RTG's Caribbean 21 lie

[Pirateofc21]

Hi Folks,

This is my first post here.

First off, I would like to start by saying Ive know Ron of Hampton for a few years now and my own experience with him has always been positive. Hes always had a strong presence in Casino Times News when I was Managing Editor there and back when my site was hit by denial of service attacks in July of last year, Ron was very instrumental in helping me set up with another hosting company. Of course I have nothing but respect for many of the folks here. Ive known an admired people like Jetset and Spearmaster for many years now.

I have a tough time believing that Ron would deliberately screw anybody from a personal standpoint and at the same time I cant ignore the fact that there are intelligent players advocates suggesting his actions are completely intolerable. So essentially I am left questioning how weve ended up in this fine mess without taking away arguments from either side.

From where I stand, there is no denying both parties handled this matter dreadfully. I might be mistaken here, but it seems to me that the player knew of this websites existence (CasinoMeister) before making his phone confession and I know that Hampton (and Ron) certainly knew of this sites existence. Sites like Casinomeister are in place to handle these matters (granted this one is in a league all its own) before they get to the point where we are at now. Everything else, in my opinion, is secondary.

My question then becomes, Why did neither of these parties consider approaching Bryan Bailey or any one of a number of online casino advocates prior to mishandling this matter on their own?

As things stand now, the player will not be paid the $1.3 million as his confession is right on tape, and while I realize the possibility of intimidation leading to a false confession, there is simply no need to do so with folks like Bryan here for the players. Unless the player was not aware of this sites existence, there is no excuse as to why he would have made a false disclosure. He did so after an initial phone conversation. Instead of calling Ron back, he should have contacted Bryan. I get the impression (especially since the calls were taped by the player) that he was more focused on dragging Hamptons name through the mud through the enlisting of other forum members than he was using this site for its intended purpose that is RESOLVING THE MATTER BEFORE IT ESCALATES. Neither Bryan, Myself or anyone else for that matter can force Hampton Casino to pay the guy as their whole argument now hinges on the fact that he admits to using a robot, thus violating their published company policy, irrespective of how that confession was derived (I don't believe their is a dispute related to whether or not that specific policy appeared on the Hampton site at the time).

By the same token, the online casinos must do their best to avert this type of negative publicity. Questioning the authenticity of a $1.3 million dollar win is not your every day run of the mill dispute. Companies like Hampton do not need this type of a black eye. The top companies in this industry need to work closely with respected watchdog sites and consult with them regularly. The argument that Hampton Casino acted arrogantly here certainly holds water.

The point Im getting at is that sites such as Casino Meister need to be utilized more properly. From a players perspective, coming onto the forum and complaining AFTER a confession is made serves no purpose. Likewise, from the online casinos perspective, offering the stance that the player made a confession only after baiting him along during a half hour phone conversation serves no purpose either and is not likely to win over many supporters.

Sites like this need to be utilized from the onset immediately upon determination of a dispute.otherwise there will be no winners when all is said and done. If ever there was a case study on how NOT to handle an online gambling payout dispute, this would be IT.

Both the player and the casino made their own bed and now they have to lay in it.

Hello Sting, You don't have some of your facts straight. For instance:

you said:My question then becomes, Why did neither of these parties consider approaching Bryan Bailey or any one of a number of online casino advocates prior to mishandling this matter on their own?

For your information I did. Bryan himself discusses several of these communications in previous posts.

next you say: Instead of calling Ron back, he should have contacted Bryan. I get the impression (especially since the calls were taped by the player) that he was more focused on dragging Hamptons name through the mud through the enlisting of other forum members than he was using this site for its intended purpose that is RESOLVING THE MATTER BEFORE IT ESCALATES.

For your information you are mistaken here too. Again Bryan has discussed this matter in previous posts.
I most certainly was in contact with Bryan Bailey long before any phone calls or escalation. Again he discusses this himself.

Next: "irrespective of how that confession was derived". Really? So it is your position that the Casino bears no ethical nor legal responsibility for their illicit behavior?

next: Companies like Hampton do not need this type of a black eye." Then they need to do the right thing and pay me.

next: "Sites like this need to be utilized from the onset immediately upon determination of a dispute". THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I DID TO THE LETTER STING. As a matter of fact Bryan discusses the content of that contact in a previous post.

next: "The point Im getting at is that sites such as Casino Meister need to be utilized more properly" What else should I have done?
PirateofC21

 

[portia]

The motivation behind, and the symmetry of the taped calls :

Hamptons and P21 both recorded their telecons without the others knowledge.

EACH side was ACTING - giving false info - hoping to get genuine disclosures from the other side.

While everyone here agrees that the hamptons side was an ACT (or con job) trying to get Pc21 to acknowledge use of a bot cause their T & C's have a dumb clause prohibiting it. (good thing they don't have a clause prohibiting windows ME or they wouldn't have paid me that 1k i won), but ...

It seems pretty clear that Pc21's side of the conversation was a PUT-ON as well.

His "disclosures" should be taken as seriously as Hampton's "disclosure" of their desire and intent to rip-off other RTG casinos (untrue). And, for that matter that they were not going to pay him another dime (untrue). It was the gut wrenching realization, after RTG thoroughly investigated this case and found NOTHING solid or even circumstantial that could be used to disqualify Pc21's win, that drove Ron of Hampton's to go on TILT - loose all his good sense and try to con Pc21 with all his silly false statements. A wise guy like Ron who knows which side of the table to work from getting stuck with a 1.3 million bill to a gambler - Ron's world turned upside down. *TILT*

Pc21 must have got the picture that Ron has fliipped out, from the prior conversation when Ron called. Raving mad.

So Pc21 figure to call back and play along see if Ron will put his foot in his mouth.

Because both sides were Bullsh*tting each other to get the other side to say something Dumb they reinforced each other to BS even more. Each side taking the others BS to be gold.

So Pc21's admission of a bot written in Cobol etc, etc should be taken with a grain of salt - gag - put-on. If ron was willing to pay 6 figures for a bot written in cobol (haha) why should he be denied that opportunity. Buyer beware especially one who refuses to pay a gambling debt.

Agree with spear (how strange is that?). If Hamptons does not pay up, and does not come forward with play logs, math analysys, report from RTG, or wizard or some other authority indicating foul play from Pc21 than it will cost Ron and RTG more than 1.3 million.

Hamptons/winward will disappear and RTG will become a ROGUE LEGEND in online casino history. The best most honest games, best gaming SW, best backend, clever ownership and the worst family of casino owners. The biggest risk of playing at an RTG casino is that if you win you either do not get paid, wait 10 months before getting paid, suffer abusive phone conversations with the casino owner. In future any 2 bit casino that refuses to pay for some half baked reason will be said to have pulled an "RTG".

M. Staw you know that is going to stick and cost $$. We know you have done (or commisioned someone else to do) the analysis of the game and Pc21's play. And you found nothing that indicated the player should be disqualified. And now another RTG casino owner has flipped out and let the players know that he is untrustworthy and very foolish.

Has he calmed down enough for you (M. Staw) to point out to him that he damaged himself in the first instance by raising the limits on the game? Guess he thought that the laws of statistics said that in the long run the player will lose and, by gosh, this guy is "overdue for a loss". In an earlier post he dismissed the notion of mathematical analysis being relevant in this case (no doubt because it had already been done and yielded nothing he could use to disqualify the players win). He could have avoided a damaging loss to this player if he had been better aquainted with the basic facts of gaming derived from the math analysis.

When Casino-on-net got dinged for $4 million in a couple of hours a few years back they must have been shocked too. And they must have had some analysis done to see if the loss was due to foul play as RTG did in this case. But somehow, after they thought things through they took a different approach than Ross over at Hampton's. Which approach is better?

Casino-on-net showed the gaming world how successful they are. How they can be trusted with a players money even large sums. How they are so well financed. They talked to the players made an accomodationm and then used the event as a marketing tool. They used it in advertising. It was now a positive occurence so everyone should know about it. They must be the safest place to play on the net. That is what players tell each other. So many new players flocked into casino-on-net due to the marketing of their big 2 hour payout that the marketing of the event paid for itself very quickly. Casino-on-net turned a big loss into a big win for them and the players. First Class strategy.

Now Ross at Hamptons has projected the image of a bleeder;

Who sweats about players who win;

Who doesn't have deep enough pockets to cover big action;

A man with a gamblers mentality ("I'll raise da limits 'cause he's over due to lose big") who pretends to have great knowlegde about his games;

A man who cannot be trusted with players deposits;

A man who grasps at rationizations to justify misdeeds (not paying gambling debts) to satisfy his short term interest (not paying big winners).

