Definition of, or what exactly is 'bonus abuse'?

[Fleur-De-Lis]

As one of casino's rep told me after reviewing my account: "i see that you are not much of a bonus person". Well, I guess I was not, not when I just started. First of all, because the first online casino I played at offered no bonuses really, just $50 at sign-up, so I remained quite ignorant about the whole bonus thing for long time, untill getting to this Forums

Thanks to reading lots of posts on the subject, I realized that 1) bonuses are quite common practice 2) taking bonuses is favourable for a player 3) there are strings attached usually, i.e. you need to meet high WR, play certain games only etc. 4) bonus-relates problems are common, too - judging by fact that the whole CM Forum folder is devoted to this Most common clause discussed is referred to as 'bonus abuse'

Now, can somebody told me what exactly is considered abuse and what is safe, when taking a bonus? Thanks!..

See Related Threads:

• 21Grand: Pay Attention (IMHO)
• Rivals Dropping Like Flies
• 21Grand
• Define Bonus Abuse
• 21Grand Casino Bonus Abuse

 

[Casinomeister]

...Now, can somebody told me what exactly is considered abuse and what is safe, when taking a bonus? Thanks!..

Bonus abuse, or bonus abuser are tricky terms because they are so subjective. Operators see "abuse" - while players see this as taking a bonus and playing it to precise wagering requirements, and no more. If the player never returns to the casino, the casino operator feels "abused" and cries foul. The player did not play within the "spirit of the bonus". The spirit of the bonus being an incentive to try out new games, or play longer, but specifically - to become a returning player. Operators offer bonuses to retain their players, simple as that.

I try to convince operators that there is no such thing as bonus abuse, only poorly written terms and conditions. Bonus "abuse" and fraud are two different things. Some operators get their terms mixed up - a player who commits fraud (pretends he is more than one player, acts in tandem with other players, provides false ID, etc.) is not an abuser; he's a fraudster.

Players who use bonuses exclusively are deemed "advantage players". They are not abusing anything - they are only taking advantage of offers given to them. It's up to the casino operator to protect themselves with rock solid terms and conditions that are both fair and precise. And it's up to the casino operator to convince players that their casino is one to return to.

In fact, casinos should welcome advantage players. These players help the casinos keep on their toes ensuring there are no loopholes in poorly written terms.

The casino makes an offer and the player accepts this offer and abides by the rules, then that's a binding contract right?

So bonus abuse is a misnomer to some extent. There is really no such thing.

 

[happygobrokey]

the better the casino, the less you have to worry about.

basically they don't want people playing deliberately to cash out bonus money without actually "gambling". however, they also get peeved if you whack down most or all of the bonus money in one bet. those are the ideological answers to what they see as bonus abuse; of course standard things like multiple accounts, multiple bonuses, not meeting t&c's, playing disallowed games before wagering is cleared, etc can void your bonus/cashout under "abuse" as well.

your intent shows through; if you play as you would without a bonus, then it's nothing to worry about. if you grind out the exact number of minimum bets to reach the wr, or if you bet huge off the start to make double or nothing the value, then it's obvious you are trying to use the bonus with an intent (this is their favourite line) "contrary to the spirit in which it was given".

to min-grind is to not be gambling but just following instructions toward making bonus chips into real money. to do the quick-double-up is to treat the bonus as worthless to you, ie prepared to lose it in one or two hands. they want you to play as you normally would with your own money (no one throws their entire balance on one roll, well at least not the second they enter the casino), but of course they have to limit how soon you can cash out to avoid the first type who just want the max free cash with the least risk.

lmao i was going to just post the first line of this post, but i figure why not elaborate the reasons behind it as well. but no accredited casino should give you any flak if you're legit, and the best will not even care much to impose the ideological reasons, since technically it's all still betting and not really their business how you choose to bet.

and of course they do still win from the house edge taking its predictable cut (and reserving the right to restrict games and make playthroughs long enough to predictably win back the entirety of the bonus credits paid out), not to mention the big-bettors who get the short end of "double-or-nothing". nonetheless, in their shoes i can see why they view it as harmful/abusive or mean/rude of the player to use the bonuses this way.

as the phenomenon of bonus-wh0ring grew, casinos had to wise up and increase wr's, restrict games, and invent new ways to define improper play. it's just a shame they don't actually specify in t&c which play patterns are considered abusive. still, many explicitly forbid betting for instance red and black together on roulette, but they don't go one more step and say don't bet your whole stack or play to the very dollar of the wagering required...

alas, such is ambiguity... hope that is a decent treatise on bonus abuse. kk, v-dub, anything i omitted? they probably rung in on this while i was typing

edit after seeing above: spot on bryan! spoken like a true player advocate! mine on the other hand, spoken like a crusty cynical player...

edit after seeing below: simmo!! how ya been, old chap? i miss the days when we used to all make fun of you all the time, often in animation as well as just in text. you big blue blinking muppet!

