wofacai bonus issue: Pontoon = Blackjack Game?

[tristan727]

Any chance you could scroll this page back a week? Then you'd see where the mis-understanding lies.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

It really doesn't matter what it says to be honest - I'll admit in all honesty that I probably should have clicked on the more detailed terms before wagering, and noticed an inconsistency.

But having done so now - I am very pleased to note that one can indeed play Pontoon on sign-up, and as long you do not play with bonus credits - which their terms clarify by saying you play first with deposit funds, you are allowed to receive any winnings from play.

These are very clear terms they have on this subject - so why so far my funds have been confiscated, account frozen - and only mixed acknowledgement of this here, so far I really don't understand.

1) T&C 13.3. The first credits wagered will be deducted from your deposit(s) rather than from the PLAY BONUS.


2) T&C 13.14. Wofaca Casino reserves the right to withhold any amount in excess of the players original deposit from a player's withdrawal if the bonus is wagered in Roulette (all sorts of Roulette), Baccarat (all sorts of Baccarat), Blackjack (all sorts of Blackjack, Craps (all sorts of Craps), SicBo (all sorts of SicBo) or Pontoon.

Even without these terms being here - can anyone name me one Wagerworks or Crypto casino which will throw you out and take/steal your funds - simply because you played a game not related to a current promo? No, of course not - it just doesn't count towards the W.R. - and they give you the option of playing for a bonus anyways, which I never was given here. This is all sheer madness and a ridiculous over-reaction.

 

[spearmaster]

Did it occur to you that, as wagering on pontoon is not allowed or counted, that you have not met the wagering requirements?

For fair game, before you request to withdraw your deposit and bonus, you much wager at least 20 times your First Deposit plus the bonus.

This bonus doesn't apply for any blackjack games and Pontoon.

 

[Casinomeister]

On the surface it looks like you took them up on their sign-up bonus offer and played a disallowed game. Like I said, as soon as I get more info from the casino, I'll let you know.

 

[tristan727]

Did it occur to you that, as wagering on pontoon is not allowed or counted, that you have not met the wagering requirements?

How could it possibly have occurred to me at the time, when they sent me an email confirming my withdrawal -advising on how long it would take to process, followed by 3 further emails (even from the same bloke who decided to confiscate my funds, the casino manager!) & one phone call , all advising me on what further ID I needed to provide (ie a more recent utility bill), in order for them to process it? Is a strange way to behave towards a customer when not met the W.R., isn't it?

I am aware now obviously that I haven't met the wagering requirements under these terms - so please can they unfreeze my account, restore my balance, and let me wager another $12k on allowed games, admitting that under their terms I am indeed allowed to play Pontoon with my deposited funds - as long as I played the game in a non-bonus abuse way, which at $10/hand for a Play bonus - is not bonus abuse as far as I can see.

 

[Casinomeister]

Maybe this had something to do with it

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/caution-xxl-club-casino-bonus-terms.17245/

...I'm not from any of the countries the rep mentioned, but I still got bonus-banned, before I even played here. I'm VIP at dozens of online casino's - but one Playtech (I have a good guess who, since Totesport had the cheek to deny me a 10 slots bonus I'd earned before they bonus-banned me) took umbrage against a casino session or two I had, and now find myself banned at every Playtech under the sun- most using words I find quite libellious & un-necessary - stuff like 'we have to protect ourselves against fraudulent activity'. Well gee, sorry I spent a weekend playing Blackjack with a 75 x W.R. somewhere instead of 'Hole-in-one' - why don't you stick my photo on a milk carton or something. I don't deposit once & run-off, I am a recurring player who play's 3/4ths card games, and 1/4th fruit/leisure games - sadly this is evidently completely unacceptable to likes of Playtech's.

If you felt you were banned at most Playtech casinos, why did you think you'd not have a problem at this one? Or did this happen about the same time?

How many casinos have banned you by the way? If you could list them here, along with the reasons, that would be helpful.