A casino owner "wise guy" who sees players as born losers who do not deserve any respect and who should be treated as enemies if they win big;

A man who uses his intellectual capacity to find ways to decieve others to get what he wants instead of finding ways to accommodate both sides ( and did he ever miss the boat here - Ross, RTG, or Pc21 PM me if you want some suggestions for both sides to come out ahead on this mess);

A man so unrestrained by scruples, who no longer even recognises that he has concocted an underhanded (and perhaps criminal?) scheme that he even publicizes it online. (Even now is he sayng "what da f**k is all da fuss about wit dat tape, anywayzuh?")

A somewhat low class backalley type strategy wouldn't you say? (so avoidable *sigh*)

It makes me shake my head in sadness that the RTG brand and image, which represents,without dispute, the most honest games and quality SW, run by some very bright people - has to be once again associated with the hairbrained schemes of a rogue casino operator.

Sting, respect your work as always. And you have done well to post about the character of a business associate and perhaps friend, that you know personally. But the image of him that is going to stick to him is that derived from his tape and from his overall handling of this case.

Hope you have given Ross the benefit of your council. My estimate is that there are still several ways of salvaging this thing.

 

[caruso]

"A casino owner "wise guy" who sees players as born losers who do not deserve any respect and who should be treated as enemies if they win big."

Isn't that the truth? Players held in contempt as pondlife scum - THAT'S the reality. Maybe truer of Hampton than most, but that's the reality. Utter contempt.

One of many quote-worthy phrases in that post, Portia.

 

[gamblinboi]

One of many quote-worthy phrases in that post, Portia.

agreed, excellent post Portia.

 

[bohawkins]

I am sure he is using his robot as we speak

I don't think we need to worry about the pirate. I am sure he has learned his lesson here and is now using his robotic software on other casinos. If not then he has a system which is unbeatable and he could take that knowlege to Vegas and make a killing there.

I cannot believe that anyone who didn't have a robot would be so stupid as to confess to using one thinking that he was somehow playing along with them. I think he confessed because he knew the jig was up and he was hoping to get paid the settlement.

He is toast. But, like I said... shed no tears for the pirate, most likely he is racking up wins on lots of other casinos but now he has cleverly designed his software so that it totally is undetectable.

 

[jetset]

That's a good and reasonably balanced first post, Sting.

In my opinion the bottom line here is that folks involved in this industry can do pretty much what they want to in the absence of effective regulation. Only the threat of player absence from their businesses out of abhorrence for their policies, and the laudable activities of a few good and genuine portals in publicising this sort of behaviour can deter them at present.

Before this thing degenerated into a public bun fight, in fact when RTG first froze the Caribbean 21 game the Pirate of C21 posted here - his first post initiated this thread. Despite the sterling efforts of Bryan and others it kind of went downhill from there with the attempted retroactive WT imposition, those telephone calls made with the explicit purpose of getting an admission, the cryptic posts and jibes from the player and sundry other sillinesses.

As you say, there is fault on both sides and some pretty abrasive comments have been made, including some by Mr. Lewin in your 911 coverage of this affair.

What is troubling me deeply is the fact that Hampton have made some strong statements about the evidence they claim to have (mouse-mapping technology and log checks for instance) which could be corroborative of the alleged confession they have that was achieved by questionable means. Noone has yet seen this evidence to confirm it. They're not the only ones to attempt to obtain admissions using this method, but we're focusing on the Hampton case here.

I am therefore uncomfortable with the unilateral decision not to pay the player (for all his faults) on grounds of a claimed admission made under questionable circumstances. Corroboration of that claim is necessary imv.

We have RTG giving this game a clean bill of health, and I would assume (in view of the fact that Hampton have not supplied the player with his game logs) that game logs were a part of that thorough inspection and that no overt evidence of bots was found.

The whole question of making the use of robots grounds for disqualification is probably a seperate debate, because I think it is generally accepted that Hampton have a "no bot rule" from their UG days, and if they can conclusively PROVE that the player used one, then that is pretty much that in a factual as opposed to moral sense.

1.3 million is a lot of cash no matter what your position, and can induce some strange conduct as we have seen in this case. I honestly do not know who was in the wrong here - I certainly think for 1.3 million more evidence needs to be adduced.

If that cannot be done then it's time for the parties to retire to the negotiating table - in private.

 

[gamblinboi]

I don't think we need to worry about the pirate. I am sure he has learned his lesson here and is now using his robotic software on other casinos. If not then he has a system which is unbeatable and he could take that knowlege to Vegas and make a killing there.

I cannot believe that anyone who didn't have a robot would be so stupid as to confess to using one thinking that he was somehow playing along with them. I think he confessed because he knew the jig was up and he was hoping to get paid the settlement.

He is toast. But, like I said... shed no tears for the pirate, most likely he is racking up wins on lots of other casinos but now he has cleverly designed his software so that it totally is undetectable.

bohawkins dont be ridiculous. any software, regardless how well designed (and remember, this guy made the ludicrous statement that he wrote the bot in COBOL... lol!!) is NOT going to beat the house advantage. RTG fully investigated the game and found no flaws, NOR did they find bot play.

This whole robot business is ridiculous.

 

[HamptonCasino]

Here's answers to the points raised since my last post :

1> "Hampton appear to be guilty of criminal solicitation"

How? Those who say this have either not heard the tape or have purposely
decided to block out certain parts of it in their heads.

It may also be the case that some of you are not understanding our
point. As Ron is heard saying on the phone :

"We have to isolate casinos that don't have terms that you know, robot
play is forbidden"

Ron is not soliciting anything illegal. He told him that they were going
to play at casinos that DID NOT have the term "Robot play is forbidden"
like Hampton DOES. Hence that would not have been illegal.

But the problem is that we did and still do have that term. Robot play
is forbidden at Hampton casino and will continue to be indefinitely.

2> "This "bot" play exception is simply ridiculous, even if it IS in the
terms and conditions. If the casino were to say that I must be using IE6
and Windows 95 in order to claim winnings, would that be an acceptable
condition?"

I have already explained this in my previous post. If you wish to play
with Hampton Casino then please read the terms and conditions before
doing so. If you disagree with any of our terms and conditions then
please do not play with Hampton Casino because all winnings will be
voided for any and all individuals that break our rules. No matter how
"unacceptable" he/she may happen to believe they are.

3> Some here seem to believe that this is a court of law and they are
the judge/jury and they may indict and convict as they please. Let me
remind them that this is not the case. We welcome Pirate to challenge us
in a real court of law and we will present any and all evidence that the
court may require of us and we believe we will win hands down. As far as
the message boards are concerned, we believe we have disclosed all we
can without compromising the security of our operation.

Regards

Robert Myers
Public Relations
Hampton Casino

 

[jetset]

" Some here seem to believe that this is a court of law and they are
the judge/jury and they may indict and convict as they please. Let me
remind them that this is not the case. We welcome Pirate to challenge us
in a real court of law and we will present any and all evidence that the
court may require of us and we believe we will win hands down. As far as
the message boards are concerned, we believe we have disclosed all we
can without compromising the security of our operation."

Your impertinence is staggering, Mr. Myers.

This is a public message board discussing an issue of importance to the online gambling community and as such its members have every right to debate the details, note inadequacies in the claims of either side or to be critical of policies and conduct that are now squarely in the public domain whether you like it or not.

If this matter does go to litigation it will be interesting to learn what this evidence you claim to have really is, and what the gaming logs truly show bearing in mind your several statements on this board (which have been saved for future reference).

Until then, publicly claiming to have evidence and then not producing convincing proof of it is not strengthening the community's perception of your case.

 

[jyde]

"We have to isolate casinos that don't have terms that you know, robot
play is forbidden"

Ron is not soliciting anything illegal. He told him that they were going
to play at casinos that DID NOT have the term "Robot play is forbidden"
like Hampton DOES. Hence that would not have been illegal.

For Christs sake If a robot should do you anything good there had to be a bug in the game. Would it be ethical allright to exploit a bug in the software? Do you believe there is a bug in the game?

 

[Pirateofc21]

Player Logs

Dear Mr. Myers, Please consider this my formal written request for my player logs for the months of November 2003, December 2003 and January of 2004. My account is bjdhampt. My contact details are on file.

Thanks, PirateofC21.

 

[spearmaster]

Mr. Myers, your continued attempt to evade legitimate questions will not work.

