Expired Promo Branders Partners - Exclusive CasinoMeister Competition

[dunover]

Since we had a disagrement on the forum the results were sent to a verification by our compliance.
They concluded the entry is valid and according to T&C's of the competition. If you have to blame someone, blame me.

Yes, because it was loophole and I suppose you couldn't really be seen to close it retrospectively.

But reps need to be aware of this, all reps, when running similar competitions.

You have to remove opportunity for some being able to load the dice in their favour. All players should have the same chance and no way to affect game volatility using miniature stakes with little financial risk but a very good chance of high multiplies thereof.

As he has not technically broken the rules because it was not expressly forbidden they've honoured the result. Nobody can deny it leaves a sour taste though. If I had entered, I would be whining like a b admittedly.

We should now all learn from this.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

I'm not familiar with the game in question and despite reading the entire thread since the screenshot was posted I'm still not clear what was done - can someone explain it for a simpleton please

Also, I'm not sure that refusing to play at the group in question really helps anything, especially considering the competition was run as a free 'perk' if you will for CM members. And I was personally affected as my placing in the leaderboard is one lower than it would have been.

 

[colinsunderland]

Yes, because it was loophole and I suppose you couldn't really be seen to close it retrospectively.

But reps need to be aware of this, all reps, when running similar competitions.

You have to remove opportunity for some being able to load the dice in their favour. All players should have the same chance and no way to affect game volatility using miniature stakes with little financial risk but a very good chance of high multiplies thereof.

As he has not technically broken the rules because it was not expressly forbidden they've honoured the result. Nobody can deny it leaves a sour taste though. If I had entered, I would be whining like a b admittedly.

We should now all learn from this.

How do you come to that conclusion? The screenshot states betsize 10p, therefore its 10p.

 

[Playford7]

Yes, because it was loophole and I suppose you couldn't really be seen to close it retrospectively.

But reps need to be aware of this, all reps, when running similar competitions.

You have to remove opportunity for some being able to load the dice in their favour. All players should have the same chance and no way to affect game volatility using miniature stakes with little financial risk but a very good chance of high multiplies thereof.

As he has not technically broken the rules because it was not expressly forbidden they've honoured the result. Nobody can deny it leaves a sour taste though. If I had entered, I would be whining like a b admittedly.

We should now all learn from this.

With all due respect he knew exactly what he was doing.
shame there isnt a spirit of the bonus rule, he certainly would of taken the piss right out of that wouldn’t he...
I’m gutted for the other members and the rep, she seems awesome and ran a comp in good faith for casinomeister for the same old ‘dodgy Dave’ to pull his tricks again.
shameful

 

[Jono777]

With all due respect he knew exactly what he was doing.
shame there isnt a spirit of the bonus rule, he certainly would of taken the piss right out of that wouldn’t he...
I’m gutted for the other members and the rep, she seems awesome and ran a comp in good faith for casinomeister for the same old ‘dodgy Dave’ to pull his tricks again.
shameful

bottom line, plain and simple!

 

[dunover]

How do you come to that conclusion? The screenshot states betsize 10p, therefore its 10p.

I am referring to her screenshot, in the table where they've classed it as 0.01.

 

[colinsunderland]

I am referring to her screenshot, in the table where they've classed it as 0.01.

But it wasn't 1p, the bet size is clearly shown as 10p. The 1p is linked to the previous spin, it isn't independent, you can't open the game and play a 1p spin, you have to hold reels, which you can only do once you have spun.

 

[Wondah]

Yes, because it was loophole and I suppose you couldn't really be seen to close it retrospectively.

But reps need to be aware of this, all reps, when running similar competitions.

You have to remove opportunity for some being able to load the dice in their favour. All players should have the same chance and no way to affect game volatility using miniature stakes with little financial risk but a very good chance of high multiplies thereof.

As he has not technically broken the rules because it was not expressly forbidden they've honoured the result. Nobody can deny it leaves a sour taste though. If I had entered, I would be whining like a b admittedly.

