Freakyvegas declined withdraw and took all money

[ternur]

Yes, you may lower the bet size regardless if it's a winning or losing bet. in case i've not explained it as clear, the term does not allow the player to reduce bet size more than half the previous bet, after increasing balance following high value bets.

There are no traps nor random stuff, and the bonus terms laid out are straight forward and understandable. It's often mentioned in forums as such that in the event that one would like to claim a bonus, to know the terms they're playing with in order to avoid any such situations.

Having said that, as per previous posts above, i think it's safe to say that we operate in a super fair way, even though the terms were indeed breached, the casino at it's own will gives the player another chance at continuing their game play to complete the wagering of the said bonus in compliance with the terms stated.

Like every single member has stated in this thread, the term used is quite the opposite of "straight forward and understandable". I'm having a hard time understanding the necessity of the term.

I'm sorry Lucas, but it seems that you allowing the player a second chance seems only to be some type of whitewashing. Would the player have had that chance if they did not post about it here? A decent move would have been to delete that term entirely.

 

[trancemonkey]

If they have a max bet rule they simply don't need this predatory term. It's that simple.

 

[Sonict]

I just happened to look at the Terms and Conditions on Ikibu Casino ( In the CA site ) and I see a similar term here...

• Bonus abuse
  • Bonuses at Ikibu are intended as reward to regular and valued customers. In order to continuing giving the best possible bonuses to valued customers, it is necessary to ensure that bonus abuse does not take place.
  • Accordingly, before any withdrawals are processed, all play will be reviewed for irregular playing patterns that may constitute bonus abuse.
  • The Casino has a zero tolerance policy towards bonus abuse and bonus-related fraudulent activity on accounts. If any bonus abuse or bonus-related fraudulent activity is suspected, casino management reserves the right to stop any further bonuses, promotions and/or offers and remove bonuses and winnings from these and/or linked accounts.
  • Behavior or activity that constitutes bonus abuse or bonus related fraudulent activity shall be at the sole discretion of casino management. Examples of bonus abuse may include, but not be limited to:
  • Using more than one account
  • Equal, zero or low margin bets or hedge betting
  • Placing single bets equal to or in excess of 30% or more of the value of the bonus credited to your account until such a time as wagering requirements have been met. This shall apply even if the value of the bet is less than €5 ($/CHF/AUD/CAD or 50 SEK/NOK).
  • Decreasing your stake amount by 60% or more (compared with your maximum bet since the award of the bonus) after a large win for the purpose of clearing wagering requirements while a bonus is still active.
  • Switching from a low weighted game (25% wagering contribution or less) to a higher weighted contribution game (70% or more) after large wins for the purpose of clearing wagering requirements.
  • When playing with a no-deposit bonus in your account, if you bet more than 10% of the bonus amount in a single bet, spin or round, your bonus and winnings may be voided.
  • Wagering the bonus money on excluded games
  • Bonus stacking (where multiple deposits are made to claim multiple bonuses, before original bonus wagering requirements are met)
  • Two tier betting (where large bets are placed on high variance games or outcomes, before switching to lower variance games or outcomes to clear wagering requirements).
  • Affiliate CPA or revenue share abuse.
  • Using a proxy or a VPN or masking IP your address
  • Delaying any game round in any game, including free spins features and bonus features, to a later time when you have no more wagering requirement and/or performing new deposit(s) while having free spins features or bonus features still available in a game is prohibited.
  • Players agree that games may become open to abuse against best efforts of the Casino to limit such abuse. Should such situation arise, the Casino will to the best of its ability to impose specific conditions in relation to awarded bonus and will expect the user to act within the boundaries of reason and refrain from employing gameplay with intent to abuse said offer.

It is a thing that shouldn't be in there. If too many people are beating your bonuses, you do this... BONUS BAN them so they can't use them, but allow them to continue playing on your site.

@rafelito

 

[colinsunderland]

and Betway, Butlers bingo, casino of dreams, Fantasino, Nektan, casino.com, betsson group, all have the same or similar term.

 

[zap987]

Funniest part is that the term only hurts the casino in the long run. The ev of the bonus will be lower or equal by reducing bets after a good early win. Of course it can make sense to lower variance for the individual player but why would a casino want to force people to play the optimal strategy for a bonus if they are willing to give up money?

 

[Piijjaa]

Iv got only 105 back and had lot to wager and they told me i have to play at 3€ bet like before "breaking" bonus terms. I know i had 500-700€ before i start playing 3€ bet and not much wager left in first time. So i think they cheat me and bad. I have check my playing history several times

 

[Lucas]

That has always been one of the stupidest most predatory terms - if you cant figure out how to exclude the game from the player or a pop-up, just have it count 0% toward WR

Hi Dionysus, we actually have a system in place that won't allow players to enter restricted games while having an active bonus automatically, so that term also is not possible to breach. hope that helps.