Let me speak to you in a language that perhaps your boy Ron will understand.

Put up or shut up and pay the man.

 

[amandajm]

Some here seem to believe that this is a court of law and they are
the judge/jury and they may indict and convict as they please. Let me
remind them that this is not the case

I did'nt know that. When you started posting evidence and all - what were you thinking?

 

[caruso]

As Jyde points out: Hampton are on record as soliciting Pirate into providing his robot for the purposes of winning money. An auto-click robot doesn't have this function. The only robot that would be up to the task would be one that manipulates the software to one degree or another and turns a negative expectation situation into positive one. I assume that software hacking (which is what this would amount to) for this purpose is criminal, and therefore the solicitation in this case is presumably a criminal one. I'm no lawyer, yet even I can work that one out.

This is a desperation defence.

 

[SFeagleAgain]

Unbelievable, Mr. Myers! You continue to shoot yourself in the foot when confronted with your OWN stupidity regarding this matter. You, yourself, posted the conversation. When you did that, you made everyone who could download and listen the judge and jury. What about this don't you understand? Your own deplorable and desperate methods can only be construed as you having NOTHING that proves, without a shadow of a doubt, that pirate used anything that would circumvent your terms and conditions. And yet you have management on tape requesting that a partnership between pirate and yourselves be formed with the express purpose of defrauding another casino or casinos. Your blusterings would be true EXCEPT that the tape expressly talks about the possibility of FAILING to win money and that the program could FAIL. You expressed, quite explicitly, your desire for a program which would NOT lose. Which definitely indicates that you were fishing for a program that was intended to defraud and win regardless of the odds. That does not sound like a simple bot, that is more descriptive of a program that circumvents normal win/loss ratios. That is where you screwed up. Pull out the checkbook and start paying. I don't see any other option at this point. RTG, if you are listening which I am sure you are, LISTEN CAREFULLY TO THIS TAPE. Do you really wish to be associated with this type of underhanded organization? And another thing, RTG, how are the other casinos that you provide software for reacting to Hampton's deliberate attempt to defraud them? There have to have been some very interesting conversations behind the scenes following the release of this tape.

 

[portia]

Also how does it look to businessmen who are considering setting up an RTG powered casino.

Will they want to be associated with this brand, tarred by a reputation of a few other RTG operators.

Maybe they will request a discount for the negative-goodwill being
re-established day after day that this drags on.

Or maybe a generic or no-name brand software could be sold to new customers who want the benefits of the RTG product without being associated with the Hamptons, warren cloud, tony fredmans and any other operator who might go beserk in the future.

All that marketing money used to build up good will among the players and the industry - then Kapow - some rogue operator with the same SW torpedos you and reminds everyone of the troubles in years gone by.

Hamptons, do you think RTG regrets selling you their SW now?

 

[bohawkins]

Put yourself in the players postion

Consider for a moment that you were the one who had won all the money and were trying to collect it. Lets further assume that you won it fair and square without the use of any robot, but just by clicking with your own mouse bet by bet. Now on a phone call relating to collecting what they owe you, someone from the Casino accuses you of using a robot and invites you to at least get some cash for your robot by surrendering your code. What would you do? Admit you did use a robot and bargain for a settlement? I don't think so... you would be laughing your head off because first of all you would not even have a robot program to give them and secondly, since you would know the truth of how you played, you would know they didn't have a thing and were just making a lame bluff. My hat is off to the casino guy... he nailed a liar using one of the oldest bluff tactics in the book.

The pirate player thought they had him dead to rights and he was trying to make a deal. He wanted to know how they caught him. I do believe that the Cobol reference was because he didn't want to reveal all until he could close the deal and he wanted it to sound more mysterious. He is now grasping to that one oddity as "proof" that he was just playing along... He just didn't realize that the entire conversation had been taped by the casino just like he was doing and so he released his own, but altered, version to prove to casinomeister that he never admitted to using a robot. I am sure he knew it was over once the casino came forward with the total incriminating tape.

If the pirate could redo the past, he would have stuck by his guns and denied, denied, denied. I think the casino has him cornered.

 

[SFeagleAgain]

The pirate player thought they had him dead to rights and he was trying to make a deal. He wanted to know how they caught him. I do believe that the Cobol reference was because he didn't want to reveal all until he could close the deal and he wanted it to sound more mysterious. He is now grasping to that one oddity as "proof" that he was just playing along... He just didn't realize that the entire conversation had been taped by the casino just like he was doing and so he released his own, but altered, version to prove to casinomeister that he never admitted to using a robot. I am sure he knew it was over once the casino came forward with the total incriminating tape.

Surely, you can't be serious! Your entire post is pure speculation. Take the tape and listen carefully and stop putting a spin on it. Take it at face value. Listen to the pause after Hamptons asked him if he wanted to sell them a bot. Listen to pirate's voice carefully. It sounded exactly as if he didn't even know what they were talking about. Put yourself in pirate's place. He did not offer to sell them a "bot". They asked him to sell one. One more point is that they didn't simply want a "bot", they were asking him to enter a partnership with them with the intent of defrauding other casinos. If he had used a "bot", they would already have any proof they needed - the play logs. And your "one oddity" comment is ludicrous. After that tape, there were certainly more than one oddity. The only ones incriminated by that tape was the casino. And you can believe that they know it too. Typical big guys against the little ones.

EXCELLENT POST, PORTIA!

 

[cipher]

Consider for a moment that you were the one who had won all the money and were trying to collect it. Lets further assume that you won it fair and square without the use of any robot, but just by clicking with your own mouse bet by bet. Now on a phone call relating to collecting what they owe you, someone from the Casino accuses you of using a robot and invites you to at least get some cash for your robot by surrendering your code. What would you do? Admit you did use a robot and bargain for a settlement? I don't think so... you would be laughing your head off because first of all you would not even have a robot program to give them and secondly, since you would know the truth of how you played, you would know they didn't have a thing and were just making a lame bluff. My hat is off to the casino guy... he nailed a liar using one of the oldest bluff tactics in the book.

The pirate player thought they had him dead to rights and he was trying to make a deal. He wanted to know how they caught him. I do believe that the Cobol reference was because he didn't want to reveal all until he could close the deal and he wanted it to sound more mysterious. He is now grasping to that one oddity as "proof" that he was just playing along... He just didn't realize that the entire conversation had been taped by the casino just like he was doing and so he released his own, but altered, version to prove to casinomeister that he never admitted to using a robot. I am sure he knew it was over once the casino came forward with the total incriminating tape.

If the pirate could redo the past, he would have stuck by his guns and denied, denied, denied. I think the casino has him cornered.

OH YOU BETCHA BO

 

[jyde]

....and even if he DID use a robot it wouldn't justify what Hampton does

(I feel like a freakin parrot)

- Hampton added the anti-robot clause when they were on the pos Unified Gaming software.

- Don't know exactly what caused them to add the rule and when, but it was there on October 18, 2000. That was when everyone offered big bonuses with low wager requirements. For a while Hampton offered positive expectation BJ. Back then the rule made sense.

- Times changed so did Hampton platform - but they kept the anti robot rule. Without juicy bonuses or positive expectation games, robots ought to be casinomanagers best friend. The rule is a relic from the past - but now we all understand why they never changed it. It comes quite handy from time to time.

- Unified Gaming casinos were on OPA not recommended. On a regular basis, they accused players of using robots and stole their money. There are plenty of evidence in the OPA archives and the messageboards.

I don't know if Pirate used a robot or not - and it doesn't really matter. Unless there was a bug in the game that gave the Pirate an edge, it doesn't really matter if he used a robot, a fork, a baseball bat or his d... for playing the game. If he - in good or bad faith - took advantage of an error in the software its something completely different. RTG would have a problem then - so would the player.

RTG cleared the player and the game - so Hampton pulled the emergency brake like they did so often before. Afterall it was more than a million dollars. They've done the same shit for peanuts in the past.

I still would like to know what RTG thinks of this. Judging from the standard terms they aren't afraid of robots - and I would be VERY surprised if the other RTG casinos Pirate played at can get away with not paying the money he won fair and square. Kind of hysterical: Three (?) casinos are told to pay the guy. One casino void his winnings by the use of a stupid old rule. And they don't even feel like they need to present any evidence other than a taped conversation with a crooked casinomanager that talks to much.

 

[caruso]

"Hamptons, do you think RTG regrets selling you their SW now?"

