What casinos usually mean when they say...

[vinylweatherman]

So, a casino may have in terms " NO low risk wagering" , but DOES NOT have CLEAR definition of what should be called "low risk wagering", and it means that this casino may define ANY bet like "low risk wagering"

NO WAY!

They can, and do.

The term was originally understood to cover strategies like betting on every possible outcome, such as all the numbers at Roulette, and both player and banker at Baccarat. Some casinos have extended the term to cover things like "low rolling", or other forms of conservative betting. Even betting the same amount on every game can fall foul of the rule, implying players are meant to raise and lower their stake during their session, which itself can then be considered "a system" and result in voided winnings.

The worst offenders can usually be found in the rogue pit.

 

[bsilva028]

1) Bonus abusers?

2) Unusual betting patterns?

3) Minimal risk wagering?

4) Advantage player?

It's also will be useful to get few examples for each above.

Thanks!

for me is:
1) bonus abusers - players that have more bonuses than deposites
ex: player xpto got made $100 in deposites (claiming deposites bonus)
after that claims another $100 in free chips instead of claim a 10% or 20% "cashback" in case of lose everything

2) unusual betting patterns - player know more math than casino manager

3) Minimal risk wagering? - players that use the "low risk" games to begin building some balance slowly
ex: player xpto playd $10 in a slot = won $50 and go to another slot played $10 and won $30, go to another and made another $10 in bets and winnings of $60 (the balance is already in $140) and shortly could go to $200 or $300 pr could be lose in hours of play instead of lose / win lot of money in a few minutes

4) advantage player - player that has more $ in withdraws that in deposites
ex: player has $500 in deposites in casino "A" and $5000 of withdraws

 

[bsilva028]

bad casino practice

5) bad casino practice

and some casinos use the "bonus abuse" argument to void the winnings EVEN when the bonus are sent directly from the casino to the player

EX: player A has $100 in deposites and $100 in bonuses
casino B send an e-mail to player A saying "claim $30 no deposit necessary"

the player claims the bonus, get some winnings, try to withdraw and the casino says "your withdrawal was denied because you are a bonus abuser, you have $100 in deposites and $130 in bonuses, so these winnings will be void, because its your responsability to check how many deposites and how many bonus you have" (rogue casinos do this)

or another "no good" practice is "player A" made a deposite to "casino B", the casino sent an "eletronic receipt" not a receipt to the adress, player do some winnings, when cash out casino ask by docs and utility bill, if the player sent an "online utility bill" or "online bank statement" the casino refuses because is considering that is not valid even if its with digital signature, the casino says "must be scanned, cant be received by e-mail" (some rogue do this to dont pay) (some acredited do this to keep the money on their side for more time)