Resolved Palace Group Rules Shenanigans

He then grinded out the wagering requirements with 2222 bets of 1.6 on Megaspin - a low risk game. This is the reason the casino confiscated his winnings.

Equal, Zero Margin or Hedge Betting is considered irregular gaming for bonus play-through requirement purposes, according to the published T&C's at the time of accepting their bonus offer. The fact that you proceeded to place 2222 bets of 1.6 on Megaspin in order to meet the play-through requirements in a manner that deliberately minimises the risk, in our opinion breaches the T&Cs.

I can't be reading this right. Placing 2K plus bets at $1.60 a pop on a SLOT is low risk betting? Since when is playing any slot low risk? Slots are volatile, and it's quite easy to lose a bankroll of 2K plus playing $1 or higher bets per spin. I'm sorry...but that's insanity to me. So if a player can't play slots now to grind out playthrough...what exactly are they supposed to play?

I'll leave the other part to you guys to discuss....I'm still picking my jaw up off the desk.
 
The term is much too vague. There should be no room for vague terms in casino T&Cs.

The method that was used to win money using this bonus was in fact very high risk, and slots are by no means a low margin game even at very low stakes. Three card poker is quite a high margin, high variance game too. There was probably more than a 90% chance of him losing his deposit betting such high stakes.

FTR Anthony had PABd and we looked at the terms and conditions, and whether we like it or not, they were broken with the last bet with the 4th Hand.

What if he'd claimed the bonus and had been playing lowish stakes on slots or something like a "normal" player, was down to his last 5, put it all on a single spin and won 1000? Would the "placing single bets using your entire or the majority of your account balance and bonus" rule mean his winnings are again, confiscated?

Probably not, but they should be if the term is applied equally over all circumstances. It seems that if you almost crash out and then make a lucky comeback, you'll get your winnings confiscated. :eek2:
 
It's MegaSpin, it's just many spins in one. The actual betting is 0.2/spin on a low variance slot. It's a well known method of clearing wagering requirements after you get a big hit on your first wagers.
 
It's MegaSpin, it's just many spins in one. The actual betting is 0.2/spin on a low variance slot. It's a well known method of clearing wagering requirements after you get a big hit on your first wagers.

I know what Megaspin is, and betting 20 cents per "board" or $1.60 a spin is hardly low risk, IMO. I've played it, and it wasn't for a buck and change a spin. I still don't see how any slot can be considered "low risk". I've had my ass kicked to next week and back from almost every MG slot available, at one time or another. The player got lucky, and happened to hit the slot when it was in a good mood.

Obviously, I must be missing something here..and you know what? I'm not even interested in finding out. It's insanity to me....and no one will convince me otherwise. KasinoKing had better watch out if casinos are starting to consider slot play as low risk. :rolleyes:
 
When you have deposited 150 and have a 2700 balance, spinning at 0.2/spin is as low risk as it gets. Of course you will most likely lose some and there will be variance but it's still a very good way to clear the wr with a guaranteed profit.

As I said I think the casino should pay if they take the bet which they did. I just want to put it in perspective, the way this player played is the reason the casinos have these kind of rules to start with and it's exactly what the rules are there to stop.
 
I can't be reading this right. Placing 2K plus bets at $1.60 a pop on a SLOT is low risk betting? Since when is playing any slot low risk? Slots are volatile, and it's quite easy to lose a bankroll of 2K plus playing $1 or higher bets per spin. I'm sorry...but that's insanity to me. So if a player can't play slots now to grind out playthrough...what exactly are they supposed to play?

I'll leave the other part to you guys to discuss....I'm still picking my jaw up off the desk.

Pina,

Whilst I do not agree playing Megaspins is low risk, it would be a quick way to meet WRs quickly and cash out whatever remains of the $2700. I believe the player wanted to cash out as soon as possible.

However, practically everyone does this if he gets a big win and wants to clear WRs so what the hell is wrong with it? Actually, the casinos sets these terms to prevent players from placing large bets with the casino's money (bonus) on even-money games and then grind out WRs. If the player had won, say $300 on a single game and then proceeded to play low-risk slots at 45c a spin that would have amounted to bonus abuse. But let's face it, the player had $2700 as a bankroll so even if he had proceeded to play other slots at $1.80 per spin he should still be able to cash out in the region of $2300-$2500 hardly the $150 that was refunded.

If the casino believes that this player should not play megaspins to clear the bonus place back the $2700 into the account and let him finish the wagering on other slots/games to clear the $150 bonus. Dont use the vague terms 'irregular betting'. They are not restricted games so no matter how haphazard his bets are they should still count.
 