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

You know what I think? I think RTG are already starting to feel the pinch; I believe players are starting to stay away from the casinos in general because they're afraid of the ramifications if they win; they're afraid of coming up against Ron The Gangster types threatening to bury them in cement if they manage to rack up a few thousand bucks. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm seeing a few thing round and about here and there that are starting to make me put two and two together.

Why the f**k couldn't RTG turn this into a PR dream rather than the current nightmare they've created? It can STILL be done, the situation is TOTALLY recoverable - with the obvious caveat that Hampton is going to be mortally wounded. Scenario: RTG come out and make a statement to the effect that, although they consider the taped "confession" to be sufficient justification to void the winnings, bereft of actual EVIDENCE, and in light of the strong public opinions being expressed on the matter, they've decided to put an end to it and pay the debt. They do genuinely believe that cheating took place on this occasion, but in the interests of their customers' general satisfaction and, of course, their own business interests, they're going to call a halt to the nonsense and pay the debt, having taken on board and digested the MANY LESSONS TO BE LEARNED.

Michael Staw - please get your head around this option. I've personally every desire to see RTG continue to prosper, but unless you sort this out I think you're in danger of TERMINALLY damaging your product.

 

[clusen]

Can you win that much by legitimate play? YES!

Pirate couldn't have gained any player advantage using any sort of program unless it could predict in some way what cards were coming (this isn't what a robot player normally does). If the cards could somehow be predicted, then the RTG software is insecure and unsafe for casinos to use. RTG haven't admitted to this and I find it hard to believe but that is the only explanation for winning so consistently. I don't think he used a robot player in the normal sense.

I still don't know what Pirate has done but it is unlikely he won without exploiting some weakness in the software. This is simply because he also had a $70k balance at Delano's which he won from a mere $400 deposit. That is unlikely enough but together with the other wins (namely at Hampton's) it seems almost impossible.

Pirate told me that together with the other two recordings, it was most of the conversation. It was actually the same conversation in all three recordings (Pirate said: "the 2 clips I posted are part of that recording"). He said there was another conversation with his wife that the casino has a recording of too but hasn't released.

The Pirate told me: "If you put the 2 pieces from earlier together with this call you will have most of the conversation. This is it. I was told the money is no more so WTF I had to find out what the hell they could have and of course he wouldn't give anything up because they don't have any proof. "

The two other recordings are in the 'NEWS AND VIEWS' section of my forum at www.faircasinos.com/forum

One month ago I turned 2000 Danish Kroner into more than 600.000, so it can be done - even without robots, that is ;-)

I think the discussion about wether the lot can be won by legitimate play should seize - because it can, if you're extremely lucky. Some people win in the lottery, too - even though it's "impossible", statistically speaking.

 

[cipher]

"Hamptons, do you think RTG regrets selling you their SW now?"

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

You know what I think? I think RTG are already starting to feel the pinch; I believe players are starting to stay away from the casinos in general because they're afraid of the ramifications if they win; they're afraid of coming up against Ron The Gangster types threatening to bury them in cement if they manage to rack up a few thousand bucks. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm seeing a few thing round and about here and there that are starting to make me put two and two together.

Why the f**k couldn't RTG turn this into a PR dream rather than the current nightmare they've created? It can STILL be done, the situation is TOTALLY recoverable - with the obvious caveat that Hampton is going to be mortally wounded. Scenario: RTG come out and make a statement to the effect that, although they consider the taped "confession" to be sufficient justification to void the winnings, bereft of actual EVIDENCE, and in light of the strong public opinions being expressed on the matter, they've decided to put an end to it and pay the debt. They do genuinely believe that cheating took place on this occasion, but in the interests of their customers' general satisfaction and, of course, their own business interests, they're going to call a halt to the nonsense and pay the debt, having taken on board and digested the MANY LESSONS TO BE LEARNED.

Michael Staw - please get your head around this option. I've personally every desire to see RTG continue to prosper, but unless you sort this out I think you're in danger of TERMINALLY damaging your product.

I for one do not believe that RTG can weather this storm at least not back to the terms of the original agreement of $4,000.00 to $9,000.00 a week for the next six and a half years. I'm seeing some very scary things happening with these supposedly "deep pocket" RTG casinos. Such as accusing a player of using a robot on a slot machine after he hits a 5,000.00 jackpot and then offering to pay this player a grand a week.

I seriously do not believe there is a viable casino in the whole lot of 53 RTG operations and I can tell you here and now when the pin is pulled AND IT WILL BE PULLED FROM THE TOP, everyone of these operations are going to fold like a deck of cards.

 

[STING]

All arguments aside as to who is right or wrong, this is an easy one to solve unless I'm missing something.

Real Time Gaming is a known entity operating out of the state of Georgia. I don't think they've ever made this a secret.

If I'm owed over 1 million from a casino that in theory operates from the United States, I will take legal action against the company that techically owns the casino in question. After all, we're not talking about a fly by night company here. I'd imagine it's much easier to go after a casino software provider than it is to go after a sportsbook that operates out of some basement in a country you or I have never heard of.

If the player is concerned about Uncle Sam coming after him for not claiming taxes on these wins, then he probably shouldn't be gambling online to begin with. This type of payment will not go unnoticed anyway so the player will have to pay taxes on these wins regardless.

There are no laws prohibiting playing with an online casino from the United States, even though our politicians would have us thinking otherwise. Most of the gambling related cases we see involve sports books and the operators of such establishments (not the players unless they are part of an organized criminal group).

A similar situation occurred with a very well known sportsbook via its affiliated online casino not too long ago. The matter was ultimately resolved in the player's favor after much baiting by the book in question. The book was encouraged to pay the player and take up the matter with their software provider. That player also expressed a willingness to take the matter to court and his best option would have been to go after the software provider.

If I were in Ron's shoes I might be more angry with the software provider than I am with those who are posting on this board.

I don't see this matter getting resolved to anyone's satisfaction without entering it into a court of law, and that is what the courts are there for to begin with. If every case were solved on a public forum, there would be no need for the court system. This is a perfect example of a matter that cannot be solved through this medium because both parties mishandled the situation.

If I'm owed over a million dollar, I go after the company that owes me (and, yes, the software company is a good place to start).

If I feel my company's name is being dragged through the mud even though I know I'm in the right, I'll encourage the player to file a lawsuit as I often encourage people to do if they feel I've published something slanderous against them on my website (or otherwise place the matter in the hands of attorneys).

Based on what little information I have though, this is not going to end up in a court of law. The player is highly unlikely to initiate a lawsuit.

Also, not to stir up the Real Time Gaming pundits, but where are they in all of this mess? Regardless of what people might feel about Ron Lewin, he is not the one who created this software, he's not the one with full control over this product either as I'm assuming RTG controls the backend. Surely they realize that one of their would be clients (and potentially largest) is now following this story with baited breath.

This is actually a welcome option for RTG I suspect as it's my understanding they have pretty good legal counsel. With the confession alone, regardless of how it was obtained, I suspect they'd win. Assuming they have evidence of robot use, this is going to help further as Hampton covers itself with the Terms of Use.

Why is this not a viable option for either party?

 

[cipher]

All arguments aside as to who is right or wrong, this is an easy one to solve unless I'm missing something.

Real Time Gaming is a known entity operating out of the state of Georgia. I don't think they've ever made this a secret.

"A similar situation occurred with a very well known sportsbook via its affiliated online casino not too long ago. The matter was ultimately resolved in the player's favor after much baiting by the book in question. The book was encouraged to pay the player and take up the matter with their software provider. That player also expressed a willingness to take the matter to court and his best option would have been to go after the software provider."

STING you're not referring to SCORE SPORTSBOOK and the infamous VIRTUAL CASINO are you? I might know just a little bit about that action having brought that case forward and ultimately winning the case. If that's the case you're referring to you're wrong STING the best option turned out to be exactly the way I played it by going after the Casino, the Sportsbook and the Software Provider.

"If I were in Ron's shoes I might be more angry with the software provider than I am with those who are posting on this board."

The only person Ron has to be angry with is himself and if you'll check the posts incident to this issue he was repeatedly warned over and over again by numerous people on this forum that he didn't and doesn't have a clue about what he's talking about.

"If I'm owed over a million dollar, I go after the company that owes me (and, yes, the software company is a good place to start)."

HAMPTON CASINO is the one that owes the money STING. As a last resort you go after the software provider but not until such time as the offending party HAMPTON CASINO et al. is shut down for good.

"This is actually a welcome option for RTG I suspect as it's my understanding they have pretty good legal counsel."

