Q&A for Casino Club and "Real Player" concerning the confiscations of winnings

[Zodiac]

Hey folks,

i was today in contact with Mike (realplayer) and now he has postet in our forum first.

Real Player actually would like to go slowly at the things and he has objection to post here because of its rejected PAB.
Also because it always was said false labelling and he don't know what it should mean.
(you must understand him Bryan)

Of course i could post here the engl. translation immediately in the name of RP if you Bryan will agree with this.

Or do you like if he do ?

 

[Zodiac]

answers

Okay, i have decided to post this here now in the name of realplayer.

Realplayer also like to thank all of you for your big interest in this affair.

I'm sure that realplayer will post here and will give you more further answers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

i don't know why the links are not working here but i give you the direct link to our forum where he has posted and then you can try the links there.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

it's a german and english version

now you should be able to read all and sorry for the links Pina

 

[Pinababy69]

Hey folks,

i was today in contact with Mike (realplayer) and now he has postet in our forum first.

Real Player actually would like to go slowly at the things and he has objection to post here because of its rejected PAB.
Also because it always was said false labelling and he don't know what it should mean.
(you must understand him Bryan)

Of course i could post here the engl. translation immediately in the name of RP if you Bryan will agree with this.

Or do you like if he do ?

I know you're just the messenger Zodiac, but that's bullshit. Realplayer is being given an opportunity to totally explain his side of things to many posters here who are truly impartial, and want nothing more than to get to the truth. He speaks English apparently, so there is no language barrier. Why would he not welcome the chance to give his side, and in the process refute some of the allegations being made against him. Makes no sense, just like everything else in this case.

If he refuses to post here, or shed any light on some of our concerns, then I for one will be left with no alternative than to give more weight to the allegations that Casino Club has made. No one in their right mind would sit idly by while being called a fraud...if they are indeed innocent.

EDITED: Just saw your second post Zodiac....and hope that he will indeed post here. I tried accessing the last two pdf's that you posted, and get an error message on both of them....Lawnet's answers, and the LGA complaint.

 

[Rusty]

That translation is truly awful by the way. (Are there no good German/English translators out there?)
None of that helps One jot unfortunately Zodiac and the links do not work.
Matters are confused enough without having to direct conversations through a Third party in different languages.

I will wait for Realplayer and Casino Club to come here and address the issues directly, if they ever do.
If Realplayer feels his PAB was handled unfairly he is being given the opportunity by Bryan to come here and state why in the forum.
You can not get fairer than that.
Casino Club have the same opportunity to set things straight and stop their quickly sliding reputation disappearing down the pan.

 

[Zodiac]

That translation is truly awful by the way. (Are there no good German/English translators out there?)
None of that helps One jot unfortunately Zodiac and the links do not work.
Matters are confused enough without having to direct conversations through a Third party in different languages.

I will wait for Realplayer and Casino Club to come here and address the issues directly, if they ever do.
If Realplayer feels his PAB was handled unfairly he is being given the opportunity by Bryan to come here and state why in the forum.
You can not get fairer than that.
Casino Club have the same opportunity to set things straight and stop their quickly sliding reputation disappearing down the pan.

i have not translated this and i have edited my post maybe you can see it now and if you always mean that's an bad translation realplayer must make a better one

 

[vinylweatherman]

From Realplayer

It is a precise translation of a human translator (English and German speaking). He has written a comment in addition. It is maybe quite interesting. Original is in German, here is the translation of the comment:

The translator is crap, EVEN when writing his own comment, where there should be no problems of having to translate from someone else's writings. It looks no better than some of the software translations quoted over here from that German language forum. Maybe the translator commented in German, and this was badly translated into English, however, it would have been better for the comment to have been constructed directly in English, since the intent is to raise the profile of the issue at an English language forum.

 

[Casinomeister]

If Realplayer feels his PAB was handled unfairly he is being given the opportunity by Bryan to come here and state why in the forum.
You can not get fairer than that...

I already explained why the PAB was rejected - the player had misrepresented himself - and as Rusty said, I'm giving him a second chance.

Realplayer needs no middle man (Zodiac), he can fend for himself in this forum.

I'll give him 48 hours to appear. If Realplayer can't answer these questions by then - in person, then the thread will be closed, his account locked, and I'll just consider this just another massive waste of time.

