Casino Club closed account of 167'500 JACKPOT winner

[kmay87]

Exactly. I gave up trying to translate using Google - it's far from perfect. But it does add even more to the confusion. To think we have debated and deconstructed virtually everything we've been told, it will be pretty annoying to say the least if this turns out to be bogus. But as you said, he's posted after your post without addressing any of your comments. Probably some of those questions might have been answered in the prior 20 odd pages, but it's hardly possible for us to translate all of those, so where's the harm in answering. It would go a long way.

 

[thelawnet]

I think that is exactly it. We've heard so many conflicting stories that noone does know for certain.

It seems the player in question played blackjack using a bot. His playlogs suggest that, but it's open to interpretation. He then went on to win that VP jackpot.

What playlogs?

 

[kmay87]

I came across them a while back. I can't remember if they were posted on the German forum, or if the OP of this thread forwarded them to me. I'll see if I can dig them up and post them.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Of course rainier123 should not be paid the 167k. If the jackpot had been 167k it would attract considerably more play and somebody else might have won it.

He chose to play a game that offers a 70k jackpot, and he won it.

I was playing at William Hill a while back and due to a server error I was unable to login. About 2 hours later the 130k jackpot had been hit by somebody else. That was tough luck for me, but you can only win what's on offer.

BTW, I've asked the player to answer some questions about his behaviour. See here:

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

He has not responded to my post although he is active on that forum.

That doesn't speak well.

This line of thought makes it even more complicated. rainer1323 may well not have won the jackpot had it been boosted by having the 167,000 put back, and it is impossible to say who might have taken it on. HOWEVER, it does not alter the fact that the money still does NOT belong to Casino Club, it belongs to the community of players who's play contributed to the pool in the first place.
Despite the complication of doing so, it should be possible to work out from playlogs from the game exactly which players contributed to that particular jackpot, and how much. They could then unwind this situation by voiding the entire round, and refunding these progressive contributions to their source.
There are precedents to this, Mansion had a bug with their multi-hand VP, and they fixed it, and then went back through play histories and recalculated the correct payouts for all hands played with the bug present, and credited the differences to each player.

An alternative suggestion is that Casino Club can make the 167,000 a prize pool in a separate promotion, and admit that they have done this because it was not right for them to simply keep it, and they were certainly not going to pay it to a cheat, and they thought this was the only viable way to return it to the player community who built it up in the first place.

Maybe the player has gone to ground because despite there being 167K Euros at stake, he IS using a bot, and does not want this even discussed in court as it could endanger future use of the bot to make further profits. Quite a few casinos do NOT (currently) ban such bots in their terms, but could take a more aggressive approach should the existence of a "superbot" come to light. Further, the "proof" of bot use would come out, and although it might help bot developers evade detection in future releases, it would also educate many other casino operators who might currently be unaware they had an issue with bots. An established online casino being taken to court over a large payout SHOULD be compulsory study material for all online casino management, it is VERY relevant to what might happen in future as the industry becomes ever more mainstream. Court cases have the habit of making legal precedents, lawyers often draw on past cases to prepare for, and argue, their current ones. Judges too will look to past judgements to help them with cases before them that involve subject matter unfamiliar to them (such as the arguments surrounding online "bonus abuse").

 

[thelawnet]

This line of thought makes it even more complicated. rainer1323 may well not have won the jackpot had it been boosted by having the 167,000 put back, and it is impossible to say who might have taken it on. HOWEVER, it does not alter the fact that the money still does NOT belong to Casino Club, it belongs to the community of players who's play contributed to the pool in the first place.
Despite the complication of doing so, it should be possible to work out from playlogs from the game exactly which players contributed to that particular jackpot, and how much. They could then unwind this situation by voiding the entire round, and refunding these progressive contributions to their source.
There are precedents to this, Mansion had a bug with their multi-hand VP, and they fixed it, and then went back through play histories and recalculated the correct payouts for all hands played with the bug present, and credited the differences to each player.

An alternative suggestion is that Casino Club can make the 167,000 a prize pool in a separate promotion, and admit that they have done this because it was not right for them to simply keep it, and they were certainly not going to pay it to a cheat, and they thought this was the only viable way to return it to the player community who built it up in the first place.

The argument is that the player would not have had the money to play this game without 'cheating' first. If so, the win should not have happened and to undo this the ONLY way is that the money goes back to the jackpot pool. I would suggest this happens the next time the jackpot is hit, it doesn't make sense to do it when the jackpot is already high, but if it happens the next time the jackpot resets than that would be fair.

Maybe the player has gone to ground because despite there being 167K Euros at stake, he IS using a bot, and does not want this even discussed in court as it could endanger future use of the bot to make further profits. Quite a few casinos do NOT (currently) ban such bots in their terms, but could take a more aggressive approach should the existence of a "superbot" come to light. Further, the "proof" of bot use would come out, and although it might help bot developers evade detection in future releases, it would also educate many other casino operators who might currently be unaware they had an issue with bots.

You're jumping the gun. No sign of a court case from either side after many months.

As for superbots, a bot can do no more than a player with a strategy card can. If you are playing Single Deck Bj (which is PA at Boss - do Casino Club offer this), you can make a profit, but the only way to guarantee this is to play about 3,000,000 hands to even be sure of breaking even, something that would take a year of 24/7 bot play. Other games are not player advantage, and as for card counting, casinos use a new deck each hand, it eliminates this issue.

 

[Gogo]

If you look a picture on german forum where is history log, its clearly indicated that AFTER jackpot (R.Flush) were hit, in the same minute was hit another bet..then another..!!
That is odd. I think everybody will wait a little. I would wait, then say :yuppppiiiii and quit/withdraw.
Player did not quit, he countinue to play..

 

[kmay87]

If you look a picture on german forum where is history log, its clearly indicated that AFTER jackpot (R.Flush) were hit, in the same minute was hit another bet..then another..!!
That is odd. I think everybody will wait a little. I would wait, then say :yuppppiiiii and quit/withdraw.
Player did not quit, he countinue to play..

I wouldn't agree with that. I don't think that any of us should judge why anyone acts in the way they do. Perhaps most players, should they hit a big win, would instantly withdraw, but there again it is quite possible a player would use these funds to play games at stakes he would not normally be able to.

If this was me, I would have been waiting every second of every day for that Moneybookers payment to arrive. The second it did, I would have withdrawn that to my bank account. Hence, the issue of the casino taking it back wouldn't have occurred

I'd disregard any questioning of why the player acted in that manner. The issue is whether he should be paid the win, and if not, where is it going to go.

 

[kmay87]

The argument is that the player would not have had the money to play this game without 'cheating' first. If so, the win should not have happened and to undo this the ONLY way is that the money goes back to the jackpot pool. I would suggest this happens the next time the jackpot is hit, it doesn't make sense to do it when the jackpot is already high, but if it happens the next time the jackpot resets than that would be fair.

I'm not sure I totally agree.