I was thinking some of those attorneys were going to get fired when I dealt with them. But they would have had to make some monumental improvements over and above what they had not all that long ago and I understand they're worse than they ever were.

It's great to have you posting STING

CIPHER

 

[gfkostas]

Would someone be so kind to send me a link with the conversation as I would like to hear it or get hold off.Thanks

 

[cipher]

Would someone be so kind to send me a link with the conversation as I would like to hear it or get hold off.Thanks

Hi G. F., Page 19 of this thread, post # 186. Additionally, gambling 911 has a transcribed copy posted @

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

though I'm not sure as to how reliable the editing of the tape is as the tape is very poor quality.

I'm currently making an attempt at removing the air conditioning background noise as well as the noise from a a noisey computer fan, as the quality of this tape leaves a whole lot of things up to interpretation not to mention the Hampton Casino Manager is constantly talking over Pirate. Hope this helps.

Have a good one.

 

[STING]

>>STING you're not referring to SCORE SPORTSBOOK and the infamous VIRTUAL CASINO are you? I might know just a little bit about that action having brought that case forward and ultimately winning the case. If that's the case you're referring to you're wrong STING the best option turned out to be exactly the way I played it by going after the Casino, the Sportsbook and the Software Provider. <<

Nope Cipher, this was a recent case that never made the boards and it involved a more legit operation than the infamous Score Sports. If you got paid by one of Score's affiliated casinos, consider yourself one of the luckiest people in the world. I've dealt with numerous complaints about Score in the past but admit haven't heard anything in a year or so and they're still functioning.

 

[jetset]

Most of us in a dispute of this magnitude would have hired counsel by now, and Cipher has offered Pirate access to his clearly effective legal representation. Nevertheless, there is possibly the hope that this can still be resolved by right-minded people sitting down and negotiating a sensible solution. That would save everyone involved a lot of hassle, exposure and stress. And, future business and reputation.

I am not too sure I agree with Sting's assessment of how the outcome of litigation might go - there are way too many irregular factors in play here to do that, and of course much of the claimed evidence has yet to be produced.

Clusen makes a relevant point which has been raised several times by Mary when he says:

"One month ago I turned 2000 Danish Kroner into more than 600.000, so it can be done - even without robots, that is ;-)

I think the discussion about wether the lot can be won by legitimate play should seize - because it can, if you're extremely lucky. Some people win in the lottery, too - even though it's "impossible", statistically speaking."

Clusen was doubly blessed in his case - I assume he was actually paid, too!

 

[portia]

Check out the damage reports provided by M. Shackleford/fairgaming on the Hamptons casino website :

www.hamptoncasino.com/payouts.asp

This is from Shackleton's analysis of the play logs provided to him by the casino.

Check the months of December/03 and Jan 04

JAN/04 payouts

21 games 106.65
roulette 88.49
slots 89.30
other tables 97.66
VP 97.61

And the shocking overall total = 104.60 OUCH!!!!!!

Now i thought they closed this Pc21 guys account in the FIRST week of January!

Did he do all this damage? Or are there other big winners?

If there are other big winners presumably they got paid.

Looks like not paying Pc21 is Ron/Ross's ticket to getting well for January. Strategically a rogue operator is more likely to survive if he renegs on one big winner than a number winning plays. As their numbers give them an air of legitimacy if they are not paid ("Are you saying that all these winners used robots?" - sounds weeker). One lone big winner is always suspected of having been up to something when a casino trys to reneg.

It also appears that the play at the 21 tables overwhelmed all the other action in the casino. The casino very well (% wise) in all the game categories - except 21 games - but overall the the wins in all other categories were swamped by the 21 games.

Does this mean that one players action for less than a week playing carib 21 was overwhelminly greater than the action in all other casino games combined for January??????

Business at Hamptons but be pretty light - except for this one player who won and they are not (or perhaps now it seems cannot) pay.

My sympathies to Ron - i hadn't realized the impact this gambling debt would have on your operation.
(Free Advice : NEVER EVER let anyone, one no matter how stupid or drunk they appear to be, play for $10,000 a hand in your casino - lady luck doesn't always play favorites)
[Does the name :Gamblers annonymous come to mind? Do they have a program for casino managers?]

This puts the motivation behind the bizarre intimidation tactics (threats?) and the schemes over the phone. Hamptons does not anywhere near the business to take a loss like this. So they possibility of using this big winning payout as a great marketing tool was moot. As paying out would mean doom. Reneging the gambling debt might be survivable.

Surely there were other big winners at 21 tables in Jan?

What about Dec/2003 payouts?

21 tables 103.42
Roulette 93.96
Slots 88.94
Other table games 95.28
VP 97.25

Overall total ... no it can't be ... 102.46 Oy Vey!

In the old days casino managers would be dropped off in the desert never to be heard from again for performances less poor than this.

Once again is this one players action swamping all the other customers play?

The irony and Hypocracy is that Ron/Ross of HAMPTONS provides Pc21's play logs to Michael Shackleford "Fair Gambling" to verify PAYOUTS TO PLAYERS to the gaming public to lure them into to play at his "safe", " fair gaming" casino when he HAS REFUSED to PAY the OVERWHEMING majority of those payouts as they are to ONE PLAYER Pc21.

IS that FRAUDULENT?

Has Michael Shackelford been sucked in by Ron/Ross of Hamptons and made party to this Fraud ?

The report says "... based on the actual amounts wagered and the winnings paid ..." Yeah right.

Has this been brought to his attention?

 

[The Dude]

Hi Sting!

And welcome to the forum! Since I normally don't participate here during weekends, please let me take the opportunity on this beautiful Monday morning to clarify a number of things. I feel that it's important to shed some light on my relation via correspondances with P21 (the "Pirate") B.T.R.P (Before the Recorded Phone Conversations)

Besides one correspondance in August, giving me a thumbs up for a prompt payment from the Virtual group, he wrote me on December 30th stating the following:

I have won over 96,000 playing Caribbean 21 and they have locked me out. They say that my play was sent to RTG to be checked. For what I dont know. I am very surprised by this action since I have had other wins at this Casino and have always been paid promptly. So if you win too much they lock you out. I had to point out to them that I have winnings at another Casino Hampton totaling over 500,000 no shit and they didnt lock me out. Not yet anyway.

I wrote back stating that if the wins were legit, he'd have no worries. He should be paid. I said that I would give RTG a call the following week to find out what was up since it was the holiday season and not too many people were around.

He then wrote me again the following day stating that he had spoken to Ron at Hamptons, that he was welcome there and to keep winning. "I am currently at over $573g and still playing on a table set for $1,000 and $10,000. They also sent me 2 bottles of Dom Perignon." P21 also stated that Delano's was looking into his account and that it should be open soon.

On the second of January, he wrote me the following:

When I last wrote I had spoken to Ron and he assured me this wouldnt happen. I have also won a total of over 1.3 million so I have doubled the 500,000 I told you about last time. Do you know of any situation where a Casino claimed that RTG software malfunctioned and allowed a player to win
Contact the Hampton / Ron Lewin to find out what the results of their review are. Again we are taliking 1.3 million. I say again I AM NOT A CHEAT and expect to be paid. I have called and they only say that my account is under review and Ron will contact me nest week. Yeah, right. I was also told this wouldnt happen. I think you would agree I need some serious help. I am going to try Delanos today to speak to their GM and will write you with the result. They locked me out for less than 100,000. I can understand suspicion but I am afraid that they will simply say that the software malfunctioned and therefore my winnings are void. This is 2 separate RTG Casinos with bad software I think not. Bryan, I need some serious help here with this. I now you said if they are legit winnings, which they are, I should have no worries, but it worries me when someone tells me that wont happen and then it does. I have not done anything publicly about would prefer to keep this quiet but I dont know what to do. Please contact the Hampton now as well as Delanos and ask them what is going on. When you let someone play on a table with a 10,000 max upper limit it stands to reason that the potential for winnings is great. So you let me play and then hold it against me when I win HELP

Two days later (4 January) he wrote again (this was a Sunday after New Years - still the holidays):

Dear Bryan, I wrote to you about the Hampton owing me 1.3mil and Delano's about 96,000. RTG has removed Caribbean 21 from all RTG casinos that I have an account at and systematically locking me out. My logons are being rejected. The rep at Crystal Palace told me specifically that my account was being investigated by RTG and they were the ones who shut me out. This is happening much faster than I thought. It is now about 3:00 am on Sunday morning. Who the hell is working at RTG now? Why is RTG shutting me out of its Casinos. They must be looking up my name and address or else how would they where I have accounts. These could be good signs I guess. they are obviously checking my play from everywhere I play. They will find that Caribbean 21 is the only game I play. I have had many wins. I won close to 40,000 at Breakaway. Delano's has paid me for a $14,000 win. From the Virtual Casino group ( I don't play there anymore ) both Prism and Virtual will have records of $30,000 wins as well as other smaller ones. The Phoenician has paid me over 20,000. My win at Hampton was over the course of several sessions. My last session I lost over 300,000 before my luck turned around. By this time my table limits had been changed to a minimum of $5000 and a max of $10,000 so I played mostly $10,000 hands. RTG is now investigating my play at their Casinos, locking me out in the process. Looks like I got somebody's attention. My wins are all legit. I have an established history of over a year at some of these places. Are they going to pay me? I am owed over 1.3 million. I sorry if I'm rambling but this is unfolding as I type. What the hell is RTG doing. There is nothing wrong with their software I just won that's it. Does nobody see the maketing potential in this? Please contact RTG and find out what you can about me since their actions are specifically directed at me and I am going to try a few more logons to see if I can track them.

