Locked Account at Royal Vegas & Vegas Towers

pangloss

Dormant account
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Location
Australia
They are locking accounts in the middle of play now it appears as you can see
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

https://www.casinomeister.com/casino-reviews/londons/

LondonsCasino rouged for calling players ignorant.


Well it gladens my heart to see the sensitivities of players afforded such a high priority that warrants the offending Casino being sent to the Rogue Pit.

Now what about our friends at Fortune Lounge?? Players aren't so worried about name calling - they are worried about about continuing, unrepentant naked theft from their collective wallets by self-confessed thieves.

LondonsCasino calles players ignorant - got sent to the Rogue Pit at the speed of light.

FL Casinos commit outright theft - takes over a week just to get them off the accredited list let alone getting them anywhere near the Rogue Pit.

What vital piece of information am I missing here? I am smelling rats - BIG ones!!!


...
 

lojo

Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Location
USA
...
What vital piece of information am I missing here? I am smelling rats - BIG ones!!!
...

Well, Pangloss, if you are of the mind, as you are, that all casinos are rigged, it's just another day at the races, huh?

At least you can be glad that no Fortune Lounge Winner Screen shots have been showing up.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
https://www.casinomeister.com/casino-reviews/londons/

LondonsCasino rouged for calling players ignorant.


Well it gladens my heart to see the sensitivities of players afforded such a high priority that warrants the offending Casino being sent to the Rogue Pit.

Now what about our friends at Fortune Lounge?? Players aren't so worried about name calling - they are worried about about continuing, unrepentant naked theft from their collective wallets by self-confessed thieves.

LondonsCasino calles players ignorant - got sent to the Rogue Pit at the speed of light.

FL Casinos commit outright theft - takes over a week just to get them off the accredited list let alone getting them anywhere near the Rogue Pit.

What vital piece of information am I missing here? I am smelling rats - BIG ones!!!


...
When you start reading my posts - which includes comprehending them - perhaps you'll understand that this situation was/is complicated due to the massive fraud involved.

There's your big rat - player fraud.

You continue to make assumptions and post statements based on misconceptions. "...got sent to the Rogue Pit at the speed of light." "takes over a week just to get them off the accredited list let alone getting them anywhere near the Rogue Pit..."

Both false/misleading statements. I'd appreciate it if you'd engage your brain before typing. Thanks!
 

nicobo78

Banned User - a-hole spammer - violation of <a hre
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Location
EU
I sell Mecca system for roulette-genuinewinner

I'm a dickhead spammer :notworthy
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Vesuvio

Dormant account
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Location
UK
...this situation was/is complicated due to the massive fraud involved.

There's your big rat - player fraud.
While I understand a willingness to give one of the oldest and largest casino groups some benefit of the doubt, player fraud simply doesn't account for FL's actions.

Fraud, like bonus hunting, has always been around since casinos started offering bonuses. If a deal is good some people will always try to do it more than once. FL know and knew all of this - as I said before, pleading ignorance isn't an option for them.

What they decided to do was to take money from anyone who played their bonuses intelligently. Sure, they knew they'd also catch fraudsters in the net, but they were entirely aware that they'd be cheating a large number of players who met all of their terms and conditions out of winnings. Presumably they calculated that it would be profitable enough to outweigh the inevitable bad publicity. They were probably right, though rogueing them, at least for now, would go some way to upsetting their calculations.

I think we need to establish two points to salvage something from this and similar issues:

1) Unless specifically stated otherwise (e.g. you cannot bet more than x) players can play a bonus in any way they choose, as long as they meet the clearly-stated terms and conditions. There is no such thing as bonus abuse, and using a catch-all bonus abuse clause to deny winnings is rogue.

2) Risk-assessments which rely on probabilities of players being linked are unacceptable as a reason for denying winnings (e.g. playing from the same area with a similar pattern and depositing similar amounts). It's fine if you want to instantly lock some players' accounts before they deposit and accept a bonus, but after that casinos should only be able to deny winnings with incontrovertible proof. The casinos must also be willing to share this proof with the players involved, and not only with organisations like eCOGRA (I don't believe they're worried about alerting fraudsters to fairly obvious procedures - more likely they're worried about exposing themselves to player outrage over privacy infringements).

This second point is becoming more and more important as casinos have moved from looking mainly for genuine fraud (credit-card fraud, and the like), to assessing which players are a financial liability to them. Understandable, of course, from their point of view, but it can't be said enough times that while you offer bonuses with a player edge players who cost you money are not automatically fraudsters, and cannot be treated as such.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
I'm just finishing up with the response that I had from FL yesterday. I'm satisfied will all but four of the 23 complaints submitted here. I'm waiting for some clarifications at the moment.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
I will put my neck on the line as say yes - players should be able to play any game they like how they please as long as it falls within the terms and conditions.
You know what? I'm going to take back what I said. I'm not going to stick my neck out for these folks again.

