beravek7 VS Fortune room

[skiny]

Why would a casino not invite a professional slot player? Regardless of how big a bonus is, the house still has an edge provided the player spins long enough. That's what wage requirements are for.

I could give you a 10 thousand times bonus and if I force you to spin long enough the TRTP should eventually bring your balance to zero. The only difference between a "professional" slot player and a recreational one is the pros look for bonus terms that work in their favour. If you know how to do that math you can write bonus terms that simply add more funds to a player's account without decreasing the house edge. It really isn't as difficult as it sounds.

Whether a person accepts a bonus or not, once the slot game is open it makes no difference if you've been playing for 50 years or never played in your life. The odds are still the same. There are no professionals once the reels start spinning. You could belong to the United Slot Players of America, be wearing a company uniform and be wearing your gold slot player's watch for 25 years of service and when you spin it won't help you any more than lining up a half dozen troll dolls on your desk and kissing the screen before you click spin.

It's all about the terms and conditions and a casino can be as honest and fair as the day is long but if they don't know how to write them there's going to be an issue.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Why would a casino not invite a professional slot player? Regardless of how big a bonus is, the house still has an edge provided the player spins long enough. That's what wage requirements are for.

I could give you a 10 thousand times bonus and if I force you to spin long enough the TRTP should eventually bring your balance to zero. The only difference between a "professional" slot player and a recreational one is the pros look for bonus terms that work in their favour. If you know how to do that math you can write bonus terms that simply add more funds to a player's account without decreasing the house edge. It really isn't as difficult as it sounds.

Whether a person accepts a bonus or not, once the slot game is open it makes no difference if you've been playing for 50 years or never played in your life. The odds are still the same. There are no professionals once the reels start spinning. You could belong to the United Slot Players of America, be wearing a company uniform and be wearing your gold slot player's watch for 25 years of service and when you spin it won't help you any more than lining up a half dozen troll dolls on your desk and kissing the screen before you click spin.

It's all about the terms and conditions and a casino can be as honest and fair as the day is long but if they don't know how to write them there's going to be an issue.

It's probably because casinos use "loss leader" offers to lure in new players, and then switch to less generous offers for loyal players. A good sots player, well versed in maths, knows this, and knows that by ONLY playing the "loss leader" offers they are playing +EV. They also have the discipline required to retain their edge, despite the casino and games having been designed to part players from their disciplined nature so that any edge they may have achieved early on gets eroded as they continue to chase the other promotions, such as wager xx to stand a chance to go to the World Cup, win 100 credits in a draw, win a cruise lucky draw ticket for every £xx deposited and played, etc.

They could tighten up the terms, but they won't lure in so many players as the "headline" would be unattractive. It is far better to have unattractive terms that not everyone reads or understands, and that even when they do, they are sufficiently vague such that "spirit of the bonus" can be invoked.

 

[KasinoKing]

They could tighten up the terms, but they won't lure in so many players as the "headline" would be unattractive. It is far better to have unattractive terms that not everyone reads or understands, and that even when they do, they are sufficiently vague such that "spirit of the bonus" can be invoked.

... which brings us right back to what I said way back in post #3, page 1 of this thread:

Casino's MUST make up their minds:
If they do WANT advantage players to come in and potentially risk losing their whole deposit + bonus in a few minutes - have lax rules.
If they DON'T want advantage players - make the rules more specific to dis-allow this style of play (e.g. by low max bet limits).

As is stands the casino wins both ways - and that is just not fair.

KK

 

[Beravek7]

Moved it here in order not to derail the other thread:

Casinomeister: "Fortune Lounge casinos were removed because of a term that they since have changed. We are in the process of bringing them back on."


Good news! Good work, Casinomeister! Since I was the obvious victim of those unfair terms' application-
am I right to suppose that I will be paid my winnings just before Fortune Lounge gets back to the accredited casinos list?

