GrandMaster
Dormant account
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2004
- Location
- UK
Something is still not clear. If they were "scammers" as you put it, why did pay them, why did you not expose them and defend your position in public?
Casinos
Casinos By Status
Popular Filters
By Banking Options
Games
All Games
Bonuses
Popular Bonus Filters
Forums
Popular Forums
Forum User Features
Complaints
Submit A Complaint (PAB)
PAB Rules and Guidelines
Browse PABs
Gambling News
Popular News Sections
A Vegas VIP Lounge Statement Regarding The Recent Dispute Over Payment of Winnings
- Thread starter VegasVIP Lounge
- Start date
vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Fire
When a fire is out of control, Gasoline is NOT the best remedy!
"Unlike anything seen before" but neither "fraud, bonus abuse or scamming", I can't see anything wrong with that! As far as I was aware, playing without the use of these three sins was legitimate, saying otherwise simply implies that players are not allowed to win "too much".
As for the idea that releasing more detail will damage Vegas Partners, well, it's too late for that now!
Releasing more detail will only serve to sway opinion that perhaps these players WERE indeed scamming, but not in the traditional sense. With no detail, and no accusations of fraud, new players can have absolutely no idea as to whether what they are doing is "legitimate", or could lead to them being in a "heads we win, tails you lose" situation with their wagering. There are so many other MG casinos out there that ONLY discriminate against fraud, and scamming, and innocent players will know that so long as they are genuine they will not be inconvenienced too much.
Allowing players to lose unchecked, but blocking them only when they win is extremely dangerous for the likes of compulsive gamblers who may be relying on the win to dig themselves out of a hole. This will serve to ensure that such a compulsive will be unable to dig themselves out and will come to the attention of the wider community, with the experience of non-payment the one that the anti lobby will sieze upon with great enthusiasm, just look at the ease with which Frist did such damage by playing on fears rather than fact - most who voted "yes" in the senate had probably had NO actual experience of online gaming but relied on what they read and were told.
When a fire is out of control, Gasoline is NOT the best remedy!
"Unlike anything seen before" but neither "fraud, bonus abuse or scamming", I can't see anything wrong with that! As far as I was aware, playing without the use of these three sins was legitimate, saying otherwise simply implies that players are not allowed to win "too much".
As for the idea that releasing more detail will damage Vegas Partners, well, it's too late for that now!
Releasing more detail will only serve to sway opinion that perhaps these players WERE indeed scamming, but not in the traditional sense. With no detail, and no accusations of fraud, new players can have absolutely no idea as to whether what they are doing is "legitimate", or could lead to them being in a "heads we win, tails you lose" situation with their wagering. There are so many other MG casinos out there that ONLY discriminate against fraud, and scamming, and innocent players will know that so long as they are genuine they will not be inconvenienced too much.
Allowing players to lose unchecked, but blocking them only when they win is extremely dangerous for the likes of compulsive gamblers who may be relying on the win to dig themselves out of a hole. This will serve to ensure that such a compulsive will be unable to dig themselves out and will come to the attention of the wider community, with the experience of non-payment the one that the anti lobby will sieze upon with great enthusiasm, just look at the ease with which Frist did such damage by playing on fears rather than fact - most who voted "yes" in the senate had probably had NO actual experience of online gaming but relied on what they read and were told.
It's pretty interesting. Apparently they did nothing wrong, so the casino is reluctantly paying them. You don't see a casino group admit to fraudulently withholding funds very often. I mean it is not like the casino is claiming they made a mistake or the players broke a rule or anything, they are just saying that they are paying.
vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Fraud
You still haven't; they are paying (reluctantly), but in the same breath are maintaining that they were in the right to take the initial action they did - and still believe so (..and presumably do the same in a similar situation).
All this is making me more and more interested in exactly what these players are supposed to have done that was neither fraud, bonus abuse, nor scamming. More interestingly, one player claims they did not even use a bonus to start with, and that whatever gaming they did on the slots was with entirely their own funds put at the mercy of the random nature of the game. Whatever their strategy was, they beat Microgaming slots so damn bad they got their winnings confiscated and account locked! The only POSSIBLE explanation I can think of is an obscure bug in the basic slot game engines that this innovative group have discovered, and then circulated through some form of organised internet community. Certainly this could cause damage if detailed, but could also be considered fraud (depending on the exact nature of the bug). The only explanation that does not involve a software bug or exploit is some form of leverage on the bonus, usually seen with Blackjack or Roulette play prior to grinding out a WR on allowed games. This is so well known in our circles that saying so will do no damage. Darren (Palace Group), said as much in a thread in their own dispute, detailing exactly that the player had deposited 75 for 75 bonus, placed 1 bet of 100 followed by one of 50 on Video Poker as the first two bets of play - and this is what was considered by them as "undesirable play". This at least tells new players what they are not expected to do with their sign-up offers.