Bonus betting caps

It's very obvious you knew what you were doing and were playing expecting to have a positive EV from the bonus.

That doesn't change the fact that the casino should pay in my opinion, if they want to stop it they should put betting limits in when a bonus is active.

Thats just it! They do have a betting limit set when the bonus is active!
 
In that case the numbers are wrong. He must have bet substantially more than 30 on the pair plus. The ante bonus is only 5-1, so that doesn't amount to all that much - not enough 2700.

If it were 60 on the pair plus, that would be 2400 win, then 40 each on ante+play, that would add up to about 2700.

But 30?

No.

OP, could you explain how you managed to win 2700 from 30 bet on this game. There are several comments in this thread but i still don't get it. :oops:
 
Rules breaking

My pleasure :D

But this is besides the point. Correct me if I'm wrong, you broke the term on your fourth bet, right? And then went on to grind out the wagering requirements with Megaspin. What were you thinking? You knew they would nail you for this, didn't you?

Or did you miss this term when signing up? There are number of members here who are bonus players who would surely school you on how to not raise red flags. That's what you did, and the casino nailed you. You gave the casino room to use their discretion and they did.

I understood the term about betting the majority to mean I couldnt bet like 300 or nearly that on a hand. The software enforces this by limiting your maximum bet anyway. I didnt think the limit would be re calculated after every hand and that I would be measured against the new total. The rules dont say this happens so a fair assumption I think. Also, when I won, I wanted to cash out straight away but couldnt because the banking system said that I had not played enough. I went and read the rules again and decided that slot machines was the best way to clear their requirements as they counted 100% towards the total. I played a few different games before finding one thast I could autoplay on and used that to finish up.

If the rules were clear (and fair) I wouldnt be kicking off. They are neither clear nor fair so I am.
 
I understood the term about betting the majority to mean I couldnt bet like 300 or nearly that on a hand. The software enforces this by limiting your maximum bet anyway. I didnt think the limit would be re calculated after every hand and that I would be measured against the new total. The rules dont say this happens so a fair assumption I think. Also, when I won, I wanted to cash out straight away but couldnt because the banking system said that I had not played enough. I went and read the rules again and decided that slot machines was the best way to clear their requirements as they counted 100% towards the total. I played a few different games before finding one thast I could autoplay on and used that to finish up...
Okay, thanks - fair enough. I'm waiting for the casino rep to give us the casino's side of things.
 
Insinuado

Unnecessary insinuation IMO.
.

FYI I played alone without any help from anyone else, no collaboration.

The casino limits the size of the bets you can make using their software, lists what games can and cant be played and has a play through requirement.

I bet what they allowed me to, the goal posts moved whilst I was playing (balance down, percentage of current balance up hence rule was broken), played only allowed games and met their requirement playing slot machines.

As such I dont think I broke their rules according to the spirit in which they were written and I think the casino is just creatively interpreting the rule to hold onto an amount of money which means nothing to them but loads to me.

I hope they look at this thread and realise that the amount in question is worth far far less than the amount of bad will they are generating, pay me, fix their rule so it is fair and not open to interpretation (by the casino or the player) and think twice in the future about clawing back payments which lets be honest they implied they were going to make when they offered me the extra bonus to put the money back in.

Anthony
 
I understood the term about betting the majority to mean I couldnt bet like 300 or nearly that on a hand. The software enforces this by limiting your maximum bet anyway. I didnt think the limit would be re calculated after every hand and that I would be measured against the new total. The rules dont say this happens so a fair assumption I think. Also, when I won, I wanted to cash out straight away but couldnt because the banking system said that I had not played enough. I went and read the rules again and decided that slot machines was the best way to clear their requirements as they counted 100% towards the total. I played a few different games before finding one thast I could autoplay on and used that to finish up.

If the rules were clear (and fair) I wouldnt be kicking off. They are neither clear nor fair so I am.

Would you mind recreating your bet history, perhaps through Playcheck? The 2700 is impossible on a single bet so something must be wrong.
 
Gingeath89,

I think we heard your story loud and clear. Let Bryan sort this out from now on. I would also like to hear the casino's side of the story.
 
The Palace Group Rulings

Okay, thanks - fair enough. I'm waiting for the casino rep to give us the casino's side of things.

I wont hold my breath for a response. I had to email them several times to even be told "we have returned your deposit this decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into". No explanation was given. The onus was on me to go to them to find out why they had returned my deposit. It was only when eCogra got involved that I even had a whiff of what I was supposed to have done. Not the best service in the world is it when you are expecting 2400 and get sent 150 without even an email telling you what they are doing. There are so many problems with this case it just isnt funny.
 
