Exterminating the low-roller from online casinos

[Mavin1]

Okay, this is not going to be an endless debate about VARIANCE, RNG's OR RTP's. As I am still pondering them from other threads I had gotten myself into.

This is about the low roller, 20 cent to 75 cent players not finding the good play anymore and it is a fact despite the statistics of the above that the small player/low roller is being systematically exterminated from online casinos.

My reason for thinking this way is not based only on my experience but on the experience of many many posters here saying the same thing.
Can't get the bonus rounds or the free spins and the payouts are very rarely more than the wager amount. Usually the line win payouts are coming in at well below the wager amount keeping the low roller on a constant decline until they/we have busted out again and again.

Think about how when a new casino comes on board the play for everyone is very good and fair. Then they become known to the entire playing public and are hit with scads of high rollers, people that can afford to wager $2 and up. Now they have to rethink the RTP so they are not taken to the cleaners by the big money payers. How would they do this and yet still have the same statistics? My guess is and I have said this before, that they are spreading the wins out that are above the players wager amount and freespin/bonus rounds where a great deal can be won by the high rollers, by increasing the smaller wins (less than wager amount) inbetween the big wins. If a casino has increased smaller wins and decreased large wins then the RTP has not changed.

Think of it as a mile marker, for every mile you have a 1/4 mile marker, each of the 1/4 mile markers are a decent win with the less than decent to none inbetween every 1/4 mile marker and the 1 mile marker is the freespin/bonus round triggers. Now remove the 1/4 mile marker and only have the 1/2 mile marker and 1 mile marker, two of the now gone 1/4 mile markers have become the less than wager amount win to no win and the 1/2 mile has become the win equal to or above the wager amount as has the 1 mile marker. Now the freespin round/bonus rounds have been set to the 2 mile marker with the same amount of distance not changing between the 1/4 mile to the 2 mile thus not changing the RTP either. You still have the same RTP because statistically you are giving the same amount of wins spread out in smaller amounts. This keeps the casino at a constant attitude of what they are paying out keeping them in the profit margins they require and still be able to pay the high rollers the types of wins they are getting at the cost of sacrificing the low rollers.
Or think in terms of $1, they can still give the %100 of the dollar but in pennies instead of quarters, 50 cents or the $1.

That is why we are not heard, because if the line win amouts were adjusted back to the original 1 mile marker settings the high rollers would kill the casino business and I'm sure casinos would rather sacrifice the low rollers than themselves. So it will never be like it was for the little player ever again.

Hopefully I have not confused to many with this thought but maybe the real issue is not the RTP or RNG or Variance, it's the high rollers that are killing it for the low rollers because they have the means to keep banging away at a casino and walking away with decent sized bankrolls on a regular basis, where if we the low rollers manage to walk away with $50 anymore we feel we hit the jackpot.

I will add to be fair to the high rollers that maybe there are just to many of us low rollers too.
Just my opinion.

 

[DemonUK]

Just a quick response to the above.......

last 3 months aladdins wishes on two occasions 1000 and 1060 times my 40c

Aztec Feature Guarantee $98 on 25c stake.

 

[est129]

That's exactly what i was thinking off the last month all the time...
Since i'm a low roller (my pockets can't afford to play too much), i've experienced the last 2 months that slots became from hard to ultra tight for my bets. I've marked down my deposits and bets the last month to figure out what's happening. The results were terrible for low bets and somehow 'acceptable' in two deposits that i decided to bet up to 2$ per spin.

The 'miles' example you mentioned is exactly what i mean.
Of course this 'policy' is not fair for online players. Others have big and full pockets to their pants, and others have some tiny ones with some pennies to spend and have fun...

Anyway, i totally agree with your opinion, maybe this topic needs some more discussion to hear other ppl what have to say.

 

[Mavin1]

Just a quick response to the above.......

last 3 months aladdins wishes on two occasions 1000 and 1060 times my 40c

Aztec Feature Guarantee $98 on 25c stake.

Not to say that a low roller still can't get lucky once in awhile, because it can happen, just not as often and for fewer low rollers.

 

[De Beuker]

Okay, this is not going to be an endless debate about VARIANCE, RNG's OR RTP's. As I am still pondering them from other threads I had gotten myself into.

This is about the low roller, 20 cent to 75 cent players not finding the good play anymore and it is a fact despite the statistics of the above that the small player/low roller is being systematically exterminated from online casinos.

My reason for thinking this way is not based only on my experience but on the experience of many many posters here saying the same thing.
Can't get the bonus rounds or the free spins and the payouts are very rarely more than the wager amount. Usually the line win payouts are coming in at well below the wager amount keeping the low roller on a constant decline until they/we have busted out again and again.

Think about how when a new casino comes on board the play for everyone is very good and fair. Then they become known to the entire playing public and are hit with scads of high rollers, people that can afford to wager $2 and up. Now they have to rethink the RTP so they are not taken to the cleaners by the big money payers. How would they do this and yet still have the same statistics? My guess is and I have said this before, that they are spreading the wins out that are above the players wager amount and freespin/bonus rounds where a great deal can be won by the high rollers, by increasing the smaller wins (less than wager amount) inbetween the big wins. If a casino has increased smaller wins and decreased large wins then the RTP has not changed.

Think of it as a mile marker, for every mile you have a 1/4 mile marker, each of the 1/4 mile markers are a decent win with the less than decent to none inbetween every 1/4 mile marker and the 1 mile marker is the freespin/bonus round triggers. Now remove the 1/4 mile marker and only have the 1/2 mile marker and 1 mile marker, two of the now gone 1/4 mile markers have become the less than wager amount win to no win and the 1/2 mile has become the win equal to or above the wager amount as has the 1 mile marker. Now the freespin round/bonus rounds have been set to the 2 mile marker with the same amount of distance not changing between the 1/4 mile to the 2 mile thus not changing the RTP either. You still have the same RTP because statistically you are giving the same amount of wins spread out in smaller amounts. This keeps the casino at a constant attitude of what they are paying out keeping them in the profit margins they require and still be able to pay the high rollers the types of wins they are getting at the cost of sacrificing the low rollers.
Or think in terms of $1, they can still give the %100 of the dollar but in pennies instead of quarters, 50 cents or the $1.

