Roguish Grand Duke Not Paying £7200 BJ Winnings Due to 'System'!

[jackieonweb]

As I'm sitting here writing this I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

I'm not sure what possessed me to sign up to Grand Duke Casino, but anyway I did, I thought I'd try them out.

What I didn't envisige was me getting some extreme luck on Blackjack. They give you a bonus on your first deposits automatically, so I accepted the bonus of £150 first of all which I lost, I deposited £100 next and that's where my luck started.

I started playing Blackjack then after a little while the table started playing extremely hot, I played max bet the whole way of £200 and eventually won £7,200! From a £100 deposit!

Inbetween winning that and after, they tried loads of delay tactics to not pay me, I had to email them about 15 times to sort out all the bonus wagering miscalculations, cancelling my cashout in error, not looking at my ID, all sorts of crap.

When they finally ran out of excusues and it came to payment time today, they've hit me with this email;


We regret to inform you that after thoroughly going through your game history, we have found pattern play, which is easily associated with several types of BlackJack systems(Paroli and 1-3-26). This type of play is strictly prohibited in all casinos, including ours. In compliance with our terms & conditions, we are forfeiting your winnings, returning your deposits, and disabling your account.
Below you will find the paragraph in our T&C which pertains to your specific methods of play:

Fraudulent Activities; Prohibited Transactions, Offensive and Abusive Language
We have zero tolerance policy towards inappropriate play and fraudulent activity. All transactions are checked to prevent money laundering. If, in our sole determination, you are found to have cheated or attempted to defraud us or any other user of any of the Services in any way, including by way of example only, game manipulation or payment fraud, or manipulation of the multi-currency facilities, or if we suspect you of fraudulent payment, including use of stolen credit cards, or any other fraudulent activity (such as but not only any chargeback or other reversal of a payment) or prohibited transaction such as money laundering, we reserve the right to suspend or terminate your Account and share this information (together with your identity) with the police, regulatory authorities and other online gaming sites, banks, credit card companies, and other such appropriate agencies. Please see our Privacy Policy for further details.


What on earth are they going on about? Aren't these systems a load of crap anyway? I done £200 hands all the way through!

 

[vinylweatherman]

As I'm sitting here writing this I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

I'm not sure what possessed me to sign up to Grand Duke Casino, but anyway I did, I thought I'd try them out.

What I didn't envisige was me getting some extreme luck on Blackjack. They give you a bonus on your first deposits automatically, so I accepted the bonus of £150 first of all which I lost, I deposited £100 next and that's where my luck started.

I started playing Blackjack then after a little while the table started playing extremely hot, I played max bet the whole way of £200 and eventually won £7,200! From a £100 deposit!

Inbetween winning that and after, they tried loads of delay tactics to not pay me, I had to email them about 15 times to sort out all the bonus wagering miscalculations, cancelling my cashout in error, not looking at my ID, all sorts of crap.

When they finally ran out of excusues and it came to payment time today, they've hit me with this email;


We regret to inform you that after thoroughly going through your game history, we have found pattern play, which is easily associated with several types of BlackJack systems(Paroli and 1-3-26). This type of play is strictly prohibited in all casinos, including ours. In compliance with our terms & conditions, we are forfeiting your winnings, returning your deposits, and disabling your account.
Below you will find the paragraph in our T&C which pertains to your specific methods of play:

Fraudulent Activities; Prohibited Transactions, Offensive and Abusive Language
We have zero tolerance policy towards inappropriate play and fraudulent activity. All transactions are checked to prevent money laundering. If, in our sole determination, you are found to have cheated or attempted to defraud us or any other user of any of the Services in any way, including by way of example only, game manipulation or payment fraud, or manipulation of the multi-currency facilities, or if we suspect you of fraudulent payment, including use of stolen credit cards, or any other fraudulent activity (such as but not only any chargeback or other reversal of a payment) or prohibited transaction such as money laundering, we reserve the right to suspend or terminate your Account and share this information (together with your identity) with the police, regulatory authorities and other online gaming sites, banks, credit card companies, and other such appropriate agencies. Please see our Privacy Policy for further details.


What on earth are they going on about? Aren't these systems a load of crap anyway? I done £200 hands all the way through!