I answered him that day, and confirmed that yes, it seemed that this game has been pulled from all RTG casinos. I'd give them a call the following day.

Which I did.

On January 5th I wrote:

I just got off the phone with RTG, and they assured me that they are looking into this diligently and carefully. There is a lot of money at stake, and this understandably warrants their checking your gameplay and looking at their software/payout tables. Hopefully in a couple of days this should be resolved.

Sincerely,

Bryan

He wrote me back, worrying that this was a ruse by RTG and that his credibility was suffering. I wrote back again:

They've removed the game for now and are having their tech guys review the coding and paytables. This may take a couple of days. Don't worry about your credibility...just wait.

Sincerely,

Bryan

He wrote back:

Hey Bryan, I didn't change any code. Who am I, 007? It's the same program it always was. Well, you sound assured that they will do the right thing so I'll just wait. Thanks again,

Over the next several days, the player emailed me daily wanting to know what was up. He wanted access to his accounts so he could play some more. I told him again that RTG was still reviewing the data on their side and that he should have some patience.

I wrote him back on the 14th :

I spoke with RGT this evening, but it looks as if the auditing is taking longer than expected. The individuals I normally speak to and who are on top of this matter were attending a business function in another state. They should be back in latter this week and I should have some clearer information then.

Don't worry. Hang tight. And yes, if this turns out to be 100% legit then it looks like you've broken some records

Sincerely,

Bryan

He wrote hack stating:

Hi Bryan, you are still saying "IF it turns out to be legit". Of course it's legit. You don't believe me? How did I do it then? I got into their system, changed the game to favor me on multiple occassions at multiple Casinos, avoiding detection, LEAVING NO TRACE, and remember theese changes ONLY AFFECTED ME. NOBODY ELSE HAD THE SAME RESULTS AT ANY TIME PLAYING THE SAME GAME. Damn, I'm good. C'mon Bryan, the Audit is taking longer than expected because they are not finding any fraud or engine malfunction. They are still looking hoping to find it. It's that simple. Why can't they release my accounts so I can get paid. Keep the game out of service till your hearts' content. They haven't found a reason not to pay me . They just don't want to pay. Talk some sense into these people. There's opportunity here for everyone. Thanks,

On the 15th of January he wrote:

Hey Bryan, Let me catch you up to speed. I heard from Ron yesterday and it looks like things will start moving now. First, the Audit gave a 100% "clean bill of health to the game engine and are supposed to release my accounts today.

Secondly in speaking to Ron I asked him if there were specific activity requirements in order to keep payments flowing. He said they would want to see 25mil in wagers weekly and table limits of $15,000min and $20,000max. Uhh hello, do I have Jack Ass written on my head? Why would I want to agree to that? Here's where I'm fuzzy. Can they simply stop paying me if I don't play? I thought it was the Virtual group that practiced this form of extortion? What can I really do other than negotiate and keep my fingers crossed? I can understand having to keep the account active but 25mil weekly in wagers??!!! They don't have anything on the website that states this requirement. Your wisdom is requested on this matter.

I will keep you posted throughout the day as I must also start to converse with Delano's who has been silent throughout this investigation.

To which I responded:

It's your choice to play or not to play. If they owe you winnings, you deserve to be paid. I'm sure everyone at RTG would agree with this as well. I would not make any sort of agreement that has stipulations on your payout.

It's a large sum, and I'm sure it'll be made in installments. If I were you, I would quit while I was ahead and just retire.

I'll be interesting to hear what the others have to say.

Sincerely,

Bryan

He replied by stating:

Hey Bryan, I hear you 5 by 5. I also have a friend who is an attorney who has offered to help if necessary. I'm glad to hear you say that as I only play Caribbean 21 at RTG casinos and right now they have not put the game back into service. I will not commit to anything I'm not comfortable with. May I use your reply for reference if necessary? Like I said they made no mention of this on their web site and it looks like somebody wants me to have a crash course in negotiating. Well, lock & load.....

Where is this friend?

Anyway, P21 wrote me bck with his agreement he was sending to Ron, on not wanting any playing stipulations, and that he would accept the $4000 per week payments. I wrote in turn:

They should have been discussing this with RTG. I too think this 6.25 year thing is a bit too long. RTG casinos aren't renowned for their longevity.

Sincerely,

Bryan

And then I wrote again:

I just got off the phone with RTG and it looks like the casino has the right to pay $4000 per week since this is in their terms and conditions. I wasn't aware of this. They checked this out on the wayback machine

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

to make sure that the casino didn't just post this, but it's been up since June. Nevertheless you'll be paid, and $4000 per week isn't that shabby. Your account should be open in the next couple of days and the game will be coming back online. Congrats!!

Sincerely,

Bryan

There was also talk of a partial lump sum to be made. On the 16th he wrote:

Hey Bryan, Just a couple of FYI's for you. I spoke again with Ron and for now things seem to be moving along. I am back in at the Hampton and waiting on the return of Caribbean 21. Delano's I'll have to try today. As always I'll keep you posted.

Everything seemed to be "Honky Dory" at this point....and then P21 opened an account in the forum and began to make his infamous pirate postings.

On the 21st of January. His accounts were still locked. He emailed me stating this:

Hey Bryan, I am still locked out of my accounts. RTG hasn't removed 1 single block. Can you find out when the hell they plan to clean this up. I have money in these accounts and I can't withdraw it because I'm locked out. The support reps only say that RTG is still doing their investigation and they will remove the block when RTG contacts them. This is rediculous now. Look, you can tell them that it is illegal to hold my accounts like they are and the next step for me is public and legal. I'm tired of being quiet while these assholes do whatever they want. Ask them to estimate how much business they will loose when I publicize how you'll be treated as a winner at any RTG casino. How you'll be locked out and labeled a criminal. Whatever, if you can do anything please let me know. Thanks,

To which I wrote back:

Actually, when they saw your posts at Casinomeister, they decided to make a closer inspection of the software which may take a few more days. It may have been better to keep quiet and not to have drawn attention to yourself. I'll let you know if I hear of anything else.

Sincerely,

Bryan

He replied:

First of all they weren't thorough the first time? Don't they have any business ethic. Second the forum is a public area. They can't honestly think I live on a Pirate ship. It was a joke. Either way they are hold my money at several Casino's illegally. Do they wan't a suit? They are breaking the law. This doesn't bother you. They are criminals looking for a way out. They deserved every word they got. They started this by calling me a fraud publically, which is against the law. They have seized monies they are not entitled to. Where I come from that is called stealing. There are a couple of legal terms for what they have done. Looking for treasure is what any gambler is doing or do you play to lose.
You don't research where you play before you play. Tell me what bothered them. I didn't say anything wrong.

You stated: They started this by calling me a fraud publically, which is against the law.

Where did they do this?