If the jackpot recently went for circa 70k, then 170k is probably not the norm. Now I've got no idea what the jackpot resets to when won (perhaps someone can tell us?) but if they throw this into the pool, it's going to be a huge jackpot. Depending on probabilities, which I cannot comment on as I don't know the frequency of this jackpot being hit, it could be won instantly, or it could take months. Although you could argue this could be just like Mega Moolah for example - many players pile huge amounts into the jackpot, along comes someone who has never played it before and takes the top prize - there are far less players contributing to it. Therefore, in my opinion, as so many people would have contributed to the 170k, chances of them winning could be greatly reduced, as this would attract more attention for a start - i.e. people looking at the jackpot and thinking it's going to pay soon.

In an ideal world, Casino Club would do as vwm said, and refund all players who contributed to it. That's fair, noone can say otherwise. But are they going to? I somehow doubt it.

Whatever does happen, it has to be returned to the video poker game in one form or another. Making it a general jackpot, be it a promotion or whatever, opens it to more people who wouldn't have played it. And that isn't fair.

But not returning it at all is entirely different.

 

[hitobito2005]

The jackpot resets to 25k. It's rare for it to get as high as 170k, although I did see it as high as 200k a couple of years ago.

 

[Jufo]

As for superbots, a bot can do no more than a player with a strategy card can. If you are playing Single Deck Bj (which is PA at Boss - do Casino Club offer this), you can make a profit, but the only way to guarantee this is to play about 3,000,000 hands to even be sure of breaking even, something that would take a year of 24/7 bot play. Other games are not player advantage, and as for card counting, casinos use a new deck each hand, it eliminates this issue.

CC removed single deck BJ almost a year ago so there cannot have been any blackjack game where he could have played profitably with a bot. That's why I don't see bot play as a legitimate issue.

When the jackpot was 167 500, that video poker game had 115% payout (checked this from vpgenius site). That is 15% player edge on each hand played. It would have made infinitely more sense to play that video poker game with a bot and hunt for the royal. However some strategy adjustments would have been needed to take into consideration the value of the royal.

 

[kmay87]

CC removed single deck BJ almost a year ago so there cannot have been any blackjack game where he could have played profitably with a bot. That's why I don't see bot play as a legitimate issue.

When the jackpot was 167 500, that video poker game had 115% payout (checked this from vpgenius site). That is 15% player edge on each hand played. It would have made infinitely more sense to play that video poker game with a bot and hunt for the royal. However some strategy adjustments would have been needed to take into consideration the value of the royal.

If that's right, it puts a new perspective on things.

 

[vinylweatherman]

The argument is that the player would not have had the money to play this game without 'cheating' first. If so, the win should not have happened and to undo this the ONLY way is that the money goes back to the jackpot pool. I would suggest this happens the next time the jackpot is hit, it doesn't make sense to do it when the jackpot is already high, but if it happens the next time the jackpot resets than that would be fair.



You're jumping the gun. No sign of a court case from either side after many months.
As for superbots, a bot can do no more than a player with a strategy card can. If you are playing Single Deck Bj (which is PA at Boss - do Casino Club offer this), you can make a profit, but the only way to guarantee this is to play about 3,000,000 hands to even be sure of breaking even, something that would take a year of 24/7 bot play. Other games are not player advantage, and as for card counting, casinos use a new deck each hand, it eliminates this issue.

That was my point, NO case seems forthcoming from the PLAYER, despite there being 167K Euro at stake. This may be because he CAN walk away from such a sum BECAUSE he IS using a bot, and does NOT want the subject matter of casino bots in general drawn to the attention of a wider audience of players and operators by being the KEY argument in a court action, and what in the player/operator community will be a high profile one.

CC removed single deck BJ almost a year ago so there cannot have been any blackjack game where he could have played profitably with a bot. That's why I don't see bot play as a legitimate issue.

When the jackpot was 167 500, that video poker game had 115% payout (checked this from vpgenius site). That is 15% player edge on each hand played. It would have made infinitely more sense to play that video poker game with a bot and hunt for the royal. However some strategy adjustments would have been needed to take into consideration the value of the royal.

Maybe he did just this, as well as a Blackjack bot, there is a VP bot available. In terms of playing a progressive with a player edge such as this, being able to play fast, and 24/7, with adjustments to strategy to hunt for the RF, will give the player quite an advantage over other players who are playing for the progressive "normally".

What we still don't have clearly is how the original and alleged bot play made him 30K Euros with which to play the progressive VP machine, since even with the single deck Blackjack (which CC didn't have at the time anyway) thelawnet says it would still take YEARS of 24/7 bot play on that game just to even be sure of breaking even.

The only way to explain a profit is BONUSES, but this would imply that CC gave this player CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN 30K EURO IN BONUSES, as bot play would ONLY allow him to keep a portion of the bonus money by efficiently clearing WR.

 

[Gogo]

Moneybooker in their T&C have not option to reverse payment unless account holder agrees.
So its obiviosly that Moneybooker have with some merchants special agreement for these act and that are very serius issue for us - players.
Can someone ask Moneybooker for a statemant?

In previus post my point is that player was use Bot, because Bot can not be happy for wining a JP, "he" imidiatly continue to play like nothing has happen.

 

[kmay87]

The one thing I can't fathom though (and this is just a guess as I don't know the facts) is why anyone would chase the progressive. He was playing at 25 Euro stakes, right? As this isn't a random, unless the terms of the game require you to be playing at those stakes - as opposed to just betting max coins - unless he was using a bot that could manipulate the game, the player stood a good chance of busting from that 30k. And as foolish we may say scammers are, I somehow doubt anyone would risk everything for a jackpot win that in effect, is purely luck, after presumably doing a lot of work to climb up to that initial balance.

 

[Gogo]

The one thing I can't fathom though (and this is just a guess as I don't know the facts) is why anyone would chase the progressive. He was playing at 25 Euro stakes, right? As this isn't a random, unless the terms of the game require you to be playing at those stakes - as opposed to just betting max coins - unless he was using a bot that could manipulate the game, the player stood a good chance of busting from that 30k. And as foolish we may say scammers are, I somehow doubt anyone would risk everything for a jackpot win that in effect, is purely luck, after presumably doing a lot of work to climb up to that initial balance.

I agree. And like you say, you would withdraw by wire. Is he hide behind MB?
He gave up money and wont to hide method of play.

 

[kmay87]

I agree. And like you say, you would withdraw by wire. Is he hide behind MB?
He gave up money and wont to hide method of play.

I personally would withdraw yes, but what someone else would do could quite easily be different. Perhaps they would use this for a high stakes poker game. Or to fund their online gambling instead of drawing on bank accounts. The reasons for why he didn't are irrelevant - after all, we don't know the timescale between Casino Club actioning the withdrawal, and then recalling it.

With regards to your earlier post, at this stage there is nothing to prove this guy used a bot. Most of us believe he did, hence the reluctance to press this case further. But who knows.

Moneybookers won't speak to us. Data protection for a start. And they have no reason to. If it goes to court, anything they said could be used against them. Clearly, there is some arrangement between Moneybookers and Casino Club. Therefore, who knows how far this arrangement could extend. And as you said, that is worrying.