Systems ARE a load of crap, and even "card counting" ONLY works in a REAL casino where the dealer deals from a shoe.

Online casinos CANNOT be beaten by ANY Blackjack system because EVERY hand is dealt from a new "virtual deck", and keeping a tally of past hands does NOT make any difference.

This is a bullshit excuse, and clearly one they had to work hard to produce whilst hitting you with stalling tactics.

Since you flat betted £200 all the way, you could NOT have been using a system in any case, since these rely on adjusting bets depending on the makeup of the remaining cards in the shoe - increasing bets when the deck is "ten rich", and decreasing when it is mostly filled with low cards, which favour the dealer.

For wheeling out an excuse like this, they should be fast tracked to the rogue pit. If by some chance a system COULD beat their Blackjack tables, it would mean the software is RIGGED.

This has been tried before on another member by a different casino, and they were thrown into the rogue pit. Further to this, their software supplier yanked their license because the allegation of "system play" being able to beat the tables being stated as FACT by the operator caused damage to their brand since it suggested that the games were not properly random.

They may well come up with a different excuse now that this has hit the forum, but it is too late - the mere fact that they have invented bullshit excuses not to pay is enough to have them rogued.

All that is now needed is the evidence, and a formal evaluation of this case by Max & Bryan.

To achieve this, first send a PM to MaxD outlining what has happened. If this casino is already in the rogue pit, you now know why, and Max will not be able to do anything about getting you paid.

If this casino is NOT in the pit, and NOT in the "no can do" list, then you should submit a formal complaint, known as a PAB.

A few of us may have a snoop around ourselves, if only to AVOID getting caught by this group and it's associated operations.

 

[Mousey]

we have found pattern play, which is easily associated with several types of BlackJack systems(Paroli and 1-3-26). This type of play is strictly prohibited in all casinos, including ours.

I'm ... flabergasted.... who ARE these people that think up this stuff??

Seriously... who owns/runs this casino???

Edited to add:

for those who don't know....

The Paroli betting system is a positive progression system and is considered to be the opposite of the Martingale system. In the Paroli betting system, you start with betting one unit. If you win the first bet you increase your next bet, instead of decreasing your next bet.


The name of this system, the 1-3-2-6 betting system, really explains it all. It's a system based on the betting pattern 1 unit, then 3 units, then 2 units, then 6 units. This type of blackjack betting system is based on the Paroli system and it's based on the premise that you can win 4 times in a row.
This system is a positive progression betting system which means you increase the betting amount when you win.

Strangely enough, my hubby uses the Paroli type 'system' in B&M casinos. A more casual way to play and manage your bankroll. He's never been asked to leave or forfeit winnings - even after a winning session - tho. LOL

 

[ergopro]

Unreal bs from Grand Duke.

 

[Repro]

I'm ... flabergasted.... who ARE these people that think up this stuff??

Usually those people are called "managers".

 

[vinylweatherman]

Software = Playtech
Operator = Integra
License = Malta
Excuse= Bullshit

So, THIS is the standard we expect from a new casino that has just signed a deal with Playtech.

Playtech has signed an agreement with Integra Gaming to become the exclusive platform provider for the Malta-based company’s Grand Duke Casino. The deal will see the online casino accommodate more than 150 games from Playtech’s stable, in both download and flash formats.

We regret to inform you that after thoroughly going through your game history, we have found pattern play, which is easily associated with several types of BlackJack systems(Paroli and 1-3-26). This type of play is strictly prohibited in all casinos, including ours. In compliance with our terms & conditions, we are forfeiting your winnings, returning your deposits, and disabling your account.

Well, we all suspected online Blackjack wasn't random, and now we KNOW by admission of an operator that it is FACT that Playtech Blackjack can be BEATEN by one of these "snake-oil" systems.

I have been a long time critic of Playtech for the persitently poor vetting of licensees, and the fact that when an operator pulls a stunt, Playtech just look the other way.

This is nothing new, and previous cases have involved rogue operators stealing progressive jackpots paid in full by Playtech, but not forwarded to the winner because of bullshit excuses. The largest offenders were Joyland casino, which kept half of a CAD$ 4Million win, and then quickly sold the business leaving no trace of where the CAD$ 2Million ended up; and the other was a progressive payout never forwarded to it's South African winner, and neither was it returned to the pool. This is theft from ALL players who have contributed through playing the games.

