GAMBLING FEDERATION: rules adhered to but winnings stolen

[bpb]

Before I get any angry responses, I totally support the fact that if you follow the rules, you should get paid. I'm just pointing out that we now know that this kind of betting strategy is fraught with potential for casinos to deny your winnings. Why even take the chance.

Because it's the only way to gamble with an edge online. There's a disgusting amount of money to be made using this approach.

[mgibson99]

Because it's the only way to gamble with an edge online. There's a disgusting amount of money to be made using this approach.

I don't think there is a concensus on that. There is another thread about people who don't gamble with bonuses (like me), and based on the responses, there is a very mixed opinion on whether you can really clean up with bonuses. Of course there are those who swear by bonuses as the only way to get an edge (like you), and I respect that. But there are also some (like me) who think that bonuses are more trouble than they are worth with the play through requirements and confusing T&C.

Also, as to the specifcs of this particular incident, and the other one I mentioned earlier, I don't think you will find very many people who make a "disgusting" amount of money by trying to make a quit hit by gambling in a bunch of casinos in a short amount of time just to collect bonuses. Oh I'm sure there are some, but I suspect that they are the exception rather than the rule. I would hazard a guess that generally people that try that just end up losing money, or hassling with the casinos when they trot out the T&C as an excuse not to pay, or worse yet label them a "bonus abuser".

[bpb]

I don't think there is a concensus on that. There is another thread about people who don't gamble with bonuses (like me), and based on the responses, there is a very mixed opinion on whether you can really clean up with bonuses.

There's mixed opinion on everything in this world. The people who don't think you can clean up with bonuses are wrong.

Of course there are those who swear by bonuses as the only way to get an edge (like you), and I respect that. But there are also some (like me) who think that bonuses are more trouble than they are worth with the play through requirements and confusing T&C.

If you are playing for entertainment, then there's no question that bonuses are more hassle than they're worth.

If you're playing to make money ... that is ... you are looking to gamble with a healthy positive expecation ... they are more than worth the hassle.

Also, as to the specifcs of this particular incident, and the other one I mentioned earlier, I don't think you will find very many people who make a "disgusting" amount of money by trying to make a quit hit by gambling in a bunch of casinos in a short amount of time just to collect bonuses. Oh I'm sure there are some, but I suspect that they are the exception rather than the rule. I would hazard a guess that generally people that try that just end up losing money, or hassling with the casinos when they trot out the T&C as an excuse not to pay, or worse yet label them a "bonus abuser".

Most people attacking these sticky bonuses are following in the footsteps of those who have already made a killing. They are following a very formulaic approach. When someone hits a brick wall (as appears the case in this GFed incident) ... word spreads quickly and people stop hitting those groups. So I would guess that the vast majority of people who try this are winning a bundle. It's the few that happen to try at a time when the casino wises up that get screwed.

[jetset]

"So there is Casino awareness, and there are rules out there, for this stuff."

Good point - and another example of the critical importance of savvy-constructed T&Cs from a casino perspective.

Some of this stuff is learned by tough experience, but that still doesn't excuse the use of unsupported disqualifications or catch-all clauses to effect them as a last resort.

Imagine entering any other commercial deal and telling the opposite party "I'd like a condition inserted here that says if I even suspect something might have gone wrong I can cancel the agreement and all its rewards without producing evidence."

If the T&C's have been met without fraudulent conduct the player must be paid. After that, apply the lesson learned to the T&Cs to prevent a recurrence, ban the player from promos or whatever. But first pay what you owe.

[Casinomeister]

...I believe that casino webcam has a rule to combat this low variance high stakes kind of stuff where the entire wedge is blown on a single bet.
http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/...ead.php?t=8694

'after the initial deposit, a minimum of 30 bets must be placed, with no one bet exceeding 25% of the initial deposit.'

So there is Casino awareness, and there are rules out there, for this stuff.

I can't seem to find this at casinowebcam.com, are you sure it was posted there? Google turns up nothing as well.

[eek]

It may have only been included in the email for a promo.
I just used the post as a reference when I remembered it had been made, I never checked the actual site itself.

Maybe jpsarte or casino webcam cs can shed some light.

I notice he's from Denmark btw
In the past, Danish players were not allowed bonuses at CWC.

[ChristopherB]

Hi all,

This is ChristopherB, and I am the one having the problem with the Gambling Federation.

I submitted a PAB to Bryan regarding this situation, so I would like some guidelines from Bryan about what to post here.

I will tell you all that the bottom line here is that I played explicitly by the rules and I am not getting paid.

Bryan, please let me know...

Thanks,

ChristopherB

[largeeyes]

I'm beginning to see a disturbing trend here; casinos that are unable to write their T&Cs well enough to protect their businesses.

If the player did not break any specific rules, then pay him and get on with it. If a casino doesn't like the style of play, then as Caruso points out, rewrite the terms and conditions to reflect the specific type of play that is acceptable.

This is a business that needs to accept the fact that players play to win. And they will use every legitimate means to do so - to win. This is why we have terms and conditions. The casino writes these conditions, the players agree to these conditions, and then hopefully abide by them.

Bingo. I feel like I should offer my services to all these casinos to save their butts as a proof reader of all T&C(and websites for that matter). I could save them 10x my salary.

[buck]

Hi all,

This is ChristopherB, and I am the one having the problem with the Gambling Federation.


ChristopherB

GF casinos are not worth the effort to even play at. Software is poor, and least us not forget about them screwing with registers upon downloads.

Buck

[Casinomeister]

GF casinos are not worth the effort to even play at. Software is poor, and least us not forget about them screwing with registers upon downloads.

Buck

Even so, they still have a high profile. They are still promoted and portals still generate traffic for them. They still need to be answerable to someone.

What is unfortunate, is that they are not answerable to anyone except perhaps their licensing jurisdiction Belize *cough cough.

http://www.casinomeister.com/casinos.html#donts
DONT'S
Some things to keep in mind:
*Don't play at sites licensed in Belize, Venezuela, Eastern Europe.

Prior proper planning prevents piss poor performance.

Now, I haven't been in contact with anyone on the casino side of the fence for this situation. There are GFed reps who are members of this forum, but I don't think they'll be jumping into this thread full-swing since it already seems to be a decided case. I don't know the full story - but I can find out.