 

[Tengil]

From Realplayer



The translator is crap, EVEN when writing his own comment, where there should be no problems of having to translate from someone else's writings. It looks no better than some of the software translations quoted over here from that German language forum. Maybe the translator commented in German, and this was badly translated into English, however, it would have been better for the comment to have been constructed directly in English, since the intent is to raise the profile of the issue at an English language forum.

I disagree, the comment is translated with an online translator. The translator has only translated the lawyers letter.

And why realplayer hasnt posted here? He uses an online translator, so he's English is not that good that some may seem to think. So yes, there is a language barrier.

To those from English speaking countries, assuming you would have basic skills in German, would you want to post on a German forum knowing that you wouldnt be able to express yourself correctly? That your comments could be misinterpreted?

Furthermore he's first experience with this site wasnt that good which may make him reluctant to post.

 

[Casinomeister]

...And why realplayer hasnt posted here? He uses an online translator, so he's English is not that good that some may seem to think. So yes, there is a language barrier.

To those from English speaking countries, assuming you would have basic skills in German, would you want to post on a German forum knowing that you wouldnt be able to express yourself correctly? That your comments could be misinterpreted?

Furthermore he's first experience with this site wasnt that good which may make him reluctant to post.

I don't buy it. His English so far is fine via emails and his PAB.

He can post here in German and in English via a translator. Don't forget, I speak German as well.

Sounds like he is just coming up with excuses not to log in. Why is that I wonder?

 

[Tengil]

He has also been in contact with your old "friend" Caruso. Not sure what he has told him about this site, one can guess that its not something overly positive.

So basically there are two options.

1. He has been told that you always side with the casino. There are quite many out there that have this (dis)belief even if the trackrecord of resolved PABs doesnt support this. What their motives are remains unclear to me.

2. He has something to hide.

One could say that he's awaiting the LGAs resolution but that shouldnt keep him from posting here.

So the easiest way for him would be to email the answers in German to CM (I guess that would be ok). If he hasnt done this by the end of the week then the second option is the most obvious, it already seems to be the most likely.

 

[thelawnet]

The player has responded to the questions I posed there.

His English is clearly not so great, but good enough, but in any case as I know it can be a very slow process to write in a foreign language, I am inserting his answers there to my questions here, as applicable. Some answers may not entirely pertain to the question as the question asked may have been slightly different, but I have put all of his answers in somewhere.

Below:

History with Casino Club
1. When did you signup at Casino Club?

I am a customer of CC since 2003.

2. Could you list the dates and amounts of each deposit you made at Casino Club and also the amounts of each cashout. If you're not sure, give approximate figures/totals.

There was several payouts and many deposits (with and without bonus).
I have no notations about that, only for the last time. For example, my last payment was in February, 2008.
There was good and bad times. The variations were high very much and I was often close in the abyss.
I have played BlackJack, many Thousand games. Sometimes I played with 500-1000 euros per play.

3. Could you approximately (or exactly) indicate how much you received in bonsues from Casino Club, what the terms of these bonuses were (for example, blackjack bonuses, 20% of your deposit, 100x wagering requirement) whether you ever deposited without a bonus.

I estimate till the end of 2007 these were ~5,000 euros of bonus, but I have done no notations.

4. Between your last cashout and winning the jackpot,
(a) how much had you deposited at Casino Club,
(b) did you receive a bonus,
(c) if so how much, and what terms?

I have precise notes about the last deposit before winnings this Jackpot. This concerns the Happy Hour bonus action from the 21st to the 27th of July 2008. Here is the link to CCs newsletter (English)

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

In this week I have done 6 deposits, no games.
total deposit = 25,900 Euros + ~5000 bonus
My account balance on the 21st July before deposit = 888 Euros (included 201 bonus)
My account balance on the 27. July after the last deposit = 31,228 Euros ( included 4,641 bonus )

[Note by thelawnet: The bonus on offered was 5000/1000 DAILY from 21st-27th July, with a wagering requirement of 25 x deposit + bonus, with only baccarat and craps excluded. This is equivalent to 150 x the bonus amount. Such a bonus is a 'fair' contest in that it has a very high wagering requirement and therefore the player is likely to lose his money, but also there is an expected blackjack if you play perfect strategy. [Of course a bot would help with this, and also in reducing the risk.] The player received 4440 in bonuses it seems, on 25900 of deposits. His play is quite far from purely 'advantage' as he only needed to deposit 22,200 to get this amount of bonus - so 3700 has been deposited unnecessarily]

5. You indicated that you had played blackjack before winning the Jackpot. At what stake per hand did you play, how much had you wagered, and what was your net win/loss?

