Hi everyone I had a day or so to mull this over. I do apologize to Dieter that I did not see his last PM and it had gone unnoticed on my end that he was willing to waive the hefty wire fee for a smaller withdrawl. Initially it was frustrating because as he said I was on the one software platform of his that didn't lay out the withdrawl terms meant specifically for US players even though he said they were there before I started playing. Typically, the casinos I've played at that offer a wire transfer withdrawl option is reserved for large balance accounts because of the fees associated for both party's. That's why I was surprised they were willing to offer this for as little as a $100 withdrawl and it stated no fees. As some have stated it can be frustrating playing from the US. You have to be willing to play a riskier bankroll strategy when playing online casinos due to all the fee's. Players outside of the US can utilize ewallets and transfer funds in and out of casinos and maybe if they double up their $50 deposit to $100 that is a good day whereas the US player doesn't have that luxury.
Anyways, as far as being denied the withdrawl I still disagree with this decision because it seems like a players trap term when playing on the bonus in a table game like blackjack where as even if I was managing my bets accordingly at $1 per hand I would have been sacrificing EV if I was dealt a pair that basic strategy says to split and then have to double down both hands. I like that Dieter has ideas such as raising the maximum bet % on blackjack so that a player would have more options if he chooses to play blackjack while on a bonus. However, in my case that doesn't help me as I was the guinea pig so to speak and brought this to people's attention. I'm sure there are some other casinos who have not well thought out their max bet terms also when allowing blackjack to be played that the player may have to end up getting several bets on the table because thats what the book calls for. I have a better idea just to completely eliminate blackjack from being played on the bonus all together. I have played other softwares that allow you to play blackjack and slots on a bonus with no max bet terms and others that simply offer separate bonuses for slots or table games. Perhaps I was all to used to playing on those sites and not having to worry about it. BTW, those casinos are all listed in the accredited section of this site.
I really feel like Dieter is here to help his players in their best interest and not intentionally deny their winnings just because Rival has made it easy for him to do so. However, I doubt he has had cases like mine to deal with since it becomes such a grey area when specifically playing blackjack under their bonus terms with the splits/doubles. A table game like PaiGow for example is a lot more cut and dry since you only place one bet in that game. Also its great that hes updating those stale help files that I know have been on other Rivals for years even though I knew the multi hand blackjack has been incorrect for quite some time. I'm sure all of this being brought to his attention has caused him significant time and energy but now it accurately reflects the games being dealt to the player.
Also, the majority of my winnings I made was on the slots and not the blackjack. I only played it for a change of pace and since it only counts towards 1/10th of the wagering. I made profit maybe like 30 bucks from the blackjack only because I had one run where I was dealt 11 winning hands in a row.
Anyways, I feel at least some positive will come at my expense. It's opened the eyes to the casino that maybe the terms should be more specific or perhaps different max bet % limits set for games like blackjack and in the future other players won't fall into this trap.
I believe in the baptism by fire thread vinylweatherman thoroughly explained my thoughts exactly except he's really able to convey his points well in his posts much better than I can. At least someone gets it and where I'm coming from and not just that I was someone negligently breaking the terms without paying due care. I'm really not sure why the thread got closed after his last post but it was well laid out and made a lot of sense. He made some great points that most people just aren't getting it maybe because they are slot players I don't know. Perhaps he has an agenda I'm not sure but there certainly are a few here that make sure their agenda is heard when it comes to this casino so seemed unfair to close it just based on his comments. Like I said most of my winnings weren't even won on the game blackjack but slots.
I have asked Dieter to re look into this via PM as some suggested to do so by sending the rep a PM.
It was a kind gesture in lieu of all the confusion he offered a $100 free chip. However, its limited to $100 max cash out and has $6,000 wagering attached to it. Something I'm definitely not interested in chasing. It's just setting myself up for more failure as I've never been able to complete one of those types crazy high wagering in the past on other casinos that offer similar wagering.
Lastly, after this frustrating situation I decided to play in a land based casino last night where I don't have to worry about all the rules of the online casinos and I can just relax, gamble and have fun. I utilized my free slot play in a quarter video poker machine and hit a club royal flush for 4,000 credits. It felt so refreshing to not have to worry about if you are going to get the money or not and as a US player really the best option to gamble is only in a land based setting. Maybe it was karma's way coming back to me. Who knows.
Take Care
Agree I've looked at the help file before for the multi hand blackjack and it doesn't represent the actual game they are dealing. Again I'm sure its all a misunderstanding or clerical error on the back end either that or nobody actually tests the games there.