That is why we are not heard, because if the line win amouts were adjusted back to the original 1 mile marker settings the high rollers would kill the casino business and I'm sure casinos would rather sacrifice the low rollers than themselves. So it will never be like it was for the little player ever again.

Hopefully I have not confused to many with this thought but maybe the real issue is not the RTP or RNG or Variance, it's the high rollers that are killing it for the low rollers because they have the means to keep banging away at a casino and walking away with decent sized bankrolls on a regular basis, where if we the low rollers manage to walk away with $50 anymore we feel we hit the jackpot.

I will add to be fair to the high rollers that maybe there are just to many of us low rollers too.
Just my opinion.

You might very wel be right..
I've often wondered how it is possible that some people just keep hitting those monsterhits at Rivals.
I've never ever hit anything over 1000x bet at Rival.
And Scary 1+2 and Psychedelic Sixties are my most played slots.
Those 2500x bet and higher wins always seem to hit on $2 or $4 or even higher bets..
And casino's dont like lowrollers, thats for sure.
Betway for example have altered their slots so its not even possible to low roll them anymore.
The minimum bet for Isis is $2,50 per spin, Avalon $2.- per spin..

 

[Wildfire7]

Surely the bet size is not relevant to the outcome. Bet size in proportion to the bankroll on a Pro rata basis, for low and high rollers it should be the same.

A low roller may have less chances because the zero balance will always be on the horizon before a lucky win could come to the rescue. Whereas someone with a larger bankroll can stick around that bit longer to hit something decent. Low rolling is good if your going for low cashouts, otherwise you need a lot of wins to keep your bankroll increasing.

An unusual thread in that its usually people saying that when they up their stakes they never win. Not the other way around.

Mike

 

[Simmo!]

I've been told that because of deposit/cashout processing costs and the cost of support required to maintain a large player base, a low-roller is often seen as a loss-making player to a casino, so it *may* make sense for *some* casinos to reduce the number of low-rollers. Or turn them into higher rollers

But, while the thread title is an interesting topic for discussion, I don't think they could do this through reductions in expected returns based on levels of play.

 

[silcnlayc]

And casino's dont like lowrollers, thats for sure.

That is because it ccosts them more in the long run for the deposits and withdrawals since many lowrollers withdraw less than $100 many times and deposit very little to begin with. Each transaction costs these casinos..If you look, the newer casinos are upping their minimum deposits..because of this.

An unusual thread in that its usually people saying that when they up their stakes they never win. Not the other way around.

I think many that are complaining in this department is upping the bet from 20 cents up to $1...not the higher stakes...and getting no return for it..

My husband just played $250 in lowrolling and got exactly ZERO bonus rounds in all the games he played at 40cents to $1...so there is something going on...because he even noticed it lately..

.

 

[silcnlayc]

Simmo! I've been told that because of deposit/cashout processing costs and the cost of support required to maintain a large player base, a low-roller is often seen as a loss-making player to a casino, so it *may* make sense for *some* casinos to reduce the number of low-rollers. Or turn them into higher rollers

Beat me to it! I said the same thing within seconds of your posting!

.

 

[Stovetopp]

I've been told that because of deposit/cashout processing costs and the cost of support required to maintain a large player base, a low-roller is often seen as a loss-making player to a casino, so it *may* make sense for *some* casinos to reduce the number of low-rollers. Or turn them into higher rollers

But, while the thread title is an interesting topic for discussion, I don't think they could do this through reductions in expected returns based on levels of play.

Ridiculous!!! It cost the same to process 100 or 10000...I assume the casinos while located in "underdeveloped" countries uses computer and not human beings to do any transactions

I know for sure the B&M casinos make most of their monies on the penny machines..onjline casinos cant differiante bgetween penny machines or dollars machines so the odds are the3 same if you bet 5/spin or 20cents/spin
Here I am referring to the real series type slots and not the 3 reel slots.

This is my 2cents worth

 

[Simmo!]

Ridiculous!!! It cost the same to process 100 or 10000

Some processors charge a percentage, but some others charge a fixed fee. And it wouldn't surprise me if most had a "minimum" charge unless they can handle micropayments. I think Visa/MC also have a fixed charge in place if I remember right.

 

[Mavin1]

Ridiculous!!! It cost the same to process 100 or 10000...I assume the casinos while located in "underdeveloped" countries uses computer and not human beings to do any transactions

I know for sure the B&M casinos make most of their monies on the penny machines..onjline casinos cant differiante bgetween penny machines or dollars machines so the odds are the3 same if you bet 5/spin or 20cents/spin
Here I am referring to the real series type slots and not the 3 reel slots.

This is my 2cents worth

I understand the point Simmo made. Yes it costs the same to process $100 or $10000, but they lose in processing and overhead for the player that only deposits $25 compared to a player that deposits $1000, as the $1000 depositor is the one they make money on. With the $25 depositor that happens to get lucky it's all gravy for the player and not the casino.

 

[dominique]

Actually, with the legal climate in the US, if you are cashing out into a US account the processing fees and time required can vary immensely. Processors are changing constantly and they can pretty much "ask" for anything they want. And they do.

It's one of the ways "prohibition" fosters criminal elements.

And that hurts everyone.

 

[Mavin1]

You might very wel be right..
I've often wondered how it is possible that some people just keep hitting those monsterhits at Rivals.
I've never ever hit anything over 1000x bet at Rival.
And Scary 1+2 and Psychedelic Sixties are my most played slots.
Those 2500x bet and higher wins always seem to hit on $2 or $4 or even higher bets..
And casino's dont like lowrollers, thats for sure.
Betway for example have altered their slots so its not even possible to low roll them anymore.
The minimum bet for Isis is $2,50 per spin, Avalon $2.- per spin..