 

[hzock2]

What we still don't have clearly is how the original and alleged bot play made him 30K Euros with which to play the progressive VP machine

it was said somewhere that he made deposit(s) of 25k Euros. CC then credited 5k (!!!) in bonus money to his account. This is where his balance came from.

So CC actually gave a 'long known fraudster' 5k in bonus money to play with :notworthy

 

[Jufo]

The one thing I can't fathom though (and this is just a guess as I don't know the facts) is why anyone would chase the progressive. He was playing at 25 Euro stakes, right? As this isn't a random, unless the terms of the game require you to be playing at those stakes - as opposed to just betting max coins - unless he was using a bot that could manipulate the game, the player stood a good chance of busting from that 30k. And as foolish we may say scammers are, I somehow doubt anyone would risk everything for a jackpot win that in effect, is purely luck, after presumably doing a lot of work to climb up to that initial balance.

I suppose that the 167k jackpot was available only for 25 bets with lower jackpots for smaller coin sizes?

Regarding the chance to bust 30K chasing royal I can provide a calculation for that:

Firstly the chance to hit royal with modified strategy is 1/28 605 (notice that this is 1/40 000 with basic strategy). 23.2% of the return is within the royal so without the royal the long term return is 91.68%. This equals average 2.09 lost for every 25 hand. Therefore 30K bankroll allows on average 14419 hands to be played. Since the probability for royal was 1/28 065, there is a 59.8% chance to lose 30K without hitting the royal. I would say that 40.2% are pretty good odds to turn 30K into 167K.

 

[thelawnet]

That was my point, NO case seems forthcoming from the PLAYER, despite there being 167K Euro at stake. This may be because he CAN walk away from such a sum BECAUSE he IS using a bot, and does NOT want the subject matter of casino bots in general drawn to the attention of a wider audience of players and operators by being the KEY argument in a court action, and what in the player/operator community will be a high profile one.

I don't see that. The casino can prove nothing. All they can say is 'this player is playing very fast, and made no mistakes, that means he is probably playing with a bot'.

Maybe he did just this, as well as a Blackjack bot, there is a VP bot available. In terms of playing a progressive with a player edge such as this, being able to play fast, and 24/7, with adjustments to strategy to hunt for the RF, will give the player quite an advantage over other players who are playing for the progressive "normally".

While this is true, it hasn't been suggested. He won on his fifth or sixth hand, the casino are saying that he had money in his account got by invalid means (playing bj with a bot) and he used that to hit the jackpot.

 

[FRENCHIE]

just wondering

I hate butting in . I have a question. I am a poker player and I don"t play slots are video poker. what is a bot never heard of one before till this thread. but my opioion is if they knew he was a abuser why did they let him play? I have seen alot of these casino get the slightest notion you are a abuser and bam they close your account. why noy him? but then you have this deal with him not saying anything for 4 months, he had twwo accounts here, so usually where there's smoke there's fire.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Moneybooker in their T&C have not option to reverse payment unless account holder agrees.So its obiviosly that Moneybooker have with some merchants special agreement for these act and that are very serius issue for us - players.
Can someone ask Moneybooker for a statemant?

In previus post my point is that player was use Bot, because Bot can not be happy for wining a JP, "he" imidiatly continue to play like nothing has happen.

Irrelevant, just as it was when Prime Casino did exactly the same to a player they had already paid by Neteller. 2 weeks later, they took it back. Prime actually discussed this with us mere players, duly apologised, after application of pressure promised this would NEVER happen again - BUT, be warned, Prime Casino NO LONGER HAVE THAT MANAGER, and they dropped themselves from Casinomeister.

What this tells us quite clearly is that casino both CAN and DO arbitrarily reverse payouts from two of the top 3 Ewallets. In the Prime case, the rep stated they simply had to ask for the money back, and since it was still these, it was given to them. The processor did NOT have to supply a reason for this, and neither did Neteller have to even INFORM the player, let alone get permission. Prime offered this as defence to allegations that they must have lied to Neteller to get the funds back on the assumption that Neteller would require a reason first.

This is indeed worrying, and quite possibly illegal under UK law. When we as customers issue a "chargeback", we have to give a reason to the card company, and the merchant HAS THE CHANCE TO DISPUTE THE CLAIM FIRST. The CASINOS ability to "chargeback" our winnings is far more absolute than OURS to chargeback payments for goods & services.

The ONLY time a payment can be taken back from someone's account is where there has been an error, and this does NOT include where there has been a DISPUTE. This was NOT a case of an error, but of a DISPUTE about whether the player had fairly won the jackpot, therefore Casino Club acted outside of these safeguards that are granted to account holders. This would be a lot worse were this a BRITISH player, as they could go straight to the FSA and put the heat on Moneybookers to explain themselves, or face being banned from offering emoney handling services to UK players (in reality, it would not be illegal for them to continue, but they would have to move fully offshore, a bit like Click2Pay, who seem to flit between Germany and Cyprus, depending on who answers your emails, or what part of the site you look at).

 

[Rusty]

I suppose that the 167k jackpot was available only for 25 bets with lower jackpots for smaller coin sizes?

Regarding the chance to bust 30K chasing royal I can provide a calculation for that:

Firstly the chance to hit royal with modified strategy is 1/28 605 (notice that this is 1/40 000 with basic strategy). 23.2% of the return is within the royal so without the royal the long term return is 91.68%. This equals average 2.09 lost for every 25 hand. Therefore 30K bankroll allows on average 14419 hands to be played. Since the probability for royal was 1/28 065, there is a 59.8% chance to lose 30K without hitting the royal. I would say that 40.2% are pretty good odds to turn 30K into 167K.

Assuming you are the only person playing

Of course the odds do not quite work like that as playing 28,605 hands would guarantee the Jackpot.

Each hand is a separate event and has an equal chance of delivering a Royal.

 

[heffernan]

i wanna know from the cc:

what was about your "one miilion winner"? you did also talk so much with your lawyers? the judgement so was faster then now...!!!!????

you paid out without questions???? h??

or only a promotion fake??? and its not a secret that all people talking this way...

and not all german, polish or other are fraudster...

and the letter of your lawyer firm is the biggest joke i ever read....

come on...

the player payed in much more the 25.000 ... and you mean he would let play a "bot"...

you are funny... and now use the statement of multi-accounts and organized crime...

you only shoot in your legs....

cause....never a "big fish" will pay in now...

and the "little" will also never play there...

sincerly

 

[kmay87]

Assuming you are the only person playing

Of course the odds do not quite work like that as playing 28,605 hands would guarantee the Jackpot.

Each hand is a separate event and has an equal chance of delivering a Royal.

My point exactly. If this player was a fraud (or should we say a competent one ) he wouldn't have gone chasing a jackpot when his chances of winning came down to that - chance.