I dont know how to do that but I have a screen shot of the winningest hand and I had 60 on Pair plus and 30 on Ante.
Ant
:confused: So your last bet was 90 - so you were lying in your first post then?:
I made a new account, deposited 150 and got a 100% matching bonus. Balance 300. Ive checked their terms and conditions and I can play 3 Card Poker which is great because thats what I normally play at land based casinos.

1st Hand, bet 120, call - lose.
2nd Hand, bet 60, fold
3rd Hand, bet 90, fold
4th Hand bet my remaining 30 quid and hit a straight flush! Happy Day! 2700.
120+60+90+30 = 300, so where did the other 60 come from?


It's very obvious you knew what you were doing and were playing expecting to have a positive EV from the bonus.

That doesn't change the fact that the casino should pay in my opinion, if they want to stop it they should put betting limits in when a bonus is active.
Totally 110% agree! (With both sentences).
When o when o when are casinos going to write clear unambiguous terms which say exactly what players can not do, or better still, use their software to make it impossible...???
Then we would NEVER have to see another thread like this ever again and everybody would live happily ever after for all eternity! :thumbsup:

Sheeeesh! :(
 
I notice when I take a bonus with some MG casinos that I am restricted by the size of bet I can place on games during time of wagering requirements. This avoids me breaking the term by ensuring I cannot place bets larger than a percentage of my balance. So it must be possible for all MG casinos to implement this in their software or request it from MG.

I think programming the software to disallow certain kinds of bets &/or games during times of bonus wagering requirements which the casino would call bonus abuse is the way to go. A simple message saying sorry this bet is not allowed until wagering requirements have been met will do. It stops confusion later on if some players haven't read the extremely long tiring set of commandments which are terms and conditions. And means nobody can be accused of bonus abuse because the software has declined those bets deemed by the casino to be of inappropiate spirit, and caused them to have never been placed. It will kill bonus abuse in its tracks. I guess it depends on how much it costs to do this. But feel it is the logical way forward and is possible because there are casinos which do this.

Also it disturbed me to read of an accredited casino, sending out an email to entice a player into reversing their withdrawal.

I feel the term quoted is too vague. It is the exact same one that crops up in lots of MG casinos. I hate the term. It is very difficult to understand where the casino is coming from. It needs to be made clearer. With play examples being illustated to show what the casino means by this term if possible. It seems a lot of casinos are a bit lazy and just copy the same terms and conditions from everyone else. Cause they are identical in the way they are phrased.

Each individual casino needs to put more effort into making these binding agreements more reader friendly and easy to understand, and in terms which appear vague, they should show clear examples of what they're talking about.
 
When you have deposited 150 and have a 2700 balance, spinning at 0.2/spin is as low risk as it gets. Of course you will most likely lose some and there will be variance but it's still a very good way to clear the wr with a guaranteed profit.

Well not quite.

0.25/spin on regular Double Magic is lower variance than what this player played, which I assume is 9 slots of 0.20 each. (I assume 1.60 is an error, I'm guessing he played 1.80/spin). He could have done 9 lines at 1 * 10p each, which would have been lower risk,but same house edge.

What the megaspin does do is get through the wagering quicker.

But by no means is this the lowest variance choice. You could play 1p, 9p, whatever on Thunderstruck.

As I said I think the casino should pay if they take the bet which they did. I just want to put it in perspective, the way this player played is the reason the casinos have these kind of rules to start with and it's exactly what the rules are there to stop.

Do people play like this without a bonus? I guess not, because if they win they are allowed to withdraw.

The point to me is that players do this because they've taken a chance, they've won, then they want to take their winnings and leave. But they're not allowed to do this, so they adopt a balance-preservation strategy. Who wants to win then see it all evaporate? Which doesn't seem unreasonable to me.
 
I dont know how to do that but I have a screen shot of the winningest hand and I had 60 on Pair plus and 30 on Ante.

Ant

Ok that makes more sense:

Balance 120

60 on Pair Plus
30 on Ante
30 on Play

Ante + play bet returns 30 + 30 + 210 = 270

Pair Plus bet returns 60 + 60 * 40 = 2460

= 2730
2610 win, 120 wagered

So you must have had at least 120 in your balance before this bet

Could you please post your accurate bet history?
 
In response

Firstly to address a few additional points raised in this thread:
30. Spin Palace Casino reserves the right to pay all Progressive Jackpot winnings in US dollars. The amount to be paid, will be determined by the US Dollar Progressive Jackpot amount on the Progressive Game played, at the time the jackpot was won.
We pay progressives in the currency the player played in. The term does need updating and will be done so accordingly.