I cannot understand how a big company like Playtech just keeps on getting away with this. They are listed on the London Stock Exchange, and this operator is licensed in a UK whitelisted territory.

Maybe turn the heat up by asking Trading Standards to look into this, as this outfit is based in Malta, and this gives them rights to market directly into the UK through TV and magazines. Since you have had over £7000 taken with a bullshit excuse, you could even try contacting your MP over this, since the UK government are looking again at the current whitelisting system, and are noting the "abuses" of some operators who rip-off consumers because they are supposedly well regulated through being in a whitelisted territory.

There is nothing better than the actual victim making an official fuss for getting something done about it. It is hard for an interested third party to get regulators interested in something they have read about, however bad, since they would not have access to all the evidence.

 

[DepositSpinLose]

excuse me for a few moments, i have to go take a grand duke.

 

[jackieonweb]

Thanks VM for that info. I have submitted a complaint to the LGA, and mentioned the whitelisting that I was not aware of, hopefully that will add some weight to my complaint.

This looks like a 100% open and shut case, as their claim I used this particular 'system' is incorrect, and even if I did, so what? There's 100's of 'systems' out there, any casino could apply one of them to a small portion of anyones play.

This casino should be 'rogued' here asap so this bullshit doesn't happen to anyone else.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Thanks VM for that info. I have submitted a complaint to the LGA, and mentioned the whitelisting that I was not aware of, hopefully that will add some weight to my complaint.

This looks like a 100% open and shut case, as their claim I used this particular 'system' is incorrect, and even if I did, so what? There's 100's of 'systems' out there, any casino could apply one of them to a small portion of anyones play.

This casino should be 'rogued' here asap so this bullshit doesn't happen to anyone else.

Don't hold your breath on that complaint to the LGA - they have won TWO Casinomeister awards for their service, but not the kind anyone would be proud to display

A formal PAB here would be a better course of action. This is how to get this incident properly looked at, and evidence gathered for possible inclusion in the rogue pit.

This is very much like Westland Bowl vs Heroes casino from a while back. They claimed his winnings were void because he had used a "system" to beat the randomness of the game. We thought it was bullshit, Max and Bryan (Casinomeister) agreed, and so did the software provider for Heroes casino, who yanked their license for bringing the product into disrepute by suggesting the software was beatable through using a "system" - something that could not happen with properly randomised software.

This incident suggests Playtech software is not random, and that systems can beat the odds at the Blackjack tables. Normally, the accusation is that the Blackjack is rigged so that the player loses far more than they should, so I am surprised Playtech are letting it go unchallenged when an operator more or less admits this is true by suggesting that the "right system" can overcome this "rigging" and allow the player to WIN more than they are supposed to.

Bryan has very strong views about these "systems", and will not take kindly to operators giving them a shred of credibilty through actions such as this.

Even if you DID use a top of the range Blackjack system, it could not have worked at online blackjack because the virtual deck is shuffled at the start of each hand, and each card is randomly dealt from the freshly shuffled deck. With this setup, the house edge will prevail, and no system can alter this.

You had nothing more than a lucky streak, and not even a perticularly remarkable one at that. You were betting 200 per hand, and won 7000. This is ONLY a 35 unit gain with level stakes, and far from being unusual, it is PERFECTLY NORMAL to have such swings either way.

What if you had LOST 7000 through level betting at 200, and been DOWN 35 units. Would this prove the game was rigged - the casino clearly believe such an event is statistically significant enough to prove the theory being tested. This is not just bullshit, it's M & S bullshit

The ONLY way this operator can avoid becoming a laughing stock is to cook up a different excuse for not paying you, but this will NOT save it in the longer term, as it will simply shift their reputation to one of habitual lying in order to avoid paying players, and the ultimate destination will be the same, even if the route chosen is different.

There is a chance now that a rep from this outfit will appear here in an attempt to defend this decision, and we will tell him/her that systems just don't work online, and that he/she is in the wrong business if they believe they do.

Far from banning you, "other casinos" will give you the ROYAL treatment if you come in with a 7000 wad and a "foolproof system" for taking their money that you have so much faith in you will NEVER quit, no matter how much the short term losses.

