accurate enough compared to chance that the strategy was guaranteed to beat the house).

What happend to Cipher and his "investors"? Last news was that he was broke, on the run, being chased by "investors" who had decided they couldn't even be arsed to use the software themselves, and just handed their bankroll to be played in one of Ciphers "labs" (sweatshops?).

"Anything's possible", well not quite, you CANNOT beat a truly RANDOM game with a house edge, however smart you are - the maths proves it.

I can now predict what probably happened here, but if this is true, WTF is the big deal LaVida - this SHOULD BE IN THE RULES ANYWAY, and there is NO JUSTIFICATION for giving this player all the lies and bullshit surrounding "discrepancies in the account".

Prediction. Deposit & bonus were bet entirely, (perhaps keeping some back for splits) across the 5 seats of multi-hand blackjack. A SMALL number of hands were played, and the dealer either busted, or lost most or all of the games against the 5 seats, such that a large balance was quickly built up. Play THEN switched to slots, where bets were MUCH smaller, and WR was completed on this slots play, and the balance was requested for withdrawal.

THIS is what has lead to the max bet rule, and THIS is what should be in place CLEARLY at LaVida for players to read. Whatever amount their security department deem "too much" should be expressed in this rule, such as

"no bets greater than xx% of the opening (deposit+bonus, or bonus) balance may be placed per game. In the case of multi-hand table games, this means per DEALER hand, and for multi-play Video Poker this means per INITIAL DEAL, from which multiple lines are DRAWN"

Added to this should be the usual "hedge betting" rules, which do NOT feature in blackjack, but DO feature in roulette (covering all numbers, red & black, odds & evens etc), and a few other games, such as Sic Bo and Craps.


Whatever forum is putting about this strategy for beating bonuses with the multi-hand blackjack games, PAY NO ATTENTION, and CASINOS, WTF are you even DOING allowing one of your affiliates to issue dodgy advice like this in order to drum up customers, many of whom WILL have their winnings confiscated, but NOT their losses refunded, and where the AFFILIATE responsible will make EVEN MORE MONEY BECAUSE players following their links and "advice" are more likely to LOSE than the norm, because of having winnings confiscated (which means FEWER negatives to offset the positives on the affiliate earnings, because of winnings confiscated, rather than paid).
 
Hello Rens

It would be useful , if you tell us how you have played ?

Have you made larger bets maybe 5 x 20 bets on BJ ? This would be a no go in Microgaming casino if a bonus is involved .
 
The amount of incompetence, ignorance and horrible customer "service" in the online industry today is just truly shocking. Were do casinos hire their employees? Their pitbosses? Amongst retired boxers, dopedealers and crackheads?

The hedgebettingpart is just, wow.

Makes me sick to think about that I just lost 350 to a casino acting in such a manner.

What the online casinos fail to understand is that the only thing that can make them favourable over other casinos is the way they treat their customers. Way to go Casino La Vida.
 
Nifty29 said:
Contact the rep, then PAB if that doesnt pan out.

Based on what you said it sounds like the casino is implementing the "FU" clause with no specific grounds, however there are two sides to every argument - lets see if the other sides' is legit.
Click to expand...


It doesn't really matter how the OP played, CS acting in such a retarded manner is simply inzane, no matter how the player played. Did you even read about the hedge betting in blackjack and the part about "since you now what hedge betting is, you did it"? Laughable.
 
Nifty29 said:
Contact the rep, then PAB if that doesnt pan out.

Based on what you said it sounds like the casino is implementing the "FU" clause with no specific grounds, however there are two sides to every argument - lets see if the other sides' is legit.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I think. It's a case of "you didn't break any terms, but we just didn't like how you played, so we aint paying" This "FU clause" has been more or less BANNED for accreditation standard casinos, and the standard now requires CLEAR and SPECIFIC clauses regarding which kinds of patterns are to be deemed "not allowed" when bonuses are being used. This is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL because the software itself ACCEPTS such bets on behalf of the casino.

Pulver said:
It doesn't really matter how the OP played, CS acting in such a retarded manner is simply inzane, no matter how the player played. Did you even read about the hedge betting in blackjack and the part about "since you now what hedge betting is, you did it"? Laughable.
Click to expand...

