Should casinos that bonus ban by country/region remain accredited?

[silcnlayc]

KariRunk: And remember it's your choice if you accept these terms or not.

Ahh, but I have aleady accepted the terms and conditions of posting in this forum...you cannot change them as you see fit, just as you cannot change a bonus T&C's to fit the bill of your choosing.

.

 

[KariRunk]

Ahh, but I have aleady accepted the terms and conditions of posting in this forum...you cannot change them as you see fit, just as you cannot change a bonus T&C's to fit the bill of your choosing.

.

I wasn't changing them. I just added extra conditions. Just like casinos do with their bonus conditions.

And now you accepted the terms and conditions to post this thread. So you wanna give me that answer? Why would my terms be any less acceptable than those casinos terms? And it was clearly stated in the terms that you accept them when you post.

So T&C guy, what's your problem. You don't like the terms and conditions any more when they don't work for you?

 

[jetset]

I'm trying to see the practical point of this thread, now that it has descended into leaps of logic and the hypothetical.

For me, Max's reasoning for the implementation and acceptability of regional banning as a business protection strategy makes sense, whilst I think that silcnlayc has put forward some practical and reasonable responses regarding the prerogatives and choices of both players and operators, and has every right to resist being pushed into opinions based purely on the hypothetical.

 

[chayton]

One casino I play at has a higher WR on bonuses for Canadian players. (Thanks to jasminebed for pointing it out) Do I continue to play there? Yes.

I don't normally take deposit bonuses, but occasionally I will if the terms are clear and the wagering requirement is reasonable - but at that casino I've excluded myself from receiving bonuses.

I'm with Silc on this one - if a casino has a bonus policy against a particular country and you live in that country, you can either play without bonuses or play elsewhere.

 

[takethemoney]

Banning someone because of where they are from is just downright stupid and in a way biggoted. That's like saying all black people or asians are fraudsters, therefore we won't give them bonuses. African people are fraudsters, so let's make them play through 3 x more than everyone else has to.

How in the hell can anyone from one of the listed countries have any advantage over slots, compared to everyone else? Their odds should be the same and I don't see how it could be possible to cheat a slot machine. I really question the mental stability of some of the casino operators sometimes. Paranoia! I remember reading a story about a player that was hot on the craps table and the pit boss had done everything to cool this guy off, from distracting him, changing dealers and dice, but to no avail. Finally the boss threw some chicken bones under the table. When asked why he did this, his reply; well, it was bad luck for the chicken wasn't it?

 

[Casinomeister]

Here is one main reason which Max alluded to earlier in this thread: there are fraud groups that originate from various locations: Finland, Israel, Denmark, Malaysia, and Poland just to name a few. Some of the casinos that have been hit hard by these groups (and I'm talking fraud, not just bonus baggers/beaters) will look at a common denominator (let's say bonus) and bonus ban the entire country. That is much easier and less time consuming (read: not as costly) than auditing each and every account.

All this stuff about it being analogous to racism or ethnocentrism is a bunch of hooey. I figure most of you can see beyond that.

So you live in a country where bonus play has a 99x play through requirement, well then just move on. Or better yet - free yourself from astronomical wagering requirements and play without one. You may find it refreshing

 

[Tengil]

I personally dont have problems with higher WRs for certain countries as long as its clearly stated. Usually I use ctrl+f to check.

Post wager bonuses are good in that sense that you basically cant play any excluded games and you arent tied to any wagering requirements. Most of the Wagerworks bonuses are like this hence why you hardly see any WW complaints. So it wouldnt matter if they had an WR of 99x or similar, you arent tied to it.

BTW bet365 has 200xD+B for Finland on their standard SUB but their slots bonus has the same WR as all the other countries, that makes sense. Dont attract APs, gnomers etc. but dont scare away the recreational slot player.

 

[KariRunk]

Can anyone tell me what's the expected value for 200$ bonus with wagering requirements of 30x bonus. If you play 5$ bets with slot that has 96% RTP?

 

[KasinoKing]

Can anyone tell me what's the expected value for 200$ bonus with wagering requirements of 30x bonus. If you play 5$ bets with slot that has 96% RTP?

200 x 30 = 6000 x96% = 5760 = a loss of 240
Therefore you would lose ALL of the bonus and $40 of your own money. (i.e. the EV is -$40)
Simples!

The size of your bets is irrelevant to the theoretical return, however due to most slots being fairly high variance it can have a very significant impact on your chances of busting out way before meeting WR, or making a good profit.
In fact, variance is how I've managed to win from casinos for 5 straight years playing (almost) slots only.
(The 4 profitable years before that was mostly done with card games).

KK

 

[takethemoney]

200 x 30 = 6000 x96% = 5760 = a loss of 240
Therefore you would lose ALL of the bonus and $40 of your own money. (i.e. the EV is -$40)
Simples!

The size of your bets is irrelevant to the theoretical return, however due to most slots being fairly high variance it can have a very significant impact on your chances of busting out way before meeting WR, or making a good profit.
In fact, variance is how I've managed to win from casinos for 5 straight years playing (almost) slots only.
(The 4 profitable years before that was mostly done with card games).