Playtech won't care about this either, they didn't care when an operator stole CAD$ 2 Million from a player, so they are not going to bat an eyelid over £7000.

It is stupidity such as this, and the fact that Playtech look the other way when licensees behave like this, that I give Playtech such a hard time on this forum.

If the LGA ignore you, get your MP involved. It is time the government were made more aware of the loopholes in the current system that are allowing bad operators to get away with acts that would be illegal for any other EU based business trading with UK citizens.

 

[zaaaaabaaaaam]

Online casinos CANNOT be beaten by ANY Blackjack system because EVERY hand is dealt from a new "virtual deck", and keeping a tally of past hands does NOT make any difference.

While above is sort of true i would insist that you can beat the casino with a bonus. Take a 100% sign up bonus which has x in wagering, going to a table where you can bet the whole bonus or both deposit and bonus in one hand would mean you only risk the bonus money or your deposit to win twice as much. With that leverage you can beat the casino (depending on the wagering requirement obviously)

 

[lamarsh]

While above is sort of true i would insist that you can beat the casino with a bonus. Take a 100% sign up bonus which has x in wagering, going to a table where you can bet the whole bonus or both deposit and bonus in one hand would mean you only risk the bonus money or your deposit to win twice as much. With that leverage you can beat the casino (depending on the wagering requirement obviously)

Yes, well you could just beat the casino by not taking a bonus and betting the entire deposit amount could you not? would not the odds be the same of winning the hand?

I think what is being discussed here is a system to beat the house edge. I think that is impossible. The poster is saying they just bet 200 the entire time. That is the issue.

I do understand the concept of risking 100% to win 200% that you are referring to. However, this is a different issue and is not a system of playing to beat the casino.

 

[Repro]

While above is sort of true i would insist that you can beat the casino with a bonus. Take a 100% sign up bonus which has x in wagering, going to a table where you can bet the whole bonus or both deposit and bonus in one hand would mean you only risk the bonus money or your deposit to win twice as much. With that leverage you can beat the casino (depending on the wagering requirement obviously)

This is exacly why casino's:

a. DON'T allow you to bet it all on one hand
b. Have games like BJ only count 5-10% towards the WR
c. Have a WR of 20-60x, sometimes even a lot more for BJ

So normally you CAN'T beat the casino.

 

[vinylweatherman]

While above is sort of true i would insist that you can beat the casino with a bonus. Take a 100% sign up bonus which has x in wagering, going to a table where you can bet the whole bonus or both deposit and bonus in one hand would mean you only risk the bonus money or your deposit to win twice as much. With that leverage you can beat the casino (depending on the wagering requirement obviously)

This works because the bonus forms part of the starting balance, and NOT because there is any system involved.

Had there been a bonus involved, the casino would have voided the winnings on the grounds of breaking the bonus terms.

It looks like this was play WITHOUT a bonus following a session WITH a bonus where the OP busted out. A lucky start then enabled the OP to bet the max of 200 and go 35 units ahead at this level. This is hardly "freaky", and shifts of well over 35 units either way are the norm in an extended session of blackjack.

I have had swings of over a HUNDRED units either way doing nothing more than "basic strategy" flat betting. This is perfectly normal, even though it might seem odd at the time.

This operator seems to know so very little about how these games work that when they saw a player run ahead 35 units they took fright and came to the conclusion that this was done through some form of "cheating", which they determined was "pattern" or "system" play.

They can't even decide which system was used, just that the play looked like a mix of a number of systems. I think ANY play history could be looked at this way, and determined to be a "mix of systems".

This is the biggest load of bullshit since Heroes casino claimed Westland Bowl had "confused the RNG" in order to win a substantial amount at their Blackjack, which was powered by GaleWind software, at least it was until the CEO of GaleWind heard the story, and then Heroes had to find an alternative software provider at short notice

It is pretty shocking that PLAYTECH Blackjack is now considered by this casino to be sufficiently non-random that it can be beaten by a player using "a mix of systems".


It looks more like they simply don't want to pay this player because they won more or less as soon as they joined, and have just invented some bullshit excuse to justify it, and accuse the player if cheating.

Maybe we should have a poll, and ask all the operators the question. "If a player came along with 7K, and wanted to bet 200 per hand at blackjack because they had this "foolproof system", would you turn them away, or give them a warm welcome".