Iv got only 105 back and had lot to wager and they told me i have to play at 3€ bet like before "breaking" bonus terms. I know i had 500-700€ before i start playing 3€ bet and not much wager left in first time. So i think they cheat me and bad. I have check my playing history several times

Hi Piijjaa, the wagering requirements were simply the remainder of the wagering required that was remaining from the point of breach of terms. (meaning the wagering that was already done, had been taken into account and deducted from the pending wagering requirement). Also we informed you that you can continue your game play as at your bet size at the time prior to breach. Having said that, you are free to increase or decrease the bet size as you did and as per bonus terms.

should you need any further assistance, please do not hesitate to get in touch with me and i'll gladly help out.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

 

[Lucas]

On a similar note - in addressing the rest of the feedback posts - we genuinely appreciate all the input and comments from the various strong opinions, and we'll take everything into consideration re; making the terms yet even more friendly, further implementing player protective measures in addition to our max bet feature as well as not allowing players to not enter restricted games while having an active bonus which have been already in place for quite some time now.

As I had stated in our BBF, we are looking forward to all of the feedback here at the Casinomeister community not just for the 120 days period of the BBF, but way beyond that as an ongoing journey.

All your comments, remarks, praise, criticism, is of great value to us, and we are working and will continue to improve every aspect of our product offering.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

 

[nutnut]

On a similar note - in addressing the rest of the feedback posts - we genuinely appreciate all the input and comments from the various strong opinions, and we'll take everything into consideration re; making the terms yet even more friendly, further implementing player protective measures in addition to our max bet feature as well as not allowing players to not enter restricted games while having an active bonus which have been already in place for quite some time now.

As I had stated in our BBF, we are looking forward to all of the feedback here at the Casinomeister community not just for the 120 days period of the BBF, but way beyond that as an ongoing journey.

All your comments, remarks, praise, criticism, is of great value to us, and we are working and will continue to improve every aspect of our product offering.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

You're a disgrace, not you personally Lucas I'm sure you're a nice guy but the company you work for. Until you remove that RULE I hope everyone rightly boycotts your casino.

Down right THEFT, whats sick I could easily get caught by this rule. I might bet £1 a spin get good win go down to 40p and I lose everything? THEFT

 

[colinsunderland]

On a similar note - in addressing the rest of the feedback posts - we genuinely appreciate all the input and comments from the various strong opinions, and we'll take everything into consideration re; making the terms yet even more friendly, further implementing player protective measures in addition to our max bet feature as well as not allowing players to not enter restricted games while having an active bonus which have been already in place for quite some time now.

As I had stated in our BBF, we are looking forward to all of the feedback here at the Casinomeister community not just for the 120 days period of the BBF, but way beyond that as an ongoing journey.

All your comments, remarks, praise, criticism, is of great value to us, and we are working and will continue to improve every aspect of our product offering.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

The thing is, is that this rule is FAR to easy to break and not even by choice. What if someone plays minimum stake on every game they play on. They play a game with 50p min stake, get a win from that, then come off it (like many players do after a big win) and go onto a game with 15p min stake. They lose their winnings. Are you seriously saying that is anyway near being a fair rule? That isn't advantage play, its not trying to cheat you, it is just playing at the lowest stake the game allows, which I am 100% sure a lot of people do.
I was playing last night at a casino. My stakes varied between 50p and £4. That is normal play for me, had nothing to do with winning or losing, just what I felt like playing on any slot at the time. I would be extremely pissed if the casino refused my withdrawal because of my normal play style, had I been playing with a bonus.

 

[Tirilej]

Wow, I'm really surprised reading this thread. It seems like most people still don't read the rules, and I don't just speak about the OP because this is a common rule who have been in many casinos for many years.
It's there to just prevent people from signing up and try to take advantage of the welcome bonus by playing max bet and if they win high, they reduce the size to lowest bet, grind the wagering, cashing out never to be seen again.

Many praised Betat for years and they had that rule. Don't know if it's still there but probably.

I have never heard about a casino who use the term against normal players, who actually plan to return to the casino. They normally don't play like that anyway.
No, I don't like the rule at all but I've never been bothered about it and I can see the casinos side too as usual.

What bothers me though is that I told Lucas about that stupid rule about risking your winnings by entering a forbidden game the very day they opened. Still they haven't fixed it

 

[Jono777]

Sorry but I cannot see the casinos side at all.

Follow suit of the casinos which do things right (in that simply have a max bet rule and/or restricted/reduced games list)

As I said before the term is vague, misleading and predatory, this is exactly the sort of thing the UKGC is trying / going to rule out.

