Am I the only one who doesn't play with bonuses?

[slotchik]

I dont play with them because if I say deposit 500.00 and then hit 2500 on a spin or on poker, I can cash out immediately and I can play whatever games I wish without worry!!!

Not closely related KK EXACTLY related.

I only play at casinos which give me bonuses. I can't understand why people refuse to play with the advantage and prefer to play whilst the casino has the advantage.

The only 'fun' for me in gambling is winning money not clicking away against a random number generator and losing my hard earned money.

Still possible to earn 2000+ a month playing cleverly. (eg won 360 out of a 400 match bonus @ Ladbrokes in 15 minutes this morning. Probably play for the weekly 100 bonus @ Harrods later.)

Mitch

 

[mitch]

I dont play with them because if I say deposit 500.00 and then hit 2500 on a spin or on poker, I can cash out immediately and I can play whatever games I wish without worry!!!

Hi Slotchick

What's to worry if you play at decent casinos?

Played at Europa tonight, deposited 100 for the monthly sticky bonus of 100 ran it up to 870, withdrew 770. I am sure my cheque will arrive in less than 2 weeks based on previous experience. Job well done, will go to bed happy.

In good casinos you have no doubts about being paid, bonus notwithstanding.

If it's a bad casino why would you play there anyway?

Mitch

 

[paul02085]

She means she doesnt have to fulfill wagering requirements.

I can see both sides here. Personally i use bonuses but only at very reputable casinos. There is no doubt this is the way to go if you are a low roller. A high roller is a different story completely IMO.

That is where we are having these disagreements i think.

 

[mgibson99]

A high roller is a different story completely.
That is where we are having these disagreements i think.

Agree....I typically start my bankroll at $1000, and its very hard to get excited about a $50 bonus with all kinds of strings attached to it.

 

[KasinoKing]

(eg won 360 out of a 400 match bonus @ Ladbrokes in 15 minutes this morning. Probably play for the weekly 100 bonus @ Harrods later.)
Mitch

Hi-ya Mitch!

Just curious about something here - In my experience Ladbrokes only occasionally offer small bonuses, like the 50 one last month for example - so how come you managed to get a 400 bonus from them?

Also, why are you still getting bonuses from Harrods? I only joined in January, but by May they stopped inviting me to take part in promotions.
Do you put a lot of action their way that is not bonus related?

Keep up the good work!
KK

 

[mitch]

Hi KK

Ladbrokes bonus was an e-mail July match offer for "loyal and VIP customers" don't know how widely the bonus was offered. Terms were - bet 400 get 400 bonus. Wager bonus once to withdraw, a great offer you would no doubt agree.

On Harrods I thought you were sailing a little 'close to the wind' with your patented roulette system!

I do give them action in excess of WR and I don't 'lowroll' as much as you.

I try to plan my play at all casinos with an object of not being barred from bonuses. Means my positive expectation is reduced a bit, but I am playing the 'long game'.

Oh BTW do you know whilst you were away a few members were trying to set you and Slotchick up as the Romeo and Juliet of the gambling world.
Well they say opposites attract.

Mitch

 

[dickens1298]

Ahhhh....I think you hit the nail on the head for me. I am a larger deposit player, and I don't get overly excited about a "relatively" small bonus that doesn't really advance my bankroll all that much.

I figure differently. If someone offered you $100 just to play.. wouldn't you take it? I don't play just for the bonuses, but I DO tend to frequent casinos with monthly bonuses more often than not.

I like Omni primarily because its bonus is reached after a certain level of play. Essentially that means that I can play throughout the month, earn loyalty points - which are pretty generous - ensure that my funds are not "tied up" if the WR has not been met, then still have the opportunity to earn that $100 bonus. May not be much - but it does pay for the electricity..!!

 

[mgibson99]

I figure differently. If someone offered you $100 just to play.. wouldn't you take it? I don't play just for the bonuses, but I DO tend to frequent casinos with monthly bonuses more often than not.

I like Omni primarily because its bonus is reached after a certain level of play. Essentially that means that I can play throughout the month, earn loyalty points - which are pretty generous - ensure that my funds are not "tied up" if the WR has not been met, then still have the opportunity to earn that $100 bonus. May not be much - but it does pay for the electricity..!!

