Sega Casino - jury's out

[MrWolf]

Since Sega Casino's on the baptism by fire list, and is linked to a big name company I thought I'd give them a go. Here's a summary of my experience with them, not sure whether I'll be a regular here or not, but hopefully this may help others when deciding to play there or not.

Anyway, I deposited £300 with them on 12.8.10 via moneybookers because they annoyingly don't accept credit cards at the moment. I declined a bonus since I play JorB VP and don't want to throw my money away playing slots just to make promo requirements.

Anyway, my bankroll headed firmly south, until I was down to my last £25. Managed to survive, get it back up to £400 before hitting a £20k Royal.

Now here's where the fun started. I sent verification documents of my passport and a utility bill. However, because I had blocked out my passport number (everything else was visible) this wasn't acceptable. I explained to them I wasn't sending them a complete copy of my passport and it was irresponsible of them to ask for this since ID theft is such a big problem.

Anyway, they contacted me and said a wage slip from my employer would be acceptable together with some utility bills. Unbelievable. So they want details of my total income, monthly take home pay, National Insurance number, and company employee number. I told them where to get off.

I did though agree to send a copy of my UK driver's licence, a copy of my credit card statement, as well as their know your customer form. And they do indeed want to know about you. There's the usual name, date of birth, nationality, address, phone and email. But they also want to know your "status" whatever that means (marital status?) whether you are self-employed, job title, nature of work, company you work for, gross monthly income, and "source of funds?income".

Is it me but are they demanding too much information? I pointed out to them if I supplied everything they wanted what guarantees do I have that someone in their organisation wouldn't steal my identity?

Anyway, eventually the documentation I provided was deemed acceptable. Then the fun part was actually getting the funds. Since I eventually cashed in £22k I asked if I could have a bank transfer made. Not available at this time. Neither was a cheque. So I had to make a moneybookers withdrawal. However, you can only make £6k at a time withdrawals (moneybookers withdrawal limits are a whole different matter!).

By the beginning of last week, I tried calling Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday, but no-one was answering their support number. So I emailed to find out what was happening with my withdrawal. I'd received six emails, corresponding with the six withdrawals I'd made, saying I would receive the funds within 24-48 hours. That wasn't quite the case, but I did receive all the money at various stages between Tuesday and Friday last week.

Another curious thing before I finish on the topic. After hitting the Royal (£5 coins, max coins), I hit a 4 oak and eventually cashed in another £1k on top of the Royal. Later when I went back to play some more VP, I noticed that they had reduced the limits and 50p was their biggest coin size. Happily I decided to play some Let It Ride, where I again hit a 4 oak, three hands of £5 plus the bonus bet, meaning a £850 pay day, and also hit three of a kind on three card poker, adding another £150 to the bank roll, so cashing in another £1k. It felt ironic that limiting my bet size on my preferred game led me to play a couple of others, and nab a sizeable win.

I find it curious that Sega reduced the limits on VP after I hit a Royal, since I assume they'd be a well funded set up. It kind of rings alarm bells with me if they can't take that kind of hit.

Anyway, I've gone on long enough. Hope it's been useful to somebody else.

 

[winbig]

Another curious thing before I finish on the topic. After hitting the Royal (£5 coins, max coins), I hit a 4 oak and eventually cashed in another £1k on top of the Royal. Later when I went back to play some more VP, I noticed that they had reduced the limits and 50p was their biggest coin size.

And this was without a bonus, correct?

If so, imo, this is an instant baptism by fire FAIL, and they should be removed from accreditation consideration if they continue this practice. In my eyes, this only points to funding problems, because it just shows that they don't want to/can't afford to pay out many large hits such as your £20K ($31,062) royal.

And new or not, no casino should open its doors without having every deposit/withdrawal option setup and active. I mean, wth, are they that eager to take wagers that they'll open up half cocked?

I'm not saying they are, but If I had known nothing about this place before reading your post, I'd assume that you were dealing with a rogue casino....that's, of course, aside from the fact that you did get paid...

 

[Simmo!]

And this was without a bonus, correct?

If so, imo, this is an instant baptism by fire FAIL, and they should be removed from accreditation consideration if they continue this practice. In my eyes, this only points to funding problems

Needs to be verified but I just reinstalled Windows and don't have SEGA on there yet so I can't. If accredited status was removed for that we'd need to know more details and of course it would also mean every Rival and RTG bar iNetBet and Intertops would have to go too.

