This is what happens when you win too many times!

[winbig]

So if your not paying attention to your balance you will miss it for a while?

Sometimes I have a set amount I want to spend on one slot, so I don't look at the balance too often because I can tell how fast that set amount will go.

I would think some kind of "woohoo" would go off, or should go off.

There's an option in autoplay where you can have it stop automatically on a jackpot win....I'm sure that it covers RJ's as well as hitting 5oak on the highest paying symbol...

You can also set it up so that if your balance increases by $xxxx, it'll stop autoplay, too. You could set this to $1,000 and I doubt that it'll trigger unless you hit a RJ....unless, of course, you're playing at $10+ a spin

 

[just play]

There's an option in autoplay where you can have it stop automatically on a jackpot win....I'm sure that it covers RJ's as well as hitting 5oak on the highest paying symbol...

You can also set it up so that if your balance increases by $xxxx, it'll stop autoplay, too. You could set this to $1,000 and I doubt that it'll trigger unless you hit a RJ....unless, of course, you're playing at $10+ a spin

I don't use autoplay that much...I like clicking the mouse.

Comment to casinos....add in a "woohoo" or something when random jackpot is hit.

 

[blacklabrador]

I don't use autoplay that much...I like clicking the mouse.

Comment to casinos....add in a "woohoo" or something when random jackpot is hit.

A woohoo??? lol, I want to see fireworks! The sea parting! Explosions! My screen melting! Anything but just my balance changing, although that is nice too

 

[all4greed]

I've only hit a RJ once, but I think something was flashing after the fireworks - maybe the random jackpot box or the win box.

 

[anniemac]

@blacklabrador, separate screen pops up and fireworks goes off.

Ok, Nicolas. Guess I didn't make my self clear. So I will start over.

Yes, Dean told me that I couldn't take any promos over 400%. Yes, I went to chat to ask what was available. Yes, Sam just told me to go to the promo page. Guess this is where the break down is. There was nothing there available that would fit what I had been told. So anyway, I picked out one I thought I would try, went to the redeem coupon page and saw the message I posted. So what would you have liked for me to do? Go back to CS? He didn't have anything to help me with in the first place.

I have never posted one untruth about what happened with my account during the 3 withdrawals I made. I have never posted one untruth about what I was told by you, your CS, or Dean. I have never threatened to post here or anywhere else about anything.

Your casino has labeled me a negative value player and I am suppose to make nice and not take that as a slap in the face.

You want to make Bet Phoenix better. Then the first thing is to keep the lines of communication open. With the exception of you, not one person answered an email that I sent. I have emailed Payouts many times and not one answer. Don't change requested payouts methods just because it's unhandy to send a withdrawal the way it was requested. Don't change terms and conditions on withdrawals in mid-stream. Don't return the player's withdrawal to their account without some kind of notification. Don't keep a player's account tied up after a withdrawal by not removing the overage. But above all, if you are going to cap withdrawals on bonuses, then pay the player quicker. After having been paid once while on the phone with Dean, I know it can be done without all the hoopla.

You wanted to know what I had a problem with, well you now know. Each thing I posted happened to me during my 3 withdrawals. I don't post innuendos, I post facts with backup. I didn't want to get into all this with you but you seem to want to call me out on it.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Apart from the debate about CS and what they did, or didn't, say. I am to understand that a RELIABLE calculation of whether a player is a "negative value player" can be done from a small sample of 10 deposits and 3 withdrawals. Given that the 3 withdrawals included some amazing LUCK (2 RJs), I can only conclude that the RJ wins contributed to the decision. This should NOT be the case, since they operate on a "random draw" basis, with each spin buying a chance of winning based on the amount staked.

It seems this determination of "negative value" is anything BUT transparent. It seems almost random, with obvious "advantage players" escaping bonus bans, and genuine recreational players getting bonus banned soon after they start playing.

I can't see how an accurate prediction of the value of a SLOTS PLAYER can be calculated from such a small sample of play (10 deposits, 3 withdrawals, 2 RJs). This sample is simply too small to calculate a reliable statistic.

When players argue that a slot "isn't random", or is "set to 50%", they are told they need MILLIONS of spins to create a reliable statistic to back up the allegation. This does NOT seem to apply when casinos make calculations of the long term value of players.

What would help in understanding the concept is knowing what other factors come into play.

For example, are players penalized because they use a particularly expensive deposit method, and deposit only small amounts each time.

Whenever this kind of thing is discussed, we only look at the VISIBLE factors, such as the amount deposited, amount withdrawn, and overall win.

annie does not seem to show the kind of statistic that would place her in that "small minority of players" that are deemed to be negative value to a casino. She is ahead by ONLY $1000, not at all an unusual short term result given the variance of slots.

