VIP Casino Reward Scheme

[mitch]

VIP Casino have a monthly reward scheme were they comp you 10% of all losses in a month or 1% of all winnings. There are no wagering requirements on these bonuses.

If you were to make one bet of say $1000 each month you would either win $1010 or lose $900. If this bet were made on a low house edge game such as blackjack this seems to give the player a very considerable advantage.

I am thinking of trying this approach but would like to know whether any other members have tried this and what reaction they got from the casino if any.

Any thoughts or opinions out there?

Mitch

"win dont gamble"

 

[KasinoKing]

You probably don't want MY opinion! But I'll give it anyway:-

ONE bet of $1000 each month? ..... Hmmmmm....

You're fricking CRAZY!!!

I can't imagine how you'd feel if the dealer pulled a Blackjack 4 months in a row!

(Why don't you just try gambling instead - it's MUCH more fun! )

 

[sw2003]

Dealer only needs to win 4 months in a row, no need for BJ!

 

[DeMango]

Even though BJ has a low house edge you only win 47.5% of hands not including pushes. Compare to Craps 49.3%, Bacarrat Banker 50.68% or Player 49.32% Just a few stats to stir the pot!

 

[ayedub]

Hmm But..

Mathematically speaking, wouldn't you be best off with a game where you lose the most percent of the time (discounting house edge), since you're getting the most money back when you lose.. So a bet that wins 1-in-100, and pays off 99-1 would yield a 10.9% player edge, whereas a 50-50 bet that pays 1-1 only yields a 5.5% player advatange...

Anyways, I'm just saying I'd play blackjack.

 

[dickens1298]

VIP Casino have a monthly reward scheme were they comp you 10% of all losses in a month or 1% of all winnings. There are no wagering requirements on these bonuses.

If you were to make one bet of say $1000 each month you would either win $1010 or lose $900. If this bet were made on a low house edge game such as blackjack this seems to give the player a very considerable advantage.

I am thinking of trying this approach but would like to know whether any other members have tried this and what reaction they got from the casino if any.

Any thoughts or opinions out there?

Mitch

"win dont gamble"

Let's assume a house advantage of 3%. You made 100 $1000 bets, losing 53 of them, and winning 47 of them (yes, I realize the percentages may be a tad off..but bear with me):

Your net losses = 53,000 - 5,300 = 47,700

Your net wins = 47,000 + 470 = 47,470

Net loss = 230

Why not just save yourself the time and the opportunity cost of the money and give them $230?

 

[GrandMaster]

Mathematically speaking, wouldn't you be best off with a game where you lose the most percent of the time (discounting house edge), since you're getting the most money back when you lose.. So a bet that wins 1-in-100, and pays off 99-1 would yield a 10.9% player edge, whereas a 50-50 bet that pays 1-1 only yields a 5.5% player advatange...

Anyways, I'm just saying I'd play blackjack.

Put all your money on a single number in roulette and you will have 7.1% advantage. You just need a strong stomach and a big bankroll.

 

[GrandMaster]

Let's assume a house advantage of 3%. You made 100 $1000 bets, losing 53 of them, and winning 47 of them (yes, I realize the percentages may be a tad off..but bear with me):

Indeed, your percentages a tad off, that's a game with 6% house edge.

 

[KasinoKing]

Let's assume a house advantage of 3%. You made 100 $1000 bets, losing 53 of them, and winning 47 of them (yes, I realize the percentages may be a tad off..but bear with me):
Your net losses = 53,000 - 5,300 = 47,700
Your net wins = 47,000 + 470 = 47,470
Net loss = 230
Why not just save yourself the time and the opportunity cost of the money and give them $230?

Yeah, but 100 bets at 1 a month would take 8.33 years - so at least he'd be getting a LOT of entertainment for his 230 bucks!

 

[dickens1298]

Indeed, your percentages a tad off, that's a game with 6% house edge.

Mea culpa, but you get my meaning....

 

[mitch]

Ayedub

I think you are right that games with a higher lose percentage but with a lower house edge pay better in this system.

Blackjack fits this system better than say craps or roulette due to the losses being nearly covered by your occasional player blackjack thereby producing a much lower house edge overall.

Using some rough stats over 100 plays using this system, ignoring pushes and assuming absolute probability, would produce losses of about $47900 and wins of $53300 a profit of $5400. This would be about $60 a month for hardly any effort. Not bad. But I suppose you could always increase the size of your bet if this wasn't enough.