No need and much better and player friendly ways of doing things.

Nothing personal to Lucas at all, I take it the "people at the top" are simply refusing to budge on this one, their bad

 

[colinsunderland]

Wow, I'm really surprised reading this thread. It seems like most people still don't read the rules, and I don't just speak about the OP because this is a common rule who have been in many casinos for many years.
It's there to just prevent people from signing up and try to take advantage of the welcome bonus by playing max bet and if they win high, they reduce the size to lowest bet, grind the wagering, cashing out never to be seen again.

Many praised Betat for years and they had that rule. Don't know if it's still there but probably.

I have never heard about a casino who use the term against normal players, who actually plan to return to the casino. They normally don't play like that anyway.
No, I don't like the rule at all but I've never been bothered about it and I can see the casinos side too as usual.

What bothers me though is that I told Lucas about that stupid rule about risking your winnings by entering a forbidden game the very day they opened. Still they haven't fixed it

But this player is one who has returned, and how can a casino know if any customer will come back next week

I'm sorry but this rule is terrible. How is anyone supposed to know what a large win is? People who play 10p stake might think £10-£20 is a large win, personally, I see it as £500+ on my style of play. So if I win £50, might drop my stake and lose all winnings .

I'm not sure how it can be defended tbh, and just because other casinos have the same rule doesn't make it right.

Let's not forget, this isn't the sole complaint .It isn't even listed under at least one language, and you can lose everything if you dare to open some games .

 

[nutnut]

Wow, I'm really surprised reading this thread. It seems like most people still don't read the rules, and I don't just speak about the OP because this is a common rule who have been in many casinos for many years.
It's there to just prevent people from signing up and try to take advantage of the welcome bonus by playing max bet and if they win high, they reduce the size to lowest bet, grind the wagering, cashing out never to be seen again.

Many praised Betat for years and they had that rule. Don't know if it's still there but probably.

I have never heard about a casino who use the term against normal players, who actually plan to return to the casino. They normally don't play like that anyway.
No, I don't like the rule at all but I've never been bothered about it and I can see the casinos side too as usual.

What bothers me though is that I told Lucas about that stupid rule about risking your winnings by entering a forbidden game the very day they opened. Still they haven't fixed it

I knew you be only one to put in a defence for a casino.......

 

[Tirilej]

But this player is one who has returned, and how can a casino know if any customer will come back next week

I'm sorry but this rule is terrible. How is anyone supposed to know what a large win is? People who play 10p stake might think £10-£20 is a large win, personally, I see it as £500+ on my style of play. So if I win £50, might drop my stake and lose all winnings .

I'm not sure how it can be defended tbh, and just because other casinos have the same rule doesn't make it right.

I believe you're seeing ghosts in daylight They would never deny anyone their winnings if they couldn't clearly see the kind of pattern I described. It's not about winning on 10c bet but on £4-5 in betsize, often on a high variance slot. If you managed to do that fast then reduce the bet to maybe 20-30c to grind out the wagering it's easy to see.

This guy probably played and won like this on his first deposit at the casino. As Lucas said it was just last weekend even though he claimed that it was in January.
If they manage it one time then why not try again.
If you go from casino to casino playing like that you can do a very nice profit even if you lose at some places. I don't recommend you trying though

As I said, if it was used against every player then we would have had a lot more complaints about it in here. Why haven't everyone who screams in this thread been screaming before?

PS. Many of you must remember that some casinos even forbid the use of playing with autoplay, just in a way of stopping players like this.

 

[Tirilej]

I knew you be only one to put in a defence for a casino.......

I said I don't like the rule but I'm not bothering about its existence. Then I'm trying to explain why the rule exist and if you want to see it like I'm defending the casino then fine.

You on the other side is as usual one of the rudest one in the thread. How come you never got back in the other thread and continue the discussion?

 

[TheAddict]

Tbh using a tablet i sometimes open the wrong game despite being confident in what id clicked. Infact i open a hell of a lot of wrong of everything on a regular basis let alone wrong games in a casino.
If its a netent game for eg usually i wouldn't realize its a different game till its loaded & so likely wouldn't have enough time to weigh up the EV between forfeiting my bonus balance or forfeiting my tablet against the nearest wall.

Am also a low roller who looks for the low stakes, and if i hit a monster on say Jurassic park at min bet of 30p, wouldnt think twice about moving to doa or bod at 9p/10p since they always get a session from me if not banned from bonus play, and always get played on min bet.

 

[AnnaTS]

What was OP's bet size when they won and what did they reduced it too ?

Not that i agree with the term, I am just curious what it actually was.

re; the term in question is used among several operators, and is among other terms for bonus abuse prevention.

