Question Is a player allowed to win?

cncas2123

Ueber Meister
PABnonaccred
Joined
May 23, 2015
Location
Belfast
I have played a bit this week at Bellfruit casino as I fancied a go at some Novo slots. Played the slots and a it of roulette, both without bonus, and have some good fortune over the weekend, mostly on roulette that led to a decent withdraw.
Got an email today to tell me the withdraw was processed, and a few minutes later another email arrived, the text of which is below:

During a routine check of your account, we found that you have violated the
sure bets rules.

We kindly invite you to read again and adhere to our Terms & Conditions,
especially section (F) Misconduct para (5): Staking explicitly and/or
persistently Real Money and/or Bonus Money on bets with a 70% chance of winning
or over (sure bets) is forbidden on this platform. The operator reserves the
right to block the player´s account and prevent and/or withhold any winnings
achieved by such a breach of the platform’s regulations and/or other violations
of the applicable T&Cs.

Our priority is to keep delivering to all players fair, safe and high quality
services!

Kind regards,
Your Support Team


I have emailed them back and asked them to tell me how I violated, but my question is do casino's now want players to lose all the time? I would have played again at Bellfruit, but after this email I dont know whether I could be bothered to check every bet I do in future to make sure I have less than a 70% chance of winning.
I dont know if this is going to affect my withdraws, I am hoping not as I played and won fair and square, but if theres any problems I will update.

Any thoughts on this?
 
of course you are not allowed to risk your own hard cash at ceartin odds on a game designed to beat you. You must gamble at longer odds and hopefully endure a bad streak and end up making multiple deposits in order to hopefully see some kind of return on your bets.
Responsible gambling 101
 
So if you cover more than 70% of the numbers in Roulette, this is somehow not allowed? Even though the house edge is the same?!
I can only assume this is some sort of anti-money laundering regulation, but it certainly isn't a legally required one, and is just that casino being idiots...
 
Ive covered 90% a few times and lost. I noticed the game was playing weird and did thos ebets to see if I would still lose and yes the random computerized roulette made me randomly lose :rolleyes:

This is a joke term. Close account and leave because if you win they will not pay you and say you had betting patterns blah fknblah
 
I have emailed them and asked them what games had over 70% chance of winning, and I am waiting a response. I know that when I play roulette, I play a certain number and the neighbours on each side, i.e. if my main number is 11 I will play 4 or 5 adjoining numbers each side, so in total I will cover 9 or 11 numbers. The most I would ever cover is around 18 numbers, so I am interested in how they reply, but it certainly does seem a term designed to trip you up.


They havent stated that they have voided the payout, and if they do decide to void the withdraw I will have no hesitation in taking it to their nominated ADR simply because its a term that is pure rogue in its nature, its akin to saying that if you have 4 winning spins in 5 we will determine that is unfair play as we expect to win 80% of the spins.......

The email below is the first one I received ( two withdrawals in total, the one below and another for £2,000):

Hi XXXX
We're pleased to confirm your requested withdrawal.
Thanks for playing at Bell Fruit Casino. See you back on site soon.
Greentube Alderney Ltd.
Century House
12 Victoria Street
Alderney
GY9 3UF
Registration number: 1788
To
Player name: XXXX

26.06.2017 13:42:31
Account:





CREDIT CARD PAYMENT/ XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Withdrawal number: 2017/ S 4612907283
(Transaction number: 26302)
Withdrawal amount: GBP 1300,00
 
Surely all slots have this chance (in fact far greater) or so we are told :rolleyes:

96% RTP or thereabouts is commonplace for most slots so well over their 70% no go rule.

Was this just tables they refer to or all bets made on their site in general ??

Makes me wonder just how much horse shit these casinos and providers are feeding us :mad:

These rules will only get worse and when they get to a certain point, I (with many other I feel) will simply quit altogether.
 
I could be wrong but is there any other form of gambling where players have no idea what the odds of a particular event happening are other than slots?

In which case....how could you possibly know if the odds of a winning spin were greater than 70% without having full access to the real payable?

I would love to see this kind of crap in a court of law because the casino surely hasn't a leg to stand on.
 
Quite the turn around in comparison to bellfruits more recent AWP compensated fruit machines available in UK pubs where you are as good as not allowed to win more than 30% of the displayed jackpot regardless of if someone just lost 100 in (a compensated game) before you, which explains why if you manage 25% of the jackpot(@£100) you now get flashing lights and see the words BIG WIN (yeah, bloomin huge that is, for the granny who just done 250 after bob the builder lost a days wage in it before her).
 
Putting half on black and red is a 'sure bet', I don't see how the player is supposed to know what 70% winning odds are on Roulette, that's stupid.