Mitch

 

[mitch]

KasinoKing

Oh by the way KK I do value your opinion. From your posts I see that you are a winner not really the out and out gambler you try and portray.

You have posted that you have won nearly every month for about three years. GREAT.

However unless you are the luckiest gambler alive the basis of your success is due to bonuses. This is no surprise to me as I also judge my success on a monthly wagering period and have never lost money in any month.

Of course bonuses are the reason I am able to do this even though my winnings far exceed the total bonuses collected.

I suspect that a progression system lies at the heart of your "method" I know it does with mine. Bonuses and progression go together like apple pie and cream when you know what you are doing.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[KasinoKing]

Mitch,

You've read me PERFECTLY!
I do play a progressive game on all card games, always start from minimum bets, stop & switch games when I win or lose a certain amount.
And you're right - when I win it's a bonus!

I went 26 consecutive months without loss before my first hiccup, if you've beaten that, then all I can say is AWESOME! :notworthy

Keep up the good work mate!
KK

 

[frafi]

what system?

Tell me more about your system. Is it a positive or negative progression?
Is there a name for it? Which steps are involved?

 

[mitch]

Mitch,

You've read me PERFECTLY!
I do play a progressive game on all card games, always start from minimum bets, stop & switch games when I win or lose a certain amount.
And you're right - when I win it's a bonus!

I went 26 consecutive months without loss before my first hiccup, if you've beaten that, then all I can say is AWESOME! :notworthy

Keep up the good work mate!
KK

KK you have got me beat there mate. RESPECT. :notworthy

However I am closing in on your record. I'll let you know if I beat it!


frafi

Serious advantage players are unlikely to want to set out a detailed description of everything they do so others can just copy. They would soon lose their "advantage" if they did so.

In any event it's not rocket science and if you think deeply around the subject you will come up with something that suits you. Just remember there are limits to how much you are likely to win. You won't become rich overnight unless you are lucky and if you consider yourself as a person blessed with luck
just gamble you'll win more money

Main thing you have got to have is willpower as I am sure KK will confirm.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[KasinoKing]

Main thing you have got to have is willpower as I am sure KK will confirm.
Mitch
"win don't gamble"

Hey - I'm checking my PC room for spy cameras!
Nail on the head again Mitch! We must be two of a kind.

Will power is indeed they key. My 3 rules:-
1) Know when to stop losing or winning, and switch to a different game or casino.
2) Never push your luck, or chase a loss.
3) If you're not enjoying it - stop.
Simple when you get the hang of it!

Certainly not get rich quick, but certainly is get richer slowly!
I'm not going to give away ALL my secrets, but my average over last 34 months was:
'Over $200 but under $500' profit per month (Including the loss months)

Makes gambling much more fun when you realise you're not playing with money you've had to go out & earn, but with profits you've made having fun in previous months!

KK (Not a rocket scientist!)

PS: Don't forget to let me know when you start placing your one $1,000 bet per month at VIP - that could put a BIG dent in your chances of matching my record!

 

[mitch]

PS: Don't forget to let me know when you start placing your one $1,000 bet per month at VIP - that could put a BIG dent in your chances of matching my record!

Written to the Wiz asking for his opinion on what he thinks of my idea.
I know it makes sense but it is a bit of kneetrembler system, not good for the old blood pressure!

Glad you agreed on the willpower thing.

Today I experienced a classic example of how hard it is to resist the inner demon called pride that lurks within us all.

Went into one casino had a session that was very close to probability (casino slightly lucky) ended up winning $140 including $100 bonus.

Went into a new casino which just wiped me out with a fantastic run of luck
(lost the first 12 bets straight off for starters). Ended up losing my entire $150 deposit.

Emotion runs high of course ' how dare this mere casino beat me I'm unbeatable'
I am sure most people on this forum experience this pretty regularly.

Felt the urge to deposit a much bigger sum and show this upstart casino who is really boss.

I then put my brain into first gear and resist the temptation. 1-0 to willpower and the end of the only realistic chance internet casinos have got of beating me overall.

Sorry to tell you KK that I am up $1900 in November so far so it looks like another month onto my record.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[Vesuvio]

Sorry to tell you KK that I am up $1900 in November so far so it looks like another month onto my record.

Seems to be some unnecessary mistification on this thread.