NextToYou said:
Can I currently as an affiliate recommend FL casinos welcome bonuses and confidentially say that they (players) can play the welcome bonus any way the like (big bets or small bets and any game they like - roulette or baccarat or slots or any other which isnt prohibited in T&C)?
I'd say proceed with caution - ask first and get it in writing.
 

halfday

Banned User - multiple forum accounts - violation
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Location
usa, pa
https://www.casinomeister.com/casino-reviews/londons/

LondonsCasino rouged for calling players ignorant.


Well it gladens my heart to see the sensitivities of players afforded such a high priority that warrants the offending Casino being sent to the Rogue Pit.

Now what about our friends at Fortune Lounge?? Players aren't so worried about name calling - they are worried about about continuing, unrepentant naked theft from their collective wallets by self-confessed thieves.

LondonsCasino calles players ignorant - got sent to the Rogue Pit at the speed of light.

FL Casinos commit outright theft - takes over a week just to get them off the accredited list let alone getting them anywhere near the Rogue Pit.

What vital piece of information am I missing here? I am smelling rats - BIG ones!!!


...


CM,

You must be in a difficult position. I realize that we don't know all the ins and outs as you do.
I would assume that you are perplexed as to why you are recieving so much criticism on this thread.
You have much respect. I think the reason so much criticism is coming from here is our angle on this situation.
We (I suppose I should not talk for others)...... I see this as blatant theft.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
was in the middle of playing and had not even finished when the casino shut down thier account and kept their winnings AND deposit AND bonus. How can this be anything but rogue? Also, we cannot see the "proof" of player fraud. No doubt there was some fraud but they are not really concerned so much with that according to their own statements. What they ARE concerned with is intelligent play. Using your money wisely and actually trying to win. They have stated this with thier own words here and in private emails and in private messages made public.
From my angle and others apparently, it appears as though they are getting some sort of pass on this outrageous behaviour. It appears as though they are not being held accountable at all. I do understand the initial period because it was surreal that it was happening, but they did not mince their words: it WAS and IS happening and they have it justified in their minds.
In what we have become used to seeing from this forum as far as being held to a high standard appears to be different in this case. That is why there is frustration and criticism. It just doesn't seem right that they are not on the top of the rogue pit from where I'm sitting. Again, I realize that I am in a different seat than you are. I am just sharing the viewpoint from here with you.
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
CM,

You must be in a difficult position. I realize that we don't know all the ins and outs as you do.
I would assume that you are perplexed as to why you are recieving so much criticism on this thread.
You have much respect. I think the reason so much criticism is coming from here is our angle on this situation.
We (I suppose I should not talk for others)...... I see this as blatant theft.
You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.
was in the middle of playing and had not even finished when the casino shut down thier account and kept their winnings AND deposit AND bonus. How can this be anything but rogue? Also, we cannot see the "proof" of player fraud. No doubt there was some fraud but they are not really concerned so much with that according to their own statements. What they ARE concerned with is intelligent play. Using your money wisely and actually trying to win. They have stated this with thier own words here and in private emails and in private messages made public.
From my angle and others apparently, it appears as though they are getting some sort of pass on this outrageous behaviour. It appears as though they are not being held accountable at all. I do understand the initial period because it was surreal that it was happening, but they did not mince their words: it WAS and IS happening and they have it justified in their minds.
In what we have become used to seeing from this forum as far as being held to a high standard appears to be different in this case. That is why there is frustration and criticism. It just doesn't seem right that they are not on the top of the rogue pit from where I'm sitting. Again, I realize that I am in a different seat than you are. I am just sharing the viewpoint from here with you.
Well Said.
 

NASHVEGAS

Banned User - flamming, disrespecting admin,
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Location
MERS
Perhaps now this thread can be closed.

You know what? I'm going to take back what I said. I'm not going to stick my neck out for these folks again.


I'd say proceed with caution - ask first and get it in writing.
WELL SAID.............what more can be accomplished by leaving thread open? It seems at least for now CM and its members(no clue about FL and no one will be forced to pet the dog unless they chose-rogueing FL can be determined in the future) have the situation in its proper perspective.
 

Casinomeister

Forum Cheermeister
Staff member
Joined
Jun 30, 1998
Location
Bierland
This person needs to either contact me or eCOGRA. If she is a legitimate player, she'll get paid. If she'd a fraudster, she won't.