Now, this casino said "no casino would allow this" when defending their decision, which sounds like more bullshit to cover up the smell of the first pile, and bullshit doesn't work like this, but there again, they don't understand how Blackjack works either.

I am just waiting to hear what they will replace this excuse with when they realise no-one believes it. My money is on a fraud allegation.

 

[jackieonweb]

They did give me a bonus automatically for each deposit.

I had to bet over £30,000 for the £100 bonus, which I done.. The only reason for them not paying is me betting with a 'system'.

I'll see what the LGA say, if not then maybe I will write to my MP... Do you really think they would respond?

 

[LinkinFart]

They did give me a bonus automatically for each deposit.

I had to bet over £30,000 for the £100 bonus, which I done.. The only reason for them not paying is me betting with a 'system'.

I'll see what the LGA say, if not then maybe I will write to my MP... Do you really think they would respond?

jackie, forget the LGA. They responded to my complaint only after I "threatened" them I will escalate the issue to VISA and other CC companies. In Your case, I really cant see what negotiating position You can make that will make them respond or if they do respond, to resolve this in fair manner.

One of LGA licensed operators allowed people to register account and register credit cards to get sign up bonus. Cashier would issue the bonus just to block access after few games played and when emailed about the issue response was "We do not allow players from your country". Nothing in terms or anywhere else on the site about exclusion and they only allowed players from EU so the volume of CC numbers they gathered from banned players was huge. Result was, casino in question quickly started restricting access to their site from banned countries and response from LGA came shortly after.

What You should do is stop posting about this in the thread, go to PAB section, read rules and follow them. Maybe its not too late for that. Max is your best hope from what I can tell. As for UK laws and what protection they offer, listen to VWM`s advices, I believe he knows them better than the government.

GL on getting your winnings and I`m guessing they would have already pulled bonus related issues out of the hat if You had broke them somehow, so thats a good start.

 

[vinylweatherman]

They did give me a bonus automatically for each deposit.

I had to bet over £30,000 for the £100 bonus, which I done.. The only reason for them not paying is me betting with a 'system'.

I'll see what the LGA say, if not then maybe I will write to my MP... Do you really think they would respond?

That is what puzzles me. If you had an automatic bonus, the thing most casinos would say is that you broke the rules on maximum allowed bet.

It is possible that this casino doesn't want to pay you because you were lucky on a bonus, but forgot to add terms that would restrict the size of bets. They have therefore decided to invent this "system" excuse instead.

Since they are EU based, they enjoy special rights when it comes to direct marketing into the UK. You could report them to Trading Standards for breaking the "Unfair business practices act", and to the ASA for misleading advertising, and "not administering the promotion fairly", the very same charge that the ASA "busted" Betfair for early this year. Unfortunately, the ASA is rather toothless, and the ruling was merely a "don't do it again", and Betfair decided to keep it's head down rather than change it's decision. Trading Standards is an arm of government, so if they feel the law has been broken, they will pass this up the chain so that the minister(s) responsible can look at tightening the laws surrounding offshore, but EU based, companies.

Malta also don't meet the criteria for being a whitelisted territory that are imposed on applicants OUTSIDE the EU, and are on the list for nothing more than being an EU member state. The government are already looking again at this system, and this may result in Malta being told to do more to protect players, or have their licensees subject to some form of additional regulation by the UK. A scheme of "secondary licensing" is something that has been suggested.

Disputing the charges with the bank and card issuers will ONLY ever cover your deposit, and the casino will always give this back in cases like these.

As a last resort, the winnings can be retrieved in court, and as this is another EU based company, they will have to abide by the decision due to EU treaties. Taking online casinos to court is a pretty new thing, and most solicitors will have had no prior experience. I have yet to hear of a firm specialising in such cases, but this could be an opportunity for firms to get into, as we are awash with conveyencing, marriage, wills, etc and firms face stiff competition.

It would be worth checking into the small claims procedure, as this is cheaper to bring, and less risky to pursue. I think this now covers claims up to 10K, but you would have to check this.

Many large companies usually start negotating once they see a court summons land on their desk, or even a letter of intent from a solicitor. For them, it is like a game of poker. They will assume a customer is bluffing about taking them to court, and the customer has to convince them that they WILL follow through.