KK

I find this statement intriguing. Do you have some way of knowing when the variance favors the player? So, I guess everyone complaining about the casinos being tight and losing their deposits over and over again are not properly aligned with timing of the variance?

 

[same_old]

Here is one main reason which Max alluded to earlier in this thread: there are fraud groups that originate from various locations: Finland, Israel, Denmark, Malaysia, and Poland just to name a few. Some of the casinos that have been hit hard by these groups (and I'm talking fraud, not just bonus baggers/beaters) will look at a common denominator (let's say bonus) and bonus ban the entire country. That is much easier and less time consuming (read: not as costly) than auditing each and every account.

All this stuff about it being analogous to racism or ethnocentrism is a bunch of hooey. I figure most of you can see beyond that.

So you live in a country where bonus play has a 99x play through requirement, well then just move on. Or better yet - free yourself from astronomical wagering requirements and play without one. You may find it refreshing

Bryan has well and truly summed it up,


((i)) myself have first hand experience with this, working for an online agency and the Identification department etc...

Most of them ARE from the countries Bryan says and honestly it is due to the Syndicates and how EASY fraud can be commited from these places.
It is no way a racist thing as all of the casino's will let you sign up it's just the bonus side of things is all..

It is VERY unfare I agree on the honest ones who come from those countries but unfortunately it doesnt seem to be changing anytime soon..

I think 3-Dice have the best Idea so far for the bonuses etc because they set them up in a way that they cant be abused. Some other places could really take a page out of Enzo's book.

Do you Agree with that KK?- you being the bonus man and know them all out there, Do you thin how 3dice have there set up is the way to go?.

Either a complete overhaul of the bonus system across the industry needs to change OR- Online casinos get more savvy with there software and implement more measures where your system can recognise the client signing up with multiple names etc or same Ip's.

I have to say it really is something that needs to be addressed across the board though with all platforms as you are all usffering the same crap.

 

[winbig]

And think about it.......with all the stuff that's been going on for years, would you ever do business with anyone that is located in Nigeria?

I sure wouldn't. But, does that make all Nigerian's bad? Of course not. But would you take that chance?

 

[zap987]

Can anyone tell me what's the expected value for 200$ bonus with wagering requirements of 30x bonus. If you play 5$ bets with slot that has 96% RTP?

The expected value depends on the variance of the slot. If you play $5 bets on a very high variance slot with that bonus the expected value is very high.

Lets say you take this bonus 10 times and that it's a 100% match on a $200 deposit. The first 9 times you lose and wager on average $1000. The 10th time you hit big and have to complete the $6000 wagering requirement before cashing out. In total you have wagered $15000 which at 96% RTP gives the casino $600 back from the $2000 in bonus money so the EV of the bonus would be $140.

What changes the EV is how often you need to meet the full WR and how fast you can bust out when losing. If you play a very low variance slot at low bets then you will most likely end up with a negative expected value. Kasinokings way of calculating the EV only applies if you ALWAYS meet the WR, which won't happen on slots.

 

[KasinoKing]

I find this statement intriguing. Do you have some way of knowing when the variance favors the player? So, I guess everyone complaining about the casinos being tight and losing their deposits over and over again are not properly aligned with timing of the variance?

Zap's post above explains it much better than I could!

To be honest, I didn't know WHY I was winning so consistently until people like Zap and Enzo explained it to me. Even now I have a little bit of trouble getting my head around it, but it obviously works so I'm happy to believe them!

Basically what they're saying is you shouldn't look at the EV of just one individual bonus, but at the combined EV of multiple bonuses.

KK

 

[takethemoney]

Zap's post above explains it much better than I could!

To be honest, I didn't know WHY I was winning so consistently until people like Zap and Enzo explained it to me. Even now I have a little bit of trouble getting my head around it, but it obviously works so I'm happy to believe them!

Basically what they're saying is you shouldn't look at the EV of just one individual bonus, but at the combined EV of multiple bonuses.

KK

Ok, well that kind of explains why. I usually shoot my wad on one deposit, then can't deposit again for another couple weeks. I normally make one or two deposits per month, going with the biggest bonus / lowest WR & max cashout I can find. I'm 96 deposits in without a cashout and I play mostly slots. I've only hit the WR about 30% of the time, but normally end up with a small scared balance that does not get above initial bonus, which I will play until I bust out. In the end I find I'm just making tiny bets trying to stay in action, just in case I get a good hit and can play at a higher level. Typical deposit for me is 200-300. I don't know how many times I can get ahead well until I get close to the WR, then bam, the thing kicks my butt.

 

[slafs]

@Takethemoney:

The solution is simple - keep your bet size but make smaller deposits. Calculate the wagering requirements on a $25 deposit vs a $200 deposit and you'll see it makes sense.

The chance of hitting something should be the same on a $200 deposit and 8 x $25 deposit, although the bonuses attached may vary when depositing 8 times instead of 1. However, when/if you hit you only have to finish the wagering for the current $25, not the full $200.

It has always made sense to me at least!