Microgaming implement max bet limit when playing with a bonus(!!)

[wintingo]

One problem is the newer multi provider platforms. It is much harder to program safeguards as they would have to cater for a number of different game providers' systems. Download casinos may for a time be the only ones able to implement such a feature, so players should not rely on it working on Microgaming games presented in multi provider platforms.

Correctomundo, with multiple platforms you cannot change coin settings. We are multi-platform but because of our Cashpay bonus system we don't have these types of problems.

 

[incrediblestuff]

Sorry mr Wintingo, i have to say that i somehow frowned at part of your posts, i know you are trying to do a good job with that cashback/clearplay system, but some of your posts could be interpreted as saying 32Red would be trying to actively stop players from winning, where as a LOT of players welcome their bonuses (as you can see in the current "32Red promos" thread) and noone, at least not 32Red is forcing anyone to take them:

The OP was maybe wrong in his assesment that this option is new to MG operators, but definitely not wrong in terms of that it is in fact a good thing to actively use, since it is purely for the players protection, that is, if and when they do take a bonus.

 

[wintingo]

Sorry mr Wintingo, i have to say that i somehow frowned at part of your posts, i know you are trying to do a good job with that cashback/clearplay system, but some of your posts could be interpreted as saying 32Red would be trying to actively stop players from winning, where as a LOT of players welcome their bonuses (as you can see in the current "32Red promos" thread) and noone, at least not 32Red is forcing anyone to take them:

The OP was maybe wrong in his assesment that this option is new to MG operators, but definitely not wrong in terms of that it is in fact a good thing to actively use, since it is purely for the players protection, that is, if and when they do take a bonus.

Its cashback/Cashpay system.. not to be confused with MGS clearplay
I was merely using 32red as an example of where this min bet rules apply. My comment about forcing players to play with bonuses was a general comment about a collection of casinos.

I'm still not convinced that this rule is for player protection, why then do casinos not have this rule as an option when a bonus is NOT active? The setting was introduced not to protect players but to protect casinos from big winners and then having to spend the time and energy on explaining to those winning players that broke the rules, why they broke the rules and why they wont be paid. The system is flawed, this is why we developed Cashpay.

 

[incrediblestuff]

Its cashback/Cashpay system.. not to be confused with MGS clearplay
I was merely using 32red as an example of where this min bet rules apply. My comment about forcing players to play with bonuses was a general comment about a collection of casinos.

I'm still not convinced that this rule is for player protection, why then do casinos not have this rule as an option when a bonus is NOT active? The setting was introduced not to protect players but to protect casinos from big winners and then having to spend the time and energy on explaining to those winning players that broke the rules, why they broke the rules and why they wont be paid.

Ok, no problem, it just seemed like it since your comment was indeed on a quote where only 32Red was named..

I bolded a part of your reply which i don't fully understand: how would preventing huge bets, i.e initializing this feature would lead to casinos having to spent time/energy into explaining anything? if this feature was used then there should have been no breach of rules.., unless you are confusing the max bet rule with the max bet feature?

 

[wintingo]

I bolded a part of your reply which i don't fully understand: how would preventing huge bets, i.e initializing this feature would lead to casinos having to spent time/energy into explaining anything? if this feature was used then there should have been no breach of rules.., unless you are confusing the max bet rule with the max bet feature?

I'm referring to the rule that when playing with a bonus the max bet settings change. There are lots of casinos that have this rule in place but cant limit the players bet settings, they rely on their terms to protect them and they rely on players reading the terms. If a player bets above the limit, the casino now needs to explain to the angry player why they wont get paid.

 

[dunover]

A bonus in itself is a gamble for BOTH parties. As we know the RTP goes in undulations, below and above the 95% flatline. Should you see a positive 'bump' after a deposit and taking a bonus, and say your 100 quid deposit is now 550, the WR of said bonus will most likely work in the casino's favour, as when your RTP temporarily goes into decline afterwards, you are captive to the bonus and cannot withdraw. (Unless a Wintingo player lol...)
Then again, you could be getting nowhere fast having played hundreds of spins, and sitting at 50 quid. You would have bust out if you had NO bonus. Then you get the big hit, and get to say 400. You then check the WR and luckily you only have 200 left, thus you have a guaranteed minimum cashout of 100 profit on your 100 deposit once WR is soon met. This time the casino loses.