It really does seem that she has been "picked on" for some other reason, as I can't believe that other players are slapped with bonus bans for this kind of short term positive result.

When it comes to PR, these cases cause problems for a casino because other players think that they too will get bonus banned simply for having similar short term figures. I for one would NOT join a casino if I knew that getting $1000 ahead off 10 deposits would be enough to have me restricted from many of the best offers there.

annie could easily have NOT won 2 RJs this early, and continued depositing and losing money to the casino. She may well not have managed to make 2 of these 3 withdrawals.

What are her stats if the very lucky RJ wins are stripped out? Would these figures also have triggered "negative value player" status.

I have experience of casinos that DO ban winning players from bonuses, even LOW bonuses, so this is not unique to BP.

Roxy Palace banned me from the weekly 30% reloads. I was ahead by £5000, and played mostly SLOTS with the bonuses. It seems they simply had a target of about £5000 ahead that got a player bonus banned, hardly a proper determination of long term value.

My own philosophy is to play at casinos I have LOST at more than those where I have WON. The basis for this is my experience that LOSING players get better offers for their loyalty than winning ones, therefore I stand more chance of winning back some of the losses where I have lost, than of winning more where I have won where there is a risk of an imminent bonus ban, or other removal of benefit.

Unfortunately, players have been lead to believe that in order to get restricted in some way, they have been doing something wrong. When a player gets told they are bonus banned, they take it as an accusation that they have done something they were not supposed to, such as "advantage play". Since they feel unjustly slighted, and cannot get a rational explanation from the casino other than "management decision", they feel the need to "prove their innocence".

It seems that annie feels she has transgressed some rule, crossed the line between recreational player and "bonus abuser", but is damn sure she has NOT, so believes this is all about her winning those RJs and having the cheek to withdraw, rather than giving it all back. This may not be good for the casino, BUT withdrawing from a decent win, rather than getting carried away and giving it back is known as RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING, which is NOT something players should be PUNISHED for by being downgraded.

 

[just play]

A woohoo??? lol, I want to see fireworks! The sea parting! Explosions! My screen melting! Anything but just my balance changing, although that is nice too

How about a hand that pops out of your computer and smacks you in the head saying... "No your not dreaming, you just hit a RJ".

 

[NicolasJohnson]

@blacklabrador, separate screen pops up and fireworks goes off.

Ok, Nicolas. Guess I didn't make my self clear. So I will start over.

Yes, Dean told me that I couldn't take any promos over 400%. Yes, I went to chat to ask what was available. Yes, Sam just told me to go to the promo page. Guess this is where the break down is. There was nothing there available that would fit what I had been told. So anyway, I picked out one I thought I would try, went to the redeem coupon page and saw the message I posted. So what would you have liked for me to do? Go back to CS?

Maybe contact us? After you got that screen, first thing you did was come straight here and post it. As you have admitted, I've taken care of you, why not just contact me, I'm sure you know I would have made things right.

I don't mind constructive criticism, and you know that I will listen to you in private, so why make things public without even contacting us once?

I have never posted one untruth about what happened with my account during the 3 withdrawals I made. I have never posted one untruth about what I was told by you, your CS, or Dean.

Totally true, but as my dad always says, it isn't only what you say, but how you say it, when you say it and why you say it. You made this thread in such a way that you knew your friends (as I can see they are your friends in your profile) would come in here and start to make exaggerated allegations/innuendos based on your posts. You may not have done it intentionally, but this is the result. That is why I want to know what your intention of starting this thread was, and why didn't you even contact us first?

Your casino has labeled me a negative value player and I am suppose to make nice and not take that as a slap in the face.

It is your prerogative to take that as an offense. I'd personally take it as a compliment

You want to make Bet Phoenix better. Then the first thing is to keep the lines of communication open.

What are you talking about? You act like we don't reply.

With the exception of you, not one person answered an email that I sent.

Are you sure of this statement. You never got a reply from us? Then how come you continued to play after each withdrawal and each deposit?

Don't change requested payouts methods just because it's unhandy to send a withdrawal the way it was requested.

US payouts are not that simple. We work hard at providing a good service, sometimes we may ask a player if they want a payout via another method to get it to them faster. But we ask. You make it sound like we changed payout methods without your consent.

Don't change terms and conditions on withdrawals in mid-stream.

Which one of our terms and conditions did we change on a withdrawal mid-stream?

Don't return the player's withdrawal to their account without some kind of notification.

This has been changed, I apologize for this one.

Don't keep a player's account tied up after a withdrawal by not removing the overage.

Did you request a flush?

But above all, if you are going to cap withdrawals on bonuses, then pay the player quicker.

I've said we will be changing this. However we were clear about payout time, you knew it and accepted it, and furthermore it seemed you didn't mind the payout time, as you only started voicing your complaint AFTER we bonus restricted you.