Anyway, I deposited £300 with them on 12.8.10 via moneybookers because they annoyingly don't accept credit cards at the moment.

They did actually implement direct card deposits recently but removed it - I don't think the authorisation codes were working quite as they should because I tried a deposit and it was "declined". So it could be an option again soon.

And new or not, no casino should open its doors without having every deposit/withdrawal option setup and active.

There must be about 100 different deposit/withdrawal options - I don't know any casino that has all of them WinBig. Bit strict aren't you LOL

 

[winbig]

Needs to be verified but I just reinstalled Windows and don't have SEGA on there yet so I can't. If accredited status was removed for that we'd need to know more details and of course it would also mean every Rival and RTG bar iNetBet and Intertops would have to go too.

So it's ok for a casino to drop a player's betting limits after a huge win? Fine, but they sure won't be keeping many players, aside from those that play for small stakes, with that policy... You would think that casinos would be jumping at the chance for a player to keep playing at their previous stake after a huge win like that, so they can give most of it back. Or are they just afraid of someone going on another great run and winning $100K more? Again, this reeks of funding problems...

They did actually implement direct card deposits recently but removed it - I don't think the authorisation codes were working quite as they should because I tried a deposit and it was "declined". So it could be an option again soon.



There must be about 100 different deposit/withdrawal options - I don't know any casino that has all of them WinBig. Bit strict aren't you LOL

Well, what I meant was that if they're going to be accepting credit cards, Neteller, etc. on a normal basis, they should have at least waited until those methods were available and working before they opened for business....I didn't know about them having to take CC deposits offline because of a 'glitch.'

But as far as w/d options go, the same still applies. Why don't they have any other w/d options available besides MB? Is that their sole source of funding right now? You would think they'd have at least one processor/bank account that would allow them to at least send a check, if not a wire transfer.

If you combine all that with their unrealistic documentation requests, well, it smells fishy, at least to me.

 

[4 of a kind]

Nothing unusual here when you should (at this point) consider this casino is just an RIT. (Rogue in Training)

They obviously paid you especially that amount in a reasonable time. They tried the minimum rogue delay and game tactics, but realized they couldn't afford bad publicity this early on and paid you in a fair time hoping you would be posting around giving them some free spam.

Red Flags should be flying here...

 

[winbig]

They obviously paid you especially that amount in a reasonable time. They tried the minimum rogue delay and game tactics, but realized they couldn't afford bad publicity this early on and paid you in a fair time hoping you would be posting around giving them some free spam.

..which backfired, if that's the case.

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: First off. Mr. Wolf, and the rest of you, when will you all learn, "Send in your required Documents, PRIOR to depositing/playing. You have to do it anyway, so do it at the start. Don't like what they are asking for? Fine, don't deposit there. How many post do we have here that say the same thing????
"I deposit, and they want my mothers maiden name before they will pay me".
You should have know this, BEFORE you deposited, instead of waiting until after you won.

Next. This is Sega. A Gaming company first, and an On Line casino second. The policy they are using is the same at Sony, or Nintendo, or any other gaming company. They want as much information about you as possible. If you don't want to provide that information, then do not deposit there.

Withdraw limits should be listed in the Banking section of the Casino, or in their terms an conditions. Don't like the limits they have, then don't deposit there.

Now, here is the bad casino part. If there are NO withdraw limits listed on their web page or banking section, and or, they request ADDITIONAL documents after already approving what was sent in, and/or they violate their OWN terms and conditions, and the like, they YES, post away and complain about it.

imhop: There is NO difference between these type of post, and a person cashing their paycheck at Palace Station, here in Vegas, an getting a $5 match ticket, "$5 free with a $5 or higher bet", and placing it on the #17 at the Roulette table, and having the Pit Boss remove it, give it back, and say, "It can only be used on even money bets". "written on the bottom of the match play ticket". And having the player say, "WTF? If i had know that i would have just cashed my check someplace else". Is it the Casino fault, or the Players fault for not reading the policy first?

 

[MrWolf]

And this was without a bonus, correct?

That is correct - no bonus involved at all.

 

[spearmaster]

And this was without a bonus, correct?