Single deck blackjack was removed in March, 2008. The concerning games from June (23./24./25./26.) and July (6.) 2008 were BlackJack (six Deck). How many games were it, i don't know. I have no access to the game history. Some days before it, I lost ~2600 with BlackJack 2against1 games. I wanted to win back the loss. If I lost, I to increased my stake progressively. In the kind 5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, 320 euros.
I had luck and it went well. With an account balance from 3500-4000 euros, I stopped the blackjack game.
In principle, I have won money which I have lost before (lost with blackjack 2against1).

6. How many spins did you play at the 25 Jackpot Poker in total between your last cashout and winning the jackpot?

My first game after the deposit was 3rd August ( Jackpot Poker), with game number 22 I win the Jackpot.

After winning

6A (asked by Gogo) If you look a picture on german forum where is history log, its clearly indicated that AFTER jackpot (R.Flush) were hit, in the same minute was hit another bet..then another..!! Why does realplayer no break if he the Jackpot wins?

I have it not seen as the R.Flush was hit. With Jackpot poker it is in such a way, if one loses a hand, one can begin immediately the next game. The button "deal" is activated.
With one won hand is deactivated to the button "deal". First must clicking(with mouse) double or collect.
Only then one can begin the next game.
What happens with a Royal flush? One cannot double the R.Flush. Therefore, it is active the button "deal" immediately and one can immediately begin the next game. I do not have a look at lost hands. If I lose, I immediately begin the next play. When the R.Flush was hit, I have seen only active button "deal" and immediately have begun the next play. Only with game Nr.24, I have seen, the Jackpot was hit.

7. Your win was on 3rd August 2008. When did you submit the cashout, and by what means (neteller/moneybookers/bank wire) did you request payment?

8. At what point did Casino Club inform you that they were not going to pay the win?

9. This letter is dated 21st August 2008: Old / Expired Link When did you receive it?

10. Regarding the above, on your first post at Kasino Forum, you say

"MY account has been locked since August, nobody told me, I only noticed when I tried to log in. When I last called them they said it was because they had the wrong address."

Regarding this matter, could you detail the emails, letters, calls, etc. you made to Casino Club in the period after you found out you would not get your win?

11. It appears that you signed up at Kasinoforum having noticed a thread about a player not being paid his winnings, and posted various comments about Casino Club on 24th November 2008 (

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

). On 7th December 2008 you then started your own thread describing this issue for the first time.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Why did you wait four months before posting?

CC says to me on the phone, it does not interest them what I would like.The account remains closed, and that's that. End of the communication without grounds for blockade of my account.
At the end of November 2008, I see several complaints on Internet forums, concerning CC.
This has motivated me to publish this case, also to warn other players.

12. Gaming VC is owned by a public company with offices in Luxembourg. Have you investigated or taken any legal action against them?

Gaming VC is the holding company with headquarter in Luxembourg.
Casino Club is registered under Gaming VC Corporation Limited in Malta
A juridical complaint against CC is possible only in Malta.

First I have consulted with a lawyer. He says, a juridical complaint against CC is possible only in Malta.
He says, he knows no comparable case and it high costs will originate. On Internet forums no useful information was also to be found on this subject. I had negative experiences with courts. In German there is the statement In court and on high sea we are everything in God's hand! At that time I have decided to initiate no legal steps. A court procedure can last several years. Also this has deterred me. But I have not excluded legal steps against CC in the future.

13. What other actions have you taken to rectify this, and on what dates did you submit your complaint? E.g., complaint to the LGA in Malta, or to Boss Media.

Later, then I have sent a detailed complaint to the LGA in Malta. I thought it is the best and easiest way. From the LGA I still have no answer.
First I did not want to publish this case.

Alleged fraud/breach of conditions

14. Have you ever used a bot at Casino Club?

Never. I did not know what a Bot is.