This comment from the casino confuses me, There is already a 30 X D + 30 x B attached too the bonus and the amount of times i have busted on bonuses that were just 30 x bonus is countless.

If someone get a decent win on say £3 and they have lets say they have £1500 but only have £900 left to wager and goes down to 90p a spin, I would see that as having a minimum of £600 after wagering , How is that bonus abuse ?

I thought bonus abuse was when you keep taking bonuses but haven't deposited without using a bonus for a while.

 

[colinsunderland]

I believe you're seeing ghosts in daylight They would never deny anyone their winnings if they couldn't clearly see the kind of pattern I described. It's not about winning on 10c bet but on £4-5 in betsize, often on a high variance slot. If you managed to do that fast then reduce the bet to maybe 20-30c to grind out the wagering it's easy to see.

Yes but you are making assumptions there, you don't actually have any idea if thats what happened, for all we know, the player may have played 500 spins @ £5, and 10 spins at £2. Even if it was clear that was what happened, the terms are not. I'm struggling to understand how anyone can defend a term that isn't clear, and is open to complete abuse by a casino. If it stated 'if you decrease betsize to under xx% of the stake after a large win of 200x stake or more, then we reserve the right to remove your bonus' then I still wouldn't like it, but I would accept the term was fair, as it was clear (assuming it was stated as a significant term rather than hidden away).

A lot of (shit) slots shout BIG WIN when you get 10x stake. So if you win a tenner from a £1 stake, then go to another game and play 40p spins, you seriously think its fair to have your winnings removed? Or is the large win 100x, 1000x, 10000x? No one knows as the casino can just make up the rules as they go and cheat players whenever they feel like it. I notice Lucas hasn't stated what a large win is, but @Lucas feel free to state EXACTLY what a large win is?

 

[sufferinsilence]

It was pointed out here that the exact terms weren't exactly like that in the Finnish (native) version of the OP. I for one wouldn't read the terms in multiple languages to see if there are differences and would trust the casino if they offered me their site in my native language to have the correct translation. And what about people who aren't fluent in any other language except their native one?

Not even talking about the rule just that if a casino offers multiple languages they should have their affairs in order to start with.

 

[Tirilej]

Yes but you are making assumptions there, you don't actually have any idea if thats what happened, for all we know, the player may have played 500 spins @ £5, and 10 spins at £2. Even if it was clear that was what happened, the terms are not. I'm struggling to understand how anyone can defend a term that isn't clear, and is open to complete abuse by a casino. If it stated 'if you decrease betsize to under xx% of the stake after a large win of 200x stake or more, then we reserve the right to remove your bonus' then I still wouldn't like it, but I would accept the term was fair, as it was clear (assuming it was stated as a significant term rather than hidden away).

A lot of (shit) slots shout BIG WIN when you get 10x stake. So if you win a tenner from a £1 stake, then go to another game and play 40p spins, you seriously think its fair to have your winnings removed? Or is the large win 100x, 1000x, 10000x? No one knows as the casino can just make up the rules as they go and cheat players whenever they feel like it. I notice Lucas hasn't stated what a large win is, but @Lucas feel free to state EXACTLY what a large win is?

I don't defend the term and I don't like it, but I do understand why it's there. I totally agree with you that they could make it much clearer, and I hope they will.
I was just surprised that this got so big and insults was thrown against them, when the rule is so common.

I also hope that as soon as you see in any T&C of a casino where it says that the casino will deny winnings because of irregular betting pattern that you also react because this is the kind of rule that should be there instead. Those casinos are just afraid to be this clear. Then they refuse to tell what the player have done wrong.

I also doubt that Lucas and his casino would get accredited here and then start to try and cheat their players.

 

[PaaskeDenmark]

I though slots were 100% random clearly they are not if casinos has to confiscate winnings from players. I have not read all the pages here but I don't see where a players has advantage of lowering bets after a win??

 

[dionysus]

I though slots were 100% random clearly they are not if casinos has to confiscate winnings from players. I have not read all the pages here but I don't see where a players has advantage of lowering bets after a win??

i dont imagine it has anything to do with randomness, rather casinos stressing players betting big, hitting big, then dropping to min bet to grind out WR to take the lot and run.

 

[colinsunderland]

I don't defend the term and I don't like it, but I do understand why it's there. I totally agree with you that they could make it much clearer, and I hope they will.
I was just surprised that this got so big and insults was thrown against them, when the rule is so common.

I also hope that as soon as you see in any T&C of a casino where it says that the casino will deny winnings because of irregular betting pattern that you also react because this is the kind of rule that should be there instead. Those casinos are just afraid to be this clear. Then they refuse to tell what the player have done wrong.

I also doubt that Lucas and his casino would get accredited here and then start to try and cheat their players.