 

[Casinomeister]

Moved it here in order not to derail the other thread:

Casinomeister: "Fortune Lounge casinos were removed because of a term that they since have changed. We are in the process of bringing them back on."


Good news! Good work, Casinomeister! Since I was the obvious victim of those unfair terms' application-
am I right to suppose that I will be paid my winnings just before Fortune Lounge gets back to the accredited casinos list?

No you're not receiving your winnings. They have refunded your deposit, right?

 

[Mouche12]

No you're not receiving your winnings. They have refunded your deposit, right?

I don't understand... Refunding the OPs deposit just won't do it - they should pay his winnings in full since the casino realised its mistake and amended the terms accordingly. I assume the OP can still submit a PAB?

 

[Beravek7]

No you're not receiving your winnings. They have refunded your deposit, right?

Yes they have.

 

[Casinomeister]

I don't understand... Refunding the OPs deposit just won't do it - they should pay his winnings in full since the casino realised its mistake and amended the terms accordingly. I assume the OP can still submit a PAB?

This is such bullshit. The OP broke the casino's terms and conditions - period. We challenged the casino about the confiscation of deposits, and about the wording of the terms. They changed the terms, and even paid back the OP's deposits (which he has so tactfully forgot to mention until I reminded him).

The casino didn't realize any mistake. They just were made aware that we thought their terms were unfair and did not meet our standards to be listed in the Accredited Casino section.

To insist on winnings begotten on broken terms is a bit cheeky - and to insist on this is rather thankless. As far as I am concerned, this matter is closed.

 

[Casinomeister]

Yes they have.

Not even a thank you. What class.

 

[dunover]

Summation:

OP AP's and breaks terms.
Casino refuses payment of both deposits and winnings under said terms.
OP complains here.
CM become involved and terms are subsequently found to be a vague FU clause not befitting an accredited site.
Accreditation suspended.
CM members' consensus is that he broke the terms but should get deposits back.
OP PAB's in order to at least get deposits back.
CM announces that offending terms will be revised and casino(s) restored to accredited section when completed and checked.
OP then (without telling us he has been refunded deposits) tried to have new terms applied retrospectively and get winnings.
CM informs him he broke the terms as they were, not as they now are and CM informs us he was refunded deposits.
OP returns to thread, brimming with gratitude at the effort CM/Max have expended on his behalf to get parity of his account whereas otherwise he'd have gotten diddly-squat.

We're done here?

 

[Beravek7]

Not even a thank you. What class.

Excuse me for asking same question again and again but what terms exactly I broke? Regarding "no thank you': I invested 660 euro at 5 Fortune Lounge casinos. I lost 510 euro at 4 of them. And I won at one. 1204 euro. My winnings were confiscated and my deposit (after a long month of discussions at this forum) was refunded. Now I am overall 510 euro minus instead of being 700 euro in plus. Would any normal person in my situation say thank you for somebody who treated him this way? The most important ,however, is the fact that I played exactly within the casino's rules.

 

[Casinomeister]

...My winnings were confiscated and my deposit (after a long month of discussions at this forum) was refunded. ...

The only reason you received that deposit back is because I insisted that it was unfair that it was confiscated. Ungrateful, self-centered, discourteous: these adjectives spring to mind.

 

[Beravek7]

The only reason you received that deposit back is because I insisted that it was unfair that it was confiscated. Ungrateful, self-centered, discourteous: these adjectives spring to mind.

I thank you personally for getting my deposit back. THANK YOU! Still I am sure that I was robbed by this casino group.

 

[dunover]

Excuse me for asking same question again and again but what terms exactly I broke? Regarding "no thank you': I invested 660 euro at 5 Fortune Lounge casinos. I lost 510 euro at 4 of them. And I won at one. 1204 euro. My winnings were confiscated and my deposit (after a long month of discussions at this forum) was refunded. Now I am overall 510 euro minus instead of being 700 euro in plus. Would any normal person in my situation say thank you for somebody who treated him this way? The most important ,however, is the fact that I played exactly within the casino's rules.