If so, imo, this is an instant baptism by fire FAIL, and they should be removed from accreditation consideration if they continue this practice. In my eyes, this only points to funding problems, because it just shows that they don't want to/can't afford to pay out many large hits such as your £20K ($31,062) royal.

Completely disagree. The casino has the right to impose whatever limits it wants at any time for any reason, so long as it honors its agreement to pay winnings. If you don't like it, don't play.

Again, this reeks of funding problems...

This is not XYZ casino, it's Sega, for crying out loud. Exactly where are they going to have funding problems?

The reason for changing bet limits is simply risk management. I might agree with you that it's silly - but that is hardly a reason for removing them from the accredited list.

 

[manofsteel]

Sounds like it might be startup pains to me. Hopefully the Sega Casino rep will see this and take what he can from it.

The Sega brand is likely worth more than this online gambling site many times over, the site is licensed in Alderney and Sega is a publicly traded company. Hardly the makings of a "rogue in training."

 

[maphesto]

Can anyone tell me if Sega Casino still offer a "No Deposit" bonus where you after playthrough have to deposit 100$ and wager it to be able to withdraw 200$?

Must not implement terms that can be construed as "unfair" towards the player.

If they don't use this promotion anymore, I guess they are good to go.

About the issue in this thread, we have recently seen an accredited casino reducing limits AND stop a promotion towards a winning player in the middle of the promotion. If that's considered ok, I'll guess this issue is also.

IMO:
To me it's only ok if they change the betsize for ALL players. To change it for one player only is definately a rogue behaviour.
It's like they don't believe that their own games are totally random and a winning player isn't just lucky, he/she has found out how to beat it..

The casino has the right to impose whatever limits it wants at any time for any reason, so long as it honors its agreement to pay winnings. If you don't like it, don't play.

Many things we are discussing here are to improve standards for online casinos.

To sit back and say "don't like it, don't play" isn't actually helping..

I agree with you totally if they limit betsize for ALL players. But to limit betsize for a player who just have won huge is alarming in many ways.
One of them might be a funding issue, but it's also indicates that they don't believe that their software can guarantee them profit by house edge.

 

[KasinoKing]

...but it's also indicates that they don't believe that their software can guarantee them profit by house edge.

That's the most worrying thing.
You don't hear stories about Ladbrokes or 32Red reducing limits for winning players do you!

KK

 

[spearmaster]

To me it's only ok if they change the betsize for ALL players. To change it for one player only is definately a rogue behaviour.

The casino is under no obligation to offer you a bet at all. Instead, it can simply refuse further play if it so chooses - so long as it pays out your winnings.

I'm not saying that changing the betsize is a good thing - but it is certainly not something which is considered rogue behavior.

 

[maphesto]

The casino is under no obligation to offer you a bet at all. Instead, it can simply refuse further play if it so chooses - so long as it pays out your winnings.

I agree with you here!

I'm not saying that changing the betsize is a good thing - but it is certainly not something which is considered rogue behavior.

I understand you! I really do!
But if you then are trying to figure out why a casino chooses to limit one players betsize, you probably see that the only reasons are very strange.

If they really believe in their software and that every single move is totally random without any possibility to cheat/fool the software, they do not reduce a single players betsize just because he/she won.

If they reduce other things for one single player, like how much he can deposit/week etc. it can indicate that the player is a risk factor. Maybe they are afraid of charge backs etc.

In this case the only risk is within the casinos trust in their own software.

But I can change "rogue behaviour" to something less accusing.

Let's say that this is not what a trustable casino would do.

 

[MrWolf]

It's been interesting to hear everyones' take on Sega. Personally, I think they are honest but have launched in a pretty amateurish way. I think the bet limits now in place are likely to stop me being a regular here, even once all the other teething problems are sorted.

 

[DiamondGeezer]

I agree Mr Wolf.

Wasn't their games motto 'to get this good takes ages?' Maybe they should simplify it - 'to get good takes ages'.

 

[spearmaster]

But if you then are trying to figure out why a casino chooses to limit one players betsize, you probably see that the only reasons are very strange.

If they really believe in their software and that every single move is totally random without any possibility to cheat/fool the software, they do not reduce a single players betsize just because he/she won.

First of all, reducing a bet limit after a win is just making it harder for the player to lose back what he won If that happened to me, I'd simply cash out my winnings and go elsewhere.