Well its happened before, in fact it happens quite often where a casino gets accredited on here then the rep drops off the face of the earth, which I know isn't cheating players as such, but some casinos are clearly happy to get the extra players, then when the sign ups drop off, don't put any effort in anymore.

What would be useful would be if someone with an account could pop onto live chat and ask what a large win is, I can't as live chat doesn't seem to be available unless you are logged in.

 

[GC_Konstantin]

Yes but you are making assumptions there, you don't actually have any idea if thats what happened, for all we know, the player may have played 500 spins @ £5, and 10 spins at £2. Even if it was clear that was what happened, the terms are not. I'm struggling to understand how anyone can defend a term that isn't clear, and is open to complete abuse by a casino. If it stated 'if you decrease betsize to under xx% of the stake after a large win of 200x stake or more, then we reserve the right to remove your bonus' then I still wouldn't like it, but I would accept the term was fair, as it was clear (assuming it was stated as a significant term rather than hidden away).

A lot of (shit) slots shout BIG WIN when you get 10x stake. So if you win a tenner from a £1 stake, then go to another game and play 40p spins, you seriously think its fair to have your winnings removed? Or is the large win 100x, 1000x, 10000x? No one knows as the casino can just make up the rules as they go and cheat players whenever they feel like it. I notice Lucas hasn't stated what a large win is, but @Lucas feel free to state EXACTLY what a large win is?

My view on the matter: it is a relatively common term found in many casinos, set as a trap not to bonus hunters but to lazy people who can't be arsed to carefully read the full terms, policies, etc which in total can add up to 1.5-2 hours of reading.

In most cases, basically that term does not allow the player to reduce his bet with more than 49.9% as long as the player has build a balance of anything more than what he started to play with (if I recall correctly, some casinos specify that this rule only applies once the player doubled his starting balance or won more than what he did deposited in his last transaction to the casino). Some casinos like those from Casino Rewards group (btw they do have maybe the best no deposit bonuses in the industry since the winnings are not capped and progressive slots are allowed -- actually someone won a few millions $$$ on a no deposit if I recall correctly) don't even let you use autoplay feature while you are playing with a bonus (and actually that makes more sense against player bonus abuse than does this rule with not reducing your stake by half). -- Why ? Because it's so simple to overcome the rule in question (as someone also pointed above in the thread): say you deposited $100 got a 100% match bonus and started playing $5 per spin (max allowed while having an active bonus) and hit a feature that paid you 900x bet within your first ten spins ! So you now have about $4,700 in your casino balance and you are now very motivated to do your best to preserve as much as possible of your win, even though there is still a very long way to go having about $11,950 to wager before you will be allowed to cash out your win. Naturally you'll want (and need) to reduce your bets somewhere within $0.4-$1 area (or even lower to as down as $0.1 if you are happy to let it on autoplay a couple days) but how you do it to not breach the term you know is there (because you read it carefully enough) ??

Simply: your next bet will be $3, the next one will be $1.6, the next one will be $1, the next one will be $0.6 and that's it (within 4-8 bets of consecutively reducing your bet with 40% from your previous bet, you overcome the rule) !

So, as I said, this rule is not set to trap bonus hunters (btw, bonus hunters usually read the rules very carefully and respect them to the letter) but lazy or unsuspecting people which don't have the patience (or time) to carefully read all the blah blah terms and policies for a couple minutes of gambling entertainment. What's worse is that this kind of rule starts to pop in terms related to non bonus play (and yes, that is rogue and predatory) also set to trap the players who prefer to play without bonuses just to skip the hassle of reading so many terms and conditions thinking that they must be safe if are playing without bonuses. There is where I draw the line: nasty terms attached to bonus might be acceptable, but unrelated to bonuses is clearly not acceptable.

Keep it Safe,
Denis

 

[Sonict]

That method you put for getting around the rule wouldn't work on Ikibu if you were to try it since it says this...

"Decreasing your stake amount by 60% or more (compared with your maximum bet since the award of the bonus) after a large win for the purpose of clearing wagering requirements while a bonus is still active."

Read the text that are in Italics. It pretty much says if I bet and won on say a $2 bet, it means I can't bet at 80 cents and lower for the rest of the bonus.

 

[lockinlove]

This is rogue and i see no way you do not lose your accreditation once the admin comes along.

Some casinos do have this but do no apply it unless it is noticeable. I have played at betsson doing $2 bets and then lower to .80 and it was fine. When I asked about it they said it more applied if I was doing $5 and then lowered to 50 cent. Which I still think is BS.

Some people like to mess around and bet a bit bigger for awhile example betting $2. And then go back to their comfort zone. You really going to take peoples winning because of this?

