Betfair Casino bonus problem - bogus PAB - bot use

[Roar]

Originally Posted by thelawnet

This is utter nonsense. Responsible gambling is about not losing more than you can afford to lose. It does not mean that you should not lose any money, or not play games in a losing manner

If Rupert Murdoch goes to a casino, and loses $100,000, that is not irresponsible for him because he is a billionaire.

By your clearly ridiculous argument, it's irresponsible to offer any other games to the player than blackjack, because they all have higher house edges, and that will make the player lose faster.

The only reason someone has a bot is because they don't want to gamble, they just want to profit from the bonus.

I agree 'Responsible Gambling' includes not spending more than you can lose.

However, no online Casino is a position to determine the means of each individual that walks thru the door let alone whether they are your friend Rupert Murdoch. That's where your 'Responsible Gambling' argument disintegrates.

'Responsible Gambling' has a wider and greater meaning than the narrow interpretation you are currently applying to online Casinos. If your definition is correct than no online Casino would have ANY enforceable obligation toward 'Responsible Gambling' as they can quite correctly claim that is simply impossible to determine if any individual is gaming beyond their means.

To suggest otherwise is simply preposterous.

Prohibiting the player from access to a superior method of playing his cards is draconian to say the very least. It is tantamount to the house meddling, tampering or distracting the customer whilst in the process of attempting to play his best cards. Besides, card counting, which leaves 'bot' play for dead, is neither illegal nor prohibited in most B+M casinos.

Next thing you know online Casinos will be banning players from consulting the Wizard of Odds BJ strategy cards. Good grief! And you'll back on here shrugging shoulders and lamenting, "Them's the Casino rules. Let the players eat cake."

.

[GrandMaster]

Originally Posted by Komodo

You are dead wrong here.
They know perfectly well the exact EV for every promotion they send out.

There is ample evidence to the contrary. People in managerial positions in casinos have written rubbish like that betting small eliminates the house edge, or that even money bets in roulette are bonus abuse because the probability of the ball landing on 0 is so tiny. There is no evidence of sufficient mathematical expertise in casino management.

[thelawnet]

Originally Posted by Roar

I agree 'Responsible Gambling' includes not spending more than you can lose.

However, no online Casino is a position to determine the means of each individual that walks thru the door let alone whether they are your friend Rupert Murdoch. That's where your 'Responsible Gambling' argument disintegrates.

'Responsible Gambling' has a wider and greater meaning than the narrow interpretation you are currently applying to online Casinos. If your definition is correct than no online Casino would have ANY enforceable obligation toward 'Responsible Gambling' as they can quite correctly claim that is simply impossible to determine if any individual is gaming beyond their means.

To suggest otherwise is simply preposterous.

Prohibiting the player from access to a superior method of playing his cards is draconian to say the very least. It is tantamount to the house meddling, tampering or distracting the customer whilst in the process of attempting to play his best cards. Besides, card counting, which leaves 'bot' play for dead, is neither illegal nor prohibited in most B+M casinos.

This argument is utterly specious, as I'm sure you are well aware. Computerised aids are ILLEGAL in B+M casinos. He's quite entitled to use the strategy card, but doing something which is contrary to the rules or law is just wrong. It's black and white. If you get caught, tough.

Have a look:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheating_(casino)

Methods of Cheating
...
Using electronic aids
Illegally using a computer or similar device to aid in the employment of an otherwise legitimate strategy such as card counting.

Otherwise legitimate being the point.

[GrandMaster]

Originally Posted by thelawnet

This argument is utterly specious, as I'm sure you are well aware. Computerised aids are ILLEGAL in B+M casinos.

Computerised aids are illegal where prohibited by law, e.g., Nevada, but not in the UK.

[GaryWatson]

Originally Posted by Komodo

You are dead wrong here.
They know perfectly well the exact EV for every promotion they send out.
What they dont know is how many players who will participate.
What messes things up for them with these promotions is when 1500 bot players signs up and takes advantage of the generous offer.

I've been told to study my wording lately. I decided to take time out to understand the english written language.

[sdaddy]

First of all, I would like to hear again from the OP and get a clear, unambiguous answer to the question: Did you or did you not use a bot to complete the WR?

If the answer is "no," then I think the casino has a responsibility to show convincing evidence of their accusation. A player shouldn't be guilty until proven innocent...it should be the other way around.

[GaryWatson]

Originally Posted by sdaddy

First of all, I would like to hear again from the OP and get a clear, unambiguous answer to the question: Did you or did you not use a bot to complete the WR?

If the answer is "no," then I think the casino has a responsibility to show convincing evidence of their accusation. A player shouldn't be guilty until proven innocent...it should be the other way around.

Back on track

[Komodo]

Originally Posted by GaryWatson

I've been told to study my wording lately. I decided to take time out to understand the english written language.

EV/player of course.

[GaryWatson]

Originally Posted by Komodo

You are dead wrong here.
They know perfectly well the exact EV for every promotion they send out.
What they dont know is how many players who will participate.
What messes things up for them with these promotions is when 1500 bot players signs up and takes advantage of the generous offer.

I was just thinking of the contradiction in term. When they know the exact EV, they will have done their research on how many players they need to get their EV. You said they dont.

[thelawnet]

Originally Posted by sdaddy

First of all, I would like to hear again from the OP and get a clear, unambiguous answer to the question: Did you or did you not use a bot to complete the WR?

If the answer is "no," then I think the casino has a responsibility to show convincing evidence of their accusation. A player shouldn't be guilty until proven innocent...it should be the other way around.

The casino needs to show it to the player and maybe their regulator.

But before that, the player, who is seeking help here, needs to answer that question.

There is a betfair bot that I imagine is being used heavily on their site. The varying bets stated would suggest not, but seven hours of play is bizarre.

If we could see the playlogs it would be fairly easily to determine whether or not a bot has been used. I'd expect to see constant play for a long period of time (not necessarily the whole seven hours), with no strategy errors, without any 'comfort break' time.