This is the SAME procedure that worked with the banks over the penalty charges, and many would negotiate only when faced with a court summons because they didn't want to risk losing what would have become a "test case", and have EVERY customer using the same legal arguments and case reference in future cases.

There is little case history on which to base a legal argument, which makes it hard to predict the worth of a case, and I am sure the casinos want to keep it this way.

Keep all the emails, especially the one where they tell you the reason for non-payment. If they suddenly come up with a different reason when faced with a court summons, it will seriously undermine their chances should it go to a hearing.

The PAB procedure should not be ignored, as a ruling in your favour would make your case even stronger, but you have to stop posting and fill in the PAB form, and refrain from posting about this until the PAB has run it's course. This rule makes it easier for Max to deal with the case, and the service is FREE. If a player makes life hard for Max by stirring up the issue on the forum whilst he is trying to resolve the PAB, he will ditch it, and he is NOT bluffing - he has done this in the past when players have not listened to his advice about not stirring the issue on the forums.

 

[Seventh777]

Have to agree 100% with VWM`s expert advice once again, and I would follow this to the max.

Firstly get in touch with Max and get the PAB wheels in motion, secondly go seek legal advice, this casino has dug a hole for itself by claiming you have used some sort of system to beat the software = impossible as explained by VWM.

Any lawyer with an IQ above 0 will quite rightly see that all you have done is bet max and hit lucky with a win streak (something a high % of us on here have done including me), there are no indications whatsoever that you have played using any other system than high rolling (a perfectly legit playing scenario).

What the casino will have to prove in court =

1). There are certain systems that can beat playtech software.

2). You used one of them.

Open and shut case, now go drag this casino through the mud including the software company that gave them the licence in the 1st place .

P.S.
I would urge every webmaster and affiliates whom have casino links on their websites to remove casino`s involved in these roguish behaviour scenarios, and inform them they will not be reinstated until these matters have been resolved, as we the players are getting sick and tired of certain software companies getting away with blatant theft, and tbh the last thing they deserve is advertising to claim nothing more than more victims.

 

[vinylweatherman]

From The Wizard of Odds.

Q: How can I determine the odds of flat betting ( no counting, no progressions , etc ) of being ahead in a negative game such as blackjack w/o counting with a .5% disadvantage after 45000 or so hands? Is it even possible? - Kevin

A: This is a typical question one might encounter in an introductory statistics class. Because the sum of a large number of random variables always will approach a bell curve we can use the central limit theorem to get at the answer. From my section on the house edge we find the standard deviation in blackjack to be 1.17. You won't understand this if you haven't studied statistics but the probability of being at a loss in your example will be the Z statistic of 45000*0.005/(450001/2*1.17) =~ 0.91. Any basic statistics book should have a standard normal table which will give the Z statistic of 0.8186. So the probability of being ahead in your example is about 18%. June 18, 2000

So, by flat betting for 45000 hands, you STILL have an 18% probabilty of being ahead (although this could be as little as one unit).

You went 35 units ahead (35*200 = 7000). This is hardly "improbable" enough over a much smaller number of hands to warrant an accusation of "cheating" by using a system.

The Wizard has a section about systems in which he says "all systems are equally worthless in the long run".

It would appear that someone with a PhD in casino mathematics agrees that their excuse is bullshit.

There used to be an Excel formula where you could plug in specific values for number of hands, and units ahead/down, and get an exact probabilty. Unfortunately, I can't find it any more.

 

[Seventh777]

What VWM said regarding systems and odds, a great example here is the odds of hitting a Royal Flush in poker are calculated at 40,000 to one, so you would think that if 40,000 hands are dealt there would be at least one RF, wrong, go take a look at MGS`s pjp website, last time I looked cyberstud`s pjp was well over 70k, that`s nearly twice as much as the odds predict, proving that the software does not appear to run on any kind of settings whatsoever, apart from not giving to many RF`s for the hands played ratios.

Here are MGS`s pjp`s, cyberstud is currently over 80k..

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

that`s 2 RF`s worth of hands.

 

[vinylweatherman]

What VWM said regarding systems and odds, a great example here is the odds of hitting a Royal Flush in poker are calculated at 40,000 to one, so you would think that if 40,000 hands are dealt there would be at least one RF, wrong, go take a look at MGS`s pjp website, last time I looked cyberstud`s pjp was well over 70k, that`s nearly twice as much as the odds predict, proving that the software does not appear to run on any kind of settings whatsoever, apart from not giving to many RF`s for the hands played ratios.