I play almost exclusively at Omni. I too gladly take the $100 loyalty bonus every month. The key is that it is not really a bonus. There are no wagering requirements, and you can even cash the $100 without wagering anything if you want.

 

[vgyhnji]

'Am I the only one who doesn't play with bonuses?'

'I too gladly take the $100 loyalty bonus every month.' !!! Oh.

The key is that it is not really a bonus. ??? It is.

There are no wagering requirements, ??? There are.

and you can even cash the $100 without wagering anything if you want.' ??? You already did.

???

Bonuses are no bad thing, they can as Mitch and KK demonstrate be a great asset to shrewd players. They can add an edge to a small bankroll, they can extend gameplay and enjoyment for your money if that is your aim.

The use of bonuses should be no hassle either, if both player and casino played by the rules, unfortunately there will always be cases of foul play from both sides. Especially from casinos while they continue to word clauses in this way:

*This loyalty bonus will not be credited to accounts that have in the past shown patterns of bonus abuse (ie wagering is done primarily using promotional funds and not deposited funds).

Sorry - absolutely no prizes for the first poster who points out where that comes from! (and that includes you Caruso!)

 

[pstnpstn]

I play almost exclusively at Omni. I too gladly take the $100 loyalty bonus every month. The key is that it is not really a bonus. There are no wagering requirements, and you can even cash the $100 without wagering anything if you want.

hey mgibson99.
you must wager $4000 before receive that $100.
I think its highly wager requirement (40times).

 

[tunisianswife]

being able to read posts on this forum regarding problems with bonuses and being labeled as an abuser and being barred, it has taught me to just steer clear of them.

I too agree that it is too confusing to try to keep track of everything played which allows me to be in more of a relaxed mode when I play.

 

[mgibson99]

There are no wagering requirements, ??? There are.

and you can even cash the $100 without wagering anything if you want.' ??? You already did.

Don't confuse the issue. My point is once you get the $100 loyalty bonus, you do not have to wager it, and you can cash it out at anytime, no strings attached.

 

[mgibson99]

hey mgibson99.
you must wager $4000 before receive that $100.
I think its highly wager requirement (40times).

As noted in many of my previous posts, I am a higher limit player. For me, wagering $4000 is not tremendously daunting. For a low limit player, I can see where this might be perceived as high. Keep in mind that the $4000 requirement is cummulative over the course of the entire month.

And its not accurate to look at this as a $100 bonus with a 40x playthrough. The concept is reversed. At most casinos, you get your bonuses up front, then have to meet wagering requirements to be able to cash them. At Omni, you gamble whenever, however you want, and you can cash out at anytime because its all your money. Once you hit $4000 in wagers, you get the $100, which is yours to do with as you please. How many other bonuses are cashable immediately, with no wagering requirements after you get them.

 

[dickens1298]

As noted in many of my previous posts, I am a higher limit player. For me, wagering $4000 is not tremendously daunting. For a low limit player, I can see where this might be perceived as high. Keep in mind that the $4000 requirement is cummulative over the course of the entire month.

And its not accurate to look at this as a $100 bonus with a 40x playthrough. The concept is reversed. At most casinos, you get your bonuses up front, then have to meet wagering requirements to be able to cash them. At Omni, you gamble whenever, however you want, and you can cash out at anytime because its all your money. Once you hit $4000 in wagers, you get the $100, which is yours to do with as you please. How many other bonuses are cashable immediately, with no wagering requirements after you get them.

$4000 isn't too steep at all, even for non-high limit players. I typically could reach that total within an hour or two of play, and this is without raising my bet above $50.

 

[dickens1298]

hey mgibson99.
you must wager $4000 before receive that $100.
I think its highly wager requirement (40times).

As mgibson had pointed out, look at the $100 as a lump loyalty bonus, in addition to the loyalty credits accrued during play. The beauty of Omni's promotion is that your funds are not "tied down" in a WR, and hence can be withdrawn at any time.