I can't comment on whether he needed to play 25 Euro hands to qualify for the jackpot, as I don't know. BUT, if that were the case, it seems a pretty high stake for any jackpot. I could spin 1p on Mega Moolah and get the 5.5 million ( although knowing my luck, it would be more like spinning 5.5 million and winning a penny ) other slots offer a good return for a fixed amount going up to 5 coins. I'm sure when I used to play at Casino Club they had a huge jackpot on blackjack, that involved getting an unlikely outcome - three 7's of a particular suit or something like that I think. Hence, I'm confused as to why he would play at these stakes.

 

[kmay87]

i wanna know from the cc:

what was about your "one miilion winner"? you did also talk so much with your lawyers? the judgement so was faster then now...!!!!????

you paid out without questions???? h??

or only a promotion fake??? and its not a secret that all people talking this way...

and not all german, polish or other are fraudster...

and the letter of your lawyer firm is the biggest joke i ever read....

come on...

the player payed in much more the 25.000 ... and you mean he would let play a "bot"...

you are funny... and now use the statement of multi-accounts and organized crime...

you only shoot in your legs....

cause....never a "big fish" will pay in now...

and the "little" will also never play there...

sincerly

You think that just because the player piled in 25k he wouldn't use a bot? In my opinion, that's more of a reason why he would. 25k plus a 5k bonus would create HUGE wagering requirements. Hence, a bot makes this much quicker.

As for the rest of your post, that's plain gibberish..............

 

[vinylweatherman]

You think that just because the player piled in 25k he wouldn't use a bot? In my opinion, that's more of a reason why he would. 25k plus a 5k bonus would create HUGE wagering requirements. Hence, a bot makes this much quicker.

As for the rest of your post, that's plain gibberish..............

I believe he uses a German to English translator, hence the "gibberish".

His 5 posts ALL relate to bot issues at CC. He raised a complaint lat Autumn, and was initially banned as a "fraudulent player" for himself using a Blackjack bot at CC, however, later was paid on appeal after it was argued the "proof" was open to debate.
What was even MORE interseting was that kmiss analysed the playlogs from this session, and claimed that it showed that CC software played differently for runs of "flat betting", but that it was possible to somehow "shock the system" by raising the bet at opportune moments, almost like a "Clairvoyant bot".
Now we have claims from CC that this "other"? German player used such a "Clairvoyant bot" to not just play, but PREDICT the outcomes in advance, and presumably bet accordingly. I had initially put this down to flawed translation, since this was an English translation of a German post; however a "proper" translation also spoke in no uncertain terms of the bot being able to PREDICT THE OUTCOME, rather than simply play perfect strategy.

My prediction, circumstantial of course, is that our heffernan and the 167,500 winner are associated in some way, perhaps by both being members of some kind of "advantage player community". His post here berating the behaviour of CC's lawyers for their actions in this compared to another case where the player was eventually paid is what aroused my suspicions. Oddly enough, heffernan was originally branded a fraud by the Meister, before himself getting paid by CC, who were also accusing him of bot play.

Perhaps I have missed something, this is after all an issue that spans several pages of several threads, and is far bigger than I had thought before last Autumn.

 

[heffernan]

You think that just because the player piled in 25k he wouldn't use a bot? In my opinion, that's more of a reason why he would. 25k plus a 5k bonus would create HUGE wagering requirements. Hence, a bot makes this much quicker.

As for the rest of your post, that's plain gibberish..............

sorry, but for me its senseless...maybe he had the luck before to get a big win like you...and would pay in 25K and more....but i think, my meaning, i would never let play a bot...in this high... ok ... i dont know what bots are able to do...but why this alleged "multi-account"?...

if the bot would not win the first time, you would try again in this marge? or would raise the marge with opening a new account and pay in 25K and would risk not cash-out to open a new account?

sincerly

 

[kmay87]

I believe he uses a German to English translator, hence the "gibberish".

His 5 posts ALL relate to bot issues at CC. He raised a complaint lat Autumn, and was initially banned as a "fraudulent player" for himself using a Blackjack bot at CC, however, later was paid on appeal after it was argued the "proof" was open to debate.
What was even MORE interseting was that kmiss analysed the playlogs from this session, and claimed that it showed that CC software played differently for runs of "flat betting", but that it was possible to somehow "shock the system" by raising the bet at opportune moments, almost like a "Clairvoyant bot".
Now we have claims from CC that this "other"? German player used such a "Clairvoyant bot" to not just play, but PREDICT the outcomes in advance, and presumably bet accordingly. I had initially put this down to flawed translation, since this was an English translation of a German post; however a "proper" translation also spoke in no uncertain terms of the bot being able to PREDICT THE OUTCOME, rather than simply play perfect strategy.

My prediction, circumstantial of course, is that our heffernan and the 167,500 winner are associated in some way, perhaps by both being members of some kind of "advantage player community". His post here berating the behaviour of CC's lawyers for their actions in this compared to another case where the player was eventually paid is what aroused my suspicions. Oddly enough, heffernan was originally branded a fraud by the Meister, before himself getting paid by CC, who were also accusing him of bot play.

Perhaps I have missed something, this is after all an issue that spans several pages of several threads, and is far bigger than I had thought before last Autumn.

Possibly, but my comment was less of the actual words used (i.e. an understanding that English isn't the players' native tongue) and more of what they are actually saying. I don't believe that the comments posted in the German forum were said by Casino Clubs' lawyer, nor do I think this issue will stop people playing there.

 

[kmay87]

sorry, but for me its senseless...maybe he had the luck before to get a big win like you...and would pay in 25K and more....but i think, my meaning, i would never let play a bot...in this high... ok ... i dont know what bots are able to do...but why this alleged "multi-account"?...

if the bot would not win the first time, you would try again in this marge? or would raise the marge with opening a new account and pay in 25K?

sincerly

Think about it this way. You have 25k and you want to make as much money from it as possible. You could play blackjack yourself, thinking that it can't be that hard to play and win, or you could let a bot do it for you, where the mathematical advantages mean a significantly lower house edge.

Casino Club has long been the target of such bot users.

But with regards to multi-accounts, that's something I had missed. Where was this suggested?

 

[heffernan]

I believe he uses a German to English translator, hence the "gibberish".

His 5 posts ALL relate to bot issues at CC. He raised a complaint lat Autumn, and was initially banned as a "fraudulent player" for himself using a Blackjack bot at CC, however, later was paid on appeal after it was argued the "proof" was open to debate.
What was even MORE interseting was that kmiss analysed the playlogs from this session, and claimed that it showed that CC software played differently for runs of "flat betting", but that it was possible to somehow "shock the system" by raising the bet at opportune moments, almost like a "Clairvoyant bot".
Now we have claims from CC that this "other"? German player used such a "Clairvoyant bot" to not just play, but PREDICT the outcomes in advance, and presumably bet accordingly. I had initially put this down to flawed translation, since this was an English translation of a German post; however a "proper" translation also spoke in no uncertain terms of the bot being able to PREDICT THE OUTCOME, rather than simply play perfect strategy.

