vinylweatherman
You type well loads
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2004
- Location
- United Kingdom
I've been out of town for about the past two weeks, so this was not on my radar.
A couple of things here:
heador112 - your PAB options have been used up, so you are SOL. You have three (unsuccessful) PABs with non-accredited casinos. I'm not making an exception in this case.
Besides, you should have known better. You are well-versed in advantage play and you are aware that most of the Rival casino bonus ban players. Why you were a player there, I haven't a clue. But you should have been more discreet in your choice of activity and/or casino.
As for the casino, this sort of "abuse" labeling went out of style a few years ago. This player should have never been offered a bonus (sorry heador112), using subjective language in one's terms and conditions is frowned upon, and enforcing these subjective terms are a no-go. Players want to win, and if they do whatever without committing fraud or breaking specific terms, then they should be paid.
Please read the Casinomeister Philosophy on "Dealing with Players" here:
https://www.casinomeister.com/about-us/philosophy/
It will probably help.
On another note - watch the flaming. There have been a number of unnecessary comments made in this thread which are really uncool. You should know better than to throw insults around here. Thank you.
This is the big issue. We all know about this Rival ratings system, and the casino ADMITTED that this player was a "well known bonus abuser", so what happened CANNOT have been an accident, it must have been a DELIBERATE act by the casino to "knock back" the normal action of the Rival ratings system on his account in order to make bonuses available to him. The casino did this, yet at the time had ALREADY made the decision that this player would not get paid if ever he won with his playing style. Rather than banning him from bonuses, they chanced their luck that he would keep losing & never find out that he was destined to have winnings confiscated. This is rigue practice, no different from the rogue player who deposits, having already decided that he will "charge back" that deposit should the casino win regardless of whatever experience his time with the casino gives him.
The CEO of Rival made some promises about "cleaning up" Rival's image, but things just get worse.
These white label casinos should go back to being "not recommended" BECAUSE of the way they are "jerking around" some players rather than doing what they ought straight away. In the OPs case, he should have been bonus banned at ALL Rival properties the instant Rival "knew" he was this "prolific bonus abuser" on the system.
Just because they are happy to give the OP (and others similar) his deposit back after winning "abusively" makes no difference to the fact that they would have been happy to keep all the LOSING deposits that never had a chance of being won from.
Even playing SLOTS is no longer a safe thing to do for players now, I NEVER thought I would see the day when following my earlier advice to "play only slots" with a welcome bonus to avoid the pitfalls of being accused of "abuse" would no longer keep players safe.
It seems it is now the case that the player wins, and THEN his play is analysed to see if they can conjure up an argument for non payment.
In particular:-
BOLD = Bollocks
This bit is their downfall. There is ABSOLUTELY NO "mathematically certain" proof that this final flurry of 20 maximum bet spins AFTER COMPLETING WR would have any more probability of success than had the player withdrawn as soon as meeting WR, redeposited an amount equal to 20 max bet spins, and made said spins.
In fact, this strategy is LESS likely to yield the maximum gain. The BEST strategy would have been to withdraw as soon as possible, then find ANOTHER bonus, and deposit, say 10x max bet, receive a bonus of 10x max bet, and make 20 max bet spins WITH the benefit of the new bonus kicking in after 10 bad spins.
What next from Rival. "abuse" from a player that didn't even TAKE a bonus simply because his bets on his deposit were "all over the place" in an attempt to trick the slot into paying more.
We should check to see if the OP is STILL being lured to Rival casinos with large bonus offers, despite the system having him down as this "legendary" bonus abuser, since we KNOW that the most likely outcome is that he will NOT get paid should he win.
It is no good telling the OP that "he should know better", since he DOES "know better", but the casinos make the rules up as they go along, so that whatever changes the OP makes to accommodate them, they will simply decide that ANY playing style that results in him "winning too much" is "abusive".
We have been here before, with players having these problems being told that if they want to avoid them, they should steer clear of table games and roulette with their welcome bonus, even if the terms allow them, and play the slots instead. Before this, we said keep the bets on roulette and tables low compared to the starting balance to avoid the common pitfall of making a big bet "with the deposit and majority of the bonus balance" which can lead to problems.
On another forum, Rival affiliates are angry that they simply cannot attract decent levels of traffic to the Rival white label brands no matter how hard they work.
I wonder why