You still haven't; they are paying (reluctantly), but in the same breath are maintaining that they were in the right to take the initial action they did - and still believe so (..and presumably do the same in a similar situation).
All this is making me more and more interested in exactly what these players are supposed to have done that was neither fraud, bonus abuse, nor scamming. More interestingly, one player claims they did not even use a bonus to start with, and that whatever gaming they did on the slots was with entirely their own funds put at the mercy of the random nature of the game. Whatever their strategy was, they beat Microgaming slots so damn bad they got their winnings confiscated and account locked! The only POSSIBLE explanation I can think of is an obscure bug in the basic slot game engines that this innovative group have discovered, and then circulated through some form of organised internet community. Certainly this could cause damage if detailed, but could also be considered fraud (depending on the exact nature of the bug). The only explanation that does not involve a software bug or exploit is some form of leverage on the bonus, usually seen with Blackjack or Roulette play prior to grinding out a WR on allowed games. This is so well known in our circles that saying so will do no damage. Darren (Palace Group), said as much in a thread in their own dispute, detailing exactly that the player had deposited 75 for 75 bonus, placed 1 bet of 100 followed by one of 50 on Video Poker as the first two bets of play - and this is what was considered by them as "undesirable play". This at least tells new players what they are not expected to do with their sign-up offers.
The above is why this group must remain on the rogue list for the forseeable future. Claiming carte blanche to do whatever they like on the basis of "bonus abuse" (or "exploitative playing activities" - whatever you want to call it), when no terms and conditions have been broken, is rogue behaviour. This isn't an isolated incident as this group have deserved to be rogued for a considerable period of time. It's characteristic that instead of closing the accounts (which is perfectly acceptable - after paying - if they don't want particular players), the casino seem to want to keep them around so they have the chance of defrauding them at some point in the future.
winbig
Keep winning this amount.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2005
- Location
- Pennsylvania
Inquiring minds want to know...please tell us how playing slots can be considered BONUS ABUSE! 
Or is there an actual PATERN to them that people have picked up on? IE: Non-Random IE2: RIGGED.
Or is there an actual PATERN to them that people have picked up on? IE: Non-Random IE2: RIGGED.
willing to start over with a new attitude? since when is paying a winner a new attitude? if someone used some kinda software or had inside knowledge or whatever then thats different and they dont deserve to be paid. but since vegasvip isnt saying so, then we are led to believe they either a. had a great run of luck or b. "exploited" a "random" game without breaking any rules. to just say that someone "scammed" the casino is stupid. if the real reason is someone did figure out a pattern or tendency, and the casino doenst want to say so for fear of everyone catching on, well then shame on them for not having true random games. whatever the case may be they sure as hell shouldnt come off a rouge list just cause they pay the money. explanation first, then maybe some credibility will be restored.
rabiddog
Dormant Account
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2006
- Location
- dogpound USA
Well I cant speak for anyone else who had problems with this group. I can only give my account. I did not play for a bonus. I also did not just play slots only. I did play some at number of different slots, both reel and video. But I also played blackjack and bacarrat. I think its probably more that I cashed out the same day I deposited. If playing for a bonus, I could see where a casino would accuse you of bonus abuse by cashing out the same day you deposit. But I wasn't playing for a bonus. I normally cash out on the same day I deposit, especially when Im ahead. I like to check the speed of cashouts at casino's I play. If they are slow, then I rarely play there anymore. Or if I have problems of some sort with a cashout, like continually asking for documents even after I sent them in. Just a stall effort. Cash outs say a ton about a casino's ethical side.
I for one am happy the group paid. And Im more than willing to let this die and the casino get on the road to building their credability back, it's probably going to take a while and some effort. But Im sure as long as they were Accredited here they should be able to work it out. I dont think they can afford to have anymore complaints filed against them, that would not help at all.
They did send me a crappy little email today stating they have paid my winnings and re-opened my account. But made it sound like they did it very relunctantly by making this statement "criticism from the wider gaming
community has prompted Old Samurai Casino to reappraise its recent
actions." Then also accused me of exploitative and abusive playing activity. The email sounded kinda like they were being made to pay winnings so they were going to get one last shot in and make it look like they were doing it out of the kindness of their heart, but we're going to accuse you anyhow.
I have the email saved in case I need it for any reason in the future.