You wanted to know what I had a problem with, well you now know. Each thing I posted happened to me during my 3 withdrawals. I don't post innuendos, I post facts with backup. I didn't want to get into all this with you but you seem to want to call me out on it.

I did not want to have this conversation in public, you were the one who chose to do so. This is your thread.

Apart from the debate about CS and what they did, or didn't, say. I am to understand that a RELIABLE calculation of whether a player is a "negative value player" can be done from a small sample of 10 deposits and 3 withdrawals. Given that the 3 withdrawals included some amazing LUCK (2 RJs), I can only conclude that the RJ wins contributed to the decision. This should NOT be the case, since they operate on a "random draw" basis, with each spin buying a chance of winning based on the amount staked.

It seems this determination of "negative value" is anything BUT transparent.

No security procedure is 'transparent'. We operate in a transparent way... but just like a bank, we can operate in a transparent way without having to publish the code to our safe. If a fault was made, we allow a trustworthy 3rd party like CasinoMeister to mediate and get access to the confidential information that allows us to stay in business. We aren't going to publish it on a public forum, to expect that is simply unreasonable. No casino will do that.

It seems almost random, with obvious "advantage players" escaping bonus bans, and genuine recreational players getting bonus banned soon after they start playing.

To you it may seem random, but it is anything but. However, you are right, it is not perfect. Still, we can't operate without it and it is very accurate, our margin of error is very, very small.

I can't see how an accurate prediction of the value of a SLOTS PLAYER can be calculated from such a small sample of play (10 deposits, 3 withdrawals, 2 RJs). This sample is simply too small to calculate a reliable statistic.

There is a lot more to it than deposits and withdrawals.

When players argue that a slot "isn't random", or is "set to 50%", they are told they need MILLIONS of spins to create a reliable statistic to back up the allegation. This does NOT seem to apply when casinos make calculations of the long term value of players.

You are assuming we simply look at deposits-cashouts. Not so.

What would help in understanding the concept is knowing what other factors come into play.

No can do, any casino that gives this info will go out of business fast.

annie does not seem to show the kind of statistic that would place her in that "small minority of players" that are deemed to be negative value to a casino. She is ahead by ONLY $1000, not at all an unusual short term result given the variance of slots.

Again, you are assuming there are few variables that are used.

It really does seem that she has been "picked on" for some other reason, as I can't believe that other players are slapped with bonus bans for this kind of short term positive result.

Picked on? Because we restricted anniemac to bonuses under 400%? Tell me which honest casinos even offer above 400% reload? I don't see them getting dragged through the mud because they aren't giving bonuses above 400%.

When it comes to PR, these cases cause problems for a casino because other players think that they too will get bonus banned simply for having similar short term figures.

By that logic all players don't sign up at any casino: every casino will bonus ban certain players. It is part of the business. This is the second time someone in this thread is seeming to implying that we should have simply let anniemac take large bonuses in fear of the player posting this thread. This will not work, we cannot allow players to strong arm us through forums. We will work with a player, we want to deliver satisfaction; but someone being part of a forum will never influence our decisions. To me, honestly, that would be unethical.

I for one would NOT join a casino if I knew that getting $1000 ahead off 10 deposits would be enough to have me restricted from many of the best offers there.

If you choose to believe that was why anniemac was bonus restricted, then you are free to your opinion.

annie could easily have NOT won 2 RJs this early, and continued depositing and losing money to the casino. She may well not have managed to make 2 of these 3 withdrawals.

What are her stats if the very lucky RJ wins are stripped out? Would these figures also have triggered "negative value player" status.

I'm sorry, but I can't discuss who we calculate what you are asking. But the fact that we bonus ban a very small percentage of our players, tells me that this isn't something your average player has to worry about.

I have experience of casinos that DO ban winning players from bonuses, even LOW bonuses, so this is not unique to BP.

Roxy Palace banned me from the weekly 30% reloads. I was ahead by £5000, and played mostly SLOTS with the bonuses. It seems they simply had a target of about £5000 ahead that got a player bonus banned, hardly a proper determination of long term value.

I can't speak for other casinos.

My own philosophy is to play at casinos I have LOST at more than those where I have WON. The basis for this is my experience that LOSING players get better offers for their loyalty than winning ones, therefore I stand more chance of winning back some of the losses where I have lost, than of winning more where I have won where there is a risk of an imminent bonus ban, or other removal of benefit.

Unfortunately, players have been lead to believe that in order to get restricted in some way, they have been doing something wrong. When a player gets told they are bonus banned, they take it as an accusation that they have done something they were not supposed to, such as "advantage play". Since they feel unjustly slighted

Unjustly slighted? That logic is based off the belief that players are entitled to something free.

If a player in a land based casino is told he/she can't get a comp room, they don't go to the casino floor telling all other players that 'this is what happens when you win'.