However, the likely reason that the limit was reduced is because they are being overly cautious - perhaps way too cautious in this case.

There is nothing strange about this from the casino's perspective. Can't really be any doubt about the fairness of the software, which has been around for many years now. Highly unlikely that they are in a precarious financial position.

If anything, perhaps the policy was set by someone not too well-versed in gambling. But the point remains - the casino has every right to do so.

I'd lean more towards MrWolf's last comment - "amateurish".

 

[vinylweatherman]

First of all, reducing a bet limit after a win is just making it harder for the player to lose back what he won If that happened to me, I'd simply cash out my winnings and go elsewhere.

However, the likely reason that the limit was reduced is because they are being overly cautious - perhaps way too cautious in this case.

There is nothing strange about this from the casino's perspective. Can't really be any doubt about the fairness of the software, which has been around for many years now. Highly unlikely that they are in a precarious financial position.

If anything, perhaps the policy was set by someone not too well-versed in gambling. But the point remains - the casino has every right to do so.

I'd lean more towards MrWolf's last comment - "amateurish".

I would have expected better from such a big company. 20K is a big hit, but should NOT be so big as to trouble a big casino. Whatever their reasons, it is the PR that counts, since only THEY know the reasons, but WE are players, and can compare their ACTIONS with well known brands.

32Red and Ladbrokes would simply not react to a player winning 20K from a RF. They know the software is fair, and that although infrequent, the RF is a hand that almost every VP player gets if they play long enough (I have had many).

There was clearly no intent to withhold payment, BUT they had all their eggs in one basket (Moneybookers), without realising that it would be difficult for a player to get a large win out this way because of Moneybookers policies (which they should have researched before using them).

They went too far with the information requests, and this may even be illegal. Companies can ONLY demand RELEVANT information for the purposes of verifying the player, and operating the service. It cannot REQUIRE players to offer up "marketing profiles", but it can ask. The player can either give this information, or decline.

Players who block passport numbers are merely responding to advice given by the government, who would rather passports were not sent in at all. The problem is down to "in fighting" between government departments, regulators, and business.

Alderney is one of the best, and I doubt SEGA will do anything "stupid" such as misuse personal information, since this could cost them their license, and damage their reputation as a company.

Alderney regulations will specify which information SEGA is required to get from players, and they should NOT be "requiring" any more.

Where you (as a player) have both a drivers license and a passport, send the drivers license - the overall risk to your ID is a bit less, as well as the risk to the country.

They may be asking about job and income because they have to adhere to codes regarding responsible gambling, and will use this to set deposit limits, and maybe bet sizes.

Making the default a £5 coin, and then dropping it to 50p after assessment was a silly move. In this case it looked like the took fright simply because the player got the RF on max bet, and near the start - it happens sometimes, this is why it is RANDOM software.

They should set the defaults low for new players, and THEN raise them after they have assessed the player. Most casinos reserve the higher betting limits for their "vip" players, or to those who can show they have the means to take the losses without suffering hardship.

I see no need to jump in when even an accredited casino opens, if my personal preferences for deposits and withdrawals are not shown, I will wait till they are, asking the relevant reps about timescales if I am particularly keen to try them out.

 

[spearmaster]

I would have expected better from such a big company.

Herein lies the rub. Sega/Sammy is a huge company in the gaming and pachinko worlds. They are well-experienced when it comes to these products, particularly in a normal retail situation.

However, Sega Casino is a fledgling company, and certainly does not have the same level of experience as its parent company. I think they're going to have to up their investment in human resources in order to get up to speed.

 

[hitobito2005]

Very strange decision to reduce the max bet. It either implies funding problems (ie risk management), which seems unlikely... or that whoever did this does not understand the fundamentals of running a casino (probably more likely).

I've had strange risk management decisions imposed on me before by other accredited casinos. Eg bwin refused to let me deposit more than £3k/month even though it would be through non-risky routes to them such as Neteller. I wasn't claiming bonuses. The manager told me it wasn't possible and suggested I play at a different casino.

I wouldn't play at Sega if they limited to 50p coins.

They will lose players if they continue with such policies.