I for one am happy the group paid. And Im more than willing to let this die and the casino get on the road to building their credability back, it's probably going to take a while and some effort. But Im sure as long as they were Accredited here they should be able to work it out. I dont think they can afford to have anymore complaints filed against them, that would not help at all.
They did send me a crappy little email today stating they have paid my winnings and re-opened my account. But made it sound like they did it very relunctantly by making this statement "criticism from the wider gaming
community has prompted Old Samurai Casino to reappraise its recent
actions." Then also accused me of exploitative and abusive playing activity. The email sounded kinda like they were being made to pay winnings so they were going to get one last shot in and make it look like they were doing it out of the kindness of their heart, but we're going to accuse you anyhow.
I have the email saved in case I need it for any reason in the future.
Last edited:
vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Innocents caught up?
It is possible you were an innocent caught up in something big, and you just happened to play a similar pattern. Many players with fraud in mind often go for the quick exit, and this is why the first withdrawal, and it's handling, can be such a pain. Given this, I don't see why casinos cannot accept that it is no longer JUST fraudulent players that will make their first cash-out at the first opportunity. I do this myself now, as it separates the truth from the hype and promises of "easy cash-ins" that all casinos offer (they are hardly likely to post "if you think depositing is not easy, just wait till you try to cash-in").
If you deposited, claimed no bonus, but just played around for the day and cashed in to see what the service was like, I fail to see why you were tangled up in the first place. They must think you did something else far more sinister, perhaps some commonality in registration details or referral portal (yes, they DO record this, & it is also in the registry under the casino's main key as "cookie = ??????")
It is possible you were an innocent caught up in something big, and you just happened to play a similar pattern. Many players with fraud in mind often go for the quick exit, and this is why the first withdrawal, and it's handling, can be such a pain. Given this, I don't see why casinos cannot accept that it is no longer JUST fraudulent players that will make their first cash-out at the first opportunity. I do this myself now, as it separates the truth from the hype and promises of "easy cash-ins" that all casinos offer (they are hardly likely to post "if you think depositing is not easy, just wait till you try to cash-in").
If you deposited, claimed no bonus, but just played around for the day and cashed in to see what the service was like, I fail to see why you were tangled up in the first place. They must think you did something else far more sinister, perhaps some commonality in registration details or referral portal (yes, they DO record this, & it is also in the registry under the casino's main key as "cookie = ??????")
Mousey
Ueber Meister Mouse
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2004
- Location
- Up$hitCreek
I appreciate that you have come here to 'clarify' matters for us, but I'm just an ordinary player who finds all this very disturbing. I think that you must find an appropriate word somewhere in the dictionary that describes these 'scammers'.
..... 'scammers' still seems to be the wrong word as players who defraud the casino should not be paid.
If what they have done is so unique that there is no common word for it, I think we're all in trouble.
And I'm one of these players that casinos don't like.... I cash out when I win. I may play 15 minutes and cash out, I may play 2 hours (yeah right), I may play off and on a few minutes at time over 2 days. I may deposit again the next day, or the next week, or never. It's rare that I leave money in a casino account for more than a day.
Last edited:
vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Gambler
As a scientist by trade, I will not likely rest till I find out what the hell happened that was neither Fraud, bonus abuse, nor a scam.
There are clues, suggestions, lines of possible research, but only the industry knows at present. Previously, the industry has put forward arguments as to why the exact details of a fraud must remain a secret, mainly that it prevents said fraudsters from benefiting from inside information to launch a modified, and far better, attack.
The fact this is also "inventive" and something "not seen before" rules out the traditional forms of bonus abuse, and there are many playing styles that this seems to cover nowdays.
One case does come to mind that may help, and that is affiliate fraud, especially in the case where the casino pays a bounty to an affiliate for getting a new player to register and deposit (irrespective of that player losing or winning). In a few cases, the bounty is greater than the players first deposit, and if player and afiliate were in together, a scam is possible with no bonus, no manipulations etc.
This could even be carried out with a large number of players making relatively small deposits having come through an affiliate link, and then playing nominally and withdrawing without the usual bonus restrictions, this would be incredibly lucrative, but is hardly innovative as it has been tried several times before, with one attempt documented on this forum, bragged about, and not paid. The group affected has now amended it's affiliate scheme to put a stop to it. Under this scenario, a player who deposits, plays a bit, and cashes out the same day, and while this is all going on, is going to be immediately snared by the investigation if their sign-up happened through one of the affiliate portals under investigation.