, and cannot get a rational explanation from the casino other than "management decision", they feel the need to "prove their innocence".

Funny you say that, Anniemac didn't contact me about this. Also, 'proved their innocence', makes it sound like we were the ones who published the bonus restrictions, when in reality it was the other way around. I'm the one here trying to prove OUR innocence.

It seems that annie feels she has transgressed some rule, crossed the line between recreational player and "bonus abuser", but is damn sure she has NOT, so believes this is all about her winning those RJs and having the cheek to withdraw, rather than giving it all back. This may not be good for the casino, BUT withdrawing from a decent win, rather than getting carried away and giving it back is known as RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING, which is NOT something players should be PUNISHED for by being downgraded.

No one is punishing anyone for responsible gambling. And just to put what you said in context 'punishment'= no bonuses ABOVE 400%. How many honest casinos even offer that kind of a reload?

Kind Regards,
Nicolas Johnson
Bet Phoenix Casino Affiliates Manager

 

[zap987]

There are like a million threads on this forum discussing bonuses and if anyone had actually read them you would understand that the actual results of play and withdrawals don't matter at all for a smart casino.

If anything it's the game choice and betsize that determines the value of a player for the casino but there hasn't even been any mention of that so far.

 

[takethemoney]

There are like a million threads on this forum discussing bonuses and if anyone had actually read them you would understand that the actual results of play and withdrawals don't matter at all for a smart casino.

If anything it's the game choice and betsize that determines the value of a player for the casino but there hasn't even been any mention of that so far.

Patterns of play also. I can tell you I know someone close to me who IS bonus banned because they would take large bonuses, then go to some game like Mystic Dragon or Real of Riches, as example, which both have stacked wilds during bonus games. The person would play only 2-3 lines, but with a large line bet. He caught too many good sessions this way and got told not only that he would get no more bonuse. He was shown the door and got a "we no longer want your business" letter in the end. I'm not going to say the casino, but it was not BetPhoenix. So I'm sure the casino watches the type of play and has a matrix for determining riskier than normal play. If you think about it, if you owned a casino, it would be foolish not to care how the play is being done.

 

[RedAndi]

Unjustly slighted? That logic is based off the belief that players are entitled to something free.

If a player in a land based casino is told he/she can't get a comp room, they don't go to the casino floor telling all other players that 'this is what happens when you win'.

The major difference is almost 99 percent of the time a land based casino would be falling all over themselves to offer ANYTHING to keep a winning player around, in order to have a chance of getting that money back.

It seems like a lot, and I mean a LOT, of onlines lately have been doing just the opposite. It makes no sense to me how these things are dealt with, winners should be ass kissed to death not shoved out the door.
I get that onlines have to be more careful than a B & M because of fraud issues, but it just seems like the majority have no clue when it comes to dealing with customers....that's right CUSTOMERS. Honestly it seems like they forget that they are trying to retain business.
(Nick J., I am not referring to yourself & BP and this situation, this is just an "in general").

 

[anniemac]

I will address your last post one point at a time, Nicolas.

1. Why didn't I contact anyone after I say the error message? Why? Looked perfectly clear to me that I could no longer claim any bonuses. Should I have contacted you after Dean Carter, casino manager, had already decided what would happen to my account?

2. It is my right as a member of this forum to post whatever I want to as long as what I post conforms to the posting rules here. Just because you don't like my 'tone' doesn't mean it's not true or that I can't post it. I don't like your 'tone' either. I don't control what my 'friends' here post on this forum or anywhere else. Nor do I need anyone to take my side on anything. I am a big girl and have been taking care of myself for a very long time. I assume that the people here are all grownups too and don't need me to lead them around.

3. Sorry but I do take being called a negative value player as an insult, not a compliment.

4. I can absolutely say without a doubt that with the exception of the telephone call I received from Dean Carter, that the only time I ever received a reply to an email was when I emailed you. Matter of fact, I even had CS change my email addy to gmail so that I would make sure and get emails.

5. I called on day 5 of my second withdrawal, which I had requested to be sent by Western Union after 2 rather extensive chats with CS and 2 emails sent to Payouts which were not answered, and talked to Dean Carter. I just wanted information about when to expect payment as well as other pertinent details. He told me that if I would change my withdrawal method to Quicktender, he would pay me right then. I had already waited 5 days for payment, was I suppose to tell him no? He told me that sending payouts by Western Union was too much trouble for him since he had to actually go do it.

6. My third request for withdrawal I asked for it to be sent Moneygram after another conversation with your CS. The reasoning behind this and I discussed this at length was to get money in hand quicker. There is nothing that says a player can't request Moneygram or Western union. Checked on my withdrawal the next day and it had been returned to my account. I called Dean and was told that I couldn't use either one of the above. That they were only for people that had deposited that way. So I had to change my withdrawal again. Why wasn't I informed of this when I requested Western Union for the second withdrawal? Changing terms and conditions in mid stream.