If you play low house edge games with decent bonuses you'll make money. There's no need to use any progressive system unless you're bored as it won't increase the expected profit (ok - a positive progression might if on-line casinos are rigged to be overly streaky but still give the right percentage return).

It's actually pretty difficult to lose in any given month if you're doing this & don't go on tilt. Haven't got close to it yet, but I've only been going 8 months so far, so the record's safe

 

[mitch]

"If you play low house edge games with decent bonuses you'll make money. There's no need to use any progressive system unless you're bored as it won't increase the expected profit "



Actually Vesuvio a limited progression system will help you win more money when bonuses are at the core of your system.

Like most people I have only a limited amount of time to play at internet casinos the more casinos I can hit in this time the better it is for my bank balance.

Progression gets my money on the table more quickly quite often and I can then move on. The money you lose to the house edge only increases if you put more money on the table than flat betting and I'm not keen to do that!

Most comparisons compare an equal number of bets made by various systems, progression will always lose more actual money under these comparisons.

Your variance increases of course but that cuts both ways. Eg on the casino where I won $140 I would have won $85 flat betting.

Any way there is far more to ensuring you continue to win at internet casinos
than the maths around probability.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[sw2003]

"If you play low house edge games with decent bonuses you'll make money. There's no need to use any progressive system unless you're bored as it won't increase the expected profit "



Actually Vesuvio a limited progression system will help you win more money when bonuses are at the core of your system.

Like most people I have only a limited amount of time to play at internet casinos the more casinos I can hit in this time the better it is for my bank balance.

Progression gets my money on the table more quickly quite often and I can then move on. The money you lose to the house edge only increases if you put more money on the table than flat betting and I'm not keen to do that!

Most comparisons compare an equal number of bets made by various systems, progression will always lose more actual money under these comparisons.

Your variance increases of course but that cuts both ways. Eg on the casino where I won $140 I would have won $85 flat betting.

Any way there is far more to ensuring you continue to win at internet casinos
than the maths around probability.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

Or at a casino that you would have won flat betting but bust out using progressive!

I suspect some softwares adapt to your playing style. After a while of using progressive suddenly you get more longer losing streaks coming at you in close succession. Call me paranoid!

 

[mitch]

Or at a casino that you would have won flat betting but bust out using progressive!

I suspect some softwares adapt to your playing style. After a while of using progressive suddenly you get more longer losing streaks coming at you in close succession. Call me paranoid!

Dear Paranoid

Thats variance for you! Win more just as often though.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[Vesuvio]

True, Mitch, but just upping the stakes flat betting achieves the same result.

 

[mitch]

True, Mitch, but just upping the stakes flat betting achieves the same result.

True again Vesuvio but more dangerous Vis a Vis getting barred from future bonuses (sob)

Just illustrating you need to think more widely when you intend to win money longterm from internet casinos. KKs got the right idea in trying to 'fly under the radar'.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[Vesuvio]

KK seems to be flying under the radar by only making a paltry amount of money - if he just flat bet normally on BJ or VP he'd be much better off.

I doubt flat betting as such is what they look for when it comes to banning people. It's consistent winnings and not going much above the wr, but until the last few months you'd have had no problems. The way things are going now playing progressive systems isn't likely to save you from being banned if they really want to clamp down.

 

[mitch]

The way things are going now playing progressive systems isn't likely to save you from being banned if they really want to clamp down.

Hope your not psychic mate!

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[KasinoKing]

Sorry to tell you KK that I am up $1900 in November so far so it looks like another month onto my record.

You've got me there mate, by MILES! My best month EVER was $917

But it was willpower 0-1 casino that month, because I had a very rare & unusual flurry on Roulette, with a mega winning streak over several days which lead me to believe I was indestructible - until it destroyed me!
Could have stopped on over $2000 - but lesson learned - hardly played it since!

I'm not likely to ever match your level cos I'm a big chicken who only does tiny, weeny, little bets!
Biggest bet EVER on any hand of any card game = $30

Keep winning - keep smiling!

EDIT] PS. Almost forgot - my next biggest bets were with Crypto sites when meaning to click on 'Rebet my pathetic $2' I accidentally hit the $25 chip & deal before I could stop myself!

 

[mitch]

Biggest bet EVER on any hand of any card game = $30

Keep winning - keep smiling!

I am no highroller KK though I very rarely bet minimums. (Radar reasons!)