Be a good casino. Give the player their money and change your terms. I see this as your only out to not lose complete respect. Its not caving or pride, its the right thing to do.

 

[Broke]

Bullshit. I would understand if a player wins big on £€5 stake and after that goes to Borenanza e.g at €0.6 - €1 stakes in order to complete the wagering reqs. But if one plays €1 stakes and after a good hit lowers bet size to 0.4 - 0.6 and if because of that casino refuses to pay, then it's just bullshit. Well, another casino to AVOID.

 

[Bonanza Lover]

I tend to stay well clear of any casino which either has vague T&C's like the one in this thread or where the bonus T&C's are so complex that it is difficult or takes time to interpret if I (the player) am meeting the T&C's. Playing at a Casino should be an enjoyable experience and their are plenty of other casinos out there which have simple, clear, concise terms. These are the ones I sign up to and these get my business.

 

[slotter999]

Such an awful yerm. I would definitely be interested to see what view UKGC took of this. It essentially forces a customer to gamble at a level which they may not be overly comfortable with doing for prolonged periods of play. There is definitely a responsible gambling consideration here which the casino appears to ignore.

If the casino were pro player and also wishing to protect themselves - why not just have a lower maximum bet size.

Freaky Vegas can be sure of one thing though as a result of this thread - they will never get one cent of my money.

 

[chiya]

This is rogue and i see no way you do not lose your accreditation once the admin comes along.

Some casinos do have this but do no apply it unless it is noticeable. I have played at betsson doing $2 bets and then lower to .80 and it was fine. When I asked about it they said it more applied if I was doing $5 and then lowered to 50 cent. Which I still think is BS.

Some people like to mess around and bet a bit bigger for awhile example betting $2. And then go back to their comfort zone. You really going to take peoples winning because of this?

Be a good casino. Give the player their money and change your terms. I see this as your only out to not lose complete respect. Its not caving or pride, its the right thing to do.

Losing accreditation over this will never happen. I've once questioned about the rogue-ish terms of one another accredited casino, which I can't remember right now. I believe I was told by the Meister himself that the bonus rules of a casino do not affect whether the casino gets accredited at all.

Also this thread clearly proves that most of you never read the T&S at casinos. This rule about halving your bet is nothing new. I've seen it countless times, and it's a rule I more or less expect a casino to have. Even if the terms don't straight out say the specifics of the rule, every casino usually has a rule about reserving the right to void winnings if they deem your play "irregular". Playing like this would classify as that. Therefore whenever I play at casinos I fully expect them to use this rule against me if I play like this.

I too sometimes raise my bet from the lowroller zone to try few spins on a bigger bet. Sometimes I get lucky and win. If it's a massive win I'm not just gonna drop back to 0,20 from 2. Instead I might drop to 1,50, and after a while drop to 1 .. never got into trouble this way.

Though I do still sometimes wonder what does classify as "significant increase" in balance, and if winning such sum means you actually can't ever go back to low bets. What I described above is what I'd do but whether I've got lucky or that's actually allowed I do not know ..

 

[theapple]

Also this thread clearly proves that most of you never read the T&S at casinos. This rule about halving your bet is nothing new. I've seen it countless times, and it's a rule I more or less expect a casino to have

where on earth do you play?

i play actively or semi actively on maybe 2-3 dozens of casinos and not a single one has this term. Are you hand picking casinos with crappy bonus terms or how does that work?

 

[CasinoNinja]

I agree with what has been said here, there is NO reason for a casino to have this term. The bonus wagering + the fact that a slot returns less than what you put in on average should be enough.

Lowering stakes does not lower the wagering requirements, it just makes it last longer but you still just have to be as lucky to clear it. It's not a "strategy" it just makes the fun last a bit longer.

This is a BS term for casinos to be greedy.

 

[AnnaTS]

This reminds me of something i did last year that i had totally forgot about when i was playing at Slots magic while having a bonus active.

Usually my bets are between 40p - 90p but sometimes i like to try my luck and do bets up to £1.50.

What i actually did was i had been betting between 40p - 90p as usual but none of the slots were doing anything and i was getting a bit fed up and i had £200 balance left, So i decided to go on magic mirror and do 100 spins at £2 a spin, I was really lucky because 5 ladies came in and i won £1000.

I posted this win in the screenshots explaining what happened and it's not something i do a lot, But after i won this i went back to doing my normal 40p - 90p spins.

So because i tried my luck at a higher stake than what i usually and won, Then went back to what i usually bet that's now abusing a bonus ?

So according to this casino what i did, I should've had my winnings taken away is disgusting.

 

[goatwack]

Of course players are going to protect their balance and grind out the remainder. With a cash out so close in sight it's what every gambler would do when playing with a bonus.