I've heard of protecting against fraudulent play but this casino that pulls dodgy, hidden T&Cs out of the hat to avoid paying goes against any notion of fair play, and should be avoided at all costs.

How long before terms void winnings on slots too because they've exceeded the 70% win potential :eek:

Annoying how casinos can run rings around regulatory bodies and amend their T&Cs when it suits. Almost every week/ fortnight something's changed, and they don't highlight the changes, ooohh nooo, they want you to re-read the entire thing (never gonna happen).

So at what point are casinos held accountable for these made-up rules? It's starting to put me off online gambling because it's actually worse than before the regulations kicked in. It's like the Wild flipping West :mad:
 
I could be wrong but is there any other form of gambling where players have no idea what the odds of a particular event happening are other than slots?

In which case....how could you possibly know if the odds of a winning spin were greater than 70% without having full access to the real payable?

I would love to see this kind of crap in a court of law because the casino surely hasn't a leg to stand on.

The only "sure bet" you could make on a casino is better on every number in Roulette - but you'd still lose 2.8% of your stake... I'm not sure they understand the term "SURE", but it doesn't mean > 70% - i'd say it meant 100%. The whole term makes little sense in any other game other than roulette - i mean, if you played blackjack perfectly mathematically, you'd be around the 99% mark - although of course, the odds on each hand of you beating the dealer would be around 49%.
 
Surely all slots have this chance (in fact far greater) or so we are told :rolleyes:

96% RTP or thereabouts is commonplace for most slots so well over their 70% no go rule.

Was this just tables they refer to or all bets made on their site in general ??

Makes me wonder just how much horse shit these casinos and providers are feeding us :mad:

These rules will only get worse and when they get to a certain point, I (with many other I feel) will simply quit altogether.

Excellent point as there has to be numerous spins where you have more than a 70% chance of winning - for example if you play DOA and hit the wildline say on spin 3, you have 14 spins on which you have 100% chance of winning.
 
Latest update below - the sure bet only applies to roulette and they are not voiding the winnings, this must just be a gentle warning!!!
I have reduced my deposit limit to £50 from £600 daily, as there is no way I will play roulette there again, i may pop in to the site from time to time to play slots, but they wont get any large deposits again.
As has been pointed out on this thread, its impossible to win on roulette, the house has the edge always, but this term is just FU if you dare to place a lot of bets and win.


Dear Mr. XXXXX,

Thank you for your reply.

Your payout has already been processed and there will be no voiding of
winnings.

The sure bets ruling applies to Roulette and applies to bets with a chance of
over 70% of winning.

The RTP for slots applies to all our users and is not including in our sure
bets policy as this cannot be manipulated in any way, in favour of or against a
user.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Kind regards,
Your Support Team
 
Latest update below - the sure bet only applies to roulette and they are not voiding the winnings, this must just be a gentle warning!!!
I have reduced my deposit limit to £50 from £600 daily, as there is no way I will play roulette there again, i may pop in to the site from time to time to play slots, but they wont get any large deposits again.
As has been pointed out on this thread, its impossible to win on roulette, the house has the edge always, but this term is just FU if you dare to place a lot of bets and win.


Dear Mr. XXXXX,

Thank you for your reply.

Your payout has already been processed and there will be no voiding of
winnings.

The sure bets ruling applies to Roulette and applies to bets with a chance of
over 70% of winning.

The RTP for slots applies to all our users and is not including in our sure
bets policy as this cannot be manipulated in any way, in favour of or against a
user.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Kind regards,
Your Support Team

hi i think its worded wrong , the true words should be if you're covering more than 70% of the numbers , not being 70% of winnings etc etc

Again another stupid rule either way !
 
The only "sure bet" you could make on a casino is better on every number in Roulette - but you'd still lose 2.8% of your stake... I'm not sure they understand the term "SURE", but it doesn't mean > 70% - i'd say it meant 100%. The whole term makes little sense in any other game other than roulette - i mean, if you played blackjack perfectly mathematically, you'd be around the 99% mark - although of course, the odds on each hand of you beating the dealer would be around 49%.

I suppose the point I was making, perhaps more of a general point, is gambling on slots is the only form of gambling I can think of where a player has no idea of the odds of any particular outcome. That in itself means you could never knowingly comply with the term.

So to include a rule like that is ridiculous, unless, the casino were prepared to disclose all odds on all games which includes slots which of course is never going to happen.
 
Latest update below - the sure bet only applies to roulette and they are not voiding the winnings, this must just be a gentle warning!!!
I have reduced my deposit limit to £50 from £600 daily, as there is no way I will play roulette there again, i may pop in to the site from time to time to play slots, but they wont get any large deposits again.
As has been pointed out on this thread, its impossible to win on roulette, the house has the edge always, but this term is just FU if you dare to place a lot of bets and win.