Biggest ever bet on Bj was $1200, then wouldn't you know it it was a splitting hand so I had $2400 on the table! Won both though .

I am sure there are loads of members out there who can beat that.
Could be the start of a whole new thread!

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[Simmo!]

You've got me there mate, by MILES! My best month EVER was $917

When i first started (only about a year ago and ignoring Month 1 when i played everywhere stupidly to learn!) i won each month for the first 6 months. Between 100 and 700. But that was on Crypto - and then i discovered MG.

IMHO, MG is a more difficult platform to to win on despite Expert Mode, indeed, because of Expert Mode. You see, when you play manually, you hit a nice win and you cashout a chunk or all. In auto-play, you're on a 25/50/100 game sycle so the temptation is to let it finish the cycle.

The sensible player stops on that win and cashes out 50% or 75% of it then finishes off - i call it "residue betting". Its only recently that i've started to reduce my losses at MG by doing this. Trouble is, MG is so much more fun than Crypto so its one of those "have more fun" or "in it to win it" decisions

 

[mitch]

The sensible player stops on that win and cashes out 50% or 75% of it then finishes off - i call it "residue betting".

Simmo.

Sounds fairly sensible but only useable when you are not in the bonus WR situation which I am for the majority of my play (75%).

KasinoKing

By the way KK the casino that took me down yesterday offered me an additional bonus to play again. So I did. Ended up winning more than $300 including the bonus. (2-1 to the Mitch) The world has a rosy glow tonight!

Mitch

" win don't gamble"

 

[KasinoKing]

KK seems to be flying under the radar by only making a paltry amount of money - if he just flat bet normally on BJ or VP he'd be much better off.

Vesuvio, you still don't quite understand, methinks!
Apart from what Mitch has said about not wishing to attract attention as a possible 'bonus hunter' by flat betting (quite true), I like the thrill and excitement of taking bigger risks (Though nowhere near as big as Mitch's risks, obviously! )

You are probably quite right that I would probably win just as much if not even more, if I flat-bet.
But to me it sounds just too damn tedious & dull.
I've posted elsewhere that I gamble not to make huge profits, but mainly for the fun & excitement of it. As long as I make a small profit every month (even if it's just $1), I'm happy because I haven't lost, and I can look forward to the next month!
I'm not rich, and it's extremely unlikely that I ever will be. But I can live with that.

Best wishes, and good luck to you - may your blackjacks be plentiful!

.

By the way KK the casino that took me down yesterday offered me an additional bonus to play again. So I did. Ended up winning more than $300 including the bonus. (2-1 to the Mitch) The world has a rosy glow tonight!

I guess they only did that because you're a high roller?
Or is there some other trick, or magic you're not going to share with the rest of us?

Have a good weekend,
KK

EDIT]PS: Nearly forgot (again) the subject of this thread! Tried the VIP Video Poker bonus - it was OK for the first 200 then dipped sharply. I was about 45 down on my deposit so decided to play a different game. But as soon as I left VP they gave me the $30 bonus, even though I hadn't yet wagered the full amount required! (?). Not sure about taking on the Blackjack one - need to wager $800.
Vesuvio, how much should I lose if I flat-bet 400 $2 hands of Crypto blackjack?

 

[Vesuvio]

Vesuvio, you still don't quite understand, methinks!
Apart from what Mitch has said about not wishing to attract attention as a possible 'bonus hunter' by flat betting (quite true), I like the thrill and excitement of taking bigger risks (Though nowhere near as big as Mitch's risks, obviously! )

You are probably quite right that I would probably win just as much if not even more, if I flat-bet.
But to me it sounds just too damn tedious & dull.
I've posted elsewhere that I gamble not to make huge profits, but mainly for the fun & excitement of it. As long as I make a small profit every month (even if it's just $1), I'm happy because I haven't lost, and I can look forward to the next month!
I'm not rich, and it's extremely unlikely that I ever will be. But I can live with that.

KK, looking back my comment does seem a bit harsh, but I'll try and explain why I said it:

On the Omni thread you were criticising another player (Megan) for being a 'stupid' bonus hunter for flat betting close to the wr. Now, ok, if you were just a 'gambler' and were upset that people exploiting bonuses would reduce the amount of extra money you had to feed your habit, then fair enough - a selfish attitude, but understandable. Instead, you also claim to be a 'clever' bonus hunter.

