1. Follow Casinomeister on Twitter | Facebook | YouTube | Casinomeister.us US Residents Click here! |  Svenska Svenska | 
  2. By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. You can find out more by following.Find out more.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Sister site to Casino Max launches

    Roaring 21 has just launched - sister casino to Casino Max, and they have a special promotion for you!! .They are in the Baptism by Fire - you can check them out here: Roaring 21 BBF and special promo.


    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
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!

Can anyone explain why Roulette is banned for clearing bonus wagering requirements?

Discussion in 'Online Casinos' started by bpb, Jan 21, 2005.

    Jan 21, 2005
  1. bpb

    bpb Banned User - repeated violations of rule 1.14 (tr PABnorogue PABnonaccred

    Location:
    Haverhill
    Can any of the casino personnel out there explain why roulette is restricted from clearing casino bonuses? This really bugs me, because I fell like I'm missing something ... but I have no idea what. (Casinos which restrict roulette, but allow other tables games such as blackjack, 3-card, etc)
     
  2. Jan 21, 2005
  3. Petunia

    Petunia Dormant account

    ** Most of the games are restricted due to the quick and easy way to up the wager if you know what you doing... ie: they brand it as a possible 'bonus abusing' game. I think. NOt sure though, but that is the standard from all casinos. You can always turn the bonus down and play the game anyway... **
     
  4. Jan 21, 2005
  5. 555YY

    555YY Dormant account

    Occupation:
    "":".."|
    Location:
    PA
    same reason why baccarat and craps are banned

    b/c you can place bets on both sides: red/black, house/banker, pass/don't pass

    yea you lose some to house adv, but it allows you to clear bonus with almost no risk to you ORIGINAL FUNDS, plus it's easy to play, whereas a 'skill' player is needed to play blackjack correctly (skill being defined defined as someone who memorized basic strategy)
     
  6. Jan 21, 2005
  7. ExSparr

    ExSparr Dormant account

    Occupation:
    employee
    Location:
    Northern Germany
    I guess its just because you can make " no risk bets" as the casinos call it, e.g. betting the same amount on red and black.
    But I dont know,if there really exist any NO risk bets on roulette

    EXSparr
     
  8. Jan 21, 2005
  9. Petunia

    Petunia Dormant account

    ** In general I just hate being told what to do... Eternal-teenager-syndrome hence i don't take bonus. grrrrr **
     
  10. Jan 21, 2005
  11. caruso

    caruso Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht

    Occupation:
    Casino apologist
    Location:
    England
    Back in the day when bonus wagering was very low, it was possible to bet red / black and play with literally no risk, the house edge on roulette not being sufficiently great to eat up the bonus on such small playthrough requirements. Nowadays, those requirements are sufficient for play on roulette to have negative value for the player, but clueless casinos don't understand this. They still think that red / black, player / banker etc are "risk free" bets, and continue to exclude them.

    Which tells you a lot about the monkeys behind the vast majority of these operations.

    EDIT: LOLOLOL - apparently it's not just casino managers. LOL.
     
  12. Jan 21, 2005
  13. Petunia

    Petunia Dormant account

    ** caruso, can you blame them? Seriously, if this was your outfit would you not want to play it safe? There are pple who make it their JOBS to 'bust the bank' for them... lol... I am not saying it is right, or even clever, but hey, I don't care. If I don't like it, I don't take the bonus! When I win I win, when I loose I loose... So long as they pay me, I have nobody to blame and nobody to accuse of all sorts of things but myself. **
     
  14. Jan 21, 2005
  15. 555YY

    555YY Dormant account

    Occupation:
    "":".."|
    Location:
    PA
    actually i think it has more to do with the fact that as long as 37 * (bonus amount) > wage requirement, you can guaranteed to be up more than your original deposit no matter what happens, hence no gamble/ no risk of your own funds

    even with flatbetting in blackjack, theoretical return is slightly less than 50%, you can still lose your deposited funds due to bad luck, rigged software, bad play, clouded judgement etc... so there's still a CHANCE that you might LOSE

    *edit* also, pass/don't pass line at craps offer you even less of a theoretical loss
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2005
  16. Jan 21, 2005
  17. Clayman

    Clayman Dormant account

    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    Actually there could be zero risk depending on the terms.