This just makes things worse, the CS, and not just lowly support, but the PITBOSS himself demonstrates a complete LACK of understanding of Blackjack when he refers to the playing style as "hedge betting", which is NOT something that can be done with Blackjack, although BIG betting IS something that can be done, and IS a popular tactic for levering up the starting balance when a bonus is involved. If the casino wants to outlaw this, IT MUST BE IN THE TERMS!
 
Last edited:
I did indeed use a bigger betsize when I started playing Multihanded BJ (20-40 a hand), up to a point where I didn't feel comfortable losing it anymore, so I started playing slots to complete the wagering, didn't have to play that much.. Ofcourse I used a lower betsize (1.80) because the variance on slots is insane and I wanted to have something left when I could make a withdrawal.

I contacted the rep but haven't heard anything yet.. I'l wait a few days, if I don't hear anything I'll do a PAB.

I know that Casino LaVida support has seen this chat, because when I went back into the livechat yesterday night asking if they maybe changed their mind they told me that their decision stands and they saw this thread and the replies, but it didn't change their mind..
 
What gets me is the refusal of the pit boss to go on record (in chat) and cite anything specific in Rens' play to justify their accusations but goes out of his way to get on record, by the use of leading questions to manipulate Rens' into stating, undeniably, that Rens' "knows what hedge-betting is" and then claims that Rens' knowledge of hedge-betting is sufficient proof of guilt without any other evidence necessary.

That entire exchange, led by the pit boss, IMO, is more than shiesty enough to cast the whole outfit into rogue-dom.
 
Pulver said:
It doesn't really matter how the OP played, CS acting in such a retarded manner is simply inzane, no matter how the player played. Did you even read about the hedge betting in blackjack and the part about "since you now what hedge betting is, you did it"? Laughable.
Click to expand...

No, I ignored that completely, in the hope that someone like yourself could point it out to me.

Could you also help me by highlighting the part where I said anything about 'how the player played'? He didnt even really say how he bet until just now so how could I comment on it?? Now that he has revealed it, betting big on BJ and then grinding out on slots is a classic 'advantage play' strategy and Im sure they (and you) know that, however there isnt a term stating you cant play BJ with the bonus so IMO has done nothing to break the specific terms - which is the reason accredited casinos must make their bonus terms clear and specific.

LaVida is in the Baptism of Fire section, so out of respect for Bryan I refrained from calling casino staff 'retarded' or anything like that (quite apart from the fact the word 'retarded' is incredibly insensitive towards handicapped people :mad: ).

Looks like its you that needs to read a bit better.

Now, Im off to hedge-bet on Thunderstruck.....
 
Well the accusation of " Hedge Betting" is nonsense , however i think it could be possible that the player has broken a different rule , which allow them to confiscate winnings :

" 15.Other practices of playing behaviour which may lead to the casino withholding cashins and/or confiscating all winnings include, but are not limited to placing single bets whereby the wager consists of the majority of the total available balance and the bonus balance contributing to a significant portion of that balance. Should the casino deem that practices such as this have been utilized; the casino reserves the right to withhold any cashins and/or confiscate all winnings. "

It seems some Affilates fortify players to abuse Microgmaing promotions with Blackjack Multihand double up stategys . I see more and more cases here with players who try to bypass the Microgmaing rules , which limit the betsize during bonus wager requirements ,with a similar gaming patterns .Well they take the lost deposits but dont payout winnings . Probably a pretty good deal for the Affiliates :p
 

Yes, its possible, and depends on what the players balance was when they were betting big on BJ - so if they were betting 5 x $40 hands and their balance was $200 or $250 they may well be in trouble. More information is needed here, which is why it would be nice to hear from the casino.

There is always 2 sides to every story.
 

Completely agree with all of what Nifty has said here, always to sides of the coin- the player has since admitted his betting patterns and Nifty is right- they class this as advantage play because he played BJ then with those winings grinded out the WR on slots.

This isnt covered in there t&C's but obviously something they will enforce if they see fit.