 

[Rusty]

I agree with Spearmaster that is unlikely to be funding problems but I have to disagree with his assessment that the Casino has no obligation to keep betting maximums at the same level and has the right to change them whenever they want.
Imagine you are losing 100K with max bets of 100 and then the Casino turns around and reduces your max bet to 1!
This would obviously be unfair practice as you would have no chance of winning your money back.
There would a be a riot in a B&M if management did this as you were playing.

As for their no deposit bonus terms, they are ludicrous and unacceptable IMO. (and don't you need to take a survey?)

I took out the Sega club 200% deposit bonus (100% poker 100% Casino)
and was told by live chat my poker balance would reflect this when I chose a user name.
Sure enough I got 100% in the casino but nothing in poker.
After live chat again I was told that the poker bonus had to be earned by points first which was not explained in their T&C's
This is not unusual for a poker bonus but I was told otherwise initially in live chat and the T&C's did not state this so I was pretty annoyed.
After all who knows how many more deposits I would have to make before I actually received the (200% initial deposit bonus) which by the time I received may well be worth only around 10% due to extra deposits required to unlock it.

In my view this made the bonus advertisement false and I made this point in chat again. They said they would apply the other 100% to my casino account to make up for it, which I agreed to but they then reneged on this.
They obviously don't know me very well.

I took the case to Alderney where I was initially fobbed off but I soon got redress when I made it clear I was serious and outlined how Alderney's policy of instantly siding with the casino without examining the details of the case might look to other players like me.

That was over a small sum of money but it is the principle of it.

So yeah they definitely have issues but I think they will sort these out as they get more used to managing a remote casino.

PS

And who could be truly pissed off with a casino they keep winning thousands at? (The Op)

 

[spearmaster]

I
Imagine you are losing 100K with max bets of 100 and then the Casino turns around and reduces your max bet to 1!
This would obviously be unfair practice as you would have no chance of winning your money back.

Doubt any casino would actually do this - but the same principle applies - the casino has the right to refuse any bet or change the limits. After all, who's to say that you're not going to keep losing after 100K, or 1 mil?

In any case, if an idiot actually lost 10,000 single bet units in a session, they probably deserve anything coming to them

 

[winbig]

Is this Casino really ran by a subdivision of Sony? Or is it just ran by a company that pays to use their name?

 

[Rusty]

Doubt any casino would actually do this - but the same principle applies - the casino has the right to refuse any bet or change the limits. After all, who's to say that you're not going to keep losing after 100K, or 1 mil?

In any case, if an idiot actually lost 10,000 single bet units in a session, they probably deserve anything coming to them

Ha, true but I use extreme examples to make a point.
The point is that a Casino changing max bet sizes should not be considered reputable as obviously it can be used as an unfair advantage.

In this case the the max bet reduced after a win so no problem but if we give them free reign on it you can be sure it will be misused as quick as you can say "Rogue"

They may have the right to use this practice but that doesn't make it right. We have the right to call them out on it.

 

[GrandMaster]

Ha, true but I use extreme examples to make a point.
The point is that a Casino changing max bet sizes should not be considered reputable as obviously it can be used as an unfair advantage.

Pray explain.

 

[spearmaster]

Is this Casino really ran by a subdivision of Sony? Or is it just ran by a company that pays to use their name?

Huh??

 

[winbig]

Huh??

Sorry, I meant Sega...

e.g.: Is it Sega that's behind the casino, or is there a separate company that is paying licensing/royalty fees in order to use the Sega brand?

 

[spearmaster]

Sorry, I meant Sega...

e.g.: Is it Sega that's behind the casino, or is there a separate company that is paying licensing/royalty fees in order to use the Sega brand?

I suppose the way to answer this question is like this.

Do you think Sony, IBM, Honda, Coca-Cola, et. al. would license out their company brand for a casino? My instinct says no.

Ah well, I'll answer it with a quote from their own site.

SEGACasino.com is a brand of SEGA Games Limited; a wholly owned subsidiary of global entertainment leader SEGA Sammy Holding Inc. (Nikkei: 6460) and licensed and regulated by the Government of Alderney.

 

[winbig]

I suppose the way to answer this question is like this.

Do you think Sony, IBM, Honda, Coca-Cola, et. al. would license out their company brand for a casino? My instinct says no.

*shrug* Most companies will do anything for money, no matter how large they are; and with outsourcing being so popular nowadays, you never know.