Bent portals are normally the ones that incessantly spam us, as with the Fortune Lounge issue last year, and at the time the casinos seemed not too concerned with shutting down such portals. Perhaps , if this is part of this issue, they will do more about rogue affiliates if only for their OWN potential protection. Who knows which spammy B*** affiliate will turn to something else if they are allowed to get away with it.
As a scientist by trade, I will not likely rest till I find out what the hell happened that was neither Fraud, bonus abuse, nor a scam.
There are clues, suggestions, lines of possible research, but only the industry knows at present. Previously, the industry has put forward arguments as to why the exact details of a fraud must remain a secret, mainly that it prevents said fraudsters from benefiting from inside information to launch a modified, and far better, attack.
The fact this is also "inventive" and something "not seen before" rules out the traditional forms of bonus abuse, and there are many playing styles that this seems to cover nowdays.
One case does come to mind that may help, and that is affiliate fraud, especially in the case where the casino pays a bounty to an affiliate for getting a new player to register and deposit (irrespective of that player losing or winning). In a few cases, the bounty is greater than the players first deposit, and if player and afiliate were in together, a scam is possible with no bonus, no manipulations etc.
This could even be carried out with a large number of players making relatively small deposits having come through an affiliate link, and then playing nominally and withdrawing without the usual bonus restrictions, this would be incredibly lucrative, but is hardly innovative as it has been tried several times before, with one attempt documented on this forum, bragged about, and not paid. The group affected has now amended it's affiliate scheme to put a stop to it. Under this scenario, a player who deposits, plays a bit, and cashes out the same day, and while this is all going on, is going to be immediately snared by the investigation if their sign-up happened through one of the affiliate portals under investigation.
Bent portals are normally the ones that incessantly spam us, as with the Fortune Lounge issue last year, and at the time the casinos seemed not too concerned with shutting down such portals. Perhaps , if this is part of this issue, they will do more about rogue affiliates if only for their OWN potential protection. Who knows which spammy B*** affiliate will turn to something else if they are allowed to get away with it.
This is definately not the case for me (I was one of those locked out without winnings) as most (if not all) of the Casinos in this group that I played were accessed directly from the Casino site and not through an affiliate.
Last edited:
vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Narrows the field.
This narrows the field then, and now the fact that it seems bonuses were not the issue points to something very sinister going on.
Last night I perused the PWC figures for a couple of casinos, simply because I recall something odd a couple of months ago at Challenge, which shows the latest figures when you log on.
It seems that the numbers for slots has been showing some HUGE variations about the norm, beyond the values that I have come to expect, which are from the low 90's% to a tad over 100%, this probably with the bigger hits and/or progressive payouts. The striking variation is all the more worrying because these are monthly means for ALL play at the casino, and seem to back up what has been posted recently, that is that the slots just sucked and sucked without mercy before October, and then after the US players got booted the slots went "mental" and started paying out. This was one of the conspiracy theories that were mostly laughed off, and I remember posting that we will see when the PWC figures come out.
Well, they're out now!
I'll need to have a closer look rather than just a random sampling of half a dozen. Further, what about those RTG outfits similarly maligned with NO audited figures. Were we all being shafted?
I will be back with some hard figures!
This narrows the field then, and now the fact that it seems bonuses were not the issue points to something very sinister going on.
Last night I perused the PWC figures for a couple of casinos, simply because I recall something odd a couple of months ago at Challenge, which shows the latest figures when you log on.
It seems that the numbers for slots has been showing some HUGE variations about the norm, beyond the values that I have come to expect, which are from the low 90's% to a tad over 100%, this probably with the bigger hits and/or progressive payouts. The striking variation is all the more worrying because these are monthly means for ALL play at the casino, and seem to back up what has been posted recently, that is that the slots just sucked and sucked without mercy before October, and then after the US players got booted the slots went "mental" and started paying out. This was one of the conspiracy theories that were mostly laughed off, and I remember posting that we will see when the PWC figures come out.
Well, they're out now!
I'll need to have a closer look rather than just a random sampling of half a dozen. Further, what about those RTG outfits similarly maligned with NO audited figures. Were we all being shafted?
I will be back with some hard figures!
This is getting silly now. You are barking up the wrong tree
I'm going to point out here that I'm a fairly succesful online poker player, with a 5 figure bankroll. (this isn't intended as a brag, just a fact)
Why would I bother trying to rip off Vegas VIP for a paltry 75 ?
The amount of time and effort I've expended on this little episode spent instead playing poker would have probably earnt me far more than that!
All I did was blew off some steam playing slots after a crappy night at the tables!