My approach is simple - I deposit and play as if it was a casino without a "bonus". When I reach a predetermined goal, I quit and withdraw (I found that money management is key to blackjack). I usually reach the $4000 cumulative total within a session or two (or three, if I were more conservative), whereupon Omni deposits the $100 "bonus". Simple.

 

[nafanny29]

I think that the Omni style of wagering first then get the bonus is the way to go. It would stop a lot of the bonus hunters in their tracks and be more rewarding to loyal, regular players.

I would much rather receive $100 with no further restrictions/wagering, than have $100 which I gotta weager 40x.

That way genuine players are rewarded as a sort of "thank you for giving us action" and bonus hunters are deterred as they have to risk their own $$ first.

 

[Bruce Hamilton]

Because the land casinos are a three hour drive away.

And with all the times I've been to

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

, I've never had the Pequots increase my bankroll by 200%... Free beverages are fine, but in the words of Tom Cruise in "Jerry Mcguire", show me da money!

 

[mgibson99]

And with all the times I've been to

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

, I've never had the Pequots increase my bankroll by 200%... Free beverages are fine, but in the words of Tom Cruise in "Jerry Mcguire", show me da money!

I've been shown da money lots of times by land based casinos. For about the last 5 years, I have NEVER paid for a hotel room in a casino, and I rarely pay for any of my meals (I actually had to pay for my meal at the Eiffel Tower restaurant in Paris the last time I was in Vegas, which sucked because it was damn expensive). I have rarely paid for shows or admittance to the clubs in the casino hotels. I've had a casino fly me up for a weekend. I've had a casino offer to pay my way into one of their $1000 entry BJ tournaments (I had to decline because it didn't work with my schedule, plus I've never played in a BJ tournament and probably would have done terrible because the strategy is completely different). I've taken advantage of offers that included a couple of hundred dollars cash with no strings to start my bankroll. I've gotten many match play coupons for BJ. And I have won lots of money without ever reaching into my own pocket (not exactly true, it is my money but I almost always play on casino credit so it sure feels like they're giving me money when I walk away a winner without having to put one cent up front). So, land based casinos can and do show ya da the money.

The funny thing is, I don't even consider myself a "big" gambler. I usually play 2 or 3 hands at $50-$100 per hand (the same as I do on line). I see the guys pushing around the $500 and $1000 chips on every hand, and I think that they are the really big gamblers. Wonder what they are getting?

 

[pstnpstn]

deposit intercasino $90 + $90 bonus
deposit williamhill $50 + $40 bonus
deposit supervegas $50 + $50 bonus

lost at intercasino, did bet $165 one spin on roulette (black) and ball was came out red

made $190 at williamhill, cashed out $140 and left $50 in my account in order to receive next monthly bonus.

made $200 at supervegas and cashed out all the money.

-90+140+150 = $200 profit

played only blackjack at williamhill and supervegas.

and one more thing, I receved $100 from ryan hartley (hi ryan promo).
this is special promotion only at the intercasino.
no strings attached. this $100 is cashable money.
but i did not cash out this money in order to further play.

 

[pstnpstn]

ok, I agree mgibson99 and dickens1298 if look at that as comp points bonus.

 

[Arclight56]

Bonii a pain

It seems to me that bonuses are more trouble than they are worth. The T&C are usually confusing, its a pain to keep track of how much you have wagered, and sometimes you end up betting more than you really wanted to because you're trying to meet wagering requirements. Even if you manage to win, casinos can label you a bonus abuser and confiscate your winnings. All this for bonuses which are usually pretty small.

I just find it easier and cleaner to play without bonuses. Maybe I'm missing out, because I have seen many people post that bonuses are the only way to get an edge over the house. Perhaps, but by the same token, many of the complaints in this forum are about problems with bonuses.

Would be curious to see what other people have to say.

I agree that the bonus wr's and t&c's can be a major pain and I am getting tired of chasing them but I only started 3 weeks ago with 100 dollars seed money a friend spotted me with because he "didn't want to do it alone". So far I have 1700 dollars in my Neteller account. This is no small amount for me. So far the casinos I have dealt with have been honest, though some have been a little slow to pay.