14A As I understand it Casino Club are denying your jackpot because you first won money playing blackjack (they say using a bot), and you then used that money to play the Jackpot Poker game. How much had you won on blackjack, and any other games between depositing and hitting the jackpot?

Between the last payment and the Jackpot profit I have not won and have not played. The money for the Jackpot games is direct from the last deposit. See answer to question 4 and 5

15. Casino Club alleged a link between you and a female player, are you aware of who this might be? Are there any other players (perhaps your wife) at your address, or has somebody else used your computer, or are you aware of any other way they could decide that you are linked to this other player?

 

[Casinomeister]

He has also been in contact with your old "friend" Caruso. Not sure what he has told him about this site, one can guess that its not something overly positive.

... I'll leave it at that.

...What their motives are remains unclear to me..

whiny players with a bone to pick?

One could say that he's awaiting the LGAs resolution but that shouldnt keep him from posting here.

I hope he's not holding his breath for LGA's outcome

So the easiest way for him would be to email the answers in German to CM (I guess that would be ok). If he hasnt done this by the end of the week then the second option is the most obvious, it already seems to be the most likely.

In my opinion, he needs to post here primarily because he is the one who made a public spectacle of this whole matter - he can finish it in a public way. I don't go for this private stuff since the members here deserve better. They are the ones he needs to answer to, not just me.

Edited to note that thelawnet's post came in before I finished writing this one

 

[vinylweatherman]

I disagree, the comment is translated with an online translator. The translator has only translated the lawyers letter.

And why realplayer hasnt posted here? He uses an online translator, so he's English is not that good that some may seem to think. So yes, there is a language barrier.

To those from English speaking countries, assuming you would have basic skills in German, would you want to post on a German forum knowing that you wouldnt be able to express yourself correctly? That your comments could be misinterpreted?

Furthermore he's first experience with this site wasnt that good which may make him reluctant to post.

Given that the whole idea was to give ENGLISH speakers an insight into this, it was careless to overlook having the translator translate his comment also into English, as well as the lawyers letter. Over on the German forum, it is this comment that has the high visibility, not the translation of the lawyers letter that is buried in links. Combine this with his usual use of a software translator, and it can look like he is claiming to have used a human translator, but has simply used another software translator trying to pass it off as one.

The bad translation of the comment is mostly words of common English phrases with the words in the wrong order, so it is not too hard to work out what a good transalation of the comment would look like. It seems the translator is giving an opinion on the content, in that it is pretty poor for a letter that is supposed to have been written by a lawyer, and that it is full of words, but says nothing.

As for realplayer not wanting to post here, well - understandable that he is afraid of getting his a$$ roasted (again), but surely it is worth a bit of pain for 167500 Euro, and the chance to have this issue debated in ENGLISH for all to see.

 

[thelawnet]

The issue of the game screw-up is quite an interesting complication.

The PDF is well worth a read

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Here are the rules of the game:

Old / Expired Link

Cards are worth their face value with the exception of Kings, Queens, and Jacks which are each worth 10 and Aces which are worth either 1 or 11. If the value of your hand is closer to 21 than that of the dealer's you win. If the value of the dealer's hand is higher than yours you lose. If the hands are of equal value the hand results in a push and your bet is returned. If you have a total of 22 or higher (a busted hand), you lose regardless of whether the dealer also busts.

Six decks of cards are used, which are shuffled after each round.

Side Bet Rules
As mentioned previously, the objective is to guess whether each of your first two cards is equal to or higher in value than the dealer's first card. Chips for the side bet are placed in the betting area marked TWO AGAINST ONE, but you cannot place a side bet without first placing a Blackjack bet. Move the mouse pointer over the betting area for information about betting limits and payout information.

The key word is 'value', and clearly a King has the same value as a Ten. This is after all blackjack, one ten-valued card is as good as any other.

So a player with two tens clearly 'equals or is higher than' a dealer with a King.