So, I say to Mr. Wintingo rep it is grossly unfair to say the 32red bonus is 'because they want you to lose'. IF the bonus means you are around EV then that can't possibly be true. Obviously some bonuses are ridiculous and tempt only the mug players, but this doesn't apply to normal MG 30 x bonus WR. JPP have/had the (ex) 20x WR which was EV+.

I have seen times in the past when IF I had had the Wintingo-style bonus it would have allowed me to cash out a decent profit which I subsequently didn't. Conversely, I have had the usual MG bonuses which have saved me from bust and made a significant cash out later. It's the choice we take, the gamble we take.

As for the statement you made stating that the 8.00 limit on bonus play is somehow disadvantageous or unfair, I cannot agree. I can't see the difference. There is NOTHING stopping you playing at 8.00, eventually turning the bonus to cash, removing the 8.00 limit then raising to 15 and winning a huge cashout with NO restriction of WR. Not only that, but the games are random, so the stake should not affect the outcome unless playing certain weighted games/AWP's.

 

[Balthazar]

I'm still not convinced that this rule is for player protection, why then do casinos not have this rule as an option when a bonus is NOT active?

Because you can't break a bonus T&C is there's no active bonus?

The setting was introduced not to protect players but to protect casinos from big winners and then having to spend the time and energy on explaining to those winning players that broke the rules, why they broke the rules and why they wont be paid.

Well it protects the players regardless of why it was created.

The bottom line is, online casinos need to stop accepting bets that they won't honor. This is a disgusting behaviour that (unfortunately) became standard in an unregulated industry.

 

[Igor82]

This has nothing to do with Microgaming, its on an operator level. A lot of operators have been doing this for some time, including 32red for their welcome bonuses, there is nothing new here.

Its a sneaky tactic! Effectively the whole game changes when you are betting with and without bonuses. Its mainly in place to limit the exposure the casino has, especially if there is a lot of fake bonus money in the system. The more worrying thing in my eyes is how a lot of casinos have drastically increased wagering requirements over the last few months. Why has no one mentioned this yet??

I have said this before and i'll say it again, casinos want you to play with bonus money, it helps them tie you down and keep you playing longer so you lose. Come play at Wintingo, you can cashout whenever you want and still earn the same bonus money as other sites (more in some cases), you just don't get it up front, you earn it while you play..

P.S. Yes, i am a "frustrated" shill for Wintingo

i tried - blew through my 500 without feeling the cashback haha good system though.

 

[Igor82]

I would take a guess that however this feature works though, it probably won't work for operators using quickfire, and even if it did, would probably just create more confusion than it solves by having the max bet limit imposed in some games and not others ...

Not surprising to see 32 red leading the way with this though, I will say that !

quickfire operators have their own systems. We've been implementing max bet feature for a long time now and we don't use MG platform, just the games. Didn't hurt ad no complaints to date (knock on wood) - at best a question to CS as to how come my WR increased with an explanation after which they happily decrease the bet.

Great thing about it is that while it limits the exposure against the AP, it doesn't bother the average joe - at the same time operators can remove bet limitations as they get to know their players and players STILL benefit from increased bankroll on their deposits. Its a win-win-win IMHO

 

[Nifty29]

Wintingo have an excellent cashpay system.....EXCEPT for one FATAL flaw (IMO).....and that is the inability to let the cashback accrue and be used at a time of the player's choosing.

Personally, being drip fed $2 at a time is just annoying, and doesn't sit well with me, which is why I seldom deposit.

If Wintingo made changes to allow the $2 chunks to accumulate for later use....such as if one loses their deposit/s or whatever....then I would most definitely be a regular customer.