This casino knows gamblers' patterns and has constructed a term around that. It's foul and if anything goes against the 'spirit of the bonus', this surely is it.

I don't see the long- term benefit for the casino here either. Player retention is going to be near 0, and all to save a few hundred here and there from confiscations??

These are the dying embers of the bonus system quite obviously, it's been coming for a while. This is about as far removed from the early introduction of bonuses as is possible and makes a mockery of honest players. Just so the casino can go

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

Accredited my arse, as Jim Royle might say

 

[Lucas]

Wow, I'm really surprised reading this thread. It seems like most people still don't read the rules, and I don't just speak about the OP because this is a common rule who have been in many casinos for many years.
It's there to just prevent people from signing up and try to take advantage of the welcome bonus by playing max bet and if they win high, they reduce the size to lowest bet, grind the wagering, cashing out never to be seen again.

Many praised Betat for years and they had that rule. Don't know if it's still there but probably.

I have never heard about a casino who use the term against normal players, who actually plan to return to the casino. They normally don't play like that anyway.
No, I don't like the rule at all but I've never been bothered about it and I can see the casinos side too as usual.

What bothers me though is that I told Lucas about that stupid rule about risking your winnings by entering a forbidden game the very day they opened. Still they haven't fixed it

Hi Tirilej, apologies for the slight delay. seems that the first sentence was removed when you had initially brought it to my attention. I realized that the part of the text towards the end of the said paragraph was still showing. It has now been updated.

you can lose everything if you dare to open some games .

Hi colinsunderland, as per above the term implying players may have their winnings voided if you enter said group of games has been updated accordingly.

Having said that, please note, that even though the term was still showing as it did to date, It was not possible to breach the said term due to the feature implemented at our casino that should a player click intentionally or unintentionally on a stated restricted game while having an active bonus, the system would automatically not allow you to proceed.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

 

[colinsunderland]

Hi Tirilej, apologies for the slight delay. seems that the first sentence was removed when you had initially brought it to my attention. I realized that the part of the text towards the end of the said paragraph was still showing. It has now been updated.



Hi colinsunderland, as per above the term implying players may have their winnings voided if you enter said group of games has been updated accordingly.

Having said that, please note, that even though the term was still showing as it did to date, It was not possible to breach the said term due to the feature implemented at our casino that should a player click intentionally or unintentionally on a stated restricted game while having an active bonus, the system would automatically not allow you to proceed.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

Thanks. However you still haven't stated what a large win is? How are players supposed to know what they can bet if you don't state a figure? Like I said, my definition of a large win is probably different to someone elses.

 

[Lucas]

Welcome colin.

And as per earlier posts we are taking into consideration all of the remarks & feedback to make the bonus terms yet even more friendly.

Feel free to keep an eye out on the forum here as we announce further updates across all of our product offering coming up.

Regards,
Lucas

 

[colinsunderland]

Welcome colin.

And as per earlier posts we are taking into consideration all of the remarks & feedback to make the bonus terms yet even more friendly.

Feel free to keep an eye out on the forum here as we announce further updates across all of our product offering coming up.

Regards,
Lucas

Not answering the question makes you seem shady at best. If you don't know what a large win is, then how on earth is this term not unfair or rogue? Some games say BIG WIN after 10x stake, some 20x stake, some 50x. Mega win can be 100x, 500x. TBH, by refusing to answer what a large win is, just makes it look like you decide what the figure is when you feel like confiscating funds. You use the term 'large' in your T&C's. You must be able to specify what 'large' means.

If you want to have that term thats fine, I won't play there, but as long as its clear, I don't have a problem with it. However it is far from clear.

@Casinomeister any views on this please?

 

[Lucas]

Hi Colin,

I'm sorry you feel that way. If you look at the term in question you'll notice it states: "increasing your balance after placing high value bets and thereafter proceeding to place bets of less than half of the prior bet value, in order to meet bonus wagering requirements" .

We understand that this bonus term may not be liked by some users, and we genuinely appreciate all feedback relating to this bonus term as replied to in previous posts, we welcome remarks and strive to have all rules as clear as possible.

Re; actual figures of balance amount increase stated:- this has been noted, & we'll inform everyone in the event that this is updated.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

 

[lockinlove]

Good job Lucas sticking around and answering questions. Alot of reps hide when things go down.

I know you arent the owner and possibly dont have any say in this but maybe link the owners to this thread so they can see the mountain of negative feedback by many different posters. This is an awful term. Its unfair.

Nobody can take a shot or do big bets for a little bit and then drop back down? You take away from fun and the gamble.

We can all agree that the house has the advantage and slots are -EV. Isnt that enough?

So many times. Most session I will do some $2-$5 down to a certain point and go back to betting normal. Most people wont hit anything and it favors the casino anyways and the one time someone might get lucky, now they have to beat rogue terms too.