The player's game history shows this:

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

You may notice the very high payout for this game - 22.50 from a 5 bet odds of 3.5 to 1 (4.5 times the original bet)

If you consider the distribution of the game:

Dealer card Odds Lower ranked cards
2 1/13 0
3 1/13 24
4 1/13 48
5 1/13 72
6 1/13 96
7 1/13 120
8 1/13 144
9 1/13 168
10 4/13 192
11 1/13 288

the odds of the player beating a given dealer card are given by (311-'Lower Ranked Cards')/311 * (310-'Lower Ranked Cards')/310

Which gives the following probability table:

Dealer card Odds Odds of player equalling/beating with both cards Odds of winning
2 1/13 1.0000 0.076923077
3 1/13 0.8514 0.065491132
4 1/13 0.7147 0.054978338
5 1/13 0.5900 0.045384695
6 1/13 0.4772 0.036710204
7 1/13 0.3764 0.028954864
8 1/13 0.2875 0.022118676
9 1/13 0.2106 0.016201639
10 4/13 0.1456 0.044815013
11 1/13 0.0052 0.000403724
0.391981362

The player's chance of winning is 0.39

The return to player is as shown by the following extremely high:

Pay Probability Return
4.5 0.391981362 1.763916127
0 0.608018638 0
1.763916127


The player has an edge of 76.4%

Although the game was not malfunctioning, they simply paid out too high, they decided that there had been an 'error', and they get to keep all the players' winnings.

It was reintroduced on 24 April. This time the pay was reduced to 1.5 to 1. I.e. pays 2.5

Now the return looks more sensible

Pay Probability Return
2.5 0.391981362 0.979953404
0 0.608018638 0
0.979953404


The player has a 99.5% return blackjack game (which requires skill to be achieved), and a no-skill sidebet with a lower return of 98.00%. Pretty standard stuff

However, even though the rules clearly state that the bet is resolved according to the cards' 'value', they changed the game play so that a Jack beats a Ten, a Queen beats a Jack, etc.

See the following screenshot:

Link Removed ( Old/Invalid)

[As a digression note that before the payout was lowered the player had been playing at 1 with a 5 sidebet. (He didn't really taking advantage)

After the game was reintroduced, with the sidebet a losing one, he was betting 1 and 75 on the side - he was wagering more on the poor side bet, and less on the higher return main bet.]

Remember that when the casino introduced the game paying 7-2 instead of 3-2, they took back the players' money in double quick time. Even though that wasn't an error - the game was playing exactly as described, they took back all the money in double-quick time.

But when the player contacted the casino about the fact that the game is plainly WRONG - it does not play according to the rules, what did they do?

Sweet FA:

On 13 June I informed CC of the defective software per e-mail and requested them to invalidate the Blackjack 2 against 1 games that I had played. As I did not receive a response from CC, I decided to phone them. The VIP manager claimed not to have received anything. I therefore sent the same e-mail to CC once again on 25 June. On 29 June the VIP manager confirmed the receipt of my email with the following text:
Dear Mr. M..,
Many thanks for your message. I have forwarded your concerns to the technical department. I will contact you as soon as I receive a response. Should you have any further questions, please dont hesitate to contact me.
Kind regards, Emely Weiss
The original e-mail (is in German) .
It is therefore clear that CC is well aware of this situation. CC has unfortunately never contacted me in relation to this matter. I phoned on 1 or 2 further occasions, and despite having spoken to customer support agents, I was not provided with any information in relation to this matter. One would at least expect CC to remove the defective game, but that has not happened. The defective software is still in use.

(BTW, the rules as implemented pay only 92.80% - as described, they pay 98.00%, so Boss Media's operators are stealing on average 5.2% of every wager made on this game)

This does not look good for Casino Club.

Not at all. There's one rule when the mistakes benefit the players, but when their errors rip off the players, they do NOTHING.

I can confirm btw, that the error described by the player is still active at all Boss Media casinos.

I trust that

(a) the game will be shut down immediately to stop any further rip-offs (funny how the game with the high payout lasted ONE DAY, but the one that rips off the player is still here 11 months later)
(b) there will be a full audit and refund to all players who played between April 2008 and today.

And don't think that refunding the players will be a big hardship - this sidebet is still sucky, and the players should stick to regular blackjack - Boss Media are not losing money on this game!

 

[thelawnet]

In my opinion, he needs to post here primarily because he is the one who made a public spectacle of this whole matter - he can finish it in a public way. I don't go for this private stuff since the members here deserve better. They are the ones he needs to answer to, not just me.

Things look very much better for him, and worse for the casino, now that he has posted.