Ah well, I'll answer it with a quote from their own site.

I guess it's my fault for not scouring their site looking for an answer, considering the fact that I couldn't gamble there, even if I wanted to.

PS: Their SSL certificate expired 3 days ago...glad to see they're on top of it.

 

[spearmaster]

*shrug* Most companies will do anything for money, no matter how large they are; and with outsourcing being so popular nowadays, you never know.

A product, yes. A well-known company name, brand and logo, highly unlikely.

PS: Their SSL certificate expired 3 days ago...glad to see they're on top of it.

LOL... the best laid plans of mice and men...

 

[Bencuri]

That's the most worrying thing.
You don't hear stories about Ladbrokes or 32Red reducing limits for winning players do you!

KK

Well, that is true, but they pull you down somewhere else. Just think of that Sega has roulette with 10c coins with turbo spin no bet required to spin roulette, all these features in 1 single game. 32Red and Ladbrokes roulette coins start at 1, and doesn't have these features together on 1 roulette game. They either has the old roulette with turbo spin, but to spin you must place a bet, or no bet required to spin roulette, but without turbo spin. It is quite annoying. Moreover Sega also has a Craps where you don't need to place a bet to roll. At 32Red and Ladbrokes you must. So Sega also has advantages over Ladbrokes and 32Red. And I also think that slots pay out better at Sega. It is esaier breaking even at Sega on slots than at 32Red. It is true Sega bonuses are usually uncashable, but this is still a useful feature if you have a good amount of win, that could still be eaten up by the slots until you finish your wagering requirements.

 

[SEGA Casino CS]

Howdy! It looks like we have some commotion around here.

Let me just start with an apology to all those players who have had the “tiring” run ins with us this past weeks. We are conducting some advancement to improve our services and promotions. For the withdrawal part, I think it was made clear especially to one “Mr. Wolf”, that we have been doing some enhancements with our withdrawal process hence the setbacks. We have been coordinating with him through phone and email regarding the status of his withdrawal. We have also explained that the reason why we need to verify his account details is that we are complying with the AML (Anti Money Laundering) legislation. The withdrawn amount of £22,000 was all paid up and released thru his Moneybookers account. It is sad that a payment that lapsed one or two days would result to others tagging us as “Rogue In Training”. We have been following our payment methods policy on releasing money on a daily basis. We would also like for other members to know that we at SEGA, has not denied any withdrawal amount of players no matter how big it is provided that it has met such requirements and passed verification. We would also like to thank those who continuously believe that our casino still has the makings of making it big in this industry. Much appreciation to those who expressed their feedback, at best or as constructive as it can get t will help us grow as we tread on this Online gambling industry.
:notworthy

 

[4 of a kind]

It is sad that a payment that lapsed one or two days would result to others tagging us as “Rogue In Training”. [/QUOTE

I actually gave you credit for the payment... My quote: "They obviously paid you especially that amount in a reasonable time. They tried the minimum rogue delay and game tactics,"

I'm sure you could understand that most experienced online players at this point can count the number of online casinos safe to play at on one hand. (at least for now)

Your company elected to jump into the cesspool of online gaming. You can't blame online players for being skeptical, and with the slightest flaw be willing to prejudge and treat you like just another piece of crap on its way to the fermenting pool of shit. We have experienced just about (we hope) by now every trick in the book. I know in normal circumstances this would not be considered fair. But there is nothing normal about the treatment and crooks online gamers have experienced in the past. Most no longer trust anyone related to this industry. We can't fall prey to the broken promises any longer, and I'm sure you will be given time to prove yourself and your name.

Many will join and play at your site, but many are in fear of being tagged the crash dummy's. Any red flags being posted here are for the protections and cautions for players, we all were taught by other providers.

Personally, I'm happy to see a real name involved and wish you luck. Maybe finally a casino can come aboard and demonstrate to the world what the term transparency means.

With that being said would you mind me asking if Video Poker, Blackjack, (card games) are being run by Random Draw software or predetermined RTP software? In addition other then slots what software are all other games using like craps etc.?

Thank You

 

[Rusty]

Pray explain.