This just doesn't seem to be the case. The earnings you've mentioned on here for the last three years are very low for anyone spending a reasonable amount of time at casinos and considering themselves a bonus hunter. I know my results are no better than average, but I made more in 6 months, despite the terms nowadays being much less generous. Comments you've made about, for instance, not taking advantage of the viper autoplay are enough to send a shiver down the spine of any bonus hunter You also don't seem to understand, for instance, sticky bonuses.

On the Omni thread your comments on flat-betting just don't make much sense. It's the most common 'betting pattern' for recreational players as well as bonus hunters. It is 'proper' gambling. You said at one point you couldn't understand why anyone would bet like this as they're just going to lose money in the long run - which, to use an overused word, is truly a ridiculous statement (or a profound insight into the folly of casino gambling without bonuses, if you prefer ).

I just think you need to show a bit more humility when it comes to telling people with more experience of bonuses what to do (your attempt to sell info on MG casinos is another case in point). As demonstrated by the Littlewoods e-mail you posted, if a casino really decides to crack down on bonus hunters then unless you're betting in a way that gives the casino an advantage you're as likely to be banned as the next person. E-cash & cryptologic could easily get together and ban all their consistent winners overnight if they so chose - which would be a shame, but there are plenty of other casinos out there.

I know you're in this more because you enjoy gambling & you're just happy not to lose money - my approach is nearly the opposite. I find on-line casinos very dull, but there's so much free money available it's worth putting up with a bit of boredom (flat betting may be more boring than some other betting 'patterns', but also quick and efficient, so it reduces the time at the casino and the boredom level overall, if that makes sense ).

Vesuvio, how much should I lose if I flat-bet 400 $2 hands of Crypto blackjack?

Theoretically only about $4 - you could be in for a bumpy ride, though

 

[KasinoKing]

KK, looking back my comment does seem a bit harsh, but I'll try and explain why I said it:

On the Omni thread you were criticising another player (Megan) for being a 'stupid' bonus hunter for flat betting close to the wr. Now, ok, if you were just a 'gambler' and were upset that people exploiting bonuses would reduce the amount of extra money you had to feed your habit, then fair enough - a selfish attitude, but understandable. Instead, you also claim to be a 'clever' bonus hunter.

This just doesn't seem to be the case. The earnings you've mentioned on here for the last three years are very low for anyone spending a reasonable amount of time at casinos and considering themselves a bonus hunter. I know my results are no better than average, but I made more in 6 months, despite the terms nowadays being much less generous. Comments you've made about, for instance, not taking advantage of the viper autoplay are enough to send a shiver down the spine of any bonus hunter You also don't seem to understand, for instance, sticky bonuses.

Thanks for the reasoned reply and your advice.

I would just like to point out though, that I never said Megan was 'a 'stupid' bonus hunter.' That was someone else - it might have even been Mitch?
(Sorry Mitch if it wasn't you - I can't be bothered to look now!)

I did say I thought that her pattern was likely to be seen by the management of Omni as 'bonus abuse'. I know that this is subjective, and some will say it's not abuse. But if that is not, then what is bonus abuse?
Let's ignore irrelevant comments from some posters about Craps, Roulette etc. which do not even enter into the equation, because as we all know (and it's clearly stated) that they do not count towards WR.
I asked several times, and no one has answered. Put yourself in the position of the casino owner. Obviously they think there is such a thing as 'bonus abuse' or they wouldn't mention it in their T&C's. So if the player stays within the permitted games, other than taking minimal risks to the point of WR & cashing out, what else could they possibly describe as 'bonus abuse'?
That is all I'm asking. What else do you think they could mean?

Before people start having a go at me again for making 'ridiculous' statements, I want to repeat again, I'm not saying I think that Megan 'abused her bonus', but I am saying I'm not surprised that the casino deemed her to be a 'bonus abuser'. There's a big difference there!
I may not have explained that very well in my earlier posts, as most were done in an extreme hurry due to other pressures in what has been a very busy & stressful week in 'the real world'. So I'm sorry about that.
But yes, I am worried that if more & more people start doing this, my easy money income will dry up. Aren't you worried about that?

As to me being a 'clever bonus hunter'. Well, as you can see from the date above, I only joined Casinomeister in August this year. And this is the first forum I have ever read, let alone joined. So in my ignorant state (which many will say I'm still in!) before I joined, I thought I was a clever bonus hunter! But many of you guys have put my activities totally to shame :notworthy
Maybe I should change my name to KasinoKlutz!