 

[thelawnet]

I trust that

(a) the game will be shut down immediately to stop any further rip-offs (funny how the game with the high payout lasted ONE DAY, but the one that rips off the player is still here 11 months later)
(b) there will be a full audit and refund to all players who played between April 2008 and today.

What I mean by refund is 'all net losses on the 2v1 sidebet'. Players who came out ahead should have their winnings credited for any hands that they should have won but were not paid for.

The reason I think all losing players should be refunded is that players were not playing the game they thought they were. This is a fundamental error and the transactions are thus void in law. Of course the winning transactions are also void, but I don't think the casino should profit from their mistake by voiding those as well.

 

[Zodiac]

I already explained why the PAB was rejected - the player had misrepresented himself - and as Rusty said, I'm giving him a second chance.

Realplayer needs no middle man (Zodiac), he can fend for himself in this forum.

I'll give him 48 hours to appear. If Realplayer can't answer these questions by then - in person, then the thread will be closed, his account locked, and I'll just consider this just another massive waste of time.

I hope that it was not my mistake that is going be confused since yesterday.

Realplayer has not said to me - Zodiac, can you go to CM and post there, it was my own decide.

It's always difficult to post in another language that all can understand correct and it can be misunderstood very easy.

He must also read and translate all, that's the reason for him why it can take longer.

That should be not an apology it should be only explain it a little bit.

And if he has still a day job there is 8 hours less time.

I requested him to come here and answer within 48hours, it lies in his own interest.

The bad translation of the comment is mostly words of common English phrases with the words in the wrong order, so it is not too hard to work out what a good transalation of the comment would look like. It seems the translator is giving an opinion on the content, in that it is pretty poor for a letter that is supposed to have been written by a lawyer, and that it is full of words, but says nothing.

correct

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

i see also that thelawnet make a good job and do much for that therewith you will understand.

 

[vinylweatherman]

From this, CC are accusing the player of FRAUD.

This is surely just a case of a game malfunction, and this is dealt with by voiding the bets, which they seem to have done,

So what happened next that elevated this to accusations of fraud by CC, and confiscation of the DEPOSIT, suggestions of the "clairvoyant bot", etc.

The only thing that could have happened is spreading news of this odds miscalculation leading to a deluge of new players jumping on the game, and making a mint on that one fateful day, later corrected by the casino invoking "malfunction voids play". No bonuses would have been necessary in this event.

Now, why did this not come out earlier?

The suggestions from the casino suggest that they may be accusing realplayer of having created this error for himself, and that he then used the money gained to play the VP machine, and win the jackpot. Whatever happened justified confiscation of his 25,000 Euro deposit, and therefore had to be pretty serious in their minds. If you bet big, and played fast, even with this fault lasting only a day, it would have been possible to make a FORTUNE!

This was one day in March, yet much of this case centered on activity later in the year.

 

[thelawnet]

From this, CC are accusing the player of FRAUD.

This is surely just a case of a game malfunction, and this is dealt with by voiding the bets, which they seem to have done,

The game did not malfunction, it behaved exactly as designed.

So what happened next that elevated this to accusations of fraud by CC, and confiscation of the DEPOSIT, suggestions of the "clairvoyant bot", etc.

The only thing that could have happened is spreading news of this odds miscalculation leading to a deluge of new players jumping on the game, and making a mint on that one fateful day, later corrected by the casino invoking "malfunction voids play". No bonuses would have been necessary in this event.

According to the player the casino took the winnings back the next day (in March), the game was reintroduced in April.

Regarding the present case, I believe this is correct:

1. The player as of 21st July had an insignificant sum in his account (888).

2. He deposited 25,900 and received 4440 in bonuses over the course of 21st July to 27th July.

3. This give him an account balance of 31,228.

4. He did not play at the casino until 3rd August.

5. On 3rd August began playing Jackpot Poker at 25/spin (good idea, the jackpot was very high, the casino's bonus money was a cushion against the losses, and video poker was allowable for bonus purposes).

6. On the 20th hand, he won the jackpot, giving him a balance of 200,000, yet had wagered only 600, out of his wagering requirement of approximately 670,000.

The following is conjecture:

Scenario 1:

7. At this point I take it, with almost 200,000 in his account, he had to complete the wagering, and so he went to play the best game available - blackjack. How he did this (wager size, number of bets) is not clear.