The Finnish site will be updated to have the same terms as the rest of our the casino sites. Thank you for pointing these out.

In response to the original post.

We have been targeted and abused by a number of players using certain betting patterns (which for obvious reasons I cannot divulge). We do not take the bets at face value but delve into the actual game play to determine whether someone has transgressed the terms and conditions or not.
The problems come in when we look at trends and play and see definite signs that someone is betting a certain way after receiving bonus money which is not in the spirit of fair play and not the reason we give offers and bonuses to our players.
Our terms do state what we do not allow and if players would like to clarify what they may or may not do prior to claiming and betting they are welcome to contact us.
The 20% bonus offer on the reversal was an error and should not have been sent out. This does not detract that once the withdrawal was submitted and analysed the player did in fact break terms which they agreed to when registering with us.
Players who play with us know we are a reputable group who does not need to revert to any underhand tactics. We do however strongly believe that a business needs to protect itself.

Regards,

The Palace Group
 
The casino needs to revise this term - it should be majority of deposit not balance. I think most everyone would agree that this is fair, right?

Ideally I think the software should set betting limits, players should not have to watch out for traps. Some MGs even appear to have table limits automatically adjusted depending on bonus. I think a lot of new players are put off by complicated terms and conditions such as this.

If they do have this term that you can only bet a certain percentage of the deposit amount/starting balance, they need to define what counts as a bet. Is it only the initial bet, or are doubles, splits, raises and calls at later stages of the hand included in the max bet amount?
 
Firstly to address a few additional points raised in this thread:
30. Spin Palace Casino reserves the right to pay all Progressive Jackpot winnings in US dollars. The amount to be paid, will be determined by the US Dollar Progressive Jackpot amount on the Progressive Game played, at the time the jackpot was won.
We pay progressives in the currency the player played in. The term does need updating and will be done so accordingly.

The Finnish site will be updated to have the same terms as the rest of our the casino sites. Thank you for pointing these out.

In response to the original post.

We have been targeted and abused by a number of players using certain betting patterns (which for obvious reasons I cannot divulge). We do not take the bets at face value but delve into the actual game play to determine whether someone has transgressed the terms and conditions or not.
The problems come in when we look at trends and play and see definite signs that someone is betting a certain way after receiving bonus money which is not in the spirit of fair play and not the reason we give offers and bonuses to our players.
Our terms do state what we do not allow and if players would like to clarify what they may or may not do prior to claiming and betting they are welcome to contact us.
The 20% bonus offer on the reversal was an error and should not have been sent out. This does not detract that once the withdrawal was submitted and analysed the player did in fact break terms which they agreed to when registering with us.
Players who play with us know we are a reputable group who does not need to revert to any underhand tactics. We do however strongly believe that a business needs to protect itself.

Regards,

The Palace Group

Would you mind addressing the fact that the term "majority of account balance and bonus" is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE to avoid breaching when a player makes a bet of the remainder of his balance, even if it's only ONE CENT?
 
Ideally I think the software should set betting limits, players should not have to watch out for traps. Some MGs even appear to have table limits automatically adjusted depending on bonus. I think a lot of new players are put off by complicated terms and conditions such as this.

If they do have this term that you can only bet a certain percentage of the deposit amount/starting balance, they need to define what counts as a bet. Is it only the initial bet, or are doubles, splits, raises and calls at later stages of the hand included in the max bet amount?

It must necessarily be only the original bet - since all further bets are optional.
 
Spearmaster

Of course:

I mentioned that we go into detail to check accounts and if it is the remaining balance used for a small bet that is fine.

Those players who have been playing with us for years know we are fair and upfront with what we do.
There are however cases where intentions are deliberate and terms are broken and these are the ones acted upon.

Hopefully this answers your question Spearmaster.

Regards,

The Palace Group
 
It must necessarily be only the original bet - since all further bets are optional.

Hmm, I think that certain games are different. For some games, you HAVE to pay more to get paid. Like casino hold em, three card poker ante + play bet, and some others.

Every brand of casino software will, with $3 in your balance, let you bet $3 on blackjack. But they won't necessarily let you bet $3 on casino hold em. Playtech limits you to 1/3 of your balance, because you NEED the extra cash to get paid.

It's not unreasonable to consider the amount wagered as the sum of ante+play for these purposes on 3 card poker. For blackjack, however, it's definitely only the original bet.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Meister Ratings

Back
Top