7. I requested a flush each and every time I made a withdrawal and was told that it was not possible. I have a screenshot of my 8/13 withdrawal for $750showing a balance of $784.39 which was the left over after my withdrawal. It sat in my balance until the day I was paid. At most RTG's, when you made a withdrawal the balance above the max withdrawal disappears, which is what your terms say.

Now the last couple of things, why did I bring it out in the open? Because you seemed to really want to make me look like the bad guy in this and I value my reputation here and I will not be made to look like a liar about anything.

Why did I keep on playing at Bet Phoenix? Truth be told, I could deposit a small amount and get a big bonus, get lots of playtime if I played small and have a good time. Never in my wildest dreams did I figure to make playthru on any bonus I took, let alone hit 2 random jackpots.

Now, I am going to put this to bed. You don't like what I said, I don't like what you said. Fair enough. It is not up to me to make Bet Phoenix a better casino, it is up to you. As a gesture of good will, close my account. That way you won't have to ever deal with me again and vice versa.

 

[takethemoney]

This is a lose / lose situation for everyone here. Nick has done his best to be professional and offer his assistance here and no matter what he says it appears that Anniemac is going to remain angry, to the point of no reconcilliation. This thread is going nowhere further and hopefully Simmo or Max realize that and just lock it up. It is what it is......caveat emptor.
There are lots worse casinos out there folks and these people in this thread are only human. It's not like there is any bad intent in either party.

 

[love2winalot]

Hiya: I look at it like this. If a player is getting Bonus offers, and he does the Math, certain Bonus offers can be, 'Positive exception", for the player. Thus, the term, "Bonus bagger". This applies to On Line casinos.

If a player is at the right table, with the right rules, and can count cards, then BJ can be a, "Positive exception", game for the player. This applies to B&M Casino's.

If a B&M Pit Boss, "Even Thinks", you are counting cards, and you are Winning, they are not going to wait for you to lose, so they can get their money back, they will just cut their losses and show you the door. They do not have to, PROVE anything.

So, a On Line Casino has the right, and they do exersise that right, that if they think you are a "Bonus Bagger", Why should they just keep offering you more Bonus Money when you have already shown that you are beating their Bonus system more often than not? Cutting Losses, and showing someone the door is sometimes the only option.

Is it always right, or fair? NO. Does a player who was NOT card counting, or Bonus Bagging sometimes get accused of it? Yes. If you are going to raise bets up & down at a BJ table, at some point in time you will get accused of card counting. If you take bonus after bonus, even with deposits, at some point in time you will be accused of being a Bonus bagger.

Thus, I hardly ever play BJ at a B&M casino, and I never take a Bonus at a On Line casino. issue solved................

 

[NicolasJohnson]

First:

Dean told me over the phone that I wouldn't be able to take more than a 400% bonus anymore

Then:

Actually a 400% bonus is pretty damn decent considering the wagering at BP is usually between 30-35x.

Take a look at Rival bonuses. You know, the ones that want 35-70x wagering for a 300% on up bonus, plus other crazy terms (must cashout 2x bonus minimum), etc.

I don't see what the big deal is about this...

After that:

Looked perfectly clear to me that I could no longer claim any bonuses. Should I have contacted you after Dean Carter, casino manager, had already decided

Now I'm not sure what this is about. What did Dean decide?

What is the purpose of this thread? I'm trying to figure out what we have done that is so wrong. It is my job to make sure we don't do wrong. I want to take care of what made you upset, even if you don't decide to continue with us. We want to constantly improve.

4. I can absolutely say without a doubt that with the exception of the telephone call I received from Dean Carter, that the only time I ever received a reply to an email was when I emailed you. Matter of fact, I even had CS change my email addy to gmail so that I would make sure and get emails.

We explained to you to change emails to so that you can get our emails. We answered all your chats and calls and explained to you why you weren't getting our emails. If we answer chats and phone calls, why not believe that we also answer emails? Especially after we explained why you weren't getting them.

Now the last couple of things, why did I bring it out in the open? Because you seemed to really want to make me look like the bad guy in this and I value my reputation here and I will not be made to look like a liar about anything.

So you originally posted this thread because I'm making you look bad in this thread? I apologize for that, it isn't my intention. But I'm not sure I follow the logic. I must be miss understading? Please be patient with me and explain, I'd really like to know what we have done to get you so upset? If you wish to follow this in private, I'd be glad to.

As a gesture of good will, close my account.

Your wish is our command.