Evidently 670,000 requires a lot of wagering.

Of course you could complete it easily in 3 hours at 500/hand (3 * 500 per hour * 500 = 750,000), that would be quite risky - standard deviation of about 10,000, but in a sense when you are 170k to the good, whether you win or lose 20k (190k profit or 150k) is not nearly such a big deal as it would normally be.

But of course realplayer has yet to address this - the blackjack wagering came AFTER he won the jackpot. He needs to give some details of what happened.

The Casino's claim that he used winnings from blackjack to win the jackpot and therefore it is void. This does not appear to be true. It is possible that he used a bot to complete the wagering after winning the jackpot, I don't think that entitles them to cancel his winnings.

In any case to me this is not a particularly credible claim.

If you have won 200k, it does not make sense to take risks in this way [by using a bot]. I can see somebody in this scenario spending 24 hours straight (I don't know if this is the case, just for example), playing blackjack. I mean for 200k, is there anyone that wouldn't?????? Even Bill Gates would probably find it worthwhile.

For this reason claims of 'bot' usage need very very very very solid proof, because any normal human being for the sake of 200k will behave exactly like a robot!

Casino Club has thus far provided nothing, let alone the concrete proof you'd need to prove such a claim. In a previous case of course their bot claim was manifest nonsense.

So should we believe it here? At this point I'd say it's not even likely.​

OR

Scenario 2:

The player has stated his account balance was EUR ~199,000

It appears that he therefore did not play at all on BJ, so the casino noticed the jackpot and simply locked the account before he did any wagering.

There do not appear to be any grounds for this, unless it relates to previous player behaviour. [I.e. he must have made over 25,000 in profit from them, and they claim that that money was paid back into the casino - but the link seems very tenuous. I'm not getting the impression that that is so, from his postings, but I could be wrong.]

Could the player indicate how much profit he has made from Casino Club overall? Or perhaps he has lost overall.

This scenario does not look at all good for the casino.

The player has stated that he received up to Y/E 2007 about 5,000 in bonuses. These are outside of our scope, because bots were not prohibited at that time.

See these terms of 15th January 2008

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

No prohibition then.

There is in my view a further issue here. The player was a member of the casino since 2007, and when he downloaded the casino will have agreed to the terms and conditions. The terms were changed in 2008 to prohibit bots.

Did Casino Club communicate this to their players?

I have been a member there since 2006, and I received NO such communiqu.

So I think the bot ban fails, utterly, through lack of communication.

Even if the player did

(a) received over 25,000 in bonuses 2008
(b) did use a bot, and Casino Club can prove this
(c) the Casino Club effectively communicated the change of terms to their players

Then I don't see that that invalidates his winnings.

The only way they can argue that it does, is that the 25,000 he deposited was actually 'the same' money that he had improperly earned through bonuses (and of course with Casino Club's bonus terms, he actually would expect to retain only about half of that, so actually we're looking at more like 50k of bonuses). Clearly not possible. The player may be a millionaire, whatever, who knows. There's no way for them to show that 25k of deposit money results from their previous bonuses.

It is plainly NOT valid to void his jackpot win on these grounds.

He deposited 25k and won the jackpot on the 20th spin, no blackjack had been played, any alleged bot usage would have been on previous deposits. If they want to reclaim those bonuses, that's a separate issue.

But voiding a win made off a 25k deposit? Never.

And to be clear, I find Casino Club's bot claims to be lacking in credibility in any case.​

Now, why did this not come out earlier?

The suggestions from the casino suggest that they may be accusing realplayer of having created this error for himself, and that he then used the money gained to play the VP machine, and win the jackpot. Whatever happened justified confiscation of his 25,000 Euro deposit, and therefore had to be pretty serious in their minds. If you bet big, and played fast, even with this fault lasting only a day, it would have been possible to make a FORTUNE!

This was one day in March, yet much of this case centered on activity later in the year.

Actually this appears to be a sideshow, just a bit of history to show Casino Club's incompetence. I don't think it's relevant to the jackpot issue, but it's relevant to Casino Club not being a reputable casino.

 

[Markus]

6. On the 20th hand, he won the jackpot, giving him a balance of 200,000, yet had wagered only 600, out of his wagering requirement of approximately 670,000.