Bryan

He responded with:

You'e kidding right! At every single casino that they have locked me out of. They closed my accounts and told the mgmt at these casinos that I was being ivestigated for fraud and that is why they stepped in, pulled the game and locked me out. Every support rep I talked to gave me a hard time bcause they look down at fraud and the people who encourage it. This is the information and reaction from the public. They gave me this information. The balances at these casinos are inaccessable. I had credit at some of these places. That's right, credit. I could show up, get an advance, and play on credit because a few places came to believe that I could be trusted. Not so anymore. Besides, wasn't it you who posted about the marketing possibilities if they play their cards right. Pun intended. They don't see the opportunity in this character. I play almost exclusively at RTG casinos. They should be flattered that I have drawn so much attention to their gaming software. The public wants to know what places have the winners. Hey what's the name of that software where the guy won a million playing on it? Maybe I could too. RTG, yeah that's the name. I won't forget that name now. Their games pay! Do I have to go on? The pirate was supposed to be a hint not an insult. Allright maybe I got too caught up in the moment, AAARRGGHHH. But I think my words have been taken out of context. When I said the vendor was involved I meant that their investigation had just cleared the game and me, so I thought, doing nothing but legitimizing the win. That would be a good thing.

And then:

Sorry Bryan, I hit the wrong button there. I have dumped a hell of alot of money into these casinos playing. I mean they have the records so they can look up how much money I've lost first in RTG casinos. Which reminds me I'd like to get a copy of my game logs once they release them. This is silly. I wan't to get back into my other accounts and spend money in their casinos. What's the problem here I DIDN"T DO ANYTHING EXCEPT DEPOSIT AND PLAY. They finished before I posted the Pirate and you said in an earlier posting they told you the game was good and the player got lucky. So you tell me what bothered them about my posting that now they are not certain of what they were certain of the day before. Sounds fishy to me.

And...

Hi Bryan, are you still up by any chance? Did you get a chance to read my e-mails. They should have cleared things up. I hope. I hope they can see the benefit in my postings. I hope they can realize that drawing attention to myself also draws attention to their games, especially that one. This is free advertising. I didn't mention any other vendor in my posting. Just RTG. If I read those postings I would want to know why the Pirate is so focused on RTG and their casinos. What does RTG offer that the others don't. I said I would be out there looking for the next opportunity not loss. This is free advertising... TTFN, Brian.

He again asked me if I heard anything. I responded:

Hi Brian,

No I haven't talked to anyone at RTG over the past few days. They were concerned about the language of the posting (referring to ports and numbers of players) that they decided to look into the issue once more. I mentioned to them that they may be analyzing your postings too much. But it's their prerogative since it's their software. Don't worry you'll be paid. I just don't understand your impatience.

As for the "free advertising" you may feel you are dishing out, I would consider it more publicity that anything else. I would have waited until I actually had the thumbs up 100%. Why complicate things in an already complicated situation?

Sincerely,

Bryan

He responded:

Hi Bryan, I know I'll get paid. I'm not impatient. It's the fact
that I cannot log into my accounts. I am locked out. I cannot
withdraw any funds since I cannot get in. Wouldn't you want access to
your money? I also cannot deposit or play, should I want to. Why do
they need to keep me locked out. As for the postings I gave this a
lot of thought yesterday. Now you said ports. Did they think I meant
computer ports as in hacking? and number of players a crew working
against them. I meant ports as in Harbour's or Casinos. You are right
too, much analyzing. Finally I took your post that stated the game
was good and the player got lucky to be that 100%. Especially when it
was suggested that the game would probably be back soon. I thought
the crew maybe could be interpreted like that but I assure you and RTG
that I play alone. I think Caribbean 21 is a fantastic expansion of
the game. Volitale maybe, but I see it as the next level of the game
of Blackjack. More options, activity, possibilities than any other
game I've played. If you would please tell them I just really like
the game and got caught up in the excitement. I have a creative,
wandering mind and up came the Pirate of Caribbean 21. Please tell
them I apologize for any misunderstandings in my posts, I was just
having some fun behind the mask and there is really nothing to find.
Ask them to bring the game back. I can't take the withdrawal anymore.
TTFN, Brian.

It was now the 23rd of January. I was making preparations for my London trip, and was planning on talking about this P21 odeal with RTG as well. That Tuesday he emailed me (I hadn't met with RTG yet):

Hey Bryan, I just got off the phone with Delano's and they tell me that I wasn't paid yesterday because RTG has re-opened their investigation and I will not be paid until they are done. So now where I was getting paid now I am not. I am going to call the Hampton now but I am sure they will tell me the same thing. Bryan this has gone too far. Why are they doing this? All I did was win. I WANT TO BE PAID NOW AND MY ACCOUNTS RELEASED. IT'S ABOUT TIME NOW DON'T YOU THINK? WHY HAVE THEY STOPPED PAYMENTS?

And then...the infamous phone call is made which most of us have heard by now. And this awaits me in my inbox.

Bryan We MUST talk Ron has threatened me. He says that I cheated and used a Robot player. I told you they were stalling to find a reason not to pay me. Bryan the man threatened me. It gets better. This moron wants me to sell him the program I used to Robot play my way to 1.3 mil. I told you they would cheat me. Please Call me collect I must talk to you. The man threatened me and my family.

Please call. I didnt cheat and he has threatened me.
What do you want me to do? Call me please. he wants me to sell him a program for robot play and I dont have one I didnt cheat. This sleeze wants to go into business with him. HELP please call collect. This is no joke. I didnt cheat. He is a moron. I have no program to sell him What does RTG have to say. I will not be threatened. Please help me Who do I call. He really believes I have a robot program. I DONT. Bryan who can I contact. I WANT TO SEE THE PROOF. I am not going to go away. I want to seek law enforcement at this point. He wants to go into Business with me. I HAVE TAPED THE CONVERSATION. I am going to contact the FBI since he has threatened me and my family.

I responded:

Hi Brian,

If they threatened you, I would immediately go to the police. I will be
speaking with RTG about this today in person.

Sincerely,

Bryan

It was at this time the thread here was started. I was in London and spoke with the guys from RTG. I was given information that the player had admitted his guilt with using software (thus voiding the play), and that he and the casino attempted to negotiate a deal about this software.

As illustrated in this thread, I at first took this confession for what it was - but I have backed up and regrouped after realizing that this case is much more complicated than what first appeared. I continue to sit on the fence and am still looking at what's falling on both sides of it.

One thing that keeps haunting me is why, if the player truly did NOT use some sort of tweaking device/software/robot/his d***/whatever, why was he so easily intimidated by Ron? Why didn't he just laugh this off and hang up? He was aware of RTG's presence. He could have easily picked up the phone and given them a call. They have a listed number. Michael Staw or any of their programers would have probably been very open to a conversation with this dude.

But what the hell? Do any of these speculations matter?

The pregnant pauses. The tones and inflections of voices. The hammering emails. The pleasantries and then the accusations. What the hell?

I am looking forward a resolution in the very near future. I believe that everyone involved with this understands the phrase "shit or get off the can". This is apparent in this case.

 

[portia]

Thanks Bryan, for putting that together for everyone to read. You certainly aquitted youself well in your correspondence.

What a jam. Pc21 seem like an unusual character in a way that doesn't help him in this situation. Personality shouldn't matter - but it does.

Lots of questions.

Will Hamptons or RTG send him the logs he requested? Or just ignore him. Or rationalize some reason not to release them.

They might answer some questions.

 

[jyde]

Pc21 seem like an unusual character in a way that doesn't help him in this situation.

Yeah - that's what I thought at first, but then I tried to imagine how it would feel to be in his shoes for the last 1 month (for the record my biggest win ever was less than his betsize). A lot of money is involved in this shit and I think most of us would act "unusual" in this situation

 

[portia]

Hmmm. Yeah you are right. It takes some effort to imagine being in his shoes. His personality makes him an easy target for a rogue casino operator.

 

[The Dude]

P21 just emailed me with the following comment:

One thing that keeps haunting me is why, if the player truly did NOT use some sort of tweaking device/software/robot/his d***/whatever, why was he so easily intimidated by Ron?

Easily?! the man took 1.3 mil from me. He had told me that I was cut off, done, fini, adios, her's your hat what's your hurry. He had put a knot in the purse strings. Can you tell me what is NOT intimidating about that? Imagine you are a millionaire for all intensive purposes and then some one who can steps in and takes it all away. Since I didn't think he was kidding I got the realization quite vividly. Lets also not forget that I was told I should have no worries! and believed so, then ... all gone, you blow, too bad, so sad, bye bye. C'mon Bryan I was in shock.

 

[Pirateofc21]

P21 just emailed me with the following comment:



Easily?! the man took 1.3 mil from me. He had told me that I was cut off, done, fini, adios, her's your hat what's your hurry. He had put a knot in the purse strings. Can you tell me what is NOT intimidating about that? Imagine you are a millionaire for all intensive purposes and then some one who can steps in and takes it all away. Since I didn't think he was kidding I got the realization quite vividly. Lets also not forget that I was told I should have no worries! and believed so, then ... all gone, you blow, too bad, so sad, bye bye. C'mon Bryan I was in shock.