I already did with my extreme example.
Obviously varying the max wager to individual accounts gives the Casino an unfair advantage.
Reduce after the player has a long losing streak (well below expected return for that game) and then change back once the percentages are back in the houses favour.
If you think it has no effect then ask yourself how you would feel if you were sat a blackjack table playing $500 max bets and after a very bad streak the managements drops the limits to $50. I doubt it would be, "Makes no difference"

As a low roller this sort of thing hardly concerns me but if I were a high roller I would not even consider playing at a casino that I knew changed their betting limits at the drop of a hat.
It is bad practice, simple as that.

 

[spearmaster]

If I were a high roller I would not even consider playing at a casino that I knew changed their betting limits at the drop of a hat.

And now that he knows, he can take his business elsewhere if he likes. The casino still hasn't done anything wrong.

 

[Rusty]

And now that he knows, he can take his business elsewhere if he likes. The casino still hasn't done anything wrong.

Nothing wrong in your opinion, something wrong in my opinion - it is bad practice, simple as that.
Not every law of the land is fair and just, much less applied so. The law is an Ass.

Back on topic I have no beef with Sega.
Hopefully they will get their act together soon and be a very trustworthy Casino - they should prove to be a great addition to Playtech Casinos with their brand behind them.

 

[hitobito2005]

I already did with my extreme example.
Obviously varying the max wager to individual accounts gives the Casino an unfair advantage.
Reduce after the player has a long losing streak (well below expected return for that game) and then change back once the percentages are back in the houses favour.
If you think it has no effect then ask yourself how you would feel if you were sat a blackjack table playing $500 max bets and after a very bad streak the managements drops the limits to $50. I doubt it would be, "Makes no difference"

As a low roller this sort of thing hardly concerns me but if I were a high roller I would not even consider playing at a casino that I knew changed their betting limits at the drop of a hat.
It is bad practice, simple as that.

It's actually the opposite of what you say. Reducing the bet sizes is bad for the casino, it gives the casino a handicap.

The reason being that more wagered = more profit the casino casino. Reducing bet sizes = less wagered = less profit for the casino.

Assuming they have enough money, it makes no sense for them to do it.

 

[deucebag]

Anyway, they contacted me and said a wage slip from my employer would be acceptable together with some utility bills. Unbelievable. So they want details of my total income, monthly take home pay, National Insurance number, and company employee number. I told them where to get off.

I did though agree to send a copy of my UK driver's licence, a copy of my credit card statement, as well as their know your customer form. And they do indeed want to know about you. There's the usual name, date of birth, nationality, address, phone and email. But they also want to know your "status" whatever that means (marital status?) whether you are self-employed, job title, nature of work, company you work for, gross monthly income, and "source of funds?income".

Is it me but are they demanding too much information?

It's not you. I can't believe almost no one has commented on this bit. It's ridiculous. This casino is asking for "proof of income". They want you to fill out a form stating gross monthly income, job title, nature of work, and the company you work for. It's none of their business!

 

[Rusty]

It's actually the opposite of what you say. Reducing the bet sizes is bad for the casino, it gives the casino a handicap.

The reason being that more wagered = more profit the casino casino. Reducing bet sizes = less wagered = less profit for the casino.

Assuming they have enough money, it makes no sense for them to do it.

Makes a lot of sense if they have made a killing but I guess it depends on your faith in the software not being streaky at all.

If it made no sense at all they wouldn't do it.

 

[winbig]

It's not you. I can't believe almost no one has commented on this bit. It's ridiculous. This casino is asking for "proof of income". They want you to fill out a form stating gross monthly income, job title, nature of work, and the company you work for. It's none of their business!

Yea, what's up with that. Maybe the rep can comment on whether or not the employment, earnings, etc. information is in fact required, or is optional. Could you imagine them denying a withdrawal because you won't tell them how much you make?

I guess if worse came to worse, you could tell them that you earn over $1 per hour, the nature of your work is slave labor, etc.

 

[spearmaster]

If it made no sense at all they wouldn't do it.

How about "misguided sense"?

 

[4 of a kind]

Personally, I'm happy to see a real name involved and wish you luck. Maybe finally a casino can come aboard and demonstrate to the world what the term transparency means.

With that being said would you mind me asking if Video Poker, Blackjack, (card games) are being run by Random Draw software or predetermined RTP software? In addition other then slots what software are all other games using like craps etc.?