Dear Mr. XXXXX,

Thank you for your reply.

Your payout has already been processed and there will be no voiding of
winnings.

The sure bets ruling applies to Roulette and applies to bets with a chance of
over 70% of winning.

The RTP for slots applies to all our users and is not including in our sure
bets policy as this cannot be manipulated in any way, in favour of or against a
user.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Kind regards,
Your Support Team

It must be able money laundering policy... As laundering is best done on roulette... And very few normal people cover more than 70% of all bets.
 
It must be able money laundering policy... As laundering is best done on roulette... And very few normal people cover more than 70% of all bets.

why would you money launder on roulette when you can just dutch soccer...are criminals that dumb that they cant dutch football via betting shops

heck you could easily launder £200k a week doing that just as one person, £20k across 10 betting shops per match
 
Maybe they just realised Belfast is in the UK, and the CMA have just announced that this kind of BS will soon attract large fines. It may not be the kind of bet that many players use, but it is nevertheless a valid bet according to the rules of Roulette, and their software accepted the bet, and most important of all, no bonus was involved - so they can forget the BS about "advantage play".

Trouble is, although they paid, it's clear that they are full of BS and will try to screw players given the opportunity.
 
I was going to say but seen the answer back from BellEnds

The 70% is for roulette and normally every site has this rule when using a bonus but playing with your own cash :eek: not only do we have a massive mountain to deal with but now we are being told what bets we can an not do.

They do give loyalty points out but like somebody stated even if you bet on every number the edge still has a few% and I doubt the loyalty program is no where near 1% so they would still be making cash, well profit overall, making cash I do not know.

But I can say bellfruits is a 100% genuine site, if you bet on black than thats like near 50% of the table so add a few numbers and your near the 70% limit pretty outrages to be told how you can bet
 
Hello! First post ... and it's a complaint / query! Hurrah! Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere but I couldn't find it.

Fancied a bash on some Novomatics, and since Bellfruit is a "respected" name in fruit machine circles - registered and took the 100% bonus... 35 x wagering ... fine. Got my £400 (£200+£200) up to about £1400 ... so I thought I'd see where my wagering was... it was around £900 / £7000. Fine. Played a bunch more games ... checked my wagering. Still £900.

So after speaking to customer support... "By staking bonus money you can win only bonus money" ... so in other words ... the only way I can get my hands on any of that money is to deposit more real money. If I deposited, say, another £200 - then while I play with that £200 I'll continue to get the wagering up to £7000. As soon as I lose my £200 then no more wagering will take place, and I'm essentially playing freeplay.

Now obviously I should have read the Ts and Cs a bit more carefully. But a couple of questions...

1. Is this standard across online casinos?
2. Is there anything I can do about it except moan? :)
3. And finally, the maximum amount of real money I'd need to wager to get the bonus funds would be £6100. But obviously the real amount would be a lot less (assuming I get any wins etc)... given the slots have a payout of approx. 95% .. is it worth my while depositing real money to try and get at the bonus funds? (I'm not being lazy here, I just can't work it out!)

Thanks in advance. Nice site btw!
 
Last edited:
Hi and welcome to CM :D

A few things to consider and some options also before making a decision.

*) How big / little is you gaming allowance, can you cover this sort of outlay if you were to hit a poor spell / serious losing patch
*) With respect if there is doubt over the above, are you a controlled gambler or could this sort of scenario maybe cause you to overspend

It is not that common a wagering setup at the more decent (accredited here) casinos, Royal Panda works like this as one quick example.

IMO, forget the 95% RTP - yes this is the payout but several sessions can return less than 50% RTP, trust me I've experienced enough of em lol!

My personal final decision, should I be in your shoes would be to continue to play the existing balance (bonus funds right?) and see if I can get the balance right up, say to around 4-5K - may sound crazy but doable if you catch these Novomatic slots in the right mood and gives you a much better chance at clearing WR later with cash deposits, putting yourself in at least a better "break even" position.

That being said, I hate this sort of wagering structure and think its player unfriendly, I'd think long and hard as only having a very limited selection of ultra high variance slots to do this wagering on, things could go pear shaped very quickly and Novo slots really do have little mercy!

Good luck whatever you decide!
 
I'm not overly hostile to these types of bonus's but they do require you to have the cash available to 'front'. Had some great uses of it for example - 1 quid bonus money, few spins in Immortal and before i know it up to 1k with only 1x35=35 quid wagering. So deposit a tenner, withdraw 1k. But then again, deposit, deposit deposit....bonus money unlocked and now only breaking even or worse, down...:eek2: But that was me being stupid. I personally only play the bonus money up to a point where it becomes a financial incentive to deposit real cash. Only way to really play them.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top