That's in video poker, and includes the draw. Cyberstud needs a pat dealt RF for the jackpot, and the odds for this are close to one in 700,000 hands. As 1 credit goes into the jackpot for each hand played, it would on average go much higher than 70K before being "due" in a statistical sense.

 

[Temperance Fox]

My experience

I've seen , I don't remember where, this casino, with those great offers. I'm not so able to play , so I gave a four digits sum to my frend . If she looses, no matter, if she wins we divide the withdrawal (sorry for my english but has becoming terrific , while I'm sunbathing). She used to forward me all the corrispondence. She made about 5 deposits for the total ammount of 1500 usd , if I remember right.She said she doesn't like for : terms very confused, support coming and go, and so on.
In the last deposit finally she won. They sent her "congrats email ". But , a few later, some kind of manager wrote "She didn't play according the rules".That's absolutely fals,I know her and her prudence.
They put money again into cashier and , of course, she have lost all the winnings.


So I think they are a sort of "Keep the player's money and run away".

This is my idea of Rogue
Fight against them ,I think is a waste of time and health.

I'm very sorry for you, indeed.
Perhaps it's better to write a post here, before depositing and playing at a not CM casino, just like did a guy, now I'm gonna answer him.
Experiences of other are very precious. This is my opinion.

 

[vinylweatherman]

I've seen , I don't remember where, this casino, with those great offers. I'm not so able to play , so I gave a four digits sum to my frend . If she looses, no matter, if she wins we divide the withdrawal (sorry for my english but has becoming terrific , while I'm sunbathing). She used to forward me all the corrispondence. She made about 5 deposits for the total ammount of 1500 usd , if I remember right.She said she doesn't like for : terms very confused, support coming and go, and so on.
In the last deposit finally she won. They sent her "congrats email ". But , a few later, some kind of manager wrote "She didn't play according the rules".That's absolutely fals,I know her and her prudence.
They put money again into cashier and , of course, she have lost all the winnings.


So I think they are a sort of "Keep the player's money and run away".

This is my idea of Rogue
Fight against them ,I think is a waste of time and health.

I'm very sorry for you, indeed.
Perhaps it's better to write a post here, before depositing and playing at a not CM casino, just like did a guy, now I'm gonna answer him.
Experiences of other are very precious. This is my opinion.

They would view this as multi accounting on your part, and it is possible they figured out your friend was playing on your behalf, as all correspondence had to be referred to you before your friend replied. The rule broken would probably have been the one that players have to play with their own funds, and for "leisure". Operating an account on behalf of someone else who instructs them how to play, would be against these rules.

 

[Seventh777]

That's in video poker, and includes the draw. Cyberstud needs a pat dealt RF for the jackpot, and the odds for this are close to one in 700,000 hands. As 1 credit goes into the jackpot for each hand played, it would on average go much higher than 70K before being "due" in a statistical sense.

Ah my bad, I stand corrected .

 

[Repro]

That's in video poker, and includes the draw. Cyberstud needs a pat dealt RF for the jackpot, and the odds for this are close to one in 700,000 hands. As 1 credit goes into the jackpot for each hand played, it would on average go much higher than 70K before being "due" in a statistical sense.

In fact not even the complete dollar/credit is added to the jackpot, but the house also takes a cut on this. They see it as a "compensation" for the initial jackpot seed after it's been hit, but eventually the house takes a LOT more than that (source: floor manager @ Holland Casino).

 

[vinylweatherman]

In fact not even the complete dollar/credit is added to the jackpot, but the house also takes a cut on this. They see it as a "compensation" for the initial jackpot seed after it's been hit, but eventually the house takes a LOT more than that (source: floor manager @ Holland Casino).

That's a bit cheeky, as it is clearly advertised as a "progressive side bet", and understood to be a contribution to the pool, with the huse getting it's cut from the house edge of the underlying game. Maybe this DOES happen online where I have seen it, but not in B & M casinos. I always thought the underlying game had a lower RTP than the non progressive version to take account of things like providing the seed after the jackpot has been won.