I agree with this statement as well. I used to play at Millionaire casino, quit because all the classic slots are a minimum of $2 and I'm a 30 cent player on those. Top Game, quit them for several reasons, but the attitude they have towards the low roller in a past post is, "The wagering requirements will not change for the progressives", we're talking $45 to $65 per spin!
This is just a small sample of again how lowrollers are eliminated.

 

[Nifty29]

Good post Mavin and thankyou for your thoughts.

My guess is and I have said this before, that they are spreading the wins out that are above the players wager amount and freespin/bonus rounds where a great deal can be won by the high rollers, by increasing the smaller wins (less than wager amount) inbetween the big wins. If a casino has increased smaller wins and decreased large wins then the RTP has not changed.

Yes thats right....the RTP hasnt changed....but can anyone guess what has changed in this scenario?

In this situation, your money should last longer - not the other way around. The more smaller wins means more play time but less chance of a bigger win.

If the casino wanted to 'get rid' of low rollers, all they have to do is make the min deposit $50 or $100 and make the min slot bet $2....it isnt necessary for them to alter the games etc as this would affect the high rollers as well which would be counter-productive.

It is really important to realise that betting .20 or .40 per spin will very seldom result in a decent withdrawable balance, hence it is more likely for a low roller to just keep playing hoping for one of those 'monster' hits which almost never comes....and the money is gone. How do I know this?? I used to be a low roller. Nowadays Im certainly not a high roller, but I have increased my bet size and sacrificed some play time for a chance to hit a bigger win. My deposit amount hasnt significantly increased, so it just means that sometimes it is gone in very short order, but other times (as in the winner SS) I hit some really nice wins. I made that decision as I was in the same boat as some people above where I just never seemed to cash out..after all, you would need to win 500xbet to cashout $100 betting .20 spins, and $100 isnt exactly a huge amount and 500x bet doesnt happen very often either.

If you are on a very limited budget, its important to have a very strict set of guidelines in regards to cashout levels, bet levels and which games you play, with the latter being more important than you might think. If you dont have a large bankroll, dont play the high variance games like scary rich or rain dance or you will always be behind the 8 ball.

As for being disappointed with a 1000x bet win....that is a very rare animal and I would be jumping for joy! The 2500x wins etc you see are extremely rare and are more likely to be hit by players with big bankrolls who can absorb all the crap spins in between. In some cases, they might just be getting back some of the money they spent chasing it (which is the part you dont see in the winners screenshot thread - remember that).

Ask yourself this question = Why do you gamble?

If you play for fun just to pass the time etc, then low roll and stick to the low variance games. You might even consider video poker at low stakes.

If you want to make decent money at times (in the long run you wont), then increase your stake and choose games like scary rich etc.

If you dont care either way and you just gamble because you're sad or lonely or you cant help it, then please get some professional help as I guarantee it will all end in tears.

Good Luck!

 

[pmhcfc]

I'm inclined to side with the OP - I think they have it spot on.

I've always 'low rolled' and in the past this has netted me some very good returns - 6k from a 20 deposit being the best.

I only play at MG casinos, but that being said I've just about stopped playing at them all anyway...Why? Because of the non-returns I get from any deposit these days.

For eg; I have to ask myself why MG have completely changed 2 of my (old) favourite slots, they being Ladies Nite and Kathmandu. I'm not sure when they changed but it's fairly recent. I played these because the length of play-time one got with a relatively small deposit. You always knew with Ladies Nite that if you went 300+ spins without a bonus - there were always a batch of them coming soon - as many as 5 or 6 in as little as 150 spins and at least one of those would retrigger. Play Ladies Nite now and it's so hard to hit a bonus, let alone a retrigger and let alone seeing a bonus pay well - It's much the same with Kathmandu and many other of the MG slots.

In addition, look at all the deposit bonuses, suddenly you need to deposit upwards of 60 to even qualify for the bonus.

Why can't (or won't) MG introduce 10, 20 or even 25p (or cents) Roulette? Ladbrokes have 20p Roulette machines in all their shops and there are always people playing them.

And the big slot tornys are ALL geared toward the high-rollers...Yeah I know one or two people may have got lucky and won a torny without having to rebuy, but that's rarer than Rocking-Horse s*it.

I don't know why the casinos are taking the enjoyment away for the low-rollers, but they are. I'm not knocking those who can afford 2 + per spin, good luck to them, I just wish the casinos were like they used to be. You got much longer for your money and you always felt there was a chance you'd win a decent amount of money.

Happy New Year to every member.

 

[Mavin1]

Good post Mavin and thankyou for your thoughts.

Yes thats right....the RTP hasnt changed....but can anyone guess what has changed in this scenario?

In this situation, your money should last longer - not the other way around. The more smaller wins means more play time but less chance of a bigger win.

If the casino wanted to 'get rid' of low rollers, all they have to do is make the min deposit $50 or $100 and make the min slot bet $2....it isnt necessary for them to alter the games etc as this would affect the high rollers as well which would be counter-productive.

It is really important to realise that betting .20 or .40 per spin will very seldom result in a decent withdrawable balance, hence it is more likely for a low roller to just keep playing hoping for one of those 'monster' hits which almost never comes....and the money is gone. How do I know this?? I used to be a low roller. Nowadays Im certainly not a high roller, but I have increased my bet size and sacrificed some play time for a chance to hit a bigger win. My deposit amount hasnt significantly increased, so it just means that sometimes it is gone in very short order, but other times (as in the winner SS) I hit some really nice wins. I made that decision as I was in the same boat as some people above where I just never seemed to cash out..after all, you would need to win 500xbet to cashout $100 betting .20 spins, and $100 isnt exactly a huge amount and 500x bet doesnt happen very often either.

If you are on a very limited budget, its important to have a very strict set of guidelines in regards to cashout levels, bet levels and which games you play, with the latter being more important than you might think. If you dont have a large bankroll, dont play the high variance games like scary rich or rain dance or you will always be behind the 8 ball.

As for being disappointed with a 1000x bet win....that is a very rare animal and I would be jumping for joy! The 2500x wins etc you see are extremely rare and are more likely to be hit by players with big bankrolls who can absorb all the crap spins in between. In some cases, they might just be getting back some of the money they spent chasing it (which is the part you dont see in the winners screenshot thread - remember that).