I also thought the comments involving 32Red were inappropriate from another Rep. I think if WT re reads their posts they will see that the finger was most certainly being pointed at 32Red, intentionally or otherwise.

 

[Igor82]

I have said this before and i'll say it again, casinos want you to play with bonus money, it helps them tie you down and keep you playing longer so you lose. Come play at Wintingo, you can cashout whenever you want and still earn the same bonus money as other sites (more in some cases), you just don't get it up front, you earn it while you play..

P.S. Yes, i am a "frustrated" shill for Wintingo

I had to go back and check the comments after Nifty's post... completely missed the quoted line and got to tell you: above is not cool at all.

I appreciate you have a cool system which ingeniously mixes old-school loyalty point conversion with a 66% cut to your margin (on average) with a limitation, allowing you to acquire and retain customers on volume cut. That said, no one has ever discussed the way you do things, because that's the way you do them (beauty of ingenuity) and that is to be respected as long as it is not in breach of basic morals and fairness.

However, while it's great that you managed to mix the bonuses and loyalty points, just because that's how your system is designed, doesn't give you the right preach "hate-speech" or frankly wrongly assume on why "others" use bonuses in the rest of the industry.

"Helps them tie you down and keep you playing" ??!? what does that mean? Frankly, i cant believe I just read that from another colleague in a public forum.

I think you should re-check the respectfulness of your tone when speaking about your competition, in general or otherwise.

Respect the community, respect your competition and face reality that with a good business practice there is food on the table for everyone. No need to dip in other people's plate so vulgarly.

Thanks

 

[Igor82]

If i make my first deposit and get 100% bonus the bet limits have one setting while the bonus is active. If i make another deposit straight after with no bonus then the bet limits change which to me is a big change, surely players get suspicious of changes like this?

Not the way it works at all. Read the t&c's you are referring to - winnings derived from bets over max have additional 50x turnover in case of NDB.

In case of DB max bet is applied when utilising bonus funds. Game doesn't change, how much you can bet on it with money you never had before does.

This is not about protecting players on the terms and conditions by stopping them from betting above the stated limit. This is a restrictive clause which basically says "we know you might win if we give you bonus money but we have found a way to limit our exposure and stop you from winning.

Wholeheartedly incorrect. It is not in any shape or form a ploy to stop players from winning. As some research can show you, the max bet impositions on bonuses are there to stop AP's from trying 20% of their bankroll on a volatile game as well as to stop syndicates from multi-collecting awarded deposit bonuses and applying the same volatility strategy, predominantly - until a casino gets to understand their customer at which point the whole loyalty structure is tailored (hopefully) and rules change to the benefit of the player.

It has nothing to do with "finding a way from stopping players from winning".

This is 32red you are speaking of, one of the widest recognised casinos in the industry. Do you honestly stand by your statement that they've made it "by finding ways to not let people win" - it doesn't make any sense this isnt some back-alley casino that was started yesterday based on some shady practices.

Frankly, I'm dumbfounded by your lack of casino knowledge. These "conspiracy theory" statements are better suited on a page talking about the "fool proof roulette system" than on comment thread of an accredited representative.

I would suggest that you look into bonus abuse and ways to create +EV - it will help in understand the rules of the industry which you do not seem to have a firm grasp on. Upon which, I would suggest that your statements be formatted in a way that is expected from a representative of said industry.

And my apologies if above is harsh. I do not mean to be pointed or disrespectful to you, I'm sure you treat your players extremely well and personally think your system is very much the way forward for a true casino player. However, I do feel strongly that lines should be drawn when reviewing competition however and its our duty to ensure the information we disseminate is correct and truthful.

