I think Nicolas has been both fair and reasonable in his comments. It's entirely up to them as to who they offer bonus to.
There is really no need to take it personally if they make a business decision against you.
Can't believe this thread has run to seven pages
. A case of 'move on, nothing to see here' if ever I saw one.
Unfortunately people DO, because it IS a decision taken about YOU, and not a decision made generally about "all customers".
You WILL take offence when you are branded as an "unwanted customer" by a business, and have absolutely NO idea what made YOU so very "special" in this respect.
Others watching from the sidelines think "WTF are they smokin' in the boadroom, this makes no sense at all".
This is further compounded by the sheer SECRECY of the reasoning behind such decisions, there is NO "appeal", and no "right to understand".
The customer in this sense cannot get "closure", even though they may have decided they will never be a customer there again. It is this human need for "closure" that causes threads like this to run on, even though nothing will change as a result.
The same issues affect offline life, you can be refused entry to a club or bar simply because the landlord "doesn't like the look of you". This causes ill feeling because it can affect that person's life, for example - not being able to go with friends to that venue, which in turn negatively affects how they are seen by others.
Annie has a similar problem. She can't get into the "club", so therefore can no longer "socialise" with others who still have full access. The others, whatever they may say, or whatever they are told, are always going to be thinking "what has Annie done?". If the decision has been FAIR, it HAS been based on something "Annie has done", and it has been something that only a small minority of players "do".
Annie has TOLD us what she has done, but commercial secrecy prevents the casino giving THEIR side, which in turn suggests there IS something more to this issue, and something that customers CANNOT know, or the casino "could go out of business".
The only logical deduction is that Annie has a "system", and it WORKS!, and works MATHEMATICALLY in the long term, even if not demonstrated in the SHORT term.
This goes against the idea that "the house always wins", and that those that peddle the various "systems" are nothing more than "snake oil salesmen".
There MUST be "systems" out there that WORK, and these are known to the casinos who look for the patterns, and thus ARE prepared to make such decisions based on relatively small sample sizes because they cannot take the risk that they really HAVE seen a "system" in play, thus CANNOT allow things to continue long enough for a more reliable sample can offer proof that it IS a "system player", rather than a fluke.