Casino reducing bet limits: opinions wanted?

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
It demonstrates an operator that does not understand the product they are offering.

To "limit risk" by only lowering bets for the odd individual lucky player after the fact still leaves them fully exposed to the next player that bets big, and hits big, possibly even bigger than 7K.

The only thought process I can see here is that the operator sees a new player, one who seems to have balls of steel and the bankroll to match. They see that they have gone 7K ahead not long after joining, and conclude with great "logic" that they must be using a "slot system" to increase their chances over the long term, so the 7K is just the start, they are sure to be sucked dry by this "system" in the longer term were it to be allowed to continue. Since the other players don't utilise a "system", there is no risk to allowing them to carry on betting high.

The main risk is really them never getting the chance to win back the early gains, because the genuine VIP player will walk away from this kind of messing around, taking the money with them to another operator. Word may get around (it already has, bar the name of this casino), and other high rollers may decide it isn't worth the trouble even signing up, as if they play like a VIP, they will be treated WORSE than the average player.

Once an operator accepts that there is no such thing as a system for random games without an element of strategy (slots, for example), they will realise that over the long term, they get to keep 5% of every bet, no matter how big or small, so in earnings efficiency terms, the bigger the better. Their insurance will be in place to protect them from ANY big hit, and in a random situation, it can come from ANY of their players.

It's possible they mistook you for ME though:rolleyes: (Dammit! that wretched weatherman is emptying our slots, lets play safe and set the max to 60p, no way will he get caught betting less than a pound, his reputation will be in tatters:D)
 

Simmo!

Paleo Meister (means really, really old)
Joined
May 29, 2004
Location
England
Just to update, I was deliberating how to approach this when I had an email this week saying that the casino management had reviewed the bet limits and restored them to what they were. They added that they had reduced the limits in "VIP Level 1" while the review was conducted (they said it was not just for me specifically as the software doesn't facilitate changes on an individual player).
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
Just to update, I was deliberating how to approach this when I had an email this week saying that the casino management had reviewed the bet limits and restored them to what they were. They added that they had reduced the limits in "VIP Level 1" while the review was conducted (they said it was not just for me specifically as the software doesn't facilitate changes on an individual player).

I find this VERY hard to believe. Bet limits for a VIP level 1 much LOWER than for everyone else, and them needing a "management review" of this, rather than just using common sense to tell them that VIP limits should NEVER be LOWER than for non VIP players, even if they are not made higher.

The miserly 60p bet in particular blows this excuse out of the water. No way would a competent operator EVER subject a whole tier of VIP players to this, it would be business suicide. On top of this, how come a few of their other VIP level 1 players haven't come here to comment that xxxx casino has suddenly lowered their bets to such an extreme.

I can only wonder whether they have cottoned on to who has noticed this, and having seen this thread gone into emergency damage control mode.
 

Nobunaga

Dormant Account
Joined
Jul 17, 2006
Location
Cambridge ON
Gambling

If Red 32 did this to many gamblers on this website, what would happen? It is like a partial ban.Gets back to Westland Bowl's point about blackjack.If they did this to players based on race or what country they hailed from, would that be alright with you? Or even based on one's sexual orientation at a physical casino, like in Russia or in other parts of the world?

That should be noted on the Accredited option on this website, that if a casino does this to you, players beware, because you may end up being banned someday.

The same issue happens in sports betting websites.The casinos are afraid of winners and cheaters.

I would be tempted to boycott any casino that did this to me, and talk to their ownership/management team.If I was discriminated based on race, religion, then I would allow my top lawyer to address this and look for an out of court settlement, or class action lawsuit.

Would you rather gamble at a casino that offered a limit of $1-$10 on roulette or $1-$100 on roulette?

Imagine if a stock website limited you on how much money you could invest in, and allowed rich people to do it more, and poor people to invest very small amounts only.

Nobunaga
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
If Red 32 did this to many gamblers on this website, what would happen? It is like a partial ban.Gets back to Westland Bowl's point about blackjack.If they did this to players based on race or what country they hailed from, would that be alright with you? Or even based on one's sexual orientation at a physical casino, like in Russia or in other parts of the world?

That should be noted on the Accredited option on this website, that if a casino does this to you, players beware, because you may end up being banned someday.

The same issue happens in sports betting websites.The casinos are afraid of winners and cheaters.

I would be tempted to boycott any casino that did this to me, and talk to their ownership/management team.If I was discriminated based on race, religion, then I would allow my top lawyer to address this and look for an out of court settlement, or class action lawsuit.

Would you rather gamble at a casino that offered a limit of $1-$10 on roulette or $1-$100 on roulette?

Imagine if a stock website limited you on how much money you could invest in, and allowed rich people to do it more, and poor people to invest very small amounts only.

Nobunaga

UK Privatisation share issues, most recently the Royal Mail, tend to work like this:mad:

I play mostly at Microgaming, and where bet limits have been changed, they have been INCREASED due to my "VIP Status", not shunted down to 60p. I can now bet £150 per spin on Munchkins (living dangerously, and probably for the casino too). I have even seen the limit on one Fruity upped to £20, (living VERY dangerously for the casino:p).

The only time I have seen bet maxima cut back have been at Go Wild when a bonus is in play, a setting they have used for some while, but which doesn't actually exist as far as other MGS operators seem to be concerned, who still use "smallprint" to control this parameter.
 

Vegasbum

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2007
Location
Ontario
I just signed up with Wild Jack casino (accredited here). After a couple hours they reduced the base bet on all games I was playing....and this is slots!! Most games have a base bet of just .005 or five cents per line. They left the coins/line alone but reduced the base bet. So the most I can bet on most games is 5 cents X 20 coin for 1.00 per line. Those who know how I bet realize I often bet more than a dollar on a line but I only play a line or two (not always). This has happened many times at accredited casinos. Sucks but I have learned to live with it.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
I just signed up with Wild Jack casino (accredited here). After a couple hours they reduced the base bet on all games I was playing....and this is slots!! Most games have a base bet of just .005 or five cents per line. They left the coins/line alone but reduced the base bet. So the most I can bet on most games is 5 cents X 20 coin for 1.00 per line. Those who know how I bet realize I often bet more than a dollar on a line but I only play a line or two (not always). This has happened many times at accredited casinos. Sucks but I have learned to live with it.


This is the first time I have heard of this at a Microgaming casino:eek:

It's a particularly low limit to set given the usual defaults.

It looks like Wild Jack are "spying" on individual players and micromanaging their accounts. Too much "big brother" for my liking, and yet another reason to treat Wild Jack with caution. There was a previous issue where Wild Jack were unresponsive to PABs, so it is surprising they are still accredited unless this has been cleared up.

Do the bet limits go back up to the usual defaults when there is no bonus in play?
 

mattsgame

Meister Member
webmeister
CAG
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Location
Out Of Town
I just signed up with Wild Jack casino (accredited here). After a couple hours they reduced the base bet on all games I was playing....and this is slots!! Most games have a base bet of just .005 or five cents per line. They left the coins/line alone but reduced the base bet. So the most I can bet on most games is 5 cents X 20 coin for 1.00 per line. Those who know how I bet realize I often bet more than a dollar on a line but I only play a line or two (not always). This has happened many times at accredited casinos. Sucks but I have learned to live with it.

Just so you know, Wild Jack Casino is no longer accredited here.

You may want to read these 3 threads Wild Jack Casino and Wild Jack Not Part Of Jackpot Factory and Wild Jack Casino Warning
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top