Now this is where it doesn't sit well with me- both BJ AND SLOTS are based on the RNG so in saying that there is the house edge already- I mean betting the sizes he did could have just as easily lost him the entire bank roll, he could have then went over to the slots and done the same thing and lost it all due to the RNG.

Has the player got a case here if he lost the money and said look ive played this way?, well all know the answer to that.

Not only do the casino's have the RNG in there favour they also and lets all face it make there bonuses very tight and the bonuses cater more for the casino side of things.

In this day and age of online gambling it is a gamble just to gamble.

I also signed up with this group the other night and deposited $50 and got the 111% bonus- I was out the door 45 minutes later-400-500 spins on Thunderstruck and a few on Break Da bank again and I was gone!!!

They initially credited me to much in the bonus and luckily I picked up on this and asked chat to take it back, which they did.

Casino Lavida it does seem you are reading this thread, if so, you guy's REALLY need to change the terms and conditions, these secret betting pattern things all you MG casino's keep is hurting you more, you all say you dont want it to be known because others would start doing the same thing, you guy's always cancel the withdrawals anyway so why does it matter.
 

That sounds real similar to "The Palace Group's" terms that they had awhile back in that other lengthy thread here.

Palace Group Rules Shenanigans

That thread raised an important topic regarding Casinos with subjective or "unfair" terms and conditions and their place in the "Accredited Casinos" section, as Casinomeister stated HERE

He also went on later and updated the "Accredited Casinos" requirements for being listed here too.
____
____
 
Pulver said:
Sorry for calling someone who says you can hedgebet in BJ a retard, I will not do it again. :rolleyes:

The casino should make clear rules and tell the player what spesific rule he broke, instead Casino LaVida made a joke out of them self with that chat.
Click to expand...

On behalf of disabled people everywhere, I thank you for your heartfelt and sincere apology. :rolleyes:

I see you edited out the part about me being a shill.......shame really, as its almost as funny as that Jackpot Heaven video!! LMAO :lolup: You think Im a shill because I dont always believe what a player says when they are denied payment, therefore sometimes I support the casino. Its called being fair and reasonable and looking at each case on its merits. I could comment on the bias in your posting history, but anyone who is interested can check that for themselves.

I know that there are 2 sides to every issue and, more often than not, the player isnt giving the full story and knew full well they were risking confiscation by using advantage play. If a casino has an FU clause, then the advantage player knows the casino might invoke it - there are loads of posts here at CM about the issue. The OP says hes been reading the boards for a while so its a fair bet he knows the lay of the land.

Mind you, if he did use a large % of his balance to place bets then he has violated the specific term relating to that kind of play, so its quite possible he wont be paid - and rightly so. Unfair term? Maybe, but its there and was agreed to upon registration.

Lets give CLV a chance to set things straight.
 
Rens1990 said:
I contacted the rep but haven't heard anything yet.. I'l wait a few days, if I don't hear anything I'll do a PAB.
Click to expand...

Please do! And don't wait longer than, say, end of Monday at the latest. We need to turn this into an official complaint (Pitch-A-Bitch) ASAP.

As ever, the Pitch-A-Bitch process begins here: Pitch-A-Bitch FAQ.
The usual cautionary advice applies: do yourself a favour and read the FAQ in full before you submit the PAB.
When someone does a PAB they have responsibilities too and the FAQ explains those in detail.
 
Nifty29 said:
...There is always 2 sides to every story.
Click to expand...

Yes, there is two sides to every story - I'd just wish that some of the seasoned members here wouldn't let newbie posters get them so riled up. :D

The casino has already contacted me this morning and has provided some background on this issue that indicates that this player has not divulged all pertinent information concerning his issue. Unfortunately, I've got to step out for the moment to purchase some networking gear (techno issues this morning) and will be getting involved in this thread upon my return.
 
I'm very curious about what they said because I did give all the info including games played and betsizes used.. There's not anything else that I can think of that's relevant?!?

But I'll wait for your reply...
 