 

[happygobrokey]

blackjack is homologous to 21. in french, the game blackjack is almost exclusively known as vingt-et-un.

by your logic if it doesn't have the letter formation b-l-a-c-k-j-a-c-k in the name that it is not related. thus, super fun 21, spanish 21, double exposure, etc etc are also not blackjack games.

also there is such thing as a short form. for instance, double exposure is sometimes called double exposure blackjack, in which case the first would not be a bj game, but the second and identical game is? many people say "omaha" or "texas" referring to forms of poker, and it is (implicitly) obvious the game is a variant of poker. but you might say since in texas hold'em seven cards are in play, of which only two are yours so how can you have a poker game with only two cards? because these are variations on the traditional game, but they continue to fall under the umbrella of poker games. just as games with the object of reaching closer to 21 than the dealer are all known as blackjack/21/vingt-et-un games.

you keep saying you "could name many places" which allow pontoon but not other bj's, so please tell us what these places are and show proof.

i don't think this is the first time someone has cried out "i didn't play blackjack, only pontoon" and this is why after a casino receives a case of this that they then go in and explicitly add the word "pontoon" on the disallowed list for all the numbskulls (or crafty exploiters) who seem to think pontoon and blackjack are different brands of beast. since the word beast came to mind here, would you mind telling me if chimpanzees and gorillas are apes? i don't see ape in their name, yet they share so many properties in common with the definition of ape that maybe i should ask first whether or not they are apes before i claim that they are or aren't.

and arguably the naive novice gambler who innocently were to play it and not be able to make the connection between these games, likely would also not know how to play with a good enough strategy to make money at it. this player, for instance, might stand on a soft 21, might stand with a four-card hand of 15-17. and if indeed you don't see the connection to blackjack, how would you have any notion of strategy whatsoever? i mean how do you know what the goal of the game is? the table graphic does not talk about hands with point totals of greater than 21 being busted/losing hands. if this game were put in front of an impartial judge (who has never heard of it) and the words and rules of it were not presented, some fumbling around would within minutes reveal the similarity to blackjack. "why do i lose when my total goes above 21? why didn't i have to do anything and i just win outright with an ace and tenspot/paint? oh! this game must be similar to blackjack"

bottom line, if you play innocent, then there's no way you could have played profitably, and who would try to complete a bonus wagering on a game they don't know how to play or what the risk of it is?

otherwise, you do know what you're doing, and are taking advantage that the game uses a different combination of letters to describe the same concept, and the "magic word" blackjack doesn't appear. the reason the terms state "craps (all forms of craps)" etc is just for this reason (what variations are there in craps? i think it's the same worldwide, no?). people play a game that for every intent and purpose is the same game to try to get away on a technicality, "i didn't play baccarat, i played mini-baccarat"... now the casino adds (all forms of x) as a catch-all to eliminate the games they don't want played, rather than (see the "tila casino has open" thread) naming each and every variant separately, yet people will persist that not only is pontoon not blackjack, furthermore it isn't even a form of blackjack. preposterous.

once a player or two tries to pull this on them, the casino decides they don't want this hassle anymore, so they explicitly add the word pontoon to eliminate future confusion to anyone else feeling justified that it's not in the same family. to which the "offended" players respond that "look they added pontoon specifically so therefore it must not have been a member of that set/list before!" we could discuss this till our eyes bleed, but the fact remains that it's blatantly obvious that pontoon is related to blackjack and thusly ought to be considered "a form of" the game.

if it looks, talks, and walks like a duck, even if it doesn't explicitly represent itself as one, alas it remains a duck.

and let me close by once more pointing out that the only people who could hold a belief that pontoon is not related to bj are the completely ignorant, and the conniving smart-ass word-manipulators. the latter group often proceed to defend their literal interpretations tooth and nail, refusing to accept the cogent explanations of why the consensus agrees on the true intent of the words used to convey the idea. another classic tactic of that camp in this situation is to try to make oneself look like the former, an ignorant "didn't-know-any-better-sorry-won't-happen-again" type.

 

[tristan727]

deleted

 

[tristan727]

Maybe this had something to do with it

https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/caution-xxl-club-casino-bonus-terms.17245/



If you felt you were banned at most Playtech casinos, why did you think you'd not have a problem at this one? Or did this happen about the same time?

How many casinos have banned you by the way? If you could list them here, along with the reasons, that would be helpful.

I'm not 'banned' anywhere - 2 or 3 have advised me am not eligible for any of their main promos - probably my quote was quite an over-reaction. One of them - XXL Casino, the manager spoke to me right here at CM about how they made the decision - that it was purely an individual commercial one, automated I think - and gave me advice on how to be re-instated for their promos - which was quite insightful. One Playtech last week even re-instated me fully into their promos - Betfred.