But you know, I'm quite happy plodding along making my average $300+ every month. It means I can indulge in my gambling addiction without ever having to put in a penny that I've had to work for. This is sooooo much better than those dark days before I discovered online casinos, when my hard earned cash would disappear before my very eyes on the back of some 3-legged donkey that called itself a racehorse!

So each to their own eh? I'm happy with what I do, and I'm sure you are too.

Have a nice rest-of-the-weekend.
KK

 

[Vesuvio]

But if that is not, then what is bonus abuse?


I asked several times, and no one has answered. Put yourself in the position of the casino owner. Obviously they think there is such a thing as 'bonus abuse' or they wouldn't mention it in their T&C's. So if the player stays within the permitted games, other than taking minimal risks to the point of WR & cashing out, what else could they possibly describe as 'bonus abuse'?
That is all I'm asking. What else do you think they could mean?

KK, I'm not quite sure what got into me with that long post I had a quick look back at the Omni thread (though it's now too long for anyone to read in one sitting!) and you're right, I don't think you ever criticised Megan the way I thought you did.

Anyway, I just wanted to answer your question above - the main thing on-line casinos mean by 'bonus abuse' is fraud - opening multiple accounts on the same computer to repeatedly claim a bonus is the most obvious example.

The casinos leave what constitutes bonus abuse ambiguous to scare off bonus hunters. Almost all casinos have terms and conditions that would allow them to refuse to honour a cash-in after they give you a bonus & you meet the wagering requirements. In practice, however, any casino that uses the terms in that way would be rogued on here and at other watchdog sites.

Casinos may consider bonus hunters or advantage players 'bonus abusers', though it's a careless use of words. The casino gives the bonus to attract players hoping to win from it - you can't really call it abuse just because some players do it successfully.

Anyway, no-one disputes the right of casinos to ban whoever they want, it's just that the way Omni's current bonus is set up traps people into meeting the bonus requirements when they actually have no prospect of getting the bonus. Hopefully they'll come up with some solution (perhaps making sure every banned player is informed, or having a 'pending' bonus as Chartwell casinos have) and this will blow over.

Well, that's my last word on the subject! (quite a relief )

 

[mitch]

Thanks for the reasoned reply and your advice.

I would just like to point out though, that I never said Megan was 'a 'stupid' bonus hunter.' That was someone else - it might have even been Mitch?
(Sorry Mitch if it wasn't you - I can't be bothered to look now!)



KK

Well you are right KK it was me. I did not want to insult Megan but just emphasize the serious issue at the core of this thread.

Without bonuses many players on this forum would never play at internet casinos or bother to interact with this forum for that matter.
You can definately include me in this group.
As I indicate, I have no real interest in gambling just winning. Many people on this forum may scorn me for this approach and I respect their opinion even if I don't quite understand it.

I do not get my buzz from the actual process of betting, which I mainly find quite boring, but from waking up the next morning and realising I am richer than the night before ( won $250 tonight at 3 casinos therefore will wake up happy tomorrow)

It's clear that you also feel happier playing this way but from your previous posts it may be that you would gamble without bonuses anyway and that is why you possibly react more strongly to the possible disruption of the present system.

I would regret the passing of bonuses but would have no problem in never betting again at internet casinos (don't like losing!)

This question of bonus removal was the main reason for starting this thread. Going back to my first post it is clear to me, actually, that it is financially advantageous to the player to play this way and though, as I have said before, I am no high roller I am prepared to make bets of this nature.

However, playing this way would be the clearest demonstration of bonus abuse I can think of! I really wanted to know if anyone had played this way and what the reaction of the casino was.

I know I can win money on the internet on an ongoing basis as long as I have access to bonuses, so not getting barred from bonuses is far more important to me than any particular betting system.

So keep winning KK. RESPECT.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[sw2003]

Dear Paranoid

Thats variance for you! Win more just as often though.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

Variance my arse! If it was variance, then one would have just as many long winning streaks in close succession as losing ones. I didn't see the close succession of long winning streaks, only losing ones.

 

[KasinoKing]

Vesuvio,
I did think of the multiple accounts angle, but as with craps etc. this is clearly spelled out in another of their conditions, so I discounted it.

EDIT] PS: I realise you already know the below; this post is for the benefit of any others who still don't know what we're talking about!