We should now all learn from this.

nice story, but....this are the terms




And this the win 19,30 / 0.10 = 193 according the terms.
if you need a screenshot from the log,because of the respin....that says enough

 

[brianmon]

The 0.01 spin was only achievable by making an initial 0.10 spin.
So the stake should be 0.11. Which is what that win 'cost'

 

[geordiecolin]

As soon as I seen this thread at the top of the list I had a feeling nik had won top spot and when it was confirmed after reading it I laughed too much once again. How the hell does such a long term member have the gall to treat fellow members,reps and their comps with such contempt. In all honesty he should refuse the money

 

[dunover]

The 0.01 spin was only achievable by making an initial 0.10 spin.
So the stake should be 0.11. Which is what that win 'cost'

Yes, I agree with both you and Wondah. The rules alas didn't mention 1-line or re-spin play. But the screenshot registered a 0.10 base bet to set up the screen for the subsequent 0.01 re-spin and so 193x is the slot's official log of the bet and of course, in terms of the bonus-buy rule, technically Brianmon is correct as any additions of 0.01 are add-ons to the 0.10 spin therefore should be considered within the rules when dividing the 19.30 so it would actually be less than 193x.

 

[Supababe]

@Maja Branders Partners
May I humbly apologise, on behalf of the majority of members on the forum, for the Awkward position yOu have found yourself in.

You offered a wonderful competition, in good faith, which was really appreciated.
The majority of members also entered, in good faith, playing in the spirit with which it was intended.

comps here shouldn’t need 500+ word terms and conditions to prevent players from ‘rule manipulation.

unfortunately, alongside gambling come the leeches, sneaks and rogues. With Experience and time on the forum, it soon Becomes apparent Who they are. Sadly, this sort of last minute, rule manipulation and disregard for fellow members and reps happens far too much.

please don’t feel responsible.

 

[geordiecolin]

Hi Everyone,

After sending all the Screenshots to our compliance for a verification process, the final results were concluded according to the competition T&C's.

View attachment 134792

To everyone who already sent me their usernames the winnings will be awarded to their accounts until 6pm today.
Following winners should PM me their usernames:
@nikantw @GameRoom @geordiecoling @ChopleyIOM

Thank you for the comp and the time and effort ( And trouble) you have gone through Maja.
It really is appreciated

Also congratulations to all of the winners other than one. Nothing will remove my utter contempt for the winner

 

[ChopleyIOM]

OK I've just recreated this myself to understand what happened. (I've never played the game before.)

The 1p 'spin' is clearly not an independent spin, it has to be linked to at least one previous 10p spin, it is impossible to make a 1p 'spin' on this game without first making a 10p spin, and depending on how the reels end up you may need to do multiple 10p spins to get the correct reel setup to allow the 1p respins.

The triggering stake for the spin is 10p, I don't even think that's a matter of opinion, so much a matter of fact. The 1p 'spin' is a modified result of a linked 10p spin that leaves the reels in an unfavourable state.

All I'll say is thank you very much to Maja for running for the competition, it's a shame that the 'winner' saw fit to show such discourtesy to other CM members and very clearly try to bend the rules as far as possible to sneak a winning entry in at the last moment.

 

[nikantw]

Thank you @Maja Branders Partners for the comp and the prize.

As for any questions, they have all been answered before in my posts.
I understand though it is a complicated game and you need a much deeper knowledge of it to be convinced.

If you play it enough you will see. Truth is it is not easy. I needed 100 euro to get that win and it was the final 10 that got it, pure luck.

Truth is I would have better chances to win by playing the 100 euro in DOA 0.09 spins.

 

[ChopleyIOM]

Thank you @Maja Branders Partners for the comp and the prize.

As for any questions, they have all been answered before in my posts.
I understand though it is a complicated game and you need a much deeper knowledge of it to be convinced.

If you play it enough you will see. Truth is it is not easy. I needed 100 euro to get that win and it was the final 10 that got it, pure luck.

Truth is I would have better chances to win by playing the 100 euro in DOA 0.09 spins.