Casinomeister said:
The casino has already contacted me this morning and has provided some background on this issue that indicates that this player has not divulged all pertinent information concerning his issue. Unfortunately, I've got to step out for the moment to purchase some networking gear (techno issues this morning) and will be getting involved in this thread upon my return.
Click to expand...

I'm sure this is probably the case - and these things usually get resolved anyhow - but what concerns me most is the way support handled the issue.
 
spearmaster said:
I'm sure this is probably the case - and these things usually get resolved anyhow - but what concerns me most is the way support handled the issue.
Click to expand...
The support issue is one of the main issues here, and they are retraining this guy I guess. Anyway, from the casino:
...In light of what occurred in the live chat with the customer service agent, which we view in a serious light, we will honor the withdrawal of the player. The explanation in this conversation is incorrect and we have taken corrective action with the customer service agent. We appreciate the opportunity to resolve the issue.
Click to expand...
So the player's withdrawal should be on it's way.
 
Did you know that Lasseters casino has stopped trading.

yea. Lasseters id no more. I read the bonus terns of LAVIDA. All games are permitted. Even classic blackjack, which contrubutes 2 percent towards the wagering requirements.This should meen that you can use your welcome bonus on any game. Most casinos can not be trusted. If you want to get paid, then just opt out of the bonus. Microgaming software ( in my opinion) is the best. Why not try Ladbrokes and get paid in a couple of hours. I am not intending to spam, only to gove you the benefit of ten years of online casino play. I am sick and tired of wrestling with casino reps to get paid legitimate winnings. I was winning 5000 bucks a month From Miami until they adjusted their software. In Jan this year. I played free with Everest for one week testing their 10 cent blackjack. Every session was positive. I was testing how it would play with say, a 20 bucks deposit. In free play I was never more than 7 bucks down at any time. So LOL, I deposited 50 bucks and lost it on the ten cent blackjack within an hour. You can draw your own conclisuins about their RNg. free play great. Real money play a dissasster. Sorry about my spelling misstakes. This is my first post. My new years resolution wast to leave the casinos alone. I now have 500 bucks in my wallet fro playing RUMMY which I love. And chess. So dont be a mug. Do not accept a bonus unless it is listed on Casino Meister as accredited. be lucky. trustypal. xxx
 
WayneRedreturns said:
Hi Rens1990,

Your withdrawal has been processed and will be in your account shortly. Please accept our apology for any inconvenience.

Best regards,
Wayne
Click to expand...

You should also read the updated standards for being fully accredited. Your vague term no 15 needs to be replaced by something more specific. In particular, you need to explicitly define what is meant by "bet" in these multi-hand games. Without this definition, it is going to be considered to be 1 bet per SEAT at the table, and there are FIVE seats. In terms of bet per SEAT, this player's admission that he was playing at up to 40 credits does NOT break term 15, and certainly NOTHING in this breaks term 12.

What is needed is a definition of max bet that a player can calculate explicitly, such as "xx% of initial bonus balance". Alongside this, you need to specify that in multi-hand games, the bet applies to the ENTIRE field of play, not the bet per seat, line, position, etc. In table games, you can simply state "per dealer hand".

There is no doubt now, after a few similar cases, that we have a new method of "advantage play", but it is the AFFILIATES that are driving this, not all of them by any means, but that significant group that uses bonus beating strategies as their "value added service" for players coming through their links. I have checked a few such sites, and they REALLY DO post these methods, often it is the site owner themselves who posts the info, such as "LaVida is offering xxxxxx bonus - here are the terms "xxxxxxxx", and here is how you get around them for a +EV of $xxx "xxxxxxxxxxxx".
Later, these sites fill with complaints from their members that a casino has rumbled the method, and changed the rules, or refused to pay. It is then made out to be the casinos fault entirely, and the affiliate then just offers up another "victim" to the slaughter.

The problem is, these are AFFILIATES, and they are PAID BY THE CASINO. The PLAYERS get their winnings confiscated because of false marketing by the affiliate, but the affiliate KEEPS his money, and is given the green light to carry on fleecing ever more players, because the players that get in early DO generally have an advantage, but those that get in after the casino has figured out what is going on get burned, and blame the CASINO, for not honouring the deal.

