Terms and conditions

[phynqster]

Here is one for the readers of this forum:
What should I call the wagers at roulette, baccarat, and craps that most casino's stop players from playing those games for wagering requirements. I was thinking of calling them "even money cancellation bets" do you think that would explain that roulette and craps and baccarat will count, just not those bets.

[SlotsWizard]

Here is one for the readers of this forum:
What should I call the wagers at roulette, baccarat, and craps that most casino's stop players from playing those games for wagering requirements. I was thinking of calling them "even money cancellation bets" do you think that would explain that roulette and craps and baccarat will count, just not those bets.

Most casinos call these bets "low risk wagers". You could also call them "hedge bets".

[Macgyver]

Why "call" them anything?

Why not spell out exactly what bets are disallowed?

For example:

All simultaneous bets on dealer and player in baccarat will not count toward completing the WR after a player has accepted a bonus.

Hmmm, maybe I should get a job writing T&C ...

[chuchu59]

I would leave out the word cancellation because it could be ambiguous. Will all bets or winnings be cancelled? This is what players might be thinking. Even money bets ie red/black or odd/even should not count but bets on single numbers could while the same can be said of banker/player in baccarat but bets on tie may count. So even if you mention even bets it is not clear just exactly what you are referring to.

[chuchu59]

Phynqster,

So the term is now even money offsetting bets, right?

[phynqster]

Have not decided on a set term. I hate pointing out all of the bets, because they only people who do that are the abusers anyway who ruin it for all. I want players playing craps, roulette, baccarat, sic bo, and such, but when you start saying no odd/even black/red high/low it becomes even more confusing to customers who just want to play. That was why I was thinking the "cancellation even money bets" because they only people who would really read into that are the bonus abusers.

[WAYLANDER]

Hows about something along the lines of....

Bets placed to cover all outcome's do not count towards wagering

Or because of the 0 and the red/black thing in roulette....

Bets placed that cover more than 95% of possible results do not count towards wagering requirements

It doesnt use any complicated gambling words, so i would think that most people new to the casino world would understand what that meant.

WAYLANDER

[phynqster]

Waylander,
I like your thought's but you need to realize that your explanation works on 95% of the general public, but the problem is the 5% who would say" on roulette because you could bet on every single number and all of the corners and splits and such, by me betting on both red and black, that does not cover 95% of all possibilites." You must remember these 5% look for a comma out of place just to manipulate the bonus. You think I gest, but in the real worl it is an everyday occurance.

[vinylweatherman]

Best to spell it out as well as use a phrase such as "wagers that cover all outcomes etc". Any covering phrase would have the "abusers" looking for the loophole, and spelling out the bets will not help the abusers as they know them anyway, and genuine players will see plainly what is meant by "abusive wagering", rather than them believing it covers normal clever wagering, such as small stakes and strategy.

Roulette is the most complicated game to cater for, as there are many ways to hedge all outcomes, however, the house edge never falls much below 2% (French rules), so it would be enough to ensure the WR are enough to prevent their being any overall +EV in abusive wagering.

The other type of wagering that has recently become "abusive" is making large high risk bets with the whole balance on a near 50/50 outcome, and then completing WR more conservatively if this wager is won.

One idea I have seen is a flexible WR term, such as "WR is nn x D+B OR 100x the amount of your maximum bet". This ensures that the leverage gained by making one big winning bet to start with is lost, as it causes the second term to dominate the WR of the resulting balance.

You must remember that casinos are in business to make a profit, and players are out to WIN!!

Another idea is to run a different promotion each month, thus making it harder for the websites to keep a blow by blow guide to beating the bonus up to date. Software choice is also a factor, it should make it easy for players to follow the progress of their progress towards completing a promotion, and prevent players from placing invalid wagers from the outset.
The aim should be to never have to be in the position of confiscating a player's winnings, with a worst case scenario of confiscating a bonus if it was improperly applied for and letting the player keep their deposit and winnings (although the option to close the account, or ban more bonuses, afterwards is always there).

[phynqster]

Great post, I love your thoughts and insights. We have never bumped heads so to speak in the forums, but your posts are usually enlightening.
Isn't it sad that we even have to discuss things like this, but if you do not cover all basses, someone sneaks in.