My prediction, circumstantial of course, is that our heffernan and the 167,500 winner are associated in some way, perhaps by both being members of some kind of "advantage player community". His post here berating the behaviour of CC's lawyers for their actions in this compared to another case where the player was eventually paid is what aroused my suspicions. Oddly enough, heffernan was originally branded a fraud by the Meister, before himself getting paid by CC, who were also accusing him of bot play.

Perhaps I have missed something, this is after all an issue that spans several pages of several threads, and is far bigger than I had thought before last Autumn.

heyheyhey,

at time to clear, i dont know realplayer, and the first time i also thought its a joke or fake of him (im member of the german forum)....

but today i read the lawyers letter the first time and my meaning is, theres a big joke in, in the letter, cause its not going with german rights...and they can publish much of works in net how they wanna..but thats not going with german right...and so im laughing about this letter...

sincerly

 

[Jufo]

Assuming you are the only person playing

Of course the odds do not quite work like that as playing 28,605 hands would guarantee the Jackpot.

Each hand is a separate event and has an equal chance of delivering a Royal.

The bold part is exactly how I calculated the 59.8% chance of not hitting the jackpot with 30K spent. The chance to hit the jackpot is also independent of other players.

 

[heffernan]

Think about it this way. You have 25k and you want to make as much money from it as possible. You could play blackjack yourself, thinking that it can't be that hard to play and win, or you could let a bot do it for you, where the mathematical advantages mean a significantly lower house edge.

Casino Club has long been the target of such bot users.

But with regards to multi-accounts, that's something I had missed. Where was this suggested?

ok think about....and so i would never get 25k in cc or another oc...and if i had millions of cash i wouldnt also do?... and realplayer have it?...and would risk it?...so he has to say something too!!!!...

why, where it comes.. and so on...? if i had this marge of money, would go in real casino... but its his turn to tell about, if he wanna

sincerly

 

[kmay87]

That depends.

Could I personally deposit that? Yes. But would I? Certainly not. My money remains safely with me and I'm not putting it in the coffers of casinos.

Having said that, if a casino came along and said to me 'if you make a deposit of 25,000 we will give you a bonus of 5,000' or whatever, with it being a withdrawable bonus and a WR which I could easily complete on a game I wanted to play, then I would probably consider it.

So with this player, perhaps that very thing did happen. Or perhaps as I'm sure Casino Club would like, he is part of an international fraud ring who have extorted this money from their casino in the past. Who knows.

Probably, I would guess this money either doesn't belong to the player, or it isn't alot to him. Hence why the low profile. When Casino Club 'busted' me for supposedly using a bot, I gave them absolute hell until I got my deposit back. And that was over 100 Euro!

 

[heffernan]

@ vinylweatherman

what you understand about "flat beats"...

the last times (hours) of my game in this night, i played the mostly time the high limits...so you didnt read all or talking gibberish...!!!

sincerly

 

[heffernan]

Possibly, but my comment was less of the actual words used (i.e. an understanding that English isn't the players' native tongue) and more of what they are actually saying. I don't believe that the comments posted in the German forum were said by Casino Clubs' lawyer, nor do I think this issue will stop people playing there.

read it and try to understand it, i know its in german...read it more time....

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

sincerly

 

[kmay87]

Thanks for that. I hadn't seen it in that much detail before.

I only had time to scan read it, but if that is their 'defence', it's pretty pathetic.

I'm going to do a bit of digging here. To my knowledge, there are three workable blackjack bots that actually do what they say on the tin. I know of none that are so-called 'superbots' if you like. So I'm inclined to believe that perhaps the player, or someone in his 'group' created this program.

Notice that nowhere in that letter is there a mention to the jackpot win. 'Profits' is ambiguously referred to.

Fundamentally, if this guy used multiple accounts he's pretty much stuffed. If he didn't, there's still something to pursue here.

Casino Club, nor their legal firm, make any reference to paying out withdrawals prior to this investigation (unless my translation didn't work). But we know they did. A quite common phrase we use over here comes to mind - tough titties They made a huge error in paying. If he doesn't have multiple accounts, and can prove this, there is no reason to not continue pressing.

Casino Club clearly know what they did. They think by getting some 'nasty lawyer' figure into the mix, the player is going to be too scared with the threat of legal action coming from Casino Club. But they can't sue for potential loss. Only actual. And something tells me this player probably hasn't had much out of them, so the chances of that are minimal.

 

[hzock2]

to summarize this letter for you guys:

Insbesondere der Logarithmus der gettigten Einstze sowie der Umgang mit den Karten besttigen den Verdacht, dass Sie Software gebrauchten, um statistische Vorhersagen ber die mglichen Spielereignisse zu errechnen. Dies taten Sie u. a. auch, um sich eine berlegene spielerische Strategie zu sichern und damit auch einen (finanziellen) Vorteil zu verschaffen.

Especially the logarithm (??? this does not even make any sense in German) of the bets placed as well as how you dealt with the cards confirm the suspicion, that you used software to calculate statistical predictions on the possible game outcomes. One of the reasons for your actions was to ensure a superior strategy and to gain a financial advantage.
[this is followed by standard bot accuses]

Nach den vorliegenden Informationen haben Sie noch mindestens ein weiteres Spieler-Konto unter irrefhrender Verwendung weiblicher Kontaktdaten erffnet

Based on the informationen available you have opened at least one more account using misleading female contact information.

Rechtsfolgen
Auf Grund der vorgenannten Untersuchungsergebnisse kann das betrgerische Spielverhalten technisch und rechtlich nachgewiesen werden.
Dementsprechend ist es Ihnen mit sofortiger Wirkung untersagt, Ihren/Ihre Benutzerkonto/en bei CasinoClub.com zu benutzen.
Wir fordern Sie auf, es zu unterlassen, weiterhin Auszahlungsanfragen an die Mitarbeiter unserer Mandantschaft bzw. an das Auszahlungs- oder Supportteam zu schicken.
Da die Gewinne aus den vorgenannten Aktionen fr weitere verschiedenartige Spiele genutzt wurden, wurden die gesamten Daten Ihres Spieler-Kontos, Ihr Nickname und Ihr Passwort gelscht. Ein Anspruch auf den ursprnglich ausgewiesenen Betrag auf Ihrem Spieler-Konto besteht nicht.
Des Weiteren behalten wir uns das Recht vor, etwaige Schadensersatzforderung unserer Mandantschaft, verursacht durch Ihr gesetzes- und vertragswidriges Spielverhalten, geltend zu machen. Dies bezieht sich u. a. auch auf etwaige Kosten fr die rechtliche Verteidigung unserer Mandantschaft.
Zustzlich haben wir unsere Mandantschaft darber informiert, dass nach unserer Ansicht in Ihrem Verhalten ein versuchter Betrug zu sehen ist und entsprechende rechtliche Schritte eingeleitet werden knnten.

legal impacts (summarized)

Based on the information available fraud can be proved on a legal as well as on a technical basis.