Kind Regards,
Nicolas Johnson
Bet Phoenix Casino Affiliates Manager

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Hiya: I look at it like this. If a player is getting Bonus offers, and he does the Math, certain Bonus offers can be, 'Positive exception", for the player. Thus, the term, "Bonus bagger". This applies to On Line casinos.

If a B&M Pit Boss, "Even Thinks", you are counting cards, and you are Winning, they are not going to wait for you to lose, so they can get their money back, they will just cut their losses and show you the door. They do not have to, PROVE anything.

Wrong, come on, opinions are one thing but to keep posting myth(s) as fact(s) should stop! Google Ken Uston. Then Research Bob Nersesian.

 

[takethemoney]

Nicolas,
I thought you were going to take some time off this weekend?!?! It sure doesn't appear, from this thread, that you took much time out. Please get rest and don't become another crabby, tired, casino manager.

 

[love2winalot]

Confessions of a card counter
By Jeff Haney

Sunday, March 23, 2008 | 2 a.m.

Sony Pictures' 21
In Today's Sun
■Must be ‘21’ to entertain this idea
Sun Archives
■Card counting with two MIT’s alumni who beat Vegas (10-30-2006)
■Card counters and the surreality of the professional blackjack player (10-31-2005)
Beyond the Sun
■LA Times: Card Counting in LV casinos
■Vegas Tripping: card counting
I don’t know how many times I’ve been banned from playing blackjack in casinos.

In the parlance of the game, I’ve “lost the count.”



Why don't you Google Card Counting, and Casino Banning?

 

[jod5413]

Apart from the debate about CS and what they did, or didn't, say. I am to understand that a RELIABLE calculation of whether a player is a "negative value player" can be done from a small sample of 10 deposits and 3 withdrawals. Given that the 3 withdrawals included some amazing LUCK (2 RJs), I can only conclude that the RJ wins contributed to the decision. This should NOT be the case, since they operate on a "random draw" basis, with each spin buying a chance of winning based on the amount staked.

It seems this determination of "negative value" is anything BUT transparent. It seems almost random, with obvious "advantage players" escaping bonus bans, and genuine recreational players getting bonus banned soon after they start playing.

I can't see how an accurate prediction of the value of a SLOTS PLAYER can be calculated from such a small sample of play (10 deposits, 3 withdrawals, 2 RJs). This sample is simply too small to calculate a reliable statistic.

When players argue that a slot "isn't random", or is "set to 50%", they are told they need MILLIONS of spins to create a reliable statistic to back up the allegation. This does NOT seem to apply when casinos make calculations of the long term value of players.

What would help in understanding the concept is knowing what other factors come into play.

For example, are players penalized because they use a particularly expensive deposit method, and deposit only small amounts each time.

Whenever this kind of thing is discussed, we only look at the VISIBLE factors, such as the amount deposited, amount withdrawn, and overall win.

annie does not seem to show the kind of statistic that would place her in that "small minority of players" that are deemed to be negative value to a casino. She is ahead by ONLY $1000, not at all an unusual short term result given the variance of slots.

It really does seem that she has been "picked on" for some other reason, as I can't believe that other players are slapped with bonus bans for this kind of short term positive result.

When it comes to PR, these cases cause problems for a casino because other players think that they too will get bonus banned simply for having similar short term figures. I for one would NOT join a casino if I knew that getting $1000 ahead off 10 deposits would be enough to have me restricted from many of the best offers there.

annie could easily have NOT won 2 RJs this early, and continued depositing and losing money to the casino. She may well not have managed to make 2 of these 3 withdrawals.

What are her stats if the very lucky RJ wins are stripped out? Would these figures also have triggered "negative value player" status.

I have experience of casinos that DO ban winning players from bonuses, even LOW bonuses, so this is not unique to BP.

Roxy Palace banned me from the weekly 30% reloads. I was ahead by £5000, and played mostly SLOTS with the bonuses. It seems they simply had a target of about £5000 ahead that got a player bonus banned, hardly a proper determination of long term value.

My own philosophy is to play at casinos I have LOST at more than those where I have WON. The basis for this is my experience that LOSING players get better offers for their loyalty than winning ones, therefore I stand more chance of winning back some of the losses where I have lost, than of winning more where I have won where there is a risk of an imminent bonus ban, or other removal of benefit.

Unfortunately, players have been lead to believe that in order to get restricted in some way, they have been doing something wrong. When a player gets told they are bonus banned, they take it as an accusation that they have done something they were not supposed to, such as "advantage play". Since they feel unjustly slighted, and cannot get a rational explanation from the casino other than "management decision", they feel the need to "prove their innocence".

It seems that annie feels she has transgressed some rule, crossed the line between recreational player and "bonus abuser", but is damn sure she has NOT, so believes this is all about her winning those RJs and having the cheek to withdraw, rather than giving it all back. This may not be good for the casino, BUT withdrawing from a decent win, rather than getting carried away and giving it back is known as RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING, which is NOT something players should be PUNISHED for by being downgraded.