Ask yourself this question = Why do you gamble?

If you play for fun just to pass the time etc, then low roll and stick to the low variance games. You might even consider video poker at low stakes.

If you want to make decent money at times (in the long run you wont), then increase your stake and choose games like scary rich etc.

If you dont care either way and you just gamble because you're sad or lonely or you cant help it, then please get some professional help as I guarantee it will all end in tears.

Good Luck!

Okay, maybe I'm having a Sybil moment here. First you seem to like the post then you think I should get professional help?
Well maybe I could use some but not for gaming, maybe for thinking to much.
As to your question for me to ask myself, why do I gamble, the answer there is I don't anymore. When I did, it was for mostly fun and as with anyone else to have the thrill of a nice win sometime. But when it has now become no fun for me personally anymore because the stakes have been upped for the lowroller then I knew it was time to call it a day. As I stated in the "What will you be doing for 2010" thread it certainly won't be online gaming.
But one has to reflect and ponder on just what it is that brings an online player to this point where the casino loses it's customers.
We have argued and debated the RNG and Variance issue till there was no more recourse, same with the RTP issues. These arguements and debates have been going on longer than I have been here and will go on long after I am gone because RNG's, Variances and RTP never really answers and satisfies the player when these stats do not match the experience.
Thus the reason for my original post.

 

[nisosbar]

Wait, wouldn't the high-roller get just as bored as low-rollers if they were playing the same machines with the same RNG's? How would tinkering with the payouts serve to cater to high-rollers and, at the same time, eliminate low-rollers? I'm not getting the mechanics of this theory.

 

[Mavin1]

I'm sure there are plenty of people that know exactly what I mean and it isn't about being bored.

 

[LaurieJim]

I can honestly say i used to be a high roller a year or so ago, i remember well doing 100.00 spins and there are some screenshots to prove it, buried way back there somewhere in the screenie section.

I went from being a high roller to a low to medium roller, as i wasnt having the fun, and it was eating up alot of dough, sure i was hitting a few jackpots but i have hit some pretty damn good ones on 2.00 down to 40 cent bets. if it wasnt for us low rollers, most of these casinos would be out of bussiness and they know it imo, just like in Vegas, most of the money is played on 25 cent slots or less, they make up for alot of the casinos revenue, so ive been told..........laurie( low roller)................wanted to add, most of the casinos i played bigger bets at still treat me as well as they did back then, even tho i bet smaller now

 

[4 of a kind]

In the past year Im actually getting bored from reading endless threads from players of all levels from micro to high rollers complaining how shitty online casinos have been treating us.

Bullshit bonuses being offered, and when I say bullshit bonuses, I really mean ridicules bullshit bonuses. Bullshit incompetent Casino Reps were forced to deal with via live chat and or e-mail. Bullshit documentation issues, to dark, to bright, never received it, have someone take a picture of you holding your license (one of my favorites) your e-mail must be blocking ours, etc.etc.etc. Bullshit cash out issues, Bullshit RTP issues, and Im pretty sure if I gave it much more thought, I could probably add at least another 20 more Bullshit issues were forced to deal with online.

My point being if you are tired of all the endless Bullshit you are forced to deal with if you want to gamble online, then maybe its time to pull the plug.

Do yourselves a favor and get away from the lazy habit of sitting on your ass just feeding these third world countries with your hard earned bucks. You could donate money to them the right way and at least get a tax credit for it.

If you really enjoy gambling, save up your money and treat yourself and your spouse to maybe a once or twice a month visit to a nice B&M casino. Book yourself a room, enjoy the great food and drink, have some room service, maybe a show, go to the gym, spa, pool, etc., get a massage, and enjoy the casino. If you lose at least you know it was legit, if you win leave with your money on the spot.

For the unfortunate disabled people and the ones not living anywhere near a real casino, guess you are forced to deal with the Bullshit

 

[Nifty29]

Okay, maybe I'm having a Sybil moment here. First you seem to like the post then you think I should get professional help?
Well maybe I could use some but not for gaming, maybe for thinking to much.
As to your question for me to ask myself, why do I gamble, the answer there is I don't anymore. When I did, it was for mostly fun and as with anyone else to have the thrill of a nice win sometime. But when it has now become no fun for me personally anymore because the stakes have been upped for the lowroller then I knew it was time to call it a day. As I stated in the "What will you be doing for 2010" thread it certainly won't be online gaming.
But one has to reflect and ponder on just what it is that brings an online player to this point where the casino loses it's customers.
We have argued and debated the RNG and Variance issue till there was no more recourse, same with the RTP issues. These arguements and debates have been going on longer than I have been here and will go on long after I am gone because RNG's, Variances and RTP never really answers and satisfies the player when these stats do not match the experience.
Thus the reason for my original post.

Sorry Mavin...just to clarify...when I said "you" I actually meant anyone/everyone....not you specifically. I probably should have said "if one wants to play for fun etc".

It was absolutely not aimed at any specific person, just as general advice based on my own experience.

I know you hate the RTP/Variance etc arguments, and I agree it can become somewhat technical in nature and full of little nuances, but variance does play a huge part in how long your money lasts. As for MG casinos or any other casinos actually reducing their RTPs or payouts on specific games....there is no documented evidence of this and I doubt very much if there ever will be, unless a disgruntled employee decided to let the cat out of the bag. Considering the size of RTG and MG, including operators and software company employees, one would expect that if they were as dodgy and underhanded as some people insist, there would have been at least one of these disgruntled employees who would have spilled the beans by now.

Also, if they lowered the RTP from 95 to 93 or something, you wouldnt just suddenly notice 'hey this game isnt paying what it used to'....the RTP is over millions of spins and the difference in just a few hundred or thousand spins would be negligible. If they lowered it to 80 or 85, then you would see a difference almost immediately.....but do you really think, with external audits etc, they could get away with that kind of thing? The software records every transaction/spin/hand/etc etc and it produces reports which collate everything and produce an RTP figure - there is NO way any externally audited casino could fudge what the software itself produces...this would mean they have a very high level of access to the software (maybe even the code) and there is no way RTG/MG etc would ever allow that to happen.