- Therefore you may not log in or use your account
- We require you to stop sending payment requests to any support staff.
- As the winnings obtained above were used for several other games your account (&balance) was deleted. There is no legal right to receive any winnings. We reserve the right to sue you for compensation caused by your illegal [by law] and term-breaking play. This may as well contain any lawyer costs caused by us. Additionaly we informed CC, that on our point of view your actions are attempted fraud and legal action could be taken.

(it sucks to translate lawyer style german into english)

 

[hzock2]

and now my 2 cents:

i) there's said a lot, but nothing has been proven.
ii) NO legal action has been taken just threats (see vi)
iii) even the lawyers insist that there has been some kind of a prediction element.
iv) obviously you are NOT allowed to play the best strategy possible at CC, because you gain a financial advantage by doing that
v) they insist the jackpot win derived from illegal winnings. if this guy made a 25k deposit I STRONGLY DOUBT that he would have run out of cash if he had not made these winnings before.
vi) now the most funny part: according to german law online casinos may not advertise at all. CC has been reported several times to distribute flyers in front of land based casinos in Germany. Furthermore it is not even clear if online games may be offered in Germany. --> 'semi-legal' CC now employ a German lawyer to take legal actions against a player although they must be quite aware that they can not sue this guy on a legal basis in germany... :notworthy

 

[Jufo]

iii) even the lawyers insist that there has been some kind of a prediction element.
iv) obviously you are NOT allowed to play the best strategy possible at CC, because you gain a financial advantage by doing that

It is mind-boggling that they actually believe there exists a way to beat a random game. And if their claim was true, they should face severe consequences for having a non-random/rigged blackjack game.

 

[thelawnet]

I believe he uses a German to English translator, hence the "gibberish".

His 5 posts ALL relate to bot issues at CC. He raised a complaint lat Autumn, and was initially banned as a "fraudulent player" for himself using a Blackjack bot at CC, however, later was paid on appeal after it was argued the "proof" was open to debate.

The proof was complete rubbish. Which does draw into question any claims by Casino Club that players are using bots. It seems that this is a convenient get-out clause for any big winner.

And more so given that the player was banned without the opportunity of a comeback or expert analysis by an independent third party.

What was even MORE interseting was that kmiss analysed the playlogs from this session, and claimed that it showed that CC software played differently for runs of "flat betting", but that it was possible to somehow "shock the system" by raising the bet at opportune moments, almost like a "Clairvoyant bot".

I don't find that interesting. I find it to be 'finding

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

. People are EXTREMELY bad at generating or recognising random data.

Have you ever played a (social) card game where the cards end up in order? When you shuffle you need to be especially thorough. If you check the cards to see if you've done a good job you'll probably interpret runs of cards as evidence that you have not yet done a good job, and perhaps move the offending cards to another part of the deck.

The thing is though that such patterns are inherent in random data.

Heads, tails, heads, tails, heads, tails, heads, tails, heads, tails is very very unlikely in random data, and if you experienced it online, it would be pretty good evidence that the game is not fair (if it went on long enough, it would be concrete, cast iron PROOF).

Now we have claims from CC that this "other"? German player used such a "Clairvoyant bot" to not just play, but PREDICT the outcomes in advance, and presumably bet accordingly. I had initially put this down to flawed translation, since this was an English translation of a German post; however a "proper" translation also spoke in no uncertain terms of the bot being able to PREDICT THE OUTCOME, rather than simply play perfect strategy.

But that is quite simply bollocks.

Such a thing is impossible. The analysis presented in the heffeman's thread is of no value at all.

What is this supposed to mean?

Link Outdated / Removed

"Out of 1446 hands there were the following 'streaks'

Winning streak:
6,4,4,4,5,6,5,7,9,6,4,4,8,4,6,5,7,5,4,4,5,4,4,4,4,4,5,5,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,5,4,4,4,5,4

Losing streak:
4,4,4,7,5,5,6,4,4,5,4,5,4,6,4,15,4,6,4,4,4,4,6,5,4,4,4,9,6,10,7,4,4,5,9,4,5"

So?

I made a random number generator with a similar return to blackjack, and I got the following 'streaks':

wins
"4,4,4,5,4,5,6,4,5,4,4,4,5,6,4,5,6,4,4,5,6,7,3,"
losses
"4,6,4,10,4,4,7,4,5,11,4,5,4,4,5,4,6,5,4,5,5,5,6,5,5,4,5,5,4,5,4,4,5,5,4,18,4,4"

And? What does it prove? The answer is nothing.

Each hand is independent and random, and is not correlated with another hand.

If that is not the case, then Boss Media as software provider are utterly incompetent as programmers and all of the casinos using their software should be shut down immediately.

I don't believe this to be the case of course, I am just pointing out that a stream of numbers means nothing, and 'streaks' are just 'patterns in randomness'.

My prediction, circumstantial of course, is that our heffernan and the 167,500 winner are associated in some way, perhaps by both being members of some kind of "advantage player community".

On what basis? They both come from the same country?

Hmm, wonder why that would be.

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

The Casino Club, the dominant on-line casino in German-speaking markets. Larger than William Hill, Sportingbet and Bet 365 from a single market position, The Casino Club boasts 58,000 active customers and more than 100,000 registered users. The associated Casino-Club magazine is well respected among roulette enthusiasts and currently has a circulation of over 100,000.

Gaming VC provides a proven business model and is a leading online gaming operator in German speaking countries.

His post here berating the behaviour of CC's lawyers for their actions in this compared to another case where the player was eventually paid is what aroused my suspicions. Oddly enough, heffernan was originally branded a fraud by the Meister, before himself getting paid by CC, who were also accusing him of bot play.

Heffernan took no bonus. He played blackjack with massively high bets and got lucky, such is gambling. This happens in Las Vegas every night of the week. How do they respond? With free plane tickets, a complimentary suite and dinner on the house. What happened to heffernan? He got kicked out, accused of fraud, and had his winnings confiscated.

In case this isn't clear: If (despite the evidence that heffernan is a degenerate gambler betting stupidly high stakes on a casino advantage game who should have the red carpet rolled out to him by any sensible casino) it was possible for Heffernan to make a profit by using a bot, then CASINO CLUB SHOULD BE CLOSED DOWN IMMEDIATELY, and with it all other casinos using the same software - because if the game is predictable, it is not random, it is not fair, and the casino is ripping off all its players.

And as for the German poster, in both threads, it's hardly proof of some sort of conspiracy of Germans (perhaps they will get together and cook us some bratwurst?), but pretty normal given that Casino Club are a German casino primarily, and even send out emails to English players in German!

Perhaps I have missed something, this is after all an issue that spans several pages of several threads, and is far bigger than I had thought before last Autumn.

The point to take away is that casino games are completely random, and each hand is independent from every other. If you've lost eight hands on the trot, don't increase your stakes thinking you'll win the ninth, because your chance of winning is exactly the same as it was when you started.

One Microgaming/Playtech/Boss casino is as good as any other (for 'luck', if not for payouts and service), all those posts about people saying they are not doing as well as they used to are just experiencing normal luck.