Excellent post, Vinyl.

What I find humorous is the fact that Nicolas doesn't seem to want to let go of this issue between his casino and Anniemac. He seems offended that his "reputation" might be sullied by this garbage about Annie being a "negative value player". Like you, I do not believe it is possible to make a judgment about Annie on such a short time frame and with such limited deposits and withdrawals.

Nicolas, you seem to be protesting and going on and on to what purpose I can't fathom. Annie is well respected here, she is not known to be a volatile poster and does not complain often. The harder you keep trying to make her look bad and you look like a concerned and caring manager, the more you look like a shill, in my opinion.

I do not know who your employee Dean is. Could he be an old buddy of yours back when you worked for Gambling Wages, or was it Virtual, I can not remember? Just curious.

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Confessions of a card counter
By Jeff Haney

Sunday, March 23, 2008 | 2 a.m.

Sony Pictures' 21
In Today's Sun
■Must be ‘21’ to entertain this idea
Sun Archives
■Card counting with two MIT’s alumni who beat Vegas (10-30-2006)
■Card counters and the surreality of the professional blackjack player (10-31-2005)
Beyond the Sun
■LA Times: Card Counting in LV casinos
■Vegas Tripping: card counting
I don’t know how many times I’ve been banned from playing blackjack in casinos.

In the parlance of the game, I’ve “lost the count.”



Why don't you Google Card Counting, and Casino Banning?

Try Again.......gave you some hints!!

 

[all4greed]

This is a lose / lose situation for everyone here. Nick has done his best to be professional and offer his assistance here and no matter what he says it appears that Anniemac is going to remain angry, to the point of no reconcilliation. This thread is going nowhere further and hopefully Simmo or Max realize that and just lock it up. It is what it is......caveat emptor.
There are lots worse casinos out there folks and these people in this thread are only human. It's not like there is any bad intent in either party.

I agree.

 

[NicolasJohnson]

Nicolas,
I thought you were going to take some time off this weekend?!?! It sure doesn't appear, from this thread, that you took much time out. Please get rest and don't become another crabby, tired, casino manager.

You are right. I'll leave the thread alone. I think I've answer all there is to be answered. Sorry for getting carried away, I take giving satisfaction very seriously.

Sorry you were frustrated Anniemac, I hope you find satisfaction at some other casino I truly wish you the best.

Kind Regards,
Nicolas Johnson
Bet Phoenix Casino Affiliates Manager

 

[NASHVEGAS]

Could he be an old buddy of yours back when you worked for Gambling Wages, or was it Virtual

Checkmate

 

[maphesto]

I read this thread and felt that I had read it before..

5 Business Day Cashout Time Frame
This is something that we need to improve on, no doubt.

As I mentioned earlier, we are planning on lowering our payout time frames.

Please Nicolas, fix this! You listened to players a lot when you worked for Vegas Regal, but since VRC is a white label you couldn't lower the cashout times.
Now you work for a stand alone casino, fix it!

And don't forget to answer 4 of a kind:

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/this-is-what-happens-when-you-win-too-many-times.39769/

 

[DiamondGeezer]

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.

 

[lauram]

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.

Exactly what diamondgeezer states. This thread has gone on long enough. And bearing in mind how many times Nicholas has responded to this thread, he must be commended. I am positive his time is more valuable to other players, with more serious issues then a player that has been banned on a 400% bonus.
As far as length of time for paying out, heck most of the rtg casinos i play at pay within 24 to 78 hours. I also have a few that take up to 2 to 3 weeks if i use the instadebit deposit. This is just a given with online gaming. Enough trashing casinos unless there is a valid reason. As far as my opinion goes this thread should never of been started.

 

[manofsteel]

What would help in understanding the concept is knowing what other factors come into play.

No can do, any casino that gives this info will go out of business fast.

Hehe, looks like you guys stumbled onto some sort of secret sauce.

 

[vinylweatherman]

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.

 

[anniemac]

VWM,

Let me tell you if I had a 'system' I would be winning a whole lot more.

As far as your post, you are pretty much on the mark. Regardless of the issues I had with the payout time, I never posted on any forum openly about Bet Phoenix until this thread. It really hurt my feelings that a casino, or anyone for the matter, would kick me to the curb for doing nothing wrong and I was and still am pissed.

When a player is bonus banned, account locked etc. the first thing that other players think is, 'OMG, what did they do?". "They had to do something bad for a casino to not want their money anymore." Then you are forever branded as a 'bad' person in the eyes of your peers.

But, water under the bridge. Now other casinos are getting money that would have been spent at Bet Phoenix. I wish Nicolas no ill will. Personally, I think he gets the brunt of the bitching when it really should go elsewhere.

