SlotoCash - Very bad practice

[nisosbar]

I'll tell you this: this is precisely why I almost never ever ever take bonuses.

[Nifty29]

This is just absurd. I'm sure an advantage player reads the rules, is aware of them all, and would take great care to avoid such a trap. It's the casual player who isn't thinking of rules and terms who is just out to have a good time who gets sucked into this.

In a real casino ... are you ever concerned that cashier isn't going to give you cash for your chips because you did something wrong while playing? Of course not. You're told at the table if you're doing something wrong and your bet is rejected before being resolved. Try betting too late at the roulette table, or trying to double down on three cards at blackjack, or betting the wrong amounts at crazy 4 poker .... You don't get paid chips for your incorrect wager and then have them taken away when you try to cash them in. You get told right at the time of the wager that what you're doing isn't allowed.

You are dead wrong Nifty that these rules are only hurting people trying to take advantage of the casino. They're hurting everyone EXCEPT those people.

I don't agree this is always the case.

In this case the op is clearly an AP, as with other cases mentioned and in most cases I have seen. If you're going to AP, you need to be extra careful.

The casual player doesn't flat bet 6 lines @$1 x 3500.....sorry. also, they don't bet $50 a spin to clear a bonus.

Anyway, the point is moot. You either read and abide by the rules or you don't. If an exception is made for one, it has to be made for others and then there's no point having the rule......which is in place, incidentally, because of AP who attempt to take the casino to the cleaners and never come back. I'm not saying its intrinsically wrong to be an AP, but they are the reason why there are pages of sometimes draconian terms to wade through before playing....and that's a fact. It's time some people realised that terms like this were born of need I.e. for the casino to protect itself from the players who aren't interested in becoming loyal customers and who go from casino to casino milking everything they can. As I said, not illegal or immoral per se, but its why we have ridiculous WR and max cashouts nowadays. I remember the days of 2xDB WR and no max on freebies, but they are gone due to the greed of the few who spoil things for everyone else (like life in general).

The only genuine case I can recall in the past few years is the person who hit $6000 at mummys gold on a $3 spin using a small deposit bonus. The bet used to win was within the "% of bonus" rules, but they raised their bet afterwards to $6 for a while which was in breach of the rule. In this case, the winnings were generated from a legitimate bet, but the following bets voided all the winnings which were $5500 at withdrawal. It would have been reasonable for the casino to pay and cut the guy some slack, and I hoped they would, but technically they were right to take the winnings back which they did. The casino should have taken the global view and realised this was not an AP out to fleece them, but a dolphin caught in the tuna net. It's very simple to seperate the APs from normal players, and it was obvious which the OP was. In a case like this there should be flexibility, but in the case with sloto (both) it is clear they were APs and were caught breaking the rules whilst plying their trade.....and I have no sympathy for them and they need to accept total responsibility and stop blaming the "big bad casinos" for "trucking" them.

I might even start a poll of who has ever been caught out by max bet rules and how many times, and maybe ask them to explain. You may find your ideas may change.

[kavaman]

Im not talking about this case, but the case where the player deposited 500 for 2000 of bonus. I think if he is a highroller he can bet 25 or 50 with those wagering requirements, its a really big deposit and a really big bonus. The casino has no grounds to deny his legitimate win. Its pure bs from the casinos side if the player is legit.
No casino has the right to use unwritten rules to deny winnings. He can wager what slot games he wishes and only barely meet the wr if he wishes. The max bet rule at sloto was not there in the beginning when sloto started to use RTG software. If the players should know what are high variance what are low variance games and only use the same betsize to meet the whole playtrough casinos could do whatever they want. Thats why there are t&c.

Seems to me that sloto was hit with many bonus abusers after the software change to rtg. Lets hope they do pay up the winners.

[Nifty29]

Im not talking about this case, but the case where the player deposited 500 for 2000 of bonus. I think if he is a highroller he can bet 25 or 50 with those wagering requirements, its a really big deposit and a really big bonus. The casino has no grounds to deny his legitimate win. Its pure bs from the casinos side if the player is legit.
No casino has the right to use unwritten rules to deny winnings. He can wager what slot games he wishes and only barely meet the wr if he wishes. The max bet rule at sloto was not there in the beginning when sloto started to use RTG software. If the players should know what are high variance what are low variance games and only use the same betsize to meet the whole playtrough casinos could do whatever they want. Thats why there are t&c.

When was the max bet rule added?

I also don't believe this guy wasn't an AP......and $20-50 slot bets most certainly IS high rolling to the gen pop.

The thing that kinda makes me laugh is that they bonus ban regular loyal players who suddenly end up ahead for a second, but they're happy to offer them to bonus hunters.

[Seventh777]

It is morally bankrupt and ethically reprehensible. It reflects extremely poorly on the online casino industry when they resort to such tactics and use any excuse to take people's money. The max bet nonsense is a predatory term because it sets up a lose-lose proposition for the player. Bet and lose, and you lose. Bet and win, and they take your money anyway. If you don't want the player to make a certain bet, then implement those limitations in the software. It wouldn't be difficult, but it's much more profitable to just take people\s money.

Someone should take these casinos to court over this idiocy. I doubt any court in a civilized country would accept this term as legally binding.