Listen, without no doubt laborious and time-consuming effort on your behalf by CM/Max you'd have got sweet FA. You're no worse off than before you deposited there. Quit while quits....

 

[mcgameboy]

I thank you personally for getting my deposit back. THANK YOU! Still I am sure that I was robbed by this casino group.

Bryan probably feels robbed for wasting his time on such an ungrateful SOB. Your "attempt" at showing some gratitude leaves a lot to be desired.

I'm almost tempted to hope that you get burned again in the future. Then we'll all get to see if Bryan and Max are prepared to waste time on the same ungrateful SOB a second time. I would hope they do not.

I guess the words "thankless task" really do ring true....makes me wonder why they bother at times.

 

[Dinahnana]

I am glad that this whole saga is over and Fortune Lounge listened and changed the offending terms. The OP got his deposit back through no small effort from Bryan and Max and he should be grateful. I know I would be in his place.

Anyway WTG Max and Bryan for all your tireless efforts. The OP might not appreciate them but we sure as hell do:notworthy

 

[skiny]

This entire case is kind of a vague memory for me now and I'm not even going to bother debating whether casinos should withhold winnings based on vague terms. The OP got his deposit back which is more than most people get when they gamble.

Be thankful someone sorted it out for you and move on.

Save yourself the headache and find a casino to play at that doesn't care how you bet. You might not be able to mathematically manipulate your wagers to capitalize on big bonuses but you'll be a lot more likely to get paid if you win.

 

[Mouche12]

This is such bullshit. The OP broke the casino's terms and conditions - period. We challenged the casino about the confiscation of deposits, and about the wording of the terms. They changed the terms, and even paid back the OP's deposits (which he has so tactfully forgot to mention until I reminded him).

The casino didn't realize any mistake. They just were made aware that we thought their terms were unfair and did not meet our standards to be listed in the Accredited Casino section.

To insist on winnings begotten on broken terms is a bit cheeky - and to insist on this is rather thankless. As far as I am concerned, this matter is closed.

Apologies if I did not understand correctly - if it was a clear case of breaking the NOT VAGUE terms, then indeed the OP can be grateful that he got his deposit back, thanks for clarifying this!

 

[Beravek7]

Apologies if I did not understand correctly - if it was a clear case of breaking the NOT VAGUE terms, then indeed the OP can be grateful that he got his deposit back, thanks for clarifying this!

That was NOT the case. Read the beginning of
the thread and see exactly what was the reason for confiscation.

"Placing high value bets with the single intention of increasing your balance, thereafter you substantially decrease your bet size, while reasonably not decreasing your bankroll."

I played slots varying my bets from 10 to 3.20. Was that substantial change or not? How one can know for sure?
If that is not a vague term- what is then?
I already presented the example of the same rule at Betat casino which specifies exactly what constitutes a substantial change.

"12.4.3 A user who wagers high value hands with the sole purpose of rapidly increasing bonus bankroll, then proceeds to drastically decrease their bet value(less than half) without having reasonably decreased their bankroll will be deemed to employing unnatural and advantageous betting patterns. Such cases may enforce condition 12.5, but each case will be investigated and acted upon accordingly. We strongly discourage this type of play. You have been warned. "

The rule at BetAt casino is specific and this problem would never happen if I played there.

 

[dunover]

That was NOT the case. Read the beginning of
the thread and see exactly what was the reason for confiscation.

"Placing high value bets with the single intention of increasing your balance, thereafter you substantially decrease your bet size, while reasonably not decreasing your bankroll."

I played slots varying my bets from 10 to 3.20. Was that substantial change or not? How one can know for sure?
If that is not a vague term- what is then?
I already presented the example of the same rule at Betat casino which specifies exactly what constitutes a substantial change.