 

[takethemoney]

VWM,

Let me tell you if I had a 'system' I would be winning a whole lot more.

As far as your post, you are pretty much on the mark. Regardless of the issues I had with the payout time, I never posted on any forum openly about Bet Phoenix until this thread. It really hurt my feelings that a casino, or anyone for the matter, would kick me to the curb for doing nothing wrong and I was and still am pissed.

When a player is bonus banned, account locked etc. the first thing that other players think is, 'OMG, what did they do?". "They had to do something bad for a casino to not want their money anymore." Then you are forever branded as a 'bad' person in the eyes of your peers.

But, water under the bridge. Now other casinos are getting money that would have been spent at Bet Phoenix. I wish Nicolas no ill will. Personally, I think he gets the brunt of the bitching when it really should go elsewhere.

Annie, please be fair. I've read about the whole fiasco and your were hardly kicked to the curb. When I think in terms of being kicked to the curb, I think of being barred. That is not the case. You were told you could only have max bonuses of 400%. Boohoo! That's still a good bonus! Still, however, you insist on trying to draw this casino through the muddy swamp. Bonuses are a privilege, not a God given right. When are some of you people gonna figure that out? Truth be known, if most of us were not on such a budget as to require a large bonus to have some appreciable amount of action, we would be better off not taking ANY bonuses. Just calling it as it is. Be honest with yourself here.

 

[jod5413]

VWM,

Let me tell you if I had a 'system' I would be winning a whole lot more.

As far as your post, you are pretty much on the mark. Regardless of the issues I had with the payout time, I never posted on any forum openly about Bet Phoenix until this thread. It really hurt my feelings that a casino, or anyone for the matter, would kick me to the curb for doing nothing wrong and I was and still am pissed.

When a player is bonus banned, account locked etc. the first thing that other players think is, 'OMG, what did they do?". "They had to do something bad for a casino to not want their money anymore." Then you are forever branded as a 'bad' person in the eyes of your peers.

But, water under the bridge. Now other casinos are getting money that would have been spent at Bet Phoenix. I wish Nicolas no ill will. Personally, I think he gets the brunt of the bitching when it really should go elsewhere.

I think anyone who loves to play on line would have been knocked for a loop over this scenario. Human beings have feelings that can be hurt. Being made to feel badly when you know you did nothing wrong, would upset anyone. In any case, Annie did not slam Nicolas or the casino, she just shared how she felt over what happened.

Annie, please be fair. I've read about the whole fiasco and your were hardly kicked to the curb. When I think in terms of being kicked to the curb, I think of being barred. That is not the case. You were told you could only have max bonuses of 400%. Boohoo! That's still a good bonus! Still, however, you insist on trying to draw this casino through the muddy swamp. Bonuses are a privilege, not a God given right. When are some of you people gonna figure that out? Truth be known, if most of us were not on such a budget as to require a large bonus to have some appreciable amount of action, we would be better off not taking ANY bonuses. Just calling it as it is. Be honest with yourself here.

Annie was being fair and honest about her feelings. Maybe you are used to being bonus banned or put in the spotlight for something you don't understand. IMO Annie is and has been one of the most honest and forthright members since she joined here. She is not someone that would expect to be singled out. I was happy to see her write about her feelings over this. Now, as she says, it is water under the bridge.

 

[De Beuker]

Annie, please be fair. I've read about the whole fiasco and your were hardly kicked to the curb. When I think in terms of being kicked to the curb, I think of being barred. That is not the case. You were told you could only have max bonuses of 400%. Boohoo! That's still a good bonus! Still, however, you insist on trying to draw this casino through the muddy swamp. Bonuses are a privilege, not a God given right. When are some of you people gonna figure that out? Truth be known, if most of us were not on such a budget as to require a large bonus to have some appreciable amount of action, we would be better off not taking ANY bonuses. Just calling it as it is. Be honest with yourself here.

E-X-A-C-T-L-Y!!!

So why the bannings?
Why do I have to play through my d+B 80 times instead of 40?
Because I live in the Netherlands.
Guess that makes me a better slotplayer.

Whatever, I'll just stick to Microgaming.

 

[anniemac]

Takethemoney,

I was not whining in my reply to VWM's post. I was explaining how I felt about what happened.

You don't know me, just like I don't know you. You have never read a post on this forum where I am whining about rigged games etc. But if I am po'd, you will know it.

Nicolas and I came to an understanding about this situation and we both left it alone. I believe that we have agreed to disagree.

Having had numerous conversations with CS and Dean at Bet Phoenix, Nicolas, in my opinion after consideration, is taking alot of heat about things that he has no control over and is trying to work out things as best he can.

And this is my opinion. I am entitled to it, as you are entitled to yours.

 

[all4greed]

THE END.

 

[anniemac]

Amen!