We have to stick by our guns on this, and that is exactly what I am doing. About a quarter of the PABs submitted to me on this so far have been fraudulent. This is strictly forbidden by the terms and conditions and these players deserve nothing in my opinion except a kick in the ass and tossed out the door.

FL has reversed many of the knee-jerk decisions made earlier. So far a number of these players deemed bonus "abusers" have been paid their winnings (or payments are pending).
 

Stanford

Dormant account
Joined
Feb 22, 2004
Location
USA
FL has work to do

We have to stick by our guns on this, and that is exactly what I am doing. About a quarter of the PABs submitted to me on this so far have been fraudulent. This is strictly forbidden by the terms and conditions and these players deserve nothing in my opinion except a kick in the ass and tossed out the door.

FL has reversed many of the knee-jerk decisions made earlier.

Well done on getting players paid. I don’t play anymore – yet. But it is gratifying, none the less.

I think Halfday mentioned you getting criticism. I have not noticed that. I can’t imagine why you would face any criticism

Halfday also indicated he was suspicious of the ones called “fraud”. I can understand that. A very long time ago, I was teaching my daughter to play. She did a couple of deals at FL before losing interest. She was an adult living on her own in another city and I didn’t consider that a breech at the time. She played without incident – the grinding out way.

I mention this because I think it common for players to pollinate gaming to others close to them. It is a natural thing to do. I suspect sometimes they break a rule about using a common computer or something like that. I am not sure that is fraud either. I actually played off a bonus from a Kinko’s once when I was in a pinch. Never thought it might be a common computer – but it could have been. I didn’t think about it.

I think there is real fraud. But I don’t know how you would catch it. If my intent is to deceive the casino about playing from the same machine, I can change all the indicators where they can’t tell. I suspect you don't want the details of how that can be done. But I am think “syndicates” would know how to do that if I do. So I think your “fraud players” are the amateur kind and or those committing an innocent mistake.

The problem that still exists is a premier gaming operation won’t adamantly state they won’t confiscate monies from players because they don’t like betting strategies. This indicates we have more than a knee jerk reaction. I think most of us would applaud FL setting the record straight if they have changed their philosophy. They have before discussed their bonus structure on an open forum. Why not just come here and set things right? Certainly, they must be monitoring this discussion.

The net of this is you have done all you can and with good results. But FL refuses to protect their reputation, the reputation of MicroGaming and the reputation of eCOGRA. Despite eCOGRA’s good work with you in this case, I don’t know how they could allow FL to continue to be a seal holder under the circumstances. As I read your post above, you yourself refuse to “stick your neck out” for them. I don’t blame you. I don’t know why eCOGRA would.

BTW, I received your newsletter regarding and the UIGEA and have circulated it around. It’s that pollination I was talking about - :). But this is sure putting a damper on my enthusiasm. I am starting to see a reason to bifurcate poker rooms and internet casinos.

Stanford
 
Last edited:

jpgah

Dormant account
Joined
Mar 19, 2007
Location
Suckramento
I finally received notice that I was going to paid by Fortune Lounge. I havent gotten my check yet, but I guess they at least saw the light and are paying up. I'll post back when my check arrives.
 

AudiManinBoro

Dormant account
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Location
UK
heh hey at least you were in a position to win at royal vegas. Im a new member there, made a few deposits, received a few bonuses, lost out big time on every slot i played and can count on one hand the bonuses that came out after several deposits, it doesnt play anywhere near as good as some of my other Mg casinos but hey im probably just unlucky. first time ive heard of anyone complaining about locked out casinso though, from reputation alone, this casino group is sterling!
 

lojo

Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Location
USA
I see at least one FL has updated their terms.

24. Irregular playing patterns will be reviewed before withdrawals are processed. Equal, or hedge betting shall be considered irregular gaming for bonus play-through requirement purposes. The Casino reserves the right to withhold any cash-ins where irregular play has occurred to meet play-through requirements.

Is this still a FU clause? Was it always there and I missed it? Got this from VegasPalms.
 

pangloss

Dormant account
Joined
Aug 3, 2006
Location
Australia
24. Irregular playing patterns will be reviewed before withdrawals are processed. Equal, or hedge betting shall be considered irregular gaming for bonus play-through requirement purposes. The Casino reserves the right to withhold any cash-ins where irregular play has occurred to meet play-through requirements.

Is this still a FU clause? Was it always there and I missed it? Got this from VegasPalms.


Anyone can answer, even Fortune Lounge representatives:

What is "irregular play"?

What is "equal betting"?

What is "hedge betting"?