    Say you have a 100/100 deal play 3500. Just bet $5 on all 37 numbers 19 times. You've wagered $3515 and lost the expected $95. But have a $5 profit.

    Even Playtech couldn't rig that :)

    Hard to believe there are unscrupulous people out there who would take advantage of a positive expectation with no risk.

    Edited to add: You beat me to it! See you in Jacksonville. Unless you're in AC end of month!
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2005
  18. Jan 21, 2005
  19. 555YY

    555YY Dormant account

    Occupation:
    "":".."|
    Location:
    PA

    exactly

    *EDITED* sorry brain freeze, we said the same thing, i just couldnt get my head out of my a-- in time
     
    Last edited: Jan 21, 2005
  20. Jan 21, 2005
  21. Clayman

    Clayman Dormant account

    Location:
    Pennsylvania, USA
    How so? I was assuming a wheel with one zero.
     
  22. Jan 21, 2005
  23. bpb

    bpb Banned User - repeated violations of rule 1.14 (tr PABnorogue PABnonaccred

    Location:
    Haverhill
    The only thing special about roulette/baccarat/craps is that you can bet in such a way that your standard deviation is 0. Your actual loss will be your expected loss.

    So, back in the day of 2x bonus wagering requirements ... you could bet in such a way that you'd be guaranteed to lose 2x5.26% of your bonus ... which amounted to a guaranteed win of 89.48% of your bonus.

    However, nowadays, the wagering requirements are almost always 30+x bonus. In this case, covering the board would guarantee you a 30x5.26% loss.

    So by banning roulette play, these casinos are discouraging bonus abusers from using systems that guarantee the casino a win.

    I still don't get it.
     
  24. Jan 21, 2005
  25. Vesuvio

    Vesuvio Dormant account

    Location:
    UK
    Not quite - as ezc3m said it's a question of whether the wr/37 is greater or less than the bonus. So you need to have a 37x bonus wr before there's no expected profit. e.g. a $100 bonus with a 30x wr. Put 18 on red, 18 on black and 1 on zero. 82 spins later you'll have met the wr for a profit of 18.
     
  26. Jan 21, 2005
  27. Vesuvio

    Vesuvio Dormant account

    Location:
    UK
    Just realised you're probably working on the basis of American roulette with two zeros...
     
  28. Jan 21, 2005
  29. HateMG

    HateMG Dormant account

    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY

    Actually you can have profit of more than $18. In your example for each zero outcome you'd win $17 instead of loosing $1 because your red and black bets pay half for 0.
     
  30. Jan 21, 2005
  31. Vesuvio

    Vesuvio Dormant account

    Location:
    UK
    Thanks! That explains a recent experience at an on-line casino (better not mention which one ;)). I got a zero and made an overall profit - at the time I assumed I must have somehow forgotten to cover one of the other options for that spin.
     
  32. Jan 22, 2005
  33. mitch

    mitch Dormant account

    Occupation:
    Secret
    Location:
    UK
    I have heard of these sort of people Clayman. How dare they!

    I have been told that their names tend to begin with C and end with N. Don't know how true this is? ;)

    Mitch
     
  34. Jan 22, 2005
  35. KasinoKing

    KasinoKing WebMeister & Slotaholic.. CAG MM PABnonaccred webmeister

    Occupation:
    House-Husband and Casino Advisor
    Location:
    Bexhill on sea, England
    Even harder to believe that anyone would go to all the trouble of signing up, depositing, and meeting the WR with low-risk roulette, just for a measly $6-$18!!
    C'mon guys - I thought I was tight!!! :D
    (Bonus abuse gone mad!)

    Just cover 10-18 spots, with a few extra chips on your lucky numbers, and let it spin!
    Unless your playing rigged shite, the chances are that will lose no more than covering all the numbers, and if you get lucky, you might even make a nice profit! ;)

    I agree it's totally daft for the casino's to not allow it for x20+ WR, but also quite glad in a way, cos the minimum chip size is way to big at $1, and I've had some serious finger burning with this game! :p
     

Share This Page