Im not saying that anyone who feels the payouts/play time etc are worse are lying or anything like that....people feel how they feel. Hell, sometimes I feel like I cant win a damn thing no matter where I go, and then suddenly Ill get a nice hit and everything is fine until I start losing again and that, I feel, is the point where players start to question the integrity of the games and/or operators....instead of looking at other factors like the ones discussed many times here at CM. Lets face it, when it comes to gambling, slots are just about the worst choice when it comes to RTP, and there is nothing unusual about having dozens of losing sessions in a row - you have to be in the right place at the right time, and be prepared to suck it up when you're not.

Nobody likes losing, and nobody likes the feeling of being 'ripped off', but it is a fact that online slots pay out much better than land based slots so you are still better off online than visiting your local and putting money straight into the government coffers.

Lastly, as I said before, dont be fooled by the huge wins in the winners screenshots....a lot of those are bought and paid for well before they hit. If you are a low roller and have limited resources, your chances of hitting one of these is quite small.....if you have an unlimited bankroll and like to see monster hits, you will see them occasionally but they wont necessarily put you in the black. The good thing about low rolling is that if you hit a Random Jackpot....its a big hit!

 

[Nifty29]

P.S.

I actually did see some casino managers trying to exterminate some low rollers last week....I even managed to take a pic:

 

[Mavin1]

Thanks for the mockery Nifty.

 

[Nifty29]

Thanks for the mockery Nifty.

Mockery? I want mocking anyone, least of all you...?? If its the picture, its just a play on words for those who watch Doctor Who to lighten the mood a little.

Dont take anything like that personally Mavin.....in fact, dont take anything I say to you personally as I dont have a problem with you at all. You post a lot of interesting stuff and I enjoy reading what you write even if I dont agree. At least you control your emotions and stick to the issues, and that is a big tick in my book.

 

[Mavin1]

Mockery? I want mocking anyone, least of all you...?? If its the picture, its just a play on words for those who watch Doctor Who to lighten the mood a little.

Dont take anything like that personally Mavin.....in fact, dont take anything I say to you personally as I dont have a problem with you at all. You post a lot of interesting stuff and I enjoy reading what you write even if I dont agree. At least you control your emotions and stick to the issues, and that is a big tick in my book.

Thank you Nifty, I can appreciate your compassion for your fellow human beings. Honestly, I do have my not so well controlled emotional moments and the worst ones are not posted, such as the one between my last comment and this one.
But it is an honor to engage with people like you, so I do sincerely thank you.
Evelyn

 

[Dinahnana]

P.S.

I actually did see some casino managers trying to exterminate some low rollers last week....I even managed to take a pic:

LOL.Exterminate, Eterminate!!!! I love Dr. Who!

 

[Wildfire7]

I honestly do not believe it is in the casinos interest to exterminate low rollers. Labelling players into a certain bracket does not always give an accurate picture of future revenues. Some of todays low rollers could well be tomorrows higher rollers. Lets suppose a low roller hits a big payout at one casino. The money from that, he might well plough straight back into another casino to try his luck.

Revenue from lower rollers may well have a lower mark up for the casino, but it is all profit. After all, even with low rollers we are not talking about people depositing 2 credits and withdrawing 3 credits. They still have to make minimum deposits.

Another fact to consider is a casinos player base is largely made up of these so called low rollers. So wiping out over half of its player base would not make sound business sense. Especially if some of those low rollers have a change in financial circumstances and decide to gamble at slightly higher stakes.

Most people will always gamble within what their budget dictates. Same as when people go shopping. But if that budget increases, for example if the player gets a higher paid job, then he may decide to spend more in the shops and in the casinos, as his disposable income will be higher.

Mike

 

[rockycatt]

a thought on low rolling ,i read in the newspaper a while back that the best buy on the /int market place is the 2.00 wager to win,place or show at any track in the usa ,world possibly

why ?
because the article stated that in i920's it was 2.00$ and with adjusted inflation figured in it was still available at a horrendous [i cant do the math ] discount at a unchanged price



on and on :noteworthy:noteworthy rockycatt

PS illustration of the low roller

 

[Mavin1]

I honestly do not believe it is in the casinos interest to exterminate low rollers. Labelling players into a certain bracket does not always give an accurate picture of future revenues. Some of todays low rollers could well be tomorrows higher rollers. Lets suppose a low roller hits a big payout at one casino. The money from that, he might well plough straight back into another casino to try his luck.

Revenue from lower rollers may well have a lower mark up for the casino, but it is all profit. After all, even with low rollers we are not talking about people depositing 2 credits and withdrawing 3 credits. They still have to make minimum deposits.

Another fact to consider is a casinos player base is largely made up of these so called low rollers. So wiping out over half of its player base would not make sound business sense. Especially if some of those low rollers have a change in financial circumstances and decide to gamble at slightly higher stakes.

Most people will always gamble within what their budget dictates. Same as when people go shopping. But if that budget increases, for example if the player gets a higher paid job, then he may decide to spend more in the shops and in the casinos, as his disposable income will be higher.