Mat
I'm going to point out here that I'm a fairly succesful online poker player, with a 5 figure bankroll. (this isn't intended as a brag, just a fact)
Why would I bother trying to rip off Vegas VIP for a paltry 75 ?
The amount of time and effort I've expended on this little episode spent instead playing poker would have probably earnt me far more than that!
All I did was blew off some steam playing slots after a crappy night at the tables!
Mat
vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
Put that way
Put that way, no. You wouldn't put all that effort in for a measly 75, but at the beginning of this thread you wrote of having used the same "system" at other MG casinos with no trouble!
I can't see how blowing off steam on slots can get an account locked, but some sort of organised "system" possibly would if it involved the casino believing that "cheating" was going on.
It is the Vegas rep that made this interesting by seeming to admit that no player had actually abused a bonus, committed any sort of fraud, and even that no scam (in the normal sense) was taking place. Whatever DID take place, has sent shockwaves through the reputable end of the industry, and is a strong indication that SOME kind of "scam" took place, but in such a way that loads of innocent players got caught up, compounded by the poor way the casino then dealt with the issues!
I can understand that recovery of a mere 75 is not the main issue. It is a matter of principle that the casino pays winnings when due, irrespective of how much "clout" the player is able to bring to bear.
I may be barking up the wrong tree, but this means there must be a "right" tree to be barking up?!
Put that way, no. You wouldn't put all that effort in for a measly 75, but at the beginning of this thread you wrote of having used the same "system" at other MG casinos with no trouble!
I can't see how blowing off steam on slots can get an account locked, but some sort of organised "system" possibly would if it involved the casino believing that "cheating" was going on.
It is the Vegas rep that made this interesting by seeming to admit that no player had actually abused a bonus, committed any sort of fraud, and even that no scam (in the normal sense) was taking place. Whatever DID take place, has sent shockwaves through the reputable end of the industry, and is a strong indication that SOME kind of "scam" took place, but in such a way that loads of innocent players got caught up, compounded by the poor way the casino then dealt with the issues!
I can understand that recovery of a mere 75 is not the main issue. It is a matter of principle that the casino pays winnings when due, irrespective of how much "clout" the player is able to bring to bear.
I may be barking up the wrong tree, but this means there must be a "right" tree to be barking up?!
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
bump.
They have ignored a few emails of mine for the last three weeks.
Someone needs to light a fire under their a**.
They have ignored a few emails of mine for the last three weeks.
Someone needs to light a fire under their a**.
eeeee
Dormant account
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2006
- Location
- Left Coast
AFAIK, all the players addressed by the hideous VegasVIP message have been begrudgingly paid, and not through any group effort. First their deposits, and later, their winnings too.
What haven't you been paid? What was the time period? Which casino?
rabiddog
Dormant Account
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2006
- Location
- dogpound USA
Forget about the rep. If you have a legitimate complaint go straight to eCogra if the casino will not return your emails in a timely manner.
I had a Fortune Lounge casino close my account for no reason. I emailed them and they replied and stated suspicious activity. What I won a small amount and that suspicious activity? Im not sure exactly what they thought was suspicious and they never told me. Anyhow, I replied back to them that I would be filing a complaint with eCogra and a PAB with this site, I also refered them to this message board and the complaints about the Vegas Affiliates group. They responded in less than a day saying they would be reopening my account. They just asked for verification documents. I had already sent documents in to another Fortune Casino, but obliged them and sent the same exact documents in again. They replied back that the documents were not clear and asked for color documents. I thought that was rediculus, but once I made a set of color I could really tell the difference in quality. So I sent in the color and they reopened my account.
I had a Fortune Lounge casino close my account for no reason. I emailed them and they replied and stated suspicious activity. What I won a small amount and that suspicious activity? Im not sure exactly what they thought was suspicious and they never told me. Anyhow, I replied back to them that I would be filing a complaint with eCogra and a PAB with this site, I also refered them to this message board and the complaints about the Vegas Affiliates group. They responded in less than a day saying they would be reopening my account. They just asked for verification documents. I had already sent documents in to another Fortune Casino, but obliged them and sent the same exact documents in again. They replied back that the documents were not clear and asked for color documents. I thought that was rediculus, but once I made a set of color I could really tell the difference in quality. So I sent in the color and they reopened my account.
eeeee
Dormant account
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2006
- Location
- Left Coast
Good luck addressing the rep. Vegas VIP was rogued last month. Your best bet may be ecogra or PAB. Good luck again.
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
-
REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do diddly squat without having been registered!
At the moment you have limited access to view most discussions: you can't make contact with thousands of fellow players, affiliates, casino reps, and all sorts of other riff-raff.
Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Casinomeister here!