Casino Club is using a clearplay bonus system, i.e. he didn't need to wager the 670,000, before he was allowed to make a withdrawal. Only the bonus of 5000 Euro was been voided if he didn't met the WR.

 

[thelawnet]

Casino Club is using a clearplay bonus system, i.e. he didn't need to wager the 670,000, before he was allowed to make a withdrawal. Only the bonus of 5000 Euro was been voided if he didn't met the WR.

You mean you can withdraw and just lose the bonus?

In that case 'bot' use, real or imagined by Casino Club, is 100% irrelevant.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Sideshow

I got the impression it was a copy of the complaint submitted to LGA

The stories from BOTH sides seem to be falling apart. Well, a FULL play and transaction history should sort out the timeline though, not just the sessions in question, EVERYTHING, right from the SUB, through this game cock-up (OK - CC call it a malfunction, but it DID function perfectly in accordance to the published rules), the "bot play", and the VP Jackpot and account locking.

The game cock-up is another story. IF the game played exactly in accordance with the rules, it did not malfunction, and it is only MALFUNCTION that voids bets. Surely, they simply offered a game with a player edge, just like single deck blackjack, and later decided to no longer offer it. This suggests they have NO cause to void the bets, just as they have not voided all the play at single deck blackjack. If this was NOT the source of the "illegitimate funds" CC claim were used to play and win the VP jackpot, what was.
The account of this suggests only 888 Euro could be brought into question, with the rest of the balance coming from a 25,000 Euro series of deposits, and approx 5000 Euro worth of bonuses.

 

[kmay87]

This thread is starting to go in the direction of the other one.....

But seriously, realplayer, you need to get involved with this thread instead of the Chinese whispers we have had for the past few months. If this thread is also closed, you've just lost the last chance for anyone here to help you. Judging by the detail you have gone into, you have a strong case and your odds are looking favourable.

So what, you may have been treated bad on here in the past (although it would appear that was your doing) but that's the great thing about the anonymity of the internet - noone actually knows you, so whatever disrespective comments may be said, it's not like it's going to have an impact on you personally.

It's good that you took the time to answer thelawnet's questions, but I can't imagine that many of us are prepared to register an account on the German forum, and then translate our messages into German. Clearly, you speak good English, but that aside, if you are seeking help, and we are offering, it isn't up to us to come to you.

Think about it.

 

[paul02085]

I agree. realplayer, if you are being honest believe me this is the best place for you to come. You are making a big mistake if you are telling the truth and dont come onto this forum. People here will help you if you are legit!!!!

 

[thelawnet]

Sideshow

I got the impression it was a copy of the complaint submitted to LGA

That part has a line above it (to separate it) and the heading 'Prior events'

The stories from BOTH sides seem to be falling apart.

The player's story is seeming more coherent, the casino's rather less so.

The game cock-up is another story. IF the game played exactly in accordance with the rules, it did not malfunction, and it is only MALFUNCTION that voids bets. Surely, they simply offered a game with a player edge, just like single deck blackjack, and later decided to no longer offer it. This suggests they have NO cause to void the bets, just as they have not voided all the play at single deck blackjack. If this was NOT the source of the "illegitimate funds" CC claim were used to play and win the VP jackpot, what was.

Can't see how it could be. It's clear that Casino Club introduced the game in March, closed it down, and then reintroduced it in April. We also have the player's word that they confiscated all winnings from the game in March. I see no reason to doubt this. He did not therefore have any money from this game. Even if he did use a bot in March, and those rather feeble 1/5 bets in his screenshot are just the tip of a much bigger iceberg, then the fact that they voided all play would make any possible bot use irrelevant.

And the later play was on a sucker bet, even correctly implemented (98% payout), so it'd be crazy to suggest he was using a bot for that. Any bot claims must surely relate to regular blackjack, and some play that we've yet to hear about.

With regards to this game, I think he is just having a moan that they ripped him off on this game and didn't respond to his complaints.

The account of this suggests only 888 Euro could be brought into question, with the rest of the balance coming from a 25,000 Euro series of deposits, and approx 5000 Euro worth of bonuses.

I agree with that. But it is Casino Club, rather than the player, that have a responsibility to explain this part, because it is their contention that the player had significant improper bonus/bot derived winnings in his account.