Mike

What I see here in the forum of those of you who do dispute the idea of win line payouts being smaller, casinos getting tighter and so on, is the same response and attitude that we who bring up these subjects are always the ones that are wrong and you and I'm sure most of you that dispute are affiliates for these casinos, won't step outside of your boxes to even consider that yes there is the possibility that something has changed or that low-rollers need to be done away with one way or the other.
Because you always give the same arguement, same stats, same attitude that creates a fortress to protect your interest.
Then ultimately when you know the poster will not relent on a subject, then you bring out the reason of, "You must be having a bad run, or you're not playing right, or maybe you have a gambling problem, or if you aren't happy why not quit". These are your weapons of defense and you are the police on the front line in charge of damage and crowd control. You do your job very well as you know that bottom line is that when people finally do decide they aren't buying the standard reasons of why they are losing daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, then they will quit wasting their money supporting a venue that has become greedy just as any other big corp/business/bankers what have you.
Just like this country of ours, over time the low and middle class is being eliminated as we are forced to pay higher gas prices, forced to pay higher grocery prices, forced to pay higher health cost, forced to pay higher housing prices, forced to pay higher insurance be it auto/home/health. The lower and middle class is either going to have to cough it up to be able to continue in this society or be forced eventually to be living on the streets or with friends and relatives. This has been a long slow process to keep society from realizing what is going on. It's the old put a frog in hot water he'll jump out, but bring him to a boil slowly and he'll stay in the pot.
So why would anyone think for a moment that the casino industry is any different? Do people honestly think it's camelot filled with knights in shinning armor that will always protect and look after the best interest of everyone? I mean really, how deluded do you think we all are.
The comment Simmo made about "Make them all high rollers", means two things, some will get very lucky and win a monster hit, while others will have to up the anty to stay in the game. This is how your force the low-roller to either up the anty or quit.
Since the casino player base is largely made of low rollers as you say and they wouldn't want to lose this big player base, then the casinos have to make them high rollers so as not to be brought down to it's own demise. Again this is done largely by making the low roller have to play the $1 rather than the 20 cents if they want to have more than just a long play session. Unfortunately there are many low rollers willing to accept this and they continue playing. If they deposit their $25 and get no return which I'm sure counts for the majority of $25 depositors, the casino has made $25x? and the player thinks well it was only $25. If the $25 depositor now decides they are tired of the same non productive play they now start depositing $50 and wagering more trying to catch the magic that so many here are always boasting about, giving screenshots of their awesome wins and so on.
It's like you are keeping the herd constantly running to graze in this pasture or that pasture, as long as they keep grazing because you all share an interest in each pasture and will profit from them. The grazing fields get salted so to speak with just enough low rollers finding the good grass to keep all the low rollers thinking they will find it too. Thus keeping the low rolling player in the game.
It is largely a psychology game that is used very effectively to keep the low rollers thinking the casinos are upright and righteous and you too can win. You have to protect your castle and this is what you do very well.
When a small handful of players come along and state things have gotten tight or it just isn't the same anymore they don't do it together to make their forces strong enough to break down the barriers the opposition has in place, thus they are picked off one by one and other players look at a thread and say yeah, they just don't understand the dynamics, or they are just having a bad run, or they feel they are being cheated and are just posting their sour grapes attitudes, or they should just quit if they aren't having any fun or think they are being cheated.
Yes for the few that would take you up on just quitting, you know you won't need to deal with them anymore, but you have to keep your armor on as there will always be another that will venture up to the front line in the battlefield.
It would be interesting to examine the winning the posts and see just how many are won by affiliates that have successfully done their job in defeating yet another rebellion.

 

[Wildfire7]

Hi Mavin

Firstly let me clear one thing up here. I do not work in the gambling industry, nor am I an affiliate trying to protect my interests. Just like you I am an ordinary player.

Gambling by nature carrys an element of risk. Sometimes you might win, sometimes you might lose. Part of the problem is that some of the players who participate, in what is quintessentially a loss making hobby, seem to be under the impression that casinos must payout more to them. If casinos did pay out more to them, they still would not be happy, because then they would want even more.

The low roller is at no disadvantage to anybody else by playing at the stakes he chooses. Infact he probably has a financial advantage in that over time he will be losing less. So your suggestion that the low roller is somehow subsidising the industry is ludicrous. You the player choose how much you wish to deposit. You make your bets, sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Exactly the same however much your stake is.

Anybody that has ever visited a landbased bookmaker will probably have seen those ultra low rollers, sitting their with their 10p roll ups. They will quite often enjoy watching all the races on the TV screens and get free warmth and comfort at the bookmakers expense. Who do you think is paying Ladbrokes electricity bills? Because it is not this kind of punter that is for sure. This kind of landbased punter is still treated the same as the next punter, because the bottom line is, he is still a customer.

Ask yourself this Mavin, who is paying for all those new games you the low roller enjoys? These are games paid for by depositing players, the higher rollers are putting up a lot of money towards this.

The only difference between a player like yourself Mavin and a player like me is that I accept the house has an advantage, I accept the games are fair and I accept that because of the inbuilt disadvantage I might lose money. If I want a hobby that can make me money I would do something like sell things on Ebay.

As your average player, I am just contented with the establishments I play at, and it really is as simple as this for mesometimes I win, sometimes I lose. By being over analytical towards results can make a player become paranoid and lose confidence in their own ability to gamble for pleasure.

Mike

 

[Mavin1]

Hi Mavin

Firstly let me clear one thing up here. I do not work in the gambling industry, nor am I an affiliate trying to protect my interests. Just like you I am an ordinary player.

Gambling by nature carrys an element of risk. Sometimes you might win, sometimes you might lose. Part of the problem is that some of the players who participate, in what is quintessentially a loss making hobby, seem to be under the impression that casinos must payout more to them. If casinos did pay out more to them, they still would not be happy, because then they would want even more.

The low roller is at no disadvantage to anybody else by playing at the stakes he chooses. Infact he probably has a financial advantage in that over time he will be losing less. So your suggestion that the low roller is somehow subsidising the industry is ludicrous. You the player choose how much you wish to deposit. You make your bets, sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. Exactly the same however much your stake is.

Anybody that has ever visited a landbased bookmaker will probably have seen those ultra low rollers, sitting their with their 10p roll ups. They will quite often enjoy watching all the races on the TV screens and get free warmth and comfort at the bookmakers expense. Who do you think is paying Ladbrokes electricity bills? Because it is not this kind of punter that is for sure. This kind of landbased punter is still treated the same as the next punter, because the bottom line is, he is still a customer.

Ask yourself this Mavin, who is paying for all those new games you the low roller enjoys? These are games paid for by depositing players, the higher rollers are putting up a lot of money towards this.