But again, I ask everyone to look at this from the casino's angle. If every player used any system whatever to ensure they qualified for WR, and then withdrew their deposit and any earned bonus every month - even if it was only a few dollars of bonus cash - the casino would go bust extremely quickly!

Coming down a step - if 25% of their players did it, they may not go bust, but it's going to eat into their profit margin. How would you like that if it was your profit?

Obviously it's a complicated calculation for the casino's, because they know they need to offer bonuses to increase their player numbers & turnover, but it's not turnover that keeps them in business, it's profit.

Therefore it's only natural for them to include a condition in their T&C's that allows them to ban anyone they think is taking the piss!
And personally I'd feel the same, and I agree that they should have this option.

I'm not an expert in business practice (or anything else for that matter!), and this is just my opinion, but to me it is also just common sense.

So like Mitch, I'm not saying others shouldn't take advantage of these bonuses, but please just play in a way that makes it less bleeding obvious!

Well, that's my last word on the subject! (quite a relief )

Yeah, me too. Frankly I'm sick to the back teeth about it!
Lets start arguing about something else!

_

It's clear that you also feel happier playing this way but from your previous posts it may be that you would gamble without bonuses anyway and that is why you possibly react more strongly to the possible disruption of the present system.

Bit of a confused statement? Did you mean to type I 'would not gamble without bonuses'?
(I sometimes miss critical words out too!)

If so, then yes, you're right. If there were no bonuses at all, there would be very little to attract me to an online casino. (From reading other people's posts, I don't think I would be alone!!!). So I would probably just play in fun mode!
Mind you, saying that is easy, having the will power to give up an addiction is another thing...

Keep winning guys!

 

[mitch]

Variance my arse! If it was variance, then one would have just as many long winning streaks in close succession as losing ones. I didn't see the close succession of long winning streaks, only losing ones.

Well you could be right. Just because you are paraniod it doesn't mean they are not out to get you!

Can't understand why it only seems to affect certain players though.

I keep a written record of every bet I make in internet casinos. That is a heck of a lot of bets believe me. (geeky or what!)
I just don't see what other players say they experience and I play at a wide variety of casinos. Everything seems to come out close to probability in the long run.

I just make certain I do not bet at recognised scam operations.( (un) Lucky Chance casino come on down!)

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

 

[jpsartre]

I want to repeat again, I'm not saying I think that Megan 'abused her bonus', but I am saying I'm not surprised that the casino deemed her to be a 'bonus abuser'.
KK

So aren't you in essence saying that the casino has labeled her a bonus-abuser unfairly? I mean, if she did not abuse the bonus how can they be justified in calling her an abuser?

 

[KasinoKing]

So aren't you in essence saying that the casino has labeled her a bonus-abuser unfairly? I mean, if she did not abuse the bonus how can they be justified in calling her an abuser?

Want I meant was, the casino can call anyone a 'bonus abuser' when it suits them - for example, when they think the player is taking the piss. (I assume you understand that expression in Denmark?) Please see my last post above.
Whether you or I think it's unfair or unjustified is irrelevant, if the casino thinks it is fair and justified in accordance with their T&C's, what can we do about it?

 

[jpsartre]

Want I meant was, the casino can call anyone a 'bonus abuser' when it suits them - for example, when they think the player is taking the piss. (I assume you understand that expression in Denmark?) Please see my last post above.
Whether you or I think it's unfair or unjustified is irrelevant, if the casino thinks it is fair and justified in accordance with their T&C's, what can we do about it?

Yeah, I understand it. We have another expression in Denmark that apparently you don't know - it's called 'answering the question asked' - which you failed to do. So I'll ask again: By your own logic, the casino has unfairly deemed Megan a bonus-abuser. Do you agree or not?

I find your comment on the opinions of the posters in this (and other) forums quite baffling. Of course it matters what you, I and all fellow gamblers think! If not, we might as well shut down Casinomeister and all other gambling forums......

 

[KasinoKing]

jpsartre,

I'm not a politician, but I seem to somehow be answering all these points very politically!

For example, I carefully used my words when I said:-
"I'm not saying I think that Megan abused her bonus"
Which means the same as:
I'm not saying "I think that Megan abused her bonus" or
"Do I think that Megan 'abused her bonus'? I'm not saying!"

Similarly, I politically avoided directly answering your question above.
But only because I to do so I feel I would have to fully explain lots of things.
(I can't help it - it's just the way I am!)