If the answers aren't immediately obvious then ..........well in truth we all know it is the same old bullshxt from these pirates.


...
 

cyprean

Banned User
PABnononaccred
Joined
Jul 31, 2006
Location
Sun/Moon
Anyone can answer, even Fortune Lounge representatives:

What is "irregular play"?

What is "equal betting"?

What is "hedge betting"?

If the answers aren't immediately obvious then ..........well in truth we all know it is the same old bullshxt from these pirates.


...

I would like to know as well. They surely seem to have the FU clause in use.

I believe that the safest way to avoid "equal betting", "irregular play" and "hedge betting" is to avoid their casino in the first place. I thought "regular play" was a bad thing as "over 4000 players played EXACTLY the same way" but now "irregular play" is on the FU clause as well.
 

vinylweatherman

You type well loads
Joined
Oct 14, 2004
Location
United Kingdom
It's still and FU clause because it is way too open for the casino to interpret.
It is better than nothing, but it still only defines two kinds of play patterns, and they are not clearly defined either.

Hedge betting is probably the clearest, being placing a bet on all, or damn near all, possible outcomes such that all variance in a game is eliminated.
An illustration of this would be placing bets on both red and Black at French Roulette, and engaging autoplay for the number of spins required to clear the WR, and then withdrawing.

Equal betting is not clear. Again they could be referring to the above red/black strategy, but "Equal betting" can also be playing a large number of spins on a slot all with the same bet, or hands of Blackjack, table poker, VP, scratchcard. This is so wide a definition they could use this to void paying very large numbers of players they "don't like".

As to other irregular patterns, well, EVERYBODY plays an "irregular" pattern, surely that is what casinos want; us to be playing as individuals for entertainment, and not part of a bonus whoring group, or players club.
Where they have large numbers of players who all play pretty much the same, i.e, a REGULAR pattern of play, they can then be accused of "fraud", or being part of a group or syndicate.

If this is such a problem, why does MG not prevent such hedge betting through the software, they have done at the Bacarrat table, so why not with the other games. (Just try the player & banker hedge at any MG Bacarrat game - you just can't do it!)
 

lojo

Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Location
USA
The whole idea is a bit crazy. They've approved my craps strategy as 'pure', still waiting on a response to my roulette methods. (I use over 70% coverage)

I really don't see, in the long run, how any roulette play could be acceptable or unacceptable (except as part of a larger bonus strategy). If I bet black once aren't my odds the same as betting 17 thirtyfive times? If I put one dollar on a number, or 35 dollars on a color... wtf? it's the same thing over time isn't it? (unless of course I don't have at least 35x35 (or $1225) to play with.

A high risk bet is a high risk bet, and a grinding bet is a grinding bet. I guess they could be used together, but that seems to be clearly termed against via 'even money' betting.

I'll probably start another thread for this after I get a response on my roulette query. But I haven't completely decided whether to take the 400% bonus or not. It doesn't convert to real cash in ten dollar increments: you have to wager the whole bonus 30x before cashing out or you forfeit any winnings. Not sure I like that.
 

lojo

Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Location
USA
I guess I won't be starting another thread. I hit an impasse so I'll just wrap it up here.

Here's how it went: I asked for clarification of 30x playthrough of bonus as there is a caveat on the 200 and 400% where it doesn't actually credit to cash in increments: if you withdraw before 30x bonus you lose all but initial purchase.
Also after reading the new hedge term I asked for clarification and explained my betting styles on craps and roulette. A rep got back to me saying my craps style was fine - gave me a guest account and password, and asked me to log in, play a few a examples of roulette, then contact him and he'd get back.

Got three replies from other CSR and none of them addressed the roulette 'trial' directly. Attn: "Dude" had no affect, so to heck with it.

Just in case anyone wondered, my roulette play is: Heavy on 17, heavy on second 12, heavy on middle line, heavy on black. Max on all splits and neighbors of 17. Coverage 70%+ it's not an all or nothing proposition because (if lucky) you get enough partial pays to hit the big one(s).

If CS would have been more responsive, not only would I have used the rare bonus, but could have shown the 'average' player that there is nothing to fear as long as you communicate. Oh well.

Agreed; if the communication isn't there, the covering term could still be an FU clause. I still trust FL, but I won't be playing any roulette with a bonus.
 

lojo

Banned User - repetitive violations of <a href="ht
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Location
USA
Looking forward to this thread closed, and a fortune lounge rep coming back on board. Prolly not in my tenure as a dysfunctionalist.

I think I might just quit folks, most ya just don't get it.
I tried.

seventeen, think it would have been differn==================
 
Top