Bonus Issues at Mansion Casino

[soflat]

Just received my reply from Mansion. They say I profited against the house, and am therefore not entitled to compensation.

Well, I was giving them the benefit of the doubt by assuming the first person who posted a Mansion reply might have gotten a hasty response from an inexperienced CS rep. But now it's starting to look like a far worse situation.

[brutaldeluxe]

I'd like to say I am surprised by the reply from mansion but I'm not. This has become standard for so many casinos. Oh we were cheating but hey we are gonna get away with it cos we can, superb.

Of course say a player had some sort of cheating device which took 4% off the house edge and turned it into a winning game for him.
If upon being caught he used the defence hey I lost £300 anyway so what's the problem, would that be ok then I wonder ?
Of course it wouldn't. Yet somehow it's ok for the casino to do it to the players.

Mansion won't be getting another penny from me and I'll be urging everyone else to follow suit.

[2BigDogs]

For what it might be worth to all of you. I emailed customer service and complained about the video poker issue. The first response was from customer service telling me they forwarded the issue to thier video poker department. Now I have recieved this:


______________________________
Further to our recent email regarding Video Poker.

We have been in touch with our Casino Department and we are pleased to confirm the technical difficulties you were experiencing on our Video Poker game are now fixed.

MANSION apologies for any inconvenience this may of caused we would also like to point out were currently reviewing your account to see if you are entitled to a refund.

If you have any further queries or require any assistance in the future, please do not hesitate to contact us again.

Kindest regards,

Dan
__________________________________________________ _

No idea how this is going to turn out, but I did bust out some serious cash playing video poker, so we'll see if I get any satisfaction. I will update when I get a further response.



MANSION Member Services

[pangloss]

This is NOT the EH defence - if you recall, they checked their own logs and paid everyone affected with 20% additional compensation.

What Mansion is doing here is far, far worse - simply inexcusable.

EH pointedly refused to check (and/or disclose) their logs beyond a teeney weeney time frame. To do so would have verified claims by kengam et al that their games had been cooked for God knows how long. Thus they escaped paying proper and due compensation to those affected by limiting the scope of enquiry.

Enter Mansion Casino - first they invoke the EH defence of bumbling software technicians. Second they limit paying compensation by pretending only players who actually complain and then actually suffer a bank roll loss are worthy of compensation.

The modus operandi sounds all too familiar to me Spear.


...

[spearmaster]

EH pointedly refused to check (and/or disclose) their logs beyond a teeney weeney time frame. To do so would have verified claims by kengam et al that their games had been cooked for God knows how long. Thus they escaped paying proper and due compensation to those affected by limiting the scope of enquiry.

Enter Mansion Casino - first they invoke the EH defence of bumbling software technicians. Second they limit paying compensation by pretending only players who actually complain and then actually suffer a bank roll loss are worthy of compensation.

The modus operandi sounds all too familiar to me Spear.


...

Pangloss, I forgot to welcome you to Casinomeister on your first post Welcome!

EH clearly identified the scope of the problem and identified the period in which the error affected accounts. They reviewed all play during that period and made compensation plus 20%.

Any period before that was NOT affected and no proof whatsoever of any irregularities during that time was given. Do not allow yourself to be swayed by cries of "Wolf!" so easily.

Mansion, on the other hand, did not introduce an error into the casino where there was none before - and even if they had, they should have been able to identify the period, and automatically review all logs during that period. Instead, they are requiring players to contact them to see if they are entitled to a refund, rather than reviewing all logs in question and automatically paying compensation - and, as you have seen from some players, the excuse of "having profited" is the reason being given for not paying compensation.

This scenario is thus completely different - by a long shot - and far more serious than any issue that arose with any other provider.

In my book, this is rogue behavior.

[soflat]

EH clearly identified the scope of the problem and identified the period in which the error affected accounts. They reviewed all play during that period and made compensation plus 20%.

Any period before that was NOT affected and no proof whatsoever of any irregularities during that time was given. Do not allow yourself to be swayed by cries of "Wolf!" so easily.

Actually I believe you are alone in this way of thinking about the English Harbor video poker fiasco and the impportance of doing a full audit.

The Wizard of Odds put a statement on his website stating that earlier logs should and would be looked at.

And Casino Meister posted the following: "Their gaming jurisdiction should have been contacted immediately and a full audit should have commenced. This never happened to my knowledge,"

[spearmaster]

Actually I believe you are alone in this way of thinking about the English Harbor video poker fiasco and the impportance of doing a full audit.

The Wizard of Odds put a statement on his website stating that earlier logs should and would be looked at.

And Casino Meister posted the following: "Their gaming jurisdiction should have been contacted immediately and a full audit should have commenced. This never happened to my knowledge,"

Let me make this a bit more clear.

EH identified the period in question and automatically reviewed all play and paid refunds plus 20%.

Mansion has not identified any period during which the recycled cards were in use, and are asking you to request an audit into your records.

Tell me, who is the bigger culprit here? Am I the only one that thinks this way?

I don't think so, not by a long shot.

[soflat]

Since there was no audit, English Harbor never identified the time periods conclusively.

We can assume Mansion's vp was bad from the start.

Which is worse? I don't know but they are both terrible.

[spearmaster]

Since there was no audit, English Harbor never identified the time periods conclusively.

There was an audit - which identified that the problem occurred in April. All affected bets were refunded plus 20%.

[vinylweatherman]

The industry is not doing itself any favours over this. There have been numerous allegations by players who have had terrible runs and post that "the ****** game at **** is clearly rigged". These have been hard to prove, and the majority opinion is that it was just a run of bad luck and the games in gereral are fair. Operators have replied by saying how robust their software is, how well their RNG has been designed and tested to produce fair results.
Now, the conspiracy theorists have caught not one, but TWO casinos out cheating! In both instances, it was NOTHING to do with the fairness of the RNG, it was all to do with how the software converts that random number into a set of cards, dice, or reels for the game the player is playing.
The can of worms is now well and truly open. Many are feeling that online Blackjack simply does not "feel right" on occasion, and I am one of them, having said that sometimes I can play seemingly forever and all the luck is bad with no spells of good luck as might be expected to balance out the runs. I have conceded that the RNG itself must be as near to random as makes no difference, and have surmised that there must be some kind of algorithm that makes the game more "interesting" by implementing some kind of bias feedback to keep streaks going more one way than another, and that this bias changes slowly, hence advice from some casinos to leave the game alone and come back next week, strangely, it seems to work!
I would be interested to know what process they use to convert numbers to things like cards in Blackjack, a subtle error here can make all the difference, and if slight may never come to light.
I believe the PWC verification looks at the number of times cards appear and conclude that all cards appear with the frequency they should, what it does NOT look at is whether bias exists that causes the hand as a whole to be continually good or bad for either player or dealer, such as sequencing the cards in such a way that a player always gets the bust card and the dealer gets the run of low cards to make the proverbial silk purse of the Sow's ear hand started with! ( I have a particular gripe with the runs of eternal pushes of my good hands against an initial crap up card for the dealer, followed by always busting when it is I that have the "challenging" hard 14!