Casino seizes my winnings because I played a game that doesn't count towards rollover

[XXLClubCasino]

Personally, I dont think "does not count towards wagering requirements" is vague in the slightest ... quite explicit in fact ... and has only one meaning.

And even if it was vague ... then that is 100% the casinos fault .. they are their own written terms after all.

And I think the player did check beforehand and it was in writing. And behaved completely within their terms.

Any casino trying to "enforce" non-existent terms is fraudulent surely?

I Agree 100% with you! "does not count towards..." does not mean games can't be played before meeting the wagering requirements.

We write our T&C like this:

Bets placed in the games Craps, Roulette (all sorts of Roulette), Blackjack (all sorts of blackjack), Video Poker (all sorts of Video Poker), Sic Bo, Poker Three and Baccarat does not fulfil the player's obligations with regard to the minimum wagering requirements.

The above mentioned restricted games CAN'T be played before fulfilling the wagering requirement or all winnings will be void.

All casino that mean this should also write it like this. It costs nothing to write it and make it 100% clear to the player.

[Itoldyouso]

I Agree 100% with you! "does not count towards..." does not mean games can't be played before meeting the wagering requirements.

We write our T&C like this:

Bets placed in the games Craps, Roulette (all sorts of Roulette), Blackjack (all sorts of blackjack), Video Poker (all sorts of Video Poker), Sic Bo, Poker Three and Baccarat does not fulfil the player's obligations with regard to the minimum wagering requirements.

The above mentioned restricted games CAN'T be played before fulfilling the wagering requirement or all winnings will be void.

All casino that mean this should also write it like this. It costs nothing to write it and make it 100% clear to the player.

Why do you even give out bonuses if you are going to restrict the main games that makes up a casino? And then void the winnings if they play any of them. How come you get to control their money along with yours with these restrictions? I mean these terms above are a RIP-OFF!

[XXLClubCasino]

Why do you even give out bonuses if you are going to restrict the main games that makes up a casino? And then void the winnings if they play any of them. How come you get to control their money along with yours with these restrictions? I mean these terms above are a RIP-OFF!

I don't see any rip-off in those T&C. I agree that from a player view it is unattractive to have restricted games. The problem is simply that due to a 100% match bonus given to players, players can play at absolutely no risk to to them. In the long run the casino would simply go bankrupt as we would loose money months after months not being able to finance the lost incurred by new players with the relatively small base of loyal players. Bonus players will deposit once, that's it!

With card games giving a house hedge of 0.5-3.0% how should a casino be able to win any $ giving out an 100% bonus? Players are not stupid at all and know exactly the way to play to risk none of their funds by smarting outplaying the bonus. Gambling is "risking" money to be able to win more! Not risking zero to hit the jackpot of 1 Mio!

The bonus discussion is always an actual subject as not one casino seems to manage to do it right for all type of players. It's a question of taste.

For my part I prefer to play without any bonuses and be able to withdraw when ever I want and play any games I want without any restriction. This is how I can fully enjoy gambling, gambling is for me a recreation and entertain me.

Kickback bonuses to loyal players is what make the most sense to me but you wont attract new players with this type of bonuses. New players request to get a 100% or even 300% bonus to play with, this has unfortunately today become a quasi standard.

Other "professional" players do not want us to change anything in our bonuses as they always find the way to play with profit not only in the short term but also in the long term.

Anyway at least for our part every player can refuse to get this kind of restrictive bonus and will get a % of it's lost as a kickback.

We should start a poll and ask who prefer which type of bonus and I'm sure that the wast majority will vote for the 100% match bonus with game restrictions (maybe not in this forum so ).

What I really can't understand is why some players get so pissed about those clear T&C. Not a single land base casino would offer new players, they never saw before this type of free gift, ask yourself why! Also every player get the choice to refuse a bonus, if you accept it then you have to play by the rules, where do you see a rip-off here, honestly?

[Casinomeister]

Players should be reminded periodically that bonuses are not obligatory. Many players play without them and have no problem - including me.

[henryVIII]

Players should be reminded periodically that bonuses are not obligatory. Many players play without them and have no problem - including me.

I think this may be slightly missing the point.

Absolutely no one is forcing casinos to give their wager-requiremnt heavy bonuses, etc. But, when they do then the least they can do is meet their own terms.

Seems like its the casinos and not the players who are having the problems meeting the terms.

I could recommend playing casinos without bonuses but only for a laugh or to kill time or something for fun stakes. But thats me.