Oh please, it took me less than 5 minutes to get my head around what you did, and I'd never even seen the game before until I loaded it in.

 

[Maja Branders Partners]

Thank you @geordiecolin and @Supababe

 

[colinsunderland]

Thank you @Maja Branders Partners for the comp and the prize.

As for any questions, they have all been answered before in my posts.
I understand though it is a complicated game and you need a much deeper knowledge of it to be convinced.

If you play it enough you will see. Truth is it is not easy. I needed 100 euro to get that win and it was the final 10 that got it, pure luck.

Truth is I would have better chances to win by playing the 100 euro in DOA 0.09 spins.

You're a cheat, you know for a fact what you did, but hey, you go on stealing prizes from legitimate winners. Did you go crying to the rep in a pm after the results were done? I'll bet my winnings that you did. Like you have done in other competitions where you haven't won.
Not a single person agrees with what you have done, you contribute absolutely nothing to the forum, apart from pick up the prizes from the competitions you manipulate.

 

[Playford7]

Thank you @geordiecolin and @Supababe

Not one single person blames you for anything maja, what it does show is how decent you are and what a good rep you are.
I for one am glad we have you on board.
can I just ask why you had to send the comp results over to compliance or whatever though please? It was a in-house comp.
Surerly the rules where simple enough (for most)

 

[nikantw]

Yes, I agree with both you and Wondah. The rules alas didn't mention 1-line or re-spin play. But the screenshot registered a 0.10 base bet to set up the screen for the subsequent 0.01 re-spin and so 193x is the slot's official log of the bet and of course, in terms of the bonus-buy rule, technically Brianmon is correct as any additions of 0.01 are add-ons to the 0.10 spin therefore should be considered within the rules when dividing the 19.30 so it would actually be less than 193x.

With all the respect, you forget a few things:

1. It isn't 1 line bet
2. The odds for a win are completely represented by the bet size. The chance is very small and that is why the bet is 0.01. If it was easy (frozen books) the chance would be high and so the bet. The logic is the same with the bonus buy, only in this case it was the opposite.

 

[geordiecolin]

Thank you @Maja Branders Partners for the comp and the prize.

As for any questions, they have all been answered before in my posts.
I understand though it is a complicated game and you need a much deeper knowledge of it to be convinced.

If you play it enough you will see. Truth is it is not easy. I needed 100 euro to get that win and it was the final 10 that got it, pure luck.

Truth is I would have better chances to win by playing the 100 euro in DOA 0.09 spins.

When you posted your "win" you stated " Sorry but I could not afford to spin at a higher stake" yet you now claim it took you 100 euro to achieve it?

That in itself proves that you knew what you where doing. Disgusting

 

[Kroffe]

Not saying i agree with the tactic used necessarily, but isnt it very similar to playing 1 line?
Playing one line on BOD, every win you get get multiplied by ten.
Its the same here no?, but multiplied by 100 instead of 10.

 

[geordiecolin]

I still can not stop chuckling at it all

 

[colinsunderland]

Not saying i agree with the tactic used necessarily, but isnt it very similar to playing 1 line?
Playing one line on BOD, every win you get get multiplied by ten.
Its the same here no?, but multiplied by 100 instead of 10.

no, if you play at one line, it isn't linked to a previous spin, and the win isn't muliplied by 10.
If you get 10 coins for a win on book of dead, you get 10 coins if you play 1/5 or 10 lines. You don't get 100.
In fact it can negatively affect you, as if you get the bonus you only get 10% of the coins.

 

[Kroffe]

no, if you play at one line, it isn't linked to a previous spin, and the win isn't muliplied by 10.
If you get 10 coins for a win on book of dead, you get 10 coins if you play 1/5 or 10 lines. You don't get 100.
In fact it can negatively affect you, as if you get the bonus you only get 10% of the coins.

Id still count it as a 10p spin.
I mean, it is a 10p spin, that cost 1p to make, because the game reduced the cost.
Its still playing all lines 1p/line right? So its a 10p spin that the game reduced the price on to cost 1p.