BTW, here's a graph of Heffernan's balance:

Expired Image

Looks like this particular clairvoyant is about as accurate as Mystic Meg. There's a near-10,000 euro downswing there!

And with the player playing at least 240 500-euro hands, what would you say the standard deviation is of that play? That is a measure of normal +- loss from the average (which happens to be a loss of about 600 for 240 hands).

The answer is sqrt(240) * 1.15 * 500 = 8900 euros. That's ONE standard deviation. Only 68% of results lie within one standard deviation of the mean for a normal distribution! In other words 68% of results lie between 8900 euros above and ~ 8900 euros below the mean - i.e. between a 9500 euro LOSS and a 8300 WIN.

For two standard deviations, it would be +- 17,800 euros. And results outside even those scary looking numbers are nothing unusual. You need to be getting up to some pretty crazy numbers to be sure (or at least 99.999999%)

It's VERY clear to me, that Casino Club don't have a clue what they are doing, given that they took a player who had bet like a degenerate for hours on end, happened to come out on top, and decided to accuse him of fraud.

They clearly can't:

* identify whether a player has used a bot or not
* retain a very profitable gambler who is prepared to play at 500 euros a hand and should have had the red carpet rolled out
* understand basic probability.

This doesn't speak well of them at all, they blatantly don't understand the way the business they are in works.

As for the present case, the claims that the player has used a bot, given past experience (that Casino Club chose to accuse a (potentially very profitable) player of fraud simply because he won and had played for a long time), the casino's word should NOT be taken as true, for the reason that it wasn't in the past, and in fact their claims that that player did were fatal to the credibility of their business, because the only way that a player can profit without a bonus on blackjack is if they are not dealing fair games, so they were effectively saying that their games are not fair and that the player was exploiting that.

 

[heffernan]

bad translated words:

in particular, the logarithm of actual links and the colloquial with the card confirms the suspicion that they used software to perform statistical prediction about the possible backlash to calculate results.

means for me, i can tell you the lottery pays for wednesday...

its possible...??? i think no... if i could, i would tell you all without getting money

so its possible to know the cc random generator?

if it it, it was the last time i paid in there...???

so where is the trick?

there is no one!!!!

right

the only foul is he won this jp...

and now the cc is looking for fouls...like they always do


sincerly

 

[thelawnet]

to summarize this letter for you guys:



Especially the logarithm (??? this does not even make any sense in German) of the bets placed as well as how you dealt with the cards confirm the suspicion, that you used software to calculate statistical predictions on the possible game outcomes. One of the reasons for your actions was to ensure a superior strategy and to gain a financial advantage.
[this is followed by standard bot accuses]

I'm not sure why they are talking about 'statistical predictions', because it is actually very hard to make 'statistical predictions' as such on the fly. Boss use a six deck game and with 312 cards in the deck the possible combinations are huge, and with the deck being shuffled after each hand, there would be no point in making such predictions anyway, because a coded strategy card would have exactly the same effect.

It is a rather odd claim, they are claiming that the software can give SUPERIOR strategy. This is not so. It can only give perfect strategy, which still accords the casino with 0.46% advantage.

They clearly don't know what they are talking about (although they are certainly not alleging 'clairvoyance', they seem to be labouring under the illusion that in a six deck game shuffled each hand, composition-dependent strategy is useful. It is not).

 

[heffernan]

and now my 2 cents:


vi) now the most funny part: according to german law online casinos may not advertise at all. CC has been reported several times to distribute flyers in front of land based casinos in Germany. Furthermore it is not even clear if online games may be offered in Germany. --> 'semi-legal' CC now employ a German lawyer to take legal actions against a player although they must be quite aware that they can not sue this guy on a legal basis in germany... :notworthy

yeah...

this i mean... hzock2 undertand me a little bit...and i got more in this "nice" letter..

sincerly

 

[Rusty]

Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
Assuming you are the only person playing

Of course the odds do not quite work like that as playing 28,605 hands would guarantee the Jackpot.

Each hand is a separate event and has an equal chance of delivering a Royal.

The bold part is exactly how I calculated the 59.8% chance of not hitting the jackpot with 30K spent. The chance to hit the jackpot is also independent of other players.

I do understand what you mean I am just pointing out that with 29,975 spent the chance of hitting a random is exactly the same as it was with the First hand.
The chance to hit the jackpot is not independent of other players (though again I know what you mean) because they are playing in the same game and should they win the jackpot before you (something that becomes more likely the more players playing) then obviously your strategy would be in shreds as the value of the jackpot would now massively decrease.
Or, in short, your odds change the more players there are.

Anyway we digress.
The One thing that is different here than with Heffernan's case is that this payout is in theory already accounted for as it is a Jackpot.
So assuming the money would be returned to the Jackpot the Casino has nothing to gain by deciding to not pay One player over another.

Certainly CC would appear more credible if the Jackpot had been returned to the game since they are so certain that RealPlayer is not entitled to it and they can prove he is a fraudulent player. (according to them)

So a pertinent question for CC to answer is, where is the money?

If they have doubts they may still have to pay out the Jackpot to RealPlayer then obviously that proves they themselves believe their case is weak.
If it is watertight as they seem to insist then why is the money not yet returned to the Jackpot?

I will give CC an award for "Casino most likely to cut its own throat"

Every argument they use seems to be contradictory.

"Our software is random but people cheat by predicting the outcomes"

I really can not judge whether this player is a fraud or not (though my instincts tell me he is not squeaky clean) but knowing the facts you would have to be crazy to play at CC.
At the very least they are grossly negligent in their handling of the matter.

 

[vinylweatherman]

to summarize this letter for you guys:



Especially the logarithm (??? this does not even make any sense in German) of the bets placed as well as how you dealt with the cards confirm the suspicion, that you used software to calculate statistical predictions on the possible game outcomes. One of the reasons for your actions was to ensure a superior strategy and to gain a financial advantage.
[this is followed by standard bot accuses]



Based on the informationen available you have opened at least one more account using misleading female contact information.



legal impacts (summarized)

Based on the information available fraud can be proved on a legal as well as on a technical basis.

- Therefore you may not log in or use your account
- We require you to stop sending payment requests to any support staff.
- As the winnings obtained above were used for several other games your account (&balance) was deleted. There is no legal right to receive any winnings. We reserve the right to sue you for compensation caused by your illegal [by law] and term-breaking play. This may as well contain any lawyer costs caused by us. Additionaly we informed CC, that on our point of view your actions are attempted fraud and legal action could be taken.

(it sucks to translate lawyer style german into english)

This is all a bit odd, because since when did an online casino bring in the big guns (lawyers) to deal with minor infractions of terms & conditions.

It seems CC were the ones who started getting lawyers involved, but given the analyses of other posters, if online casinos are not strictly legal in Germany, CC must surely know that nether side could even bring this before a GERMAN court, as either party have already committed what could well be deemed an illegal activity. CC for offering it's services to Germans, and German players for playing - which might be contrary to interpretations of the law.