I have in fact written out an answer to your question, but it is extremely long! For example, it includes an idiots guide to "what is bonus abuse" (i.e.written by an idiot!)

However, I am rather reluctant to post it on the forum due to the reaction I have had to my earlier posts.

I am quite happy to e-mail it to you personally (it's far too long for a PM!), but what do you think? E-mail or post it for everyone see? What do others think?

Now I have a question for you! You said:-

I find your comment on the opinions of the posters in this (and other) forums quite baffling. Of course it matters what you, I and all fellow gamblers think! If not, we might as well shut down Casinomeister and all other gambling forums......

What are these 'other forums'?
I am only a member here, and at faircasinos.com, where I haven't ever posted a reply to anyone.

Catch you later! (No doubt!)
KK

 

[jpsartre]

KasinoKing:

Just read my reply to you and realized that I sounded like an arse. Sorry about that - didn't mean to

I think we should just agree to disagree since you seem to pretty alone with your opinion anyway...

The other forums I frequent (besides Der Meister) is WinnerOnline and a couple of Danish forums.

 

[KasinoKing]

Nice one!

That's the sort of thing I thought only I did.

Apologize for sounding like a complete arse, then immediately follow it with a comment that makes you sound like a bigger arse!

I like you - you're funny!

So which of these other forums have I posted at in my sleep then?

Have a good one!
KK

 

[mitch]

KasinoKing

If you have read the posts on my Harrods Casino thread you will see that the casino has almost certainly been able to identify me from this forum even though I use a completely different user name for contacting casinos.

I know you are keen to "fly under the radar" as I am. Does this worry you?

Any other views from members on possible drawbacks to using forums as well as the obvious advantages.

mitch

"win dont gamble"

 

[nafanny29]

my user name on most casinos is nafanny29. It doesnt bother me in the slightest whether any casinos know who I am. I say what I think and sod em

 

[KasinoKing]

KasinoKing
If you have read the posts on my Harrods Casino thread you will see that the casino has almost certainly been able to identify me from this forum even though I use a completely different user name for contacting casinos.
I know you are keen to "fly under the radar" as I am. Does this worry you?

That is a very good question - I wish I had a very good answer!

The simple answer is 'Yes, it does worry me'.
But whether I have any just reason to be worried - I have no idea!

I would never reveal my true identity on any forum - just in case!

The vast majority of posters to this site admit to being 'advantage players' or 'bonus abusers' (the only exceptions being those who don't take bonuses, and those in denial that there is any such thing as bonus abuse ) so I would also be very interested to hear if anyone feels they ever have been identified through a forum, and more importantly, if they feel they have been in some way treated differently by any casino because of it.

So far (touch wood) I haven't noticed anything 'strange'.

PS. I'm not 100% sure what you meant in relation to Harrods. Are you saying you e-mailed them something without identifying yourself in any way whatsoever as 'Mitch', but then they replied calling you that?
That WOULD be worrying!

Happy Hunting!
KK

PPS: I think you should have posted this under your 'Harrods' topic - I think most people are fed up with the petty bickering under this VIP thread! (And so wont look here)
PPPS: Or was that deliberate in the hope Harrods wouldn't see it...?

 

[Petunia]

** You know, I always look at the 'radar' issue in this way (Yes and I know nobody asked ME! hehe)
Seriously. I cannot be arsed to change my Nic. I have used this for the past 5 years, and I guess I will for another five. I have seen 'The Net' ... *giggle* but stupidity/bravery will set me free!! In the words of Dido 'I am what I am, and I do what I want' or something like that!

 

[mitch]

PS. I'm not 100% sure what you meant in relation to Harrods. Are you saying you e-mailed them something without identifying yourself in any way whatsoever as 'Mitch', but then they replied calling you that?
That WOULD be worrying!

Happy Hunting!
KK...?

They had no information from my previous contact that could link to 'Mitch'.
They e-mailed me out of the blue shortly after their CS manager posted to my thread. Unlikely to be a coincidence I think.

PPS: I think you should have posted this under your 'Harrods' topic - I think most people are fed up with the petty bickering under this VIP thread! (And so wont look here)
PPPS: Or was that deliberate in the hope Harrods wouldn't see it...?

Yes it was deliberate. I am fairly open about my motives and methods on this forum but would not normally be e-mailing casinos with this information.

Mitch

"win don't gamble"

err!! actually I mean "gamble don't win" dear casino manager