I also wanted to thank you for your continued efforts in spite of everything.

 

[caruso]

Speaking from slightly less high-level experience, the reason he went off on a tilt is because of the money involved. Large winnings can put you in full paranoia mode; you're thinking to yourself "I KNOW they'll find a reason to cheat me", so even the most innocuous phrase can put you on the defensive. It certainly would me.

Thanks for posting all that correspondence, Bryan. Very revealing. WTF was that about 25 million wagering per week at the $15,000 to $20,000 level to get paid????

 

[jyde]

WTF was that about 25 million wagering per week at the $15,000 to $20,000 level to get paid????

Another idea from the "oh so honest" Ron. Hopefully the player would have lost everything within a couple of weeks.

 

[Pirateofc21]

Speaking from slightly less high-level experience, the reason he went off on a tilt is because of the money involved. Large winnings can put you in full paranoia mode; you're thinking to yourself "I KNOW they'll find a reason to cheat me", so even the most innocuous phrase can put you on the defensive. It certainly would me.

Thanks for posting all that correspondence, Bryan. Very revealing. WTF was that about 25 million wagering per week at the $15,000 to $20,000 level to get paid????

In all fairness I will say Ron corrected me on that. It was 25 million a month not a week. A mere trifle and the $15,000 was minimum bet and the $20,000 the max. When I said that was too high he was kind enough to lower them too $5,000min and $7,500max. What a guy!

Hey wait a minute...I just remembered...something about the range between min and max..OH Yeah! Spread! You don't want them close together...You know...I think he tried to trick me!?

 

[caruso]

OK: $25,000,000 a week for 6 years.

Expected loss on C21: $10,000 per week.

Expected loss over six years (big breath): $3,200,000.

In short: in order to cashin your winnings, the casino originally required that you wager an amount necessary to lose over twice that amount. You would have lost on average over half a million a year.

Every aspect of this fit-up job con trick is utterly nauseating.

 

[caps]

This $25M activity requirement (whether per month, per week, or per millenium) is amazing, and to my mind casts the whole thing in an entirely different light. If I'm following the chronology correctly, the casino imposed this requirement -- completely without basis under its own published Ts & Cs -- BEFORE the Pirate commenced his ill-advised postings, and therefore BEFORE, by the casino's own account, it had reason to suspect the use of a robot. This suggests that the casino had every intention, then, from the get-go, of imposing a requirement that would have, over time, guaranteed either avoidance of the debt or a substantial recoupment of it through additional play. Smelly.

Did the payments that the casino actually make carry this requirement?

 

[jyde]

Did the payments that the casino actually make carry this requirement?

No - I think RTG got them back on track before that.

 

[caruso]

Without wishing to go off track here but for the record anyway, it's worth pointing out that this clearly UNDISCLOSED "extra activity" clause is not unique to Hamptons; other RTGs also employ it. The simple rationale is that to guarentee that winners end up losers you hold them to a given amount of extra wagering. The amount - which in Pirate's case was set initially at 25 million a month - can be however much you need to wager in order to lose everything back to the casino, or until such a time as the win has been reduced to the satisfaction of the casino.

I've heard of several cases of this, and I'm currently in one such situation myself. I daresay it comes from the M. Staw handbook for licensees "How To Screw The Suckers To The Maximum".

Imagine going into a B & M casino, sitting down to play, racking up a nice win - and then finding yourself surrounded by a bunch of goons who tell you that in order to leave the building with your winnings you need to carry on playing untill such a time as the casino is satisfied!

Not ALL RTGs impose this ripoff requirement, but a few most definately do. Hampton, evidently, is one.

 

[caps]

Also not going off track here . . . but BLYEECCH! This is effectively a compulsory double-down requirement, with crappier odds. A perfect heads-I-win, tails-you-lose deal. God love (and have mercy upon) these schnooks.

 

[cipher]

>>STING you're not referring to SCORE SPORTSBOOK and the infamous VIRTUAL CASINO are you? I might know just a little bit about that action having brought that case forward and ultimately winning the case. If that's the case you're referring to you're wrong STING the best option turned out to be exactly the way I played it by going after the Casino, the Sportsbook and the Software Provider. <<

Nope Cipher, this was a recent case that never made the boards and it involved a more legit operation than the infamous Score Sports. If you got paid by one of Score's affiliated casinos, consider yourself one of the luckiest people in the world. I've dealt with numerous complaints about Score in the past but admit haven't heard anything in a year or so and they're still functioning.

Then STING, I see that yet another "more legit" R T G operation continues to carry forward in the best traditions of Realtime Gaming et al. "if you can't beat them, cheat em." Makes em kind of look all warm and fuzzy doesn't it?

As for my case against the "TRIO" (Virtual, Score Sportsbook and Realtime Gaming) and their attorneys. There is no IF, they paid. Nor was there any LUCK about prevailing. "LUCK" is the residual of thorough and painstaking planning. We went in with volumes of information related to PRIOR BAD ACTS and those (3) words will PROVE to be huge factor should this case find it's way to trial.
Have a good one.

 

[SFeagleAgain]

As for my case against the "TRIO" (Virtual, Score Sportsbook and Realtime Gaming) and their attorneys. There is no IF, they paid. Nor was there any LUCK about prevailing. "LUCK" is the residual of thorough and painstaking planning. We went in with volumes of information related to PRIOR BAD ACTS and those (3) words will PROVE to be huge factor should this case find it's way to trial.
Have a good one.

Cipher is exactly on the money here. You have to do your homework and you only have one shot at it. Hell, I would have been so intimidated (even being in the legal field) that I most likely would have posted and said some things I shouldn't have also. Intimidated and so damned furious you could cook an egg on my ass! RTG and Hamptons have dug their grave and have PLENTY of past history (not good) in favor of the player. Hell, they buried themselves so deeply with that taped mess and now the revelation of their further wagering requirements. It is the equivalent of saying "We will only pay you after you have lost sufficient amounts. You MAY see some return only after we deem your losses sufficient". In other words, get this down to about $500 and we will pay! Unethical at best. Even I am speechless at this. But like I said earlier, an EXPERIENCED litigator would make hash browns out of them almost instantly. Even a first year law student could have a field day with this one.

SIDENOTE TO BRYAN: You have handled yourself extremely ethically and fairly in this situation and the fact that you continue to look into the matter and have re-evaluated your stance proves this to all. Kudos!

 

[jetset]

I've gotta say that having spent much of this debate trying to take a balanced viewpoint, these last few posts starting with Portia's analysis of The Wiz's stats and going on through Bryan's excellent precis to the allegations regarding the retroactive WT have pushed me decidedly to the player's side of the fence in the absence of other evidence.

Seeing the background laid out so well gives a better perspective on both the facts and the personalities involved here.

 

[SFeagleAgain]

I've gotta say that having spent much of this debate trying to take a balanced viewpoint, these last few posts starting with Portia's analysis of The Wiz's stats and going on through Bryan's excellent precis to the allegations regarding the retroactive WT have pushed me decidedly to the player's side of the fence in the absence of other evidence.

Seeing the background laid out so well gives a better perspective on both the facts and the personalities involved here.

Jet, we may have had our differences in the past, but I totally agree with you here. There is no longer ANY doubt in my mind that the player should prevail. If Hampton had a leg to stand on, they would have posted those player's logs immediately, if not sooner. It certainly explains a lot of the pirate's earlier ramblings. I would have been rambling too!

 

[gamblinboi]

Jet, we may have had our differences in the past, but I totally agree with you here. There is no longer ANY doubt in my mind that the player should prevail. If Hampton had a leg to stand on, they would have posted those player's logs immediately, if not sooner. It certainly explains a lot of the pirate's earlier ramblings. I would have been rambling too!

wow. the recent post by Casinomeister makes it clear .. the casino in no way intended to pay this winner. The 25 MILLION (!!!!!!!!) wagering clause they wanted to put on him *clearly* shows this.. simply amazing, just when you thought Hamptons couldn't go any lower, they do.

Not a scintilla of doubt in my mind now - this player is legit and deserves to be paid.

 

[islandmaan]

cobol = Latin

These are both dead lanquages I believe, I took Cobol 20 years ago using punch cards. (I passed fourth grade too).

This is all silly, if he lost 1.3 Mil this thread would not even exist. He beat them, legal or with a scam but without the proof he beat them.