Thank You

The rep has been here several times monitoring this thread. I guess the hope for transparency is a scratch. -1

 

[maphesto]

The rep has been here several times monitoring this thread. I guess the hope for transparency is a scratch. -1

To be fair, I don't think all reps know the meaning of RTP-based or Random Draw software.

But you can have my guess instead!

I think it is RTP based. I am pretty sure that Playtech's roulette is a slot machine.

 

[SEGA Casino CS]

The rep has been here several times monitoring this thread. I guess the hope for transparency is a scratch. -1

Howdy!

We comply with the Alderney Gambling Control Commission's standards of game fairness. To ensure the fairness of our games for all players, we operate with the advanced systems for our software that uses the most sophisticated Random Number Generators.

 

[4 of a kind]

To be fair, I don't think all reps know the meaning of RTP-based or Random Draw software.

Do you think since they are new in this field we should give them a free lesson on the most basic functions of how a casino operates?

This person speaking at this forum is not casino support personnel, but rather a casino representative. I'm sure with a simple call to headquarters he could retrieve what should be common available information in order for players to be able to apply correct playing strategy's.

It's not like this information would give players the combination to the vault. But being able to apply the right strategy only extends playing time since the ultimate long term outcome is still going to be the inevitable.

I think their in fear of all the smart players that wouldn't even try these games.

 

[4 of a kind]

Howdy!

We comply with the Alderney Gambling Control Commission's standards of game fairness. To ensure the fairness of our games for all players, we operate with the advanced systems for our software that uses the most sophisticated Random Number Generators.

LOL Great attempt at derailment. What you just said above means nothing what so ever in relation to the RTP or Random Draw for card games. No one said anything about being fair. Of course your fair, and whatever version your using for card games is also fair. We just want to know which version is being used. This information is readily available for all land based casinos. They openly admit which version they use.

 

[winbig]

Howdy!

We comply with the Alderney Gambling Control Commission's standards of game fairness. To ensure the fairness of our games for all players, we operate with the advanced systems for our software that uses the most sophisticated Random Number Generators.

Just so it doesn't get pushed under the rug, could you please address the issue about the verification docs asking about income, etc?

 

[MrWolf]

Howdy! It looks like we have some commotion around here.

Let me just start with an apology to all those players who have had the “tiring” run ins with us this past weeks. We are conducting some advancement to improve our services and promotions. For the withdrawal part, I think it was made clear especially to one “Mr. Wolf”, that we have been doing some enhancements with our withdrawal process hence the setbacks. We have been coordinating with him through phone and email regarding the status of his withdrawal. We have also explained that the reason why we need to verify his account details is that we are complying with the AML (Anti Money Laundering) legislation. The withdrawn amount of £22,000 was all paid up and released thru his Moneybookers account. It is sad that a payment that lapsed one or two days would result to others tagging us as “Rogue In Training”.
:notworthy

If you check my original post you'll see it's a statement of facts as they happened, and I pointed out I got paid. The explanation about enhancements was made the week after I withdrew, and only after I sent an email enquiry following emails saying I'd be paid within 24 hours, and not all the money had been paid within that time frame.

My point about the ID stands - it's reckless to ask for a full passport with every single detail showing. I've sent my passport with the number blocked out to plenty of other casinos who are happy with that but not Sega apparently. Fortunately the copious amounts of documentation I provided were sufficient.

Also curious about changes to the wagering limits on VP?

 

[GrandMaster]

I already did with my extreme example.
Obviously varying the max wager to individual accounts gives the Casino an unfair advantage.
Reduce after the player has a long losing streak (well below expected return for that game) and then change back once the percentages are back in the houses favour.

The well-known gambler's fallacy. Reducing your betting limits only means that your expected loss will be less and the casino's expected win will be less.

 

[Rusty]

The well-known gambler's fallacy. Reducing your betting limits only means that your expected loss will be less and the casino's expected win will be less.

The well known casinomeister fallacy that software is not weighted.

Not to mention that all Blackjack, roulette, Video poker and slot machines are not proper simulations of the real games - playing as bingo/lottery type games instead with set RTP.
If you ignore all those realities you might have a case but it would be based on fantasy.
A bit like the fantasy that all Casinos are in it for the long run or the fantasy that as long as it is in the T&C's it is OK.

Like I say, if you would just as soon play at Casinos that change their betting limits without notice than ones that don't I think you will find you are in the minority of one.