The only difference between a player like yourself Mavin and a player like me is that I accept the house has an advantage, I accept the games are fair and I accept that because of the inbuilt disadvantage I might lose money. If I want a hobby that can make me money I would do something like sell things on Ebay.

As your average player, I am just contented with the establishments I play at, and it really is as simple as this for mesometimes I win, sometimes I lose. By being over analytical towards results can make a player become paranoid and lose confidence in their own ability to gamble for pleasure.

Mike

First this statement was sparked by yours in your previous post.
And I am glad to know that I am bantering back and forth with a regular player. I can also appreciate the fact that some, will always enjoy online gaming like yourself and be successful at it. I don't have a problem with that one way or another. But there are plenty that do otherwise the questions would not arise almost daily.
And yes I am a seller on ebay and have been for a decade.

 

[Jasminebed]

I think the low-roller is the bread and butter for casinos. A player that deposits $20 50 times is much more profitable than one that deposits $1000. The $20 player is not likely to withdraw $40 (at least not most of us), whereas the $1000 depositor is likely to withdraw $2000.

A low roller that does withdraw consistently when they have made a 20percent profit may cost the casino more in processing fees than they are worth, and might find their account cancelled. A high-roller that martigales red/black roulette and settles for $1 profit on a session consistently might find themselves in the same boat.

Some casinos require that all deposits be played at least 1X. This helps protect their profit margin. Others accept very small deposits by some methods but not others. Most have minimum amounts for withdrawals, and sometimes these vary according to method.

I would hope that any casino that was looking at dropping a low-roller because their play did not cover processing costs would at least contact the player and give them an option to vary their deposit/withdrawal patterns.

Some alternatives would be:

Reducing the number of free withdrawals per month.

Requesting a larger deposit amount.

Increasing the amount required for a free withdrawal.

Requiring one-time playthrough on deposits.

I think that many of us low-rollers are at least mid-range rollers when we are ahead on a deposit, or near the end of a bankroll, hoping for a decent hit.

 

[De Beuker]

If lowrollers are so important for casino's, I really wonder why Betway have altered their slots like this, if it is not to chase the lowroller away.
They succesfully chased ME away!
There's no way you can ajust the coins, you must play max. bet. and only through autoplay.
Some of the newer slots are normal, but by far the most of them are stripped like this.
I certainly hope this is NOT going to be a new trend, jeez...

 

[nitro]

They try to attract highrollers, but they will chase away their profits.

 

[Mavin1]

Thank you De Beuker, for showing some proof positive on this issue. I would imagine we will be seeing much more of this sort of thing going on, forcing the low roller to spend like a high roller or seek another outlet for fun.

I appreciate that some are earnestly looking at this point of view rather than making a joke of it to purposely kill a thread.

If all players think about it for even a moment, once all low rollers are phased out, who do you think is next in line for the big fleecing? So protecting and standing up for the low rollers is protection for all.

 

[nisosbar]

I'm sorry, not only do I disagree, but I see the exact opposite happening. For example, on one small site I've been registered at since 2006, they reduced the minimum deposit from $50 to $25. Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet. If that isn't lowrolling, I don't know what is.

 

[silcnlayc]

nisosbar:Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet

That is because of a tourney a long while back that we all were invited to play for free but if you didn't deposit, you had to have at least made a $1 deposit ...so that is there not for low rollers but because of this one instance...if I remember correctly...

.

 

[nisosbar]

Jackpot Capital's minimum is $5, 3Dice is $10. They COULD in theory raise the minimums and be rid of the lowroller altogether.

 

[eu_lowroller]

I'm sorry, not only do I disagree, but I see the exact opposite happening. For example, on one small site I've been registered at since 2006, they reduced the minimum deposit from $50 to $25. Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet. If that isn't lowrolling, I don't know what is.

What have this to do with low-rolling?

You speak about min. deposits and not about min. (line)bet size!

 

[coxwel]

Jackpot Capital's minimum is $5, 3Dice is $10. They COULD in theory raise the minimums and be rid of the lowroller altogether.

like buzzluck did..

they ahd 5 min deposit on neteller. now all is 20 allthough on their neteller promotion it still states 5 min..


as they had the lower limit i put in sth more often just for fun.. now i stopped.

seems they had too many lowrollers on board ;-9


cheers

coxwel

 

[Pinababy69]

I'm sorry, not only do I disagree, but I see the exact opposite happening. For example, on one small site I've been registered at since 2006, they reduced the minimum deposit from $50 to $25. Further, you can still deposit a single dollar ($1.00) on Inetbet if you are depositing from UseMyWallet. If that isn't lowrolling, I don't know what is.

Just to add to this thought, for years 32Red's minimum deposit has been $20. About a month or six weeks ago, they lowered this to ten dollars, which I was ecstatic about. Inetbet has always had the $1 minimum CC deposit, as far as I can remember. And someone mentioned 3Dice as well having a $10 minimum. I'm sort of curious if any other MG's have lowered their minimums from $20 or $25 to $10?

It just seems odd that if they wanted to get rid of low rollers, they would lower the minimum deposit to $10...especially given the fact that they pay processing fees on each deposit and withdrawal. I'm sure they'd much rather have someone deposit $50 once, as opposed to $10 five times, from a fee standpoint. When 32Red (maybe MG altogether?) lowered the minimum altogether, I sort of looked upon it as them catering to the low roller. Don't really know what to think. They certainly won't get me to raise my bets...I'm the Queen of the low rollers, and intend to stay that way.

 

[De Beuker]

Just to add to this thought, for years 32Red's minimum deposit has been $20. About a month or six weeks ago, they lowered this to ten dollars, which I was ecstatic about. Inetbet has always had the $1 minimum CC deposit, as far as I can remember. And someone mentioned 3Dice as well having a $10 minimum. I'm sort of curious if any other MG's have lowered their minimums from $20 or $25 to $10?

It just seems odd that if they wanted to get rid of low rollers, they would lower the minimum deposit to $10...especially given the fact that they pay processing fees on each deposit and withdrawal. I'm sure they'd much rather have someone deposit $50 once, as opposed to $10 five times, from a fee standpoint. When 32Red (maybe MG altogether?) lowered the minimum altogether, I sort of looked upon it as them catering to the low roller. Don't really know what to think. They certainly won't get me to raise my bets...I'm the Queen of the low rollers, and intend to stay that way.

