Is there any other accredited casino you know of in which "systems" or "betting patterns" are officially banned? I think that that is quite dangerous because almost anything could be considered a betting pattern, even if for example you play Blackjack and simply double your bet each time you lose. In this case, if you end up winning a sum of money and you cash out, they could say you were using a "system" or even worse if you play slots and do the same, your winnings might also be denied. It´s too subjective.
Unfortunately, incompetent CS can do a hell of a lot of damage when the player tries to challenge what is clearly an incorrect decision, but gets the "talk to the hand" treatment right through the chain of command until the issue blows up in public, and someone from upper management finds they have an out of control "fire" on their hands.
This happened to Fortune Lounge, where a player decided to try out a "betting system" without claiming a bonus. Front line CS then confiscated the winnings for violating the "irregular play" clause, and the player's first appeal was denied, and they then got the "talk to the hand" treatment. When the problem was posted here however, the rep spotted that the problem was with CS misinterpreting a term related to bonus play, and applying it wrongly to non bonus play. This was further compounded by the player's protests being given "talk the the hand" as a matter of policy, leading to the error never being spotted during the internal review process.
Spin Palace also went all the way with a misinterpretation of another term relating to "irregular play", and following the logic of the decision lead to the ridiculous conclusion that once a player's balance fell close to zero, there was no legal wager they could place without being in violation of the interpretation used to confisacate the winnings.
These incidents of carelessness dealt out to the "wrong player" lead to considerable embarrassment to the casinos concerned, which they would not have faced had CS either got it right, or the players' protests been dealt with properly, with the first internal review catching the errors made by front line CS long before the players felt the need to go public.
Grand Duke also tried to confiscate winnings from a player who used a "betting system" at Blackjack with no bonus involved. Unlike the others, they stuck to their decision, and ended up in the rogue pit as they were deemed unfit to operate a casino, and would therefore continue to screw players through similar decisions.
Heroes casino tried something along the same lines, confiscating the winnings from a player who used something similar to the notorious (and discredited) Cipher Blackjack pattern recognition system which predicted the outcomes of future hands based on the win/loss pattern of past hands, and encouraging the player to bet big when a winning hand was being predicted, and bet small when a losing hand was predicted. The casino claimed that such a system would "confuse the random number generator" in such a way as to make winning a certainty for the player, and again stuck to their guns. Their penalty was not merely a trip to the rogue pit, but having their software license yanked by Galewind for suggesting that the software could be "gamed" simply by recognising patterns in past result, something that was a serious libel as far as the software supplier was concerned, and who felt so strongly about it that after yanking the license, they paid the player in full from their own funds. This is something I have NEVER seen one of the major software suppliers do under similar circumstances.
This all shows that despite the logic and common sense, fear of "systems" is widespread, and quite a few operators just don't trust the randomness of the software they are using, and see abnormal good luck by a player who also appears to be using some kind of betting system as "proof" that they have somehow gotten the better of the software, and are somehow "cheating" their way to victory.
As for any casino that seeks to show players that it is reputable, even deserving of accreditation, thinking that voiding winnings for using a "system" where a player has only used their own money (no bonus involved) is OK - bring it on
-- and see how far you get when the matter reaches the forum.
Players, of course, would be best advised NOT to place themselves in the position of being the "bait", unless they are prepared for the possibility of a fight for their winnings. Only when a casino has given them the "bring it on" when they have asked if they may try a betting system without using a bonus should they consider the risk negligible.
32Red and 3Dice shouldn't have a problem with betting systems where no bonus is involved, and for any players who consider themselves better at math than the casino manager, I am sure 3Dice would welcome the challenge