 

[Simmo!]

I agree it's subjective. I think many casinos take the view that if a player is grinding out to win off a signup bonus then they are trying to profit from it and in their book that's "abuse". However, IMO if you want to use the lure of "free money" to attract players then you can't expect to have your cake and eat it. Wagerworks casinos are about the only ones that have truly sussed out how to handle signup bonuses.

If casinos want to argue that the "spirit of the bonus" is to try the games out then they are either very naive, or they should be using the "1 hour freeplay" concept. We live in age where most everyone wants a free lunch and like it or hate it, you have to recognise it.

The term "bonus abuse" is only in the dictionaries of casinos who haven't got their T&C's in order.

 

[Fleur-De-Lis]

These were two brilliant posts - basically explain everything I needed to know and/or consider - big thanks to CM and happygobrokey!

P.S. Just searched the forum and found an old thread on the same subject - had some laughs
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/youre-a-bonus-abuser-if.8841/

P.P.S. Next question: is there any no-WR bonuses around there, except those brand-new ones, just introduced by 3Dice?

I was so excited to get a newsletter yesterday, stating there gonna be no-WR match bonuses.... but since there are no WR, what is the right way for a player to act, to avoid being an abuser? Say, I deposit 100$, get a bonus, withdraw my own 100$ and play with bonus only. I bet it it is not the way it was intended to be, right?

 

[kakata]

.....it would be your last bonus....lol

 

[Simmo!]

These were two brilliant posts - basically explain everything I needed to know and/or consider - big thanks to CM and happygobrokey!

P.S. Just searched the forum and found an old thread on the same subject - had some laughs
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/youre-a-bonus-abuser-if.8841/

P.P.S. Next question: is there any no-WR bonuses around there, except those brand-new ones, just introduced by 3Dice?

I was so excited to get a newsletter yesterday, stating there gonna be no-WR match bonuses.... but since there are no WR, what is the right way for a player to act, to avoid being an abuser? Say, I deposit 100$, get a bonus, withdraw my own 100$ and play with bonus only. I bet it it is not the way it was intended to be, right?

You could probably just withdraw but I would suggest if you did that you might find future offers a bit harder to come by 3Dice tends to do no WR bonuses to loyal players mainly.

 

[happygobrokey]

i would at least play through once or twice. there's also money laundering for them to consider. deposits and withdrawals with very little to no gameplay between them is going to be a red flag with or without bonus.

might go so far to say play until you have been down by at least what the bonus is worth before trying to cash out, but provided it's a quality casino, any appreciable amount of play (like at least five to ten minutes at a medium pace with normal size bets) should be enough to show you aren't just cashing out what they give you at face, you are actually having a punt with it.

i haven't played very many no WR bonuses (or lost or max-won the petty free chips from rtg), so i don't have a lot of experience with actually cashing out on them, but if it's a top-notch casino and it is no wr, then they'll pay regardless how much play or none you give. and to get further incentives, i'd recommend giving them a bit of play back anyway to say thank you and hopefully keep 'em coming!

 

[chuchu59]

I can only recall 2 casinos giving me bonuses with no WRs - 32RED and Intercasino.

 

[Fleur-De-Lis]

Thanks again!
The very purpose of posting this was to avoid any kind of behaviour which could lead to trouble

 

[Mousey]

Once upon a time, way back when (before the UIGEA and before the casinos considered all players as enemies to be outwitted) when I'd win a contest at Mummy's Gold, the money would appear in my account. I could play it, or withdraw it -- up to me. And I'm not talking about $25 or $50, at times it would be $250 or $500. Sometimes I'd play it all out, sometimes I'd withdraw half and play the remainder.... but I kept going back, depositing (many times without a bonus) and giving them a chance to keep my money. They didn't seem to be 'afraid' of me. They had great CS. Reasonable terms for their deposit bonuses... **heavy sigh** I miss my Mummy's.

I apologize for the trip down memory lane. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming...

 

[GaryWatson]

The bonus system seems flawed. I cant say Im a fan of the.... take our mega bonuses/ you cheeky git, you won, you are a bonus abuser, mentality.

You dont see many poker sites labeling players bonus abusers. They incorporate their cut regardless, the playthrough sees to that.

The only similar thing in poker is from the affiliate side. An affiliate gets X amount for sending a player to a site. The sent player completes the minimum playthrough and never plays again. The affiliate makes more than the site and it is considered fraud abuse.

To eliminate the bonus abuse claims the sites need to keep their edge. They can do this by setting playthrough requirements. If the playthrough does not cover this, the site is at fault.

Bonus abuse claims is total BS. I hate seeing posts about it. It really doesnt have to happen. I blame the sites 100% for this.