I will not ever play in this casino because of this and I bet alot of people wont. So so so bad.

Since you guys have a max bet safety guard in place, may as well make an a safety guard in case someone bets below your 50% amount

 

[colinsunderland]

Hi Colin,

I'm sorry you feel that way. If you look at the term in question you'll notice it states: "increasing your balance after placing high value bets and thereafter proceeding to place bets of less than half of the prior bet value, in order to meet bonus wagering requirements" .

We understand that this bonus term may not be liked by some users, and we genuinely appreciate all feedback relating to this bonus term as replied to in previous posts, we welcome remarks and strive to have all rules as clear as possible.

Re; actual figures of balance amount increase stated:- this has been noted, & we'll inform everyone in the event that this is updated.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

Sorry if I used the word large if it isn't in there, my mistake as I'm not home and hadn't refreshed my memory before posting.
However it is still clear as mud. So does that mean if I deposit 100, get a 100 bonus, so balance is 200, play 2.00 on one game, first spin win 4.00, balance is now 202, then go to another game and play a stake of 0.80, then you will void any winnings?

 

[The Dude]

My apologies for not posting earlier, I was in the States last week and have just returned.

...
And the most shocking part is it comes from accredited casino.

seriously how does a place like this get accredited to begin with? a few years ago accredited casinos were actually good casinos with no traps and random stuff, and now we have to read their terms with our lawyer before we start playing there.

tldr: if places like this can keep being accredited it kinda defeats its purpose. imo, of course.

This is one of the reasons why we have the BBF. As mentioned earlier, apparently this was missed by both me and the members here. If we had caught this, then I am sure this term would have been removed or modified before accreditation.

I knew you be only one to put in a defence for a casino.......

Why is it that we can always rely on your trollish comments - an attempt to poison a thread? Hats off to Tirilej to not take the bait and turn this in thread into a tit-for-tat spat. You've been warned plenty of times for this anti-community behavior. If you are trying to be funny or controversial, it's not working. Don't be a jerk.

Losing accreditation over this will never happen. I've once questioned about the rogue-ish terms of one another accredited casino, which I can't remember right now. I believe I was told by the Meister himself that the bonus rules of a casino do not affect whether the casino gets accredited at all...

That's not true. A number of casinos have had their accreditation suspended or removed because of bad bonus terms, (i.e. spirit of the bonus, etc.). So please don't distribute false information about how we deal with bonus terms. Thanks!

Anyway, this is a bad term. And if I had been aware of this earlier, their accreditation would have been held back until it was either removed or made crystal clear. At the moment, this term needs to be either removed or modified.

I remember some time ago a casino manager (Enzo from 3Dice) stated that there was no such thing as bonus abuse - only bad casino math. This term is convoluted, vague, and seemingly unfair. I don't think there is a player here that supports a term like this.

 

[Lucas]

Hi lockinlove, thank you, and am happy to be here participating in all discussions.

And we'll be looking into whether we'll need to implement a safety guard for this term as per your suggestion and a couple of other posts reflecting the same feedback.

@ colin - winnings would be voided if the bonus was actually abused and bonus terms indeed breached.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

 

[colinsunderland]

Hi lockinlove, thank you, and am happy to be here participating in all discussions.

And we'll be looking into whether we'll need to implement a safety guard for this term as per your suggestion and a couple of other posts reflecting the same feedback.

@ colin - winnings would be voided if the bonus was actually abused and bonus terms indeed breached.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

But in my example the bonus terms would be breached. Have you ever considered a career in politics, as your refusal to answer simple straight questions would be excellent in that scenario

 

[dionysus]

I'm hoping the rep read Bryan's post and additionally, agreed - theres a lot of wordsmithing going on

 

[Steviedoo]

Reading terms these days requires a lawyer.

 

[SpinUk]

Hi lockinlove, thank you, and am happy to be here participating in all discussions.

And we'll be looking into whether we'll need to implement a safety guard for this term as per your suggestion and a couple of other posts reflecting the same feedback.

@ colin - winnings would be voided if the bonus was actually abused and bonus terms indeed breached.

Kind Regards,
Lucas

Lets not beat around the bush. A safety guard will be impossible to implement unless you give a precise figure for the increase, be it an amount or multiplier of initial deposit.

Which you won’t or can’t. Either way it makes no odds.

As it stand it would look better if you DID state something solid on this, or remove it completely, because it is annihilating your accreditation status and yours and your casino’s credibilty here.

 

[dbl88]

When i wager on slots i always bet between the range of 0,5euro and 4 euro.

 

[pinnit2014]

I’m lost reading this thread, never mind the terms

Max bet, min bet, restricted games, style of play. Lord.