32RED, Nedplay, Ladbrokes and Purple Lounge are as far as I know the only MG casino's where the minimumdeposit is $10.-
JackpotCity used to be $10.- too but they raised it to $20.- last summer.
For Betway I think its $20.- , but whats the use of depositing $20 if you can only play 8 friggin' spins?!?

 

[rockycatt]

if any body thinks for a minute that the majority of online players are going to deposite in each session to spin at 1.00 dollar and over
per spin as there min bet , [ exception the bonus users ]

i say let some air out of the balloon and come closer to earth

 

[Mavin1]

Posted by BMSTACK on Casino33 thread
mavin i see what your saying, but because its you i have to dismiss your issue. ive seen you on here before making comments about not liking online casinos. Why do you even bother being in these forums?

I want to address this statement on this thread as I would like to keep the issue together. First, I have never said I don't like online casinos. If I didn't like them I certainly would not struggle so hard to get everyone together on the same thread that have the same or similar feelings as I do. I certainly have no problem with those that dissagree, we as people will not always agree with everything that everyone says, that is human nature and each of us have our own convictions and perceptions that are just as endearing as the other persons. I am just as human as anyone else and have feelings about things too and find it difficult sometimes not to let some of you hurt me emotionally because I am human.
The first person I had contact here with back in June, was Pinababy and I admired her greatly for her strong stance and conviction on the Top Game issue, still do, she can be a very powerful force and commands some notice. She may dissagree with me, but that's okay as she is considerate and mature enough not to be insulting in the process. She will always have my respect even if we don't think alike.
The next people of whom I have come to know and admire immensely is Silcnlayc and Vegetagirl, my first encounter with them was not the best, but they being true people with great compassion and convictions have and always will have my greatest respect and admiration as well as KasinoKing and many others. This forum is so diversified with so many different personalities that it is very difficult for anyone not to upset someone.

But yes, I very much enjoy online casinos and have for 9 years and although things may seem to some as not having changed and to others that it has, I see no reason why the discussion cannot be brought together on one thread rather than spread out all over.
I do not whine that I have never won on line, I have many times, but this is not the issue.
Feeling that maybe we should ban together an hold our deposits for a bit, is just a form of protest, not because we are constant bitchers and moaners, but because we genuinely feel there has been changes that are not affecting everyone, but does effect many.
It is not just a matter of protecting the online casino business for itself, but also to protect our right to play and enjoy online gaming and not just for the low roller but for everyone.

So if my trying to bring all these spread out opinions together in one thread upsets some people that can't be helped as some will be upset no matter what and that is just human nature as well.

 

[LaurieJim]

Jackpot Capital's minimum is $5, 3Dice is $10. They COULD in theory raise the minimums and be rid of the lowroller altogether.

And when they do, they will have lost one very loyal player, i make small deposits but steady ones, sure i could deposit 20.00 or 50.00 even higher at one time but for me its the thrill of depositing less amounts and building up my bankroll.It has worked for me and if a casino doesnt want to cater to the low rollers, then i just hope they have enough whales out there to keep them a float in this ever changing business................laurie

 

[De Beuker]

And when they do, they will have lost one very loyal player, i make small deposits but steady ones, sure i could deposit 20.00 or 50.00 even higher at one time but for me its the thrill of depositing less amounts and building up my bankroll.It has worked for me and if a casino doesnt want to cater to the low rollers, then i just hope they have enough whales out there to keep them a float in this ever changing business................laurie

No, I don't think they wil limit the deposits, many ppl deposit like that.
Me too!
But some casino's already do limit the withdrawls.
Red Flush, Rich Reels and Villento have a minimum withdrawlimit of $100.-

These casino's also succesfully chased me away.

 

[vinylweatherman]

If lowrollers are so important for casino's, I really wonder why Betway have altered their slots like this, if it is not to chase the lowroller away.
They succesfully chased ME away!
There's no way you can ajust the coins, you must play max. bet. and only through autoplay.
Some of the newer slots are normal, but by far the most of them are stripped like this.
I certainly hope this is NOT going to be a new trend, jeez...

A picture paints a thousand words, and this demonstrates a CLEAR INTENT to prevent players from BETTING below a certain amount per wager, unless they play fewer LINES in this case. Many low rollers prefer to bet less per line, rather than bet far fewer lines, and see a big win come on a line they left out.

This also shows something else; PROOF that MGS DO INDEED change the OLD games. I have NEVER seen this configuration option on ANY MGS game at ANY MGS casino before.

 

[silcnlayc]

vinylweatherman:This also shows something else; PROOF that MGS DO INDEED change the OLD games. I have NEVER seen this configuration option on ANY MGS game at ANY MGS casino before.

That is called an adjustment, not change. Ask all that are in the "know" because that is what I am told everytime I have tried to show something has "changed"...so VWM...I hope you have better luck convincing them then I ever had...because you will be in an uphill fight since there really has been no changes... because it wasn't "announced" as one..but as I understand it, "adjustments are allowed without "notice" to the players..

.

 

[pmhcfc]

A picture paints a thousand words, and this demonstrates a CLEAR INTENT to prevent players from BETTING below a certain amount per wager, unless they play fewer LINES in this case. Many low rollers prefer to bet less per line, rather than bet far fewer lines, and see a big win come on a line they left out.

This also shows something else; PROOF that MGS DO INDEED change the OLD games. I have NEVER seen this configuration option on ANY MGS game at ANY MGS casino before.

And I'm just guessing that the fact they've done this on a High Variance slot is just a coincidence eh? If, as a low-roller, you're prepared to take a chance on a HV slot, you know you can hit big even at small stakes. Bet they don't do the same with Liquid Gold - which is probably the lowest variance slot that MG has.

And agreeing with you (as I always seem to do lol) on your 2nd point - As I suggested previously; Ladies Nite didn't used to be HV, but it is now.