Affiliate sites are SUPPOSED to be vetted, BY WHOM:confused: Which incompetents fail to weed out such affiliates, and put pressure on them NOT to mislead players into playing strategies that are going to violate the terms. The simplest way to ensure compliance is to close affiliate accounts of those affiliates who persist in misleading players into breaching casino terms and conditions. It is often the less experienced players that stumble upon one of these sites, and lured by the prospect of "guaranteed" profits if they follow the instructions, will become loyal members.

I am NOT against affiliates giving out strategies, but these MUST be within the casino's rules, such that players WILL get paid if they win following the strategy posted by the affiliate. Most players don't really understand the deal between affiliate & casino, and assume it is just an advert, constructed by the CASINO, and therefore assume any information contained is ENDORSED by the casino, so expect no problems.

This WILL happen again, and it would be worth while checking where this player came from, and then having a good look at the website to see whether it is actively encouraging players to play this multi-hand BJ strategy.
 
In light of what occurred in the live chat with the customer service agent, which we view in a serious light, we will honor the withdrawal of the player. The explanation in this conversation is incorrect and we have taken corrective action with the customer service agent. We appreciate the opportunity to resolve the issue
Click to expand...

Well done LaVida for sorting this out. :thumbsup:

However, from that I understand, the statement above says that the player was paid due to customer service giving the incorrect reason for the confiscation of winnings. It certainly does not vindicate the OP at all - Im pretty sure if the casino got it wrong in regards to the OP breaking the rules they would certainly apologise for doing so - but this has not occured.

I think its a reasonable question for LaVida:

Would the OP still have been paid if the live chat agent had not provided incorrect information?

The answer will go a long way to clarifying what constitutes unacceptable bonus strategy.
 
Hi everyone,

Thank you for your feedback.

Based on your feedback we will be amending the bonus terms and conditions. We will make it clear as to what constitutes promotional abuse or advantage play. Placing maximum bets on every hand of blackjack is in violation of term 15. As this constitutes a significant portion of the bonus. The OP in this case would not have been paid if the situation was handled correctly by the customer service agent.

I would appreciate it if you guys would look at the addition to the bonus terms and give me feedback or suggestions to assist players in this regard.

Best regards,
Wayne
 
New term:

15. Other practices of playing behaviour which may lead to the casino withholding cashins and/or confiscating all winnings include, but are not limited to, placing single bets whereby the wager consists of the majority of the total available balance and the bonus balance contributing to a significant portion of that balance. The placing of single bets that are equal to or in excess of 30% of the bonus that is credited to your account in order to meet wagering requirements for the bonus is considered as irregular play, and can result in any eventual winnings being confiscated. Should the casino deem that practices such as this have been utilized, the casino reserves the right to withhold any cashins and/or confiscate all winnings.
 
The OP in this case would not have been paid if the situation was handled correctly by the customer service agent.
Click to expand...

As I thought - thanks for clearing that up Wayne :thumbsup:

So the OP was using typical bonus abuser/advantage player methods to get around the rules and the 'spirit' of the rules that the rest of us are happy to abide by.

So, I would like to thanks Rens1990 for contributing to the continual increase in wagering requirements, tighter game restrictions, maximum cashout limits, and the reduction of available bonuses to the average player.

Next time anyone wants to grumble about bonuses and their terms, just remember why they were implemented in the first place. Its a simple fact of life - as soon as something good is made available to people, there are always a group determined to exploit it and spoil things for everyone else.

Once again Rens.....thankyou.

(Big kudos to Wayne for being upfront and honest)

**
@Wayne - in that new term, I would specify that a 'single bet' in multi-hand blackjack means the sum of all bets placed in all positions for that deal.
 
spearmaster said:
Not acceptable. If the total available balance is $1 and I am playing a slot in excess of 50 cents per spin, I violate the rule.

"Significant" is also open to interpretation.
Click to expand...

This is what got the Palace Group in trouble, although the player was using a similar strategy on 3 card poker, they voided his win based on his LAST bet, which was only half the size of his first due to the fact that he had lost the previous bets, and it was all he had left. Spearmaster's example is the logical end point of any rule running from CURRENT balance, and if interpreted literally means that a 51c bet from the last $1 violates it just as much as the 201 bet from a 400 balance.