Agree with you 100%, If I were a casino manager I would like nothing better than slot players with bonuses playing TSII at £15 a spin, or Mermaids Millions at £75 a pop to try and clear the w/r. I don`t think there`s an AP out there whom makes a nice steady income from bonuses, playing (where applicable) slots for max bet spins.

Imho there is no justifiable cause whatsoever to cap bet sizes on slots for anti bonus abuse reasons, it`s beyond pathetic tbh.

[kavaman]

I dont know exactly when the rule was added nifty, but when slotocash opened on rtg it was not there . More about advantage play. How can a casino or the player know what is AP or what is not. I dont know any casino rules that state exactly what is an AP, and what kind of play is not tolerated. The terms usually state it something like "advantage play is not tolerated and players who use these strategies will be barred from the casino). Terms made like this do not say what exactly they count as Advantage Play. It should be a clear cut and here it is definately not.

If the player bets all his big WR using big bets how can that be said as advantage play. He just got lucky , and casino should abide with their own t&c of the current time. If the max bet rule was in place at the time the casino has a valid reason to deny winnings, if it wasn't then hell no.

kavaman

[Nifty29]

I dont know exactly when the rule was added nifty, but when slotocash opened on rtg it was not there . More about advantage play. How can a casino or the player know what is AP or what is not. I dont know any casino rules that state exactly what is an AP, and what kind of play is not tolerated. The terms usually state it something like "advantage play is not tolerated and players who use these strategies will be barred from the casino). Terms made like this do not say what exactly they count as Advantage Play. It should be a clear cut and here it is definately not.

If the player bets all his big WR using big bets how can that be said as advantage play. He just got lucky , and casino should abide with their own t&c of the current time. If the max bet rule was in place at the time the casino has a valid reason to deny winnings, if it wasn't then hell no.

kavaman

In the absence of the max bet rule, I agree with you....its a "spirit of the bonus" thing and that is unacceptable.

A specific rule like max bet or excluded games.....no problem. However, a player cannot abide by a rule that cannot be quantified.

The casino needs to state what is not allowed specifically. If a player does something that isn't stated (or could be reasonably applied using common sense) the casino should pay. Change the rules by all means, but you can't apply them retrospectively.

If the complainant in the arsekgamblers case is legit, Bryan should review their status.

[zap987]

While I do think max bet rules need to be used with some caution and common sense, it's also important to note that they are needed or a lot of bonuses would just be too expensive for the casinos. The higher you can bet the higher your expected profit from a bonus. Good casinos don't have these rules to get an excuse to not pay people that make a mistake, they have them to limit their losses to advantage players while still being able to make reasonable offers to their normal players. This case definitely looks like someone knew exactly what they were doing but then made an expensive mistake, while the Mummy's Gold case is just a bad casino misusing the rules because the don't understand gambling. To some degree it would actually be better if casinos would be allowed to have a spirit of the bonus rule if they could use it with common sense, it's not exactly hard in most cases to spot the difference between advantage play and normal play.

[kavaman]

No way. Then casinos could do whatever they wish. Who would play in any casino with a bonus if they would knew that the casino can just void their winnings if they choose to do so. The rules are there so players NOT abusing them would get paid. Zap is basically saying just remove all the rules, and let casino decide if they wish to play using common sense . This has been discussed here previously. The spirit of the bonus thing is highly unacceptable.

Also i think this case is way clearer then the mummysgold case. There the player definately broke rules. As for this casino its not sure that the max bet rule was in place.

As for this player knowing what to do i disagree. Would a bonus abuser lose that much of his balance intentionally betting big bets the whole way. If the player would bet 100$ bets on slots and then bet the playtrough using 1-3$ bets, maybe it could be said as bonus abuse, but not here.

I somehow wish that casinos would not offer bonuses at all, so they could not use any excuse in the book to not pay a player. There is already enough protection for the casinos as it is. When i started playing 10 years ago bonuses had playtrough of 3x deposit and bonus, and some had no cap on the amount of bonus you can have. And blackjack was a game you could play. Now its slots and playtrough between 20-100x.

[Nifty29]

No way. Then casinos could do whatever they wish. Who would play in any casino with a bonus if they would knew that the casino can just void their winnings if they choose to do so. The rules are there so players NOT abusing them would get paid. Zap is basically saying just remove all the rules, and let casino decide if they wish to play using common sense . This has been discussed here previously. The spirit of the bonus thing is highly unacceptable.

Also i think this case is way clearer then the mummysgold case. There the player definately broke rules. As for this casino its not sure that the max bet rule was in place.

As for this player knowing what to do i disagree. Would a bonus abuser lose that much of his balance intentionally betting big bets the whole way. If the player would bet 100$ bets on slots and then bet the playtrough using 1-3$ bets, maybe it could be said as bonus abuse, but not here.

I somehow wish that casinos would not offer bonuses at all, so they could not use any excuse in the book to not pay a player. There is already enough protection for the casinos as it is. When i started playing 10 years ago bonuses had playtrough of 3x deposit and bonus, and some had no cap on the amount of bonus you can have. And blackjack was a game you could play. Now its slots and playtrough between 20-100x.

Actually, the best strategy if you want to maximize your profit is to bet as high as possible all the way.

The idea of hitting big and then grinding is a false economy.....the more spins you make, the more you expose your bankroll to the house edge. It might ensure that you cashout something by grinding, but its the wrong way to go if you want to take full advantage.

The players involved were advantage players....let's not kid around here. The issue is whether a specific term was breached, and in one case it was.