"12.4.3 A user who wagers high value hands with the sole purpose of rapidly increasing bonus bankroll, then proceeds to drastically decrease their bet value(less than half) without having reasonably decreased their bankroll will be deemed to employing unnatural and advantageous betting patterns. Such cases may enforce condition 12.5, but each case will be investigated and acted upon accordingly. We strongly discourage this type of play. You have been warned. "

The rule at BetAt casino is specific and this problem would never happen if I played there.

But you didn't, you chose to play at a site which had at the time a vague FU-clause which you read AFTER depositing and playing. We all supported you in getting your deposit back and I am glad you did. Unfortunately they cannot apply the terms ex post facto to your winnings too, and CM can't make them as you deposited under those terms as they WERE regardless of their accreditation subsequently being suspended for those terms.
Let it go.

 

[kavaman]

"Placing high value bets with the single intention of increasing your balance, thereafter you substantially decrease your bet size, while reasonably not decreasing your bankroll."

Thats still available on royal vegas.

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

, wasn't this the term that was supposed to be changed?

kavaman

 

[Casinomeister]

Here are the new terms:

Irregular Play is deemed when the casino detects unnatural player betting patterns. Irregular play includes, but is not limited to, any one or more of the following types of play:

Placing single bets equal to or in excess of 15% of the value of the bonus before the wagering requirements for that bonus have been met.
Using the double-up feature to increase bet values.
Placing high value bets with the single intention of increasing your balance, thereafter you substantially decrease your bet size, while reasonably not decreasing your bankroll.
Even money bets on Sic Bo, craps, baccarat, Wheel of Riches and roulette.
Employing a strategy by which high value bets are placed on any game with playthrough contribution weightings less than 30% (any table games, card games, video poker, etc.) and then proceeding to place bets of less than half of the prior average bet value while changing game type to higher weighted games (slots, casual games, scratch cards, etc).

Any irregular play will result in immediate disqualification from a bonus and the casino reserves the rights to withhold any withdrawals and/or confiscate all winnings. Irregular play will be dealt with in the same manner as fraudulent play, as detailed in clauses 1.3. and 1.4. of our General Terms and Conditions.

What was removed was the subject language concerning "not for personal entertainment [i.e. professional]". This is what most of us were concerned with, and what was in conflict with our accreditation standards.

They have also refunded this player's deposit - this confiscation was also an issue for us.

So in essence, I feel that the casino has done the right hing here, and their accreditation status has been re-instated. I'm sure there will be a couple of AP's who disagree with this decision, so be it, that's just the pay it is. I personally feel we have made progress for everyone involved, and the casino has proven to be responsive to player issues such as this - thanks to the casino rep, Wim.

 

[dunover]

Here are the new terms:



What was removed was the subject language concerning "not for personal entertainment [i.e. professional]". This is what most of us were concerned with, and what was in conflict with our accreditation standards.

They have also refunded this player's deposit - this confiscation was also an issue for us.

So in essence, I feel that the casino has done the right hing here, and their accreditation status has been re-instated. I'm sure there will be a couple of AP's who disagree with this decision, so be it, that's just the [strike]pay[/strike] way it is. I personally feel we have made progress for everyone involved, and the casino has proven to be responsive to player issues such as this - thanks to the casino rep, Wim.

10/10 for the pun Bryan!

 

[skiny]

"Irregular play includes, but is not limited to..."

Personally I think this is still too vague and will eventually cause new problems but time will tell.

I will never understand why casinos can't just lay out an exact set of rules.

 

[dunover]

"Irregular play includes, but is not limited to..."

Personally I think this is still too vague and will eventually cause new problems but time will tell.

I will never understand why casinos can't just lay out an exact set of rules.

I suppose because AP isn't an exact science.
The casinos know it when they see it, even if we can't as we don't do it.
All they can reasonably be expected to do is outline broad examples, then deem whatever falls within those AP boundaries.