The clarification of "single bet" for the multi-hand games is EXACTLY the loophole that is being exploited. In Playcheck, this is recorded as a single game, but is presented as 5 SEPARATE bets on different PLAYER hands. The advantage strategy works because the player hopes for a dealer bust, essentially offering the same as were they to place everything on a single hand of ordinary blackjack, which is a clear violation, even of the subjective terms.
"Majority" of something DOES have a clear meaning, unlike "significant". ANY amount over 50% of something is it's "majority". "30% of bonus credited" is ALSO quite clear in meaning, an exact figure the player can work out and stick to during the session. All that is needed is to close off any loopholes.

It's a great pity that the perfectly reasonable idea of using the software to forcibly implement these max bet rules is constantly falling on deaf ears. It makes players think that casinos are using the terms as a trap for the unwary, and smart advantage players, whereas enforcing the rule through the software would mean NO player could breach the rules, and there could therefore NEVER be a valid confiscation of winnings for breaching a max bet rule.

The affiliates that promote these strategies should also be pursued, after all, it is THEY that have made "bonus hunting" into a "mainstream" hobby for many. Most of these methods challenge the usual human perception of risk, and it would take a mathematician to understand how throwing everything on one bet when using a bonus DOES indeed offer a long term positive outcome, even though the first time (or even first few times) you try it you might lose everthing.

With these affiliates, players are told to follow the strategies, and are told to hold their nerve and they WILL work in the end. A few affiliates even offer "insurance" if players stick to the method, yet end up losing anyway. Affiliates can make a fortune running this "scam" against casinos, since the method itself involves players signing up everywhere, but in general playing only once with the SUB. The affiliate may be on a player acquisition deal, and gets paid whether the player beats the bonus or not. Often they are paid more than the player's own deposit, making it possible for the affiliate to offer "insurance" (a refund) if they use the method and lose. They know that if they refund the player his $50, he will stay with the site, and try the next method, maybe have his $50 refunded again, but the affiliate could have been paid $100 just for the signup and first deposit, regardless of the outcome.
 
Hi All,

This is and will always be open to interpretation regardless of how exact the rule is. The difference is that fraud on our end is monitored by security systems and individuals that make the decisions. The casino will not confiscate winnings from a regular player that makes a 50c bet with a $1 balance. The overall betting behavior of the player is evaluated and some players will stray outside the terms. However this is not reason enough to confiscate a genuine players winnings. These rules are in place to protect the casino when a player joins the casino in syndicates or blatantly violates the rules.

The rule exists because of this type behavior.


As much as we try and stop this type of affiliate marketing It still occurs. The reality is that these players exist and they will always try and find loop holes in the terms. For these players the terms will always remain open to interpretation. If it is possible to have bonus terms that stop fraud, without affecting players that want to join the casino for entertainment purposes, please post, I would like to use it.

As stated previously it is very few individuals that force these extra terms on all players. When I started in this industry 10 years ago the bonus terms were barely 10 lines of text.

This is a great thread. Thanks guys.

Best regards,
Wayne
 
Very, very smart player. Knows all the tricks of the trade and made use of this forum to coerce the casino into paying due to a mistake by the support staff. I dont believe for a second that he did not know he was in violation of rule 15 but he should have followed the Spin Palace case and thought that if he had won he had a good chance of getting his winnings by posting in the forum.

Spearmaster is correct in stating the "majority of total available balance' is too vague. Why cant it be 'x% of original balance' with the balance referring to the deposit+ bonus. This isnt rocket science is it?
 
WayneRedreturns said:
This is and will always be open to interpretation regardless of how exact the rule is.
Click to expand...