 

[dunover]

not the way it wors at all. Read the t&c's - winnings derived from bets over max have additional 50x turnover in case of NDB.

in case of DB max bet is applied when utilising bonus funds. Game doesn't change, how much you can bet on it with money you never had before does.



utter ****-****. Its a ploy to stop players from winning?? What? As some research can show you, the max bet impositions on bonuses are there to stop AP's from trying 20% of their bankroll on a volatile game as well as to stop syndicates from multi-collecting awarded deposit bonuses and applying the same volatility strategy, predominantly - until a casino gets to understand their customer at which point the whole loyalty structure is tailored (hopefully) and rules change to the benefit of the player.

it has nothing to do with "finding a way from stopping players from winning" - wow i still cant believe you said that

This is 32red you are speaking of, one of the widest recognised casinos in the industry. Do you honestly stand by your statement that they've made it "by finding ways to not let people win" - it doesn't make any sense this isnt some back-alley casino that was started yesterday based on some shady practices.

I'm dumbfounded by your lack of casino knowledge. These "conspiracy theory" statements are better suited on a page talking about the "fool proof roulette system" than on comment thread of an accredited representative.

Look into bonus abuse and ways to create +EV - it will help in understand the rules of the industry. Or don't, since you don't implement them. Whichever way, these statements need to be formatted in a way that is expected from a representative of said industry.

And my apologies if above is harsh. I do not mean to be pointed or disrespectful to you, I'm sure you treat your players extremely well. I feel strongly that lines should be drawn when reviewing competition however and its our duty to ensure the information we disseminate is correct and truthful.

Igor82 - would you like me to send him one of my custom-made foil hats? The options are silver or gold in colour, with or without built-in antenna.

 

[Igor82]

Igor82 - would you like me to send him one of my custom-made foil hats?

NO no, not at all. actually im very embarrassed i went into a rant. I just couldn't believe my eyes.

I'll see if i can get my posts removed.

And lol btw - appreciate the humor

 

[dunover]

NO no, not at all. actually im very embarrassed i went into a rant. I just couldn't believe my eyes.

I'll see if i can get my posts removed.

And lol btw - appreciate the humor

No, I'd leave the posts, they are quite justified IMO and removing them would diminish the thread somewhat. I think they are quite educational.
I don't think the guy was being malicious, but a bit naïve when he said what he did. He doesn't post as much as others so maybe needs a little practice. His bonus system has its benefits too it has to be said. I agree with our mate from down under that the bonus should be 'stored' like a sort of 3dice 'rainy day' fund.

 

[Mouche12]

Well the biggest one was obviously the Betfred 7.5k 'mistake' as you saw, very recently. The thread was closed as the OP and her sheep refused to accept that BF were correct in their decision, plus the OP never told us the whole facts. There are numerous others if you take a look under the 'casino bonus complaints' section.

I don't get it; the newly implemented feature in the MG software will largely reduce exactly the issues you mention. That's a good thing for everyone!

 

[spoton]

Yes, this is my whole point - these players should never join a site unless they do, they are a danger to themselves. If some sites idiot-proof then players will become even more complacent when playing at those who don't and will surely be stung eventually, then will appear here bleating after the event.

Yeah it really sucks that the software providers take steps to avoid confiscation of winnings cause of what can be a single missclick. In the same way it really sucks that we have casinomeister here to give us a rogue listing of casinos. I mean, if people were able to spot a rogue by their terms and company history we wouldn't have any complaints..

To be a bit serious here. If the casinos just limits a player with a bonus to play just eligible games with max bet, alot of situations will be avoided. Unless playing at a rogue site ofcourse.

 

[Sovietsky]

I don't get it; the newly implemented feature in the MG software will largely reduce exactly the issues you mention. That's a good thing for everyone!

Of course it's a good thing misclicks happens and it would suck to lose all your winning because of that so 32red (casino of the decade) actually does something about it and some people apparently don't like it for some reasons.

The "read the T&C" argument is irrelevant when you hit the spacebar or do a misclick.

 

[Nifty29]

I don't get it; the newly implemented feature in the MG software will largely reduce exactly the issues you mention. That's a good thing for everyone!

Judging from the replies from reps here, it is NOT a new feature.

It is simply a change is max coin value, which naturally produces a max bet value. It can't be changed according to deposit and bonus amount, so it won't stop players getting caught by "% of bonus" rules I.e. an $8 max bet is ok on a $50 deposit, but not on a $500 deposit.

So, it really doesn't change much at all.

