Do I Understand This Right - Buzzluck

[DemonUK]

The following is taken from the T&C for the Casinomeister Welcome bonus at Buzzluck.

While the majority of players genuinely seek an enjoyable and entertaining gaming experience, there are many others who seek to abuse special offers on low risk games. As such, players may not place individual bets greater than 20% of the current balance until the rollover requirements have been met or if the bonus+deposit balance is below 50.00. An 'individual bet' is defined as the bet committed at the start of a hand or spin. Any doubles, splits, raises, side progressive bets, etc. are not considered as part of the individual bet. For slots, the total wagered between all lines on any one spin is considered the 'individual bet'. Any winnings derived from bets placed above the 20% limit highlighted above will be removed from the account at the time of cashing out. PLEASE NOTE: We are always willing to waive this particular condition for loyal, recreational players. Please contact your host to see if this rule can be waived for your account for future deposits.

So if I have a balance of 0.40c and I have yet to make the rollover requirement, that states I can only stake .08c a spin maximum. Now if I decide to have one last spin and stake the 40c at 2c a line, and I win a random jackpot, or infact anything at all and I subsequently make the rollover requirement the whole amount won on that one spin would be removed from my withdrawal. IMO that is an unfair rule.

Basically am I right in my understanding of that rule. I was going to deposit there later but decided to read the T&C of CMs coupon. Holding fire now till I have a little more explanation

 

[Tengil]

If I remember it correct it doesnt apply to balances under 50.

If someone can confirm?

Edit: it does read in the T&Cs. or if the bonus+deposit balance is below 50.00.

 

[DemonUK]

I think it reads something like "if you haven't met the rollover or if your balance is less than 50" which means if you always spin at 40c for example you have to start reducing your spin stake from 2Euro and below. So it especially applies if your balance is below 50 doesn't it

 

[Tengil]

As such, players may not place individual bets greater than 20% of the current balance until the rollover requirements have been met or if the bonus+deposit balance is below 50.00.

They say a specific sum, not a percentage. So when you are under 50e the 20% rule doesnt apply.

 

[vinylweatherman]

As such, players may not place individual bets greater than 20% of the current balance until the rollover requirements have been met or if the bonus+deposit balance is below 50.00.

They say a specific sum, not a percentage. So when you are under 50e the 20% rule doesnt apply.

This kind of term got Palace Group into a great deal of trouble. The problem is that it tracks CURRENT balance, rather than STARTING balance. WTF wants to sit there with a calculator working out 20% of their current balance every few spins just to be on the safe side. The bit about a balance of $50 is not at all clear, NO punctuation, and a seemingly spurious "if" render the conditional phrase incomplete - it means nothing gramatically. It SHOULD read:-

"..players may not place individual bets greater than 20% of the current balance until the rollover requirements have been met, or the bonus+deposit balance is below 50.00"

The comma after "met" makes it much clearer that there are two conditions applying, and I would prefer "falls" rather than "is" for the latter condition, i.e "or the bonus+deposit balance falls below 50".

A condition based on starting balance would be better, since players could work out the 20% once, and be able to remember this one maximum bet amount throughout their play.

In it's current form, the lower boundary amount of 50 gives a 20% max bet of 10, so for most slots players this should not normally cause trouble.

The problem with this kind of term is when a player is playing with a larger starting balance where 20% allows for big bets, and hits a losing streak, followed by a nice win when almost bust, the situation that happened at the palace group. If a player makes a deposit big enough to allow them to stake 50 per hand, they should be allowed to continue staking this amount regardless of whether they are winning or losing, the only reason a casino might object to this is if the software is rigged to streak down, then up when a player is near to busting out, an allegation frequently levelled at casinos by players who think they always get this last minute comeback on their last few credits.

If a stake of 50 is not "bonus abuse" when made at the start of a session, it CANNOT suddenly become "bonus abuse" at some arbitrary point later in the session purely because a player had a bad run.

I believe CM is reviewing the terms of accredited casinos in order to weed out such "traps". These terms look like they might fall foul of his new standards, as in the Palace Group incident, the terms were changed so that they referenced a percentage of the STARTING balance.
32Red also have a similar term referencing a percentage of the STARTING balance. This is much fairer for players, who only have to work out their max permitted bet ONCE.

 

[DemonUK]

Calling Alex.....please explain/answer. If my balance is below 2 euro and the rollover not yet met do I have to bet less than 40c a spin to avoid any winnings being removed.

 

[alexbuzz]

DemonUK: no. Vinyl is correct in his deconstruction of the rule (although I don't believe a comma as suggested would be gramatically correct, personally I think a large OR would do the trick for clarification). Once your balance goes below 50 euros, the rule does NOT apply and you can wager however you like (given the specific games rules).

Most members of this forum can understand why we have this rule--it will generally never apply to people who are normal, recreational players.

Also, as usual in our one-to-one driven customer relationships, and as specificed here, we can easily suspend the rule for legitimate players.

Finally, the "starting balance" calculation may be the right "compromise"--I'm for it, with caveats about redposits, but I'm just one voice. Anyway, we'll discuss internally so the rule's clearer, easier to understand and not falling foul of CM's standards, which we do observe.

So DemonUK, come on in!

 

[DemonUK]

See ya later and thanks

 

[vinylweatherman]

DemonUK: no. Vinyl is correct in his deconstruction of the rule (although I don't believe a comma as suggested would be gramatically correct, personally I think a large OR would do the trick for clarification). Once your balance goes below 50 euros, the rule does NOT apply and you can wager however you like (given the specific games rules).

Most members of this forum can understand why we have this rule--it will generally never apply to people who are normal, recreational players.

Also, as usual in our one-to-one driven customer relationships, and as specificed here, we can easily suspend the rule for legitimate players.

Finally, the "starting balance" calculation may be the right "compromise"--I'm for it, with caveats about redposits, but I'm just one voice. Anyway, we'll discuss internally so the rule's clearer, easier to understand and not falling foul of CM's standards, which we do observe.

So DemonUK, come on in!

Redeposits shouldn't be a problem because players shouldn't be able to redeem further coupons if they still have WR remaining. I can't see any advantage for the player in making redeposits WITHOUT a bonus just to increase their max wager.
If you are still wary, you could specify that if redeposits are made before WR is met, then the ORIGINAL max bet remains in force as calculated from the deposit made when the bonus was redeemed.

Other casinos have got around this problem by restricting bonuses to slots only, where you cannot play large bets with a near 50% chance of doubling up.