Only if you choose to make it open to interpretation by using terms such as 'genuine', 'regular' and 'significant'. It is nonsense to force so-called 'genuine' players to break your terms (which is effectively what having a 50c bet from a $1 balance disallowed does) and hope that you will take pity on them and decide not to confiscate their winnings every time they do it.
 
chuchu59 said:
Very, very smart player. Knows all the tricks of the trade and made use of this forum to coerce the casino into paying due to a mistake by the support staff. I dont believe for a second that he did not know he was in violation of rule 15 but he should have followed the Spin Palace case and thought that if he had won he had a good chance of getting his winnings by posting in the forum.

Spearmaster is correct in stating the "majority of total available balance' is too vague. Why cant it be 'x% of original balance' with the balance referring to the deposit+ bonus. This isnt rocket science is it?
Click to expand...

That would be the best option IMO. Take that "30% of bonus" rule and apply it to the 2nd deposit bonus (33%) and you see how "evil" it is.

Also if they go with the 30% rule then make that the only one that matters. Not the additional BS that Spearmaster mentioned.

And the reps reply included my favourite terms fraud and syndicate;)
 

It is perfectly possible, but it needs MGS to get off their fat lazy asses and program the enforcements into the software. The operator can ALREADY configure the MGS bonus system with a considerable number of options, and the software ALREADY has code in place to block individual games entirely (it's used to block progressives in "fun" mode, and many games for US based players). The system could be programmed so that allocating a game as counting 0% towards WR automatically blocks that game from being played with a bonus in the account. The max bet percentage can be set by the operator as a global variable, such as 30% of bonus balance, and the table limit for each game will be calculated, and if the player tries to put too many chips down, they get the "max bet reached" message that ALREADY blocks bets greater than the house limit for that game, which again is operator configurable. I don't believe this will be an onerous task for MGS's programmers, but it would wipe out many of the advantage play methods currently doing the rounds, because it will NOT be about finding loopholes, or badly written terms missing something, the SOFTWARE would block the bet, leaving the player to take it up with CS, where they can be told the bet was blocked because it violated one of the terms.


As for these "syndicates", this is NOT necessarily the player's fault, IF a website is advertising a casino WITH THE BLESSING of said casino (usually a paid affiliate), it is not unreasonable for the player to assume that any advertising content also has the blessing of the casino, otherwise surely the casino could take pretty severe action, such as closing down the affiliate account and confiscating THEIR "winnings" for encouraging "bonus abuse" and "syndicated attacks" on a particular loophole.

There are some bonus beating websites where the casino has even made a special deal, giving members an enhanced bonus to abuse - they surely MUST have done due dilligence when offering such a special deal to what must be a select number of favoured affiliates.

Players CANNOT be assumed to be in a syndicate if the ONLY connecting factor is that they came to the casino through a site strongly advocating a particular strategy, and thus played that strategy.

There certainly seems to be "one rule for them (affiliates), and another for us (mere players)". Advantage players stand to have winnings confiscated for even a first offence, but advantage affiliates seem to merely get a "slap on the wrist", even after SEVERAL breaches of the affiliate terms, such as spamming, creating "advantage play attacks" through encouraging abuse of a loophole in terms, and even offering "no lose deals" to players to sign up, such as they get their first deposit back whatever, because the affiliate gets paid more than this just to bring a depositing player to the casino (why is THIS not viewed as fraud, surely it is risk free for both player and affiliate, and the casino loses money on EVERY player taking part through payments made to that affiliate).

Security departments can spot a fraudulent or advantage player among thousands, so I just don't buy the excuse that they can't similarly spot a dodgy affiliate portal sending in a load of advantage players.
 


Write your reply...

Similar threads

M
Casino Complaint Withdrawal
Replies
0
Views
718
Mighty13
M
O
OnlyWin Casino - Deceptive Cashback Practices & Hostile Customer Service
Replies
1
Views
1K
OnlyWin casino
OnlyWin casino
R
Bonus Complaint Withdrawal at Club Player Casino
Replies
2
Views
1K
mulven
mulven
A
PAB in progress 2,700 in winnings withheld due to non-consensual bonus
Replies
5
Views
1K
mulven
mulven
M
Casino Complaint Del oro Casino - Fraud
2 3 4
Replies
177
Views
6K
merino54
M

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Accredited Casinos

Read about our rating system and how it's done.
Back
Top