 

[Igor82]

Judging from the replies from reps here, it is NOT a new feature.

It is simply a change is max coin value, which naturally produces a max bet value. It can't be changed according to deposit and bonus amount, so it won't stop players getting caught by "% of bonus" rules I.e. an $8 max bet is ok on a $50 deposit, but not on a $500 deposit.

So, it really doesn't change much at all.

I hope you mean that the other way around

I've tried saying this before - its NOT for player protection, as Nifty correctly pointed out - it doesn't manage bankroll T&C conditions. It is used as a very functional AP deterrent as it doesn't allow (or punishes) bets of 15+ chips per spin for "through the door" customers.

That said, the casino may not necessary have the bankroll% line in the T&C's. In which case, if the t&c's state not to go over max bet ("or else") and at the same time max bet is imposed with repercussions by the system itself - it does make things easier on the audience and reduce confusion in respect of average non-defrauding joe.

 

[Jasminebed]

Just last night I made an accidental max bet. Now the place I was playing, I didn't violate any max bet rule with that bet. I play other places with the same software where it would have.

If you have a set dollar value for max bet, and you can set the limit for players, I see that as a good thing for all involved. It does help the casino by not having to explain to an angry player how they didn't win, by preventing such a scenario in the first place. It helps the careless player who makes a misclick, and it helps the ignorant player who didn't bother reading the terms.

 

[wintingo]

So, I say to Mr. Wintingo rep it is grossly unfair to say the 32red bonus is 'because they want you to lose'. IF the bonus means you are around EV then that can't possibly be true. Obviously some bonuses are ridiculous and tempt only the mug players, but this doesn't apply to normal MG 30 x bonus WR. JPP have/had the (ex) 20x WR which was EV+.

Again, i'm not attacking 32red in this instance. This was not my intention at all. I'm generalizing about why casinos want players to play with bonus money.

I have seen times in the past when IF I had had the Wintingo-style bonus it would have allowed me to cash out a decent profit which I subsequently didn't. Conversely, I have had the usual MG bonuses which have saved me from bust and made a significant cash out later. It's the choice we take, the gamble we take.

Yes its a gamble but would you agree that more often then not, the player wins and is restricted from cashing out until they meet the wagering requirements?

 

[wintingo]

i tried - blew through my 500 without feeling the cashback haha good system though.

I see your account, you received 16% back on your total deposits so far, obviously this is real cash.
Wow, your average bet size was high . In relation to this thread, if you were playing at the casinos that limit max bets, you would not have been able to bet that high!

 

[mattsgame]

Edit: Removed as requested

 

[wintingo]

Wintingo have an excellent cashpay system.....EXCEPT for one FATAL flaw (IMO).....and that is the inability to let the cashback accrue and be used at a time of the player's choosing.

Personally, being drip fed $2 at a time is just annoying, and doesn't sit well with me, which is why I seldom deposit.

If Wintingo made changes to allow the $2 chunks to accumulate for later use....such as if one loses their deposit/s or whatever....then I would most definitely be a regular customer.

The system awards $2 for every $60 wagered however i can set you up with bonuses that awards $10 for every $300 or $20 for every $600 etc etc
Actually, we can do any combination, the player can choose how they want to receive the cashback whether it be in $2 increments or even in $100 increments. We have this working with a number of players and we guarantee it with some players i.e. if a player has a run of bad luck and does not earn the cashback, we will simply add it manually. They can continue to play with it or they can cash it out.

Unfortunately we cannot let it all accumulate in the account for later use, because we carry over unearned cashback for every deposit, there are some tech issues with this we still have not been able to solve. The above solution almost solves this by changing when the cashback is released and how much is released in each increment.

If ANY players want a custom cashback bonus at Wintingo, please PM me your account details and i will set it up for you

I also thought the comments involving 32Red were inappropriate from another Rep. I think if WT re reads their posts they will see that the finger was most certainly being pointed at 32Red, intentionally or otherwise.

I re-read the post, sorry for that, was not my intention, i was generalizing.