CC's letter looks like scare tactics, intended to make realplayer run for cover. The threat seems to be in the phrase "reserve the right". Could be taken as meaning that if realplayer shuts up & goes away, he will hear nothing more, but if he tries to appeal the confiscation, CC will hit him with not only a court case, but a claim for costs, which could be bankrupting to a mere individual given that CC's costs will be based on their very deep pockets.

This makes the "where's the money" question even more pressing. It is becoming ever more likely that this will NEVER get to court, and CC are needlessly hanging onto this money. At present, it looks like they will let this issue drag, it will end up petering out as nothing new crops up, and CC can then quietly pocket the 167K Euro as profit. Most players will never know, since CC have announced a winner, and the payment.

thelawnet posted a time graph of heffernan's play, which was WITHOUT a bonus. To me, this looks like a trace of a session where the player steadily grew more enthusiastic, and perhaps more confident, to the stage where the "adrenalin rush" took over and he increased the size of bets he was prepared to take, and the swings become ever wilder as the session proceeds. Eventually, and purely by chance, he decides to call it a day while ahead, and withdraws a profit. Enogh it seems for CC to brand him a fraud, and even enough for them to initially convince Max they were right.

The transalation of the lawyers letter shows that they are simply accusing the player of playing with perfect strategy, and as commented, this only requires a short visit to Mr Shackleford's website for a bespoke Boss Media strategy card for that exact Blackjack variant. Something that does not seem to be against the rules.

Now, if realplayer did indeed get greedy, and try again with a false female identity, he has shot himself in the foot. THIS is FRAUD, and if CC can prove it, the bot arguments become much less important. CC's lawyers are also using this false identity claim to strengthen the impact of their lawyers letter, and maybe this has been enough to scare off realplayer, who may lack access to legal advice because of the status (social perhaps, as well as legal) of online gambling in Germany.

Heffernan and realplayer may only be connected because they live in the same country, and have experienced similar issues with the same casino, and are members of the same German forum - but, for some casinos this is enough to call them out as "connected players", the first stage in an investigation.

 

[Gogo]

Can enyone point a some court cases and ruling of player vs online casino or
other way around, no matter what grounds? Where can we find transcript for those?

 

[heffernan]

They clearly can't:

* identify whether a player has used a bot or not
* retain a very profitable gambler who is prepared to play at 500 euros a hand and should have had the red carpet rolled out
* understand basic probability.

i dont wanna have rolled out the red carpet....

some words like "sorry for the inconvenience" or something else would be enough, but till today i never get it of cc...
sincerly

 

[kmay87]

This latest revelation in the ongoing saga that is Casino Club makes me slightly disappointed.

All along, I was going with the idea that the player probably used a bot on blackjack, moved on to video poker, where he hit a huge win, and then attempted to withdraw. I understood, if this be the case, that in his mind he could either have been laughing to himself that this 'scam', shall we say, has worked big time, or he understands that using a bot was against the terms and conditions, but still hoped he could keep the win.

Now this to the average player, which I am, would likely create a degree of frustration. We too may have played that game, perhaps in the hope of winning that jackpot, and someone has come along using illegal software and taken it from us. Not fair. To those who legitimately played the game, that 167k is partly comprised of their money, and it's gone to someone undeserving.

We can be fairly certain that anyone who willingly deposits 25k into a casino and then proceeds to play 25 Euro hands must have a degree of wealth coming from somewhere. So this isn't like the small-time player who comes across this 'stunning program' that will rapidly increase you chances of winning from a bonus, decided to use it and deposited a couple of hundred only to get busted. We can say with some conviction that this guy knew what he was doing, and had probably done it many times before.

I don't personally hold a grudge against Casino Club because they tried to pull the same tactic on me. My issue arises from how they have gone about this. If any other mainstream casino pulled this against one of us, I think I can say we would be horrified. Locking your account and conviscating your funds is one thing, but somehow persuading a third party financial institution to return a huge sum of money is something completely different.

Furthermore, I don't even have that much desire for the player to be paid his win. Of course, I would counter that should he be totally legit, but that is looking more and more unlikely as the days go on. As I see it, he hasn't come on here asking for help. His story was posted by a user who was later banned for multiple accounts, who had a vested interest against Casino Club because they banned either him, or a friend of his. One or the other, but not strictly relevant. Therefore, this wasn't posted to get our attention to a human interest story, or to make us question Casino Club, it was posted by a disgruntled user who wanted to probably defame the casino and get others against it. It's only since then viewing and understanding more of the facts that we have considered this in a different light.

As I said many posts back, and others have reiterated since, there is something not right with the casino's claims. I've spoken to a couple of developers of blackjack bots. Considering they must have a pretty strong knowledge of mathematics, gambling and programming, you would have thought if they knew of a way to somehow 'predict' the outcomes of a random game, they would be selling it, and making a vast amount more than bots that just play perfect strategy. But I'm told it's just not possible. That is, unless Casino Clubs' blackjack isn't random. And they wouldn't want to admit that now.......

Ultimately here, I just want to see a resolution. I've been with this thread since the beginning, and I intend to see it through to the end. If the casino returns the money to the jackpot pool, I'll happily consider the matter over. It won't in the slightest convince me to play there again though: there's been far too much negativity written about this casino. It really is in danger of losing its credibility.

I cannot fathom why the company has let this occur. If it is a load of frauds doing the talking, threaten them with defamation suits. That will shut them up. But not saying anything at all really doesn't satisfy the unease I have about them.

 

[Pinababy69]

Max told the guy that we were putting his PAB on hold until the legal stuff is cleared up. But since it looks as though this is ANOTHER case of player fraud at CC, we've suspended his account.

God, I had to search a dozen pages before I found this. I must have missed it the first time around. Any chance you could clarify what type of fraud Bryan? Multiple account fraud? Identity theft fraud? Bot play (although that would be more a breach of T&C's than fraud)?

I had a couple of other questions as well. One, you stated that he misrepresented his PAB facts. Any chance that any of this may be due to a language barrier? And one final thing....the casino has stated they can't reach him. He's (supposedly) in Germany, you're in Germany....given the fact of the large amount of money involved here, is there any chance that you could (or already have) tried contacting him directly via phone? Did he register a phone number with the casino that you could try? I realize that it is above and beyond your job description, or what you should have to do...but again, this isn't a couple of hundred dollars we're talking about here.

And I'm disturbed by how few "facts" we actually have here, the lack of any sort of reply from CC, and by the fact that the money hasn't been returned to the pool. Are there legal proceedings or aren't there? Is the player reachable or not?

In all honestly, my memory is fuzzy, and I only just skimmed the thread again today...I haven't read every word on all 15 pages, so if I've missed something, can someone bring me up to speed?

 

[FRENCHIE]

muli accounts

yes he did have multi accounts on here thats why he was banned,also on casino. the names and addresses where fictious. Any normal person with that kind of money wouldn't wait 4 months to say anything about not getting paid.Back in jan o7 because of new usa law I had 19845dollars that took 3 months to get and i was in contact everyday!! There is somthing wron here,bad wrong.