I suppose the question then will be if we are playing against ourself or against all players (for the balancing to occure). If we are playing against ourself then forcing a higher pay would render future gameplay impossible since the bad streak destined to occure afterwards would compensate for whatever extra you managed to squeeze out of the parked bonuses. This would mean that you in reality only have 1 possible point in an account to be able to win before retirering a "busted" account.
It does seem that even the players not believing the games are rigged in reality shares this opinion, since players winning big quickly close down the account scared to wager any more due to a big win.
What is more telling are the CASINOS that believe this. Many will cut back further incentives to deposit after a player has had a huge win. This, however, is NOT simply confined to where players are deemed to have taken advantage of a conjunction of promotions and game selections to run a mildly +EV set of sessions, it has happened when player simply "got lucky" in what was otherwise a steady -EV decline as would be expected.
I was once bonus banned after a steady run of -EV play was interrupted by a 4OK, side bet & all, and dealer QUALIFYING, on stud poker. It was a single and completely lucky hit that changed me into an overall winner. This lead the casino to believe, somehow, this made me a higher risk of doing it again, whereas mathematics and common sense dictates that the best move would be to think of an incentive to get it back.
Players see and experience these things, and thus come to believe that there must be something in it.
If a casino knew for a fact that the games could NEVER be "illegitimately played", they would be after the repeat custom of lucky winners just as much as losers.
The other explanation, of course, is that all these "well respected industry veterans" just don't have a clue, and are simply scared when players hit big, and would rather they go elsewhere if they are going to do it again.
The other puzzling case is how casinos handle the bot issue. Bots were designed for one thing, doing bonuses, they work on the principle of losing quickly, but as close to long term RTP as possible, yielding a profit once a bonus is taken into account. Players silly enough to use a bot without a bonus are simply a long term cash cow for the casino, and since, unlike poker, no other player sufferes, it would seem that this should be a low priority issue. Casinos seem genuinely scared now of the latest casino bots, even when not used for their traditional purpose of clearing bonuses. It seems they are UNSURE about whether there may be a strategy to beat their random games, and are simply not prepared to take the risk, so embark on a bot "witch hunt", partly as a method to deter those who might THINK of trying out a bot in the future, as well as save money from both bonus player who use bots, and non bonus players who simply got lucky.
Stupid again, pay them, and they will use the bot again, and again, and in the long term the house edge will bite their ass, and they will realise their bot didn't work after all, but they have then lost a fortune to the casino to derive the proof.
It boils down to two options.
1) The games are NOT entirely random, and there ARE ways to beat the house WITHOUT using promotions.
2) The people at the top simply do not understand casino mathematics, and run scared at every bump in the cloth, shout from the slots, or pile of chips leaving the floor - simply because these are so obvious, unlike the steady and unseen stream of losers who are feeding it all.
Some slots just DO play badly. have to move around folks, slot to slot to slot to find the one thts paying. Sticking to a slot just cos you like it even tho its in cold mode is plain daft
I really should have carried on at 1, just to see if this was just going to carry on. I went for the "greed" option, and hoped that 10x the bet would make me 10x the profit based on the assumption that changing stake would have zero impact on the "sweet spot" I seemed to have found.