Sorry for the mis-information therefore, or misunderstanding. All casino's individually decide whether to issue large or no bonuses - is obviously no real big deal.

In fact, in case there is still some mis-understanding - in all the Playtechs I can think of who stopped sending me casino bonuses, all 2 or 3 them - they have advised me I am still allowed their sports bonuses, on their Sportsbook side - so they still value me as a customer even. Not exactly the same thing as being banned - which was the stupid impression I gave in that post.

 

[Casinomeister]

deleted

I was going to mention that Lojo decided to take a break from the forum. As you could tell, he wasn't making too much sense.

 

[Casinomeister]

I'm not 'banned' anywhere - 2 or 3 have advised me am not eligible for any of their main promos - probably my quote was quite an over-reaction. One of them - Eurogrand, the manager spoke to me right here at CM about how they made the decision - that it was purely an individual commercial one, automated I think - and gave me advice on how to be re-instated for their promos - which was quite insightful. One Playtech last week even re-instated me fully into their promos - Betfred.

Sorry for the mis-information therefore, or misunderstanding. All casino's individually decide whether to issue large or no bonuses - is obviously no real big deal.

Okay, cool. I thought you had instigated an "across the board ban" with the entire Playtech brand. That would have been impressive

 

[tristan727]

Well, that was my initial thought indeed when it all happened (the 2 or 3 bonus ineligibilities seemed to happen round the same time) - and was about to contact Playtech in fact, when the XL chap here explained it to me.

I'm pretty sure one of them, Totesport - bonus bans absolutely everyone. In fact the month or so before they bonus banned me - I lost several hundreds pounds there. Made about a third of it back though, the next month - and that was the end of me! The evil thing about it was - they never told me about it. It wasn't until I lost about 50 on their slot of the month promo, and rang to ask why the 25 bonus didn't credit - they told me was now banned, admitting they hadn't tried to contact me, and refused to credit it! Didn't want to waste a PAB on it though.

The fact that me & two mates are off shortly tonight to an all-inclusive VIP event at a racetrack, courtesy of a certain Gibraltar-based casino, shows my value to some of them, one would think. Either that, or I got lucky in some draw. ( I don't know because they rang up, saying someone had dropped out, & asked if I could replace them)

 

[happygobrokey]

sorry for that first huge rant...

now regarding the point of the general t&c talking about wagers with bonus money, the t&c for the specfic bonus will supersede the general t&c. the "bonus" section of the t&c at most casinos will include games that are always excluded from any bonus given at the casino, and the terms of specific promotions may disallow even more games than the general terms that overarch all bonuses. if you take a bonus that stipulates slots only, you can't use the general t&c to show that games other than slots are allowed for the specific bonus you had.

and "wagering with bonus" does not necessarily mean using actual bonus chips in the placement of a wager. we all know (and indeed it's the reason bonuses are good) that it gives you a cushion so that you can play for longer or be more aggressive. since the bonus funds are wagered last, the bonus is intended to prolong one's play. the term in the general t&c regarding "bets with bonus on games x,y,z...subject to scrutiny etc" is because indeed some players use an aggressive (some would say abusive) strategy of going for broke immediately, betting half their stack at once to quickly double up a couple times (sticking all their bonus chips on one or two whacks). this is not perfectly in spirit with the intention of the bonus (to extend play), however this imo is neither here nor there since the player can lose it all using any betting strategy. and all it says is that they will investigate if you play on these games with bonus, not that it's forbidden.

but as i said, "playing with bonus" might just mean "playing while you have bonus in your account", because some might also find it abusive if a player makes excessively low bets on a low-edge game like blackjack to minimize the variance and convert the bonus to cash at the minimum risk, without ever intending to dip below his own deposit into the bonus money.

again, i feel both of these techniques are not abusive, since in going for broke, the player often in fact goes broke (casinos love highrollers), and in lowrolling and grinding it out, the player is indeed playing in the spirit of the bonus to play for a long time. even beginning with big bets and then shifting way down to preserve the win is a normal strategy for someone who doesn't mind the initial risk. it really oughtn't matter the size of our wagers, and most casinos implement a $5 low limit on blackjack bets to add variance, and some implement a low or low-ish upper limit ($20-$100) to prevent the big-win-or-bust players from getting so lucky to catch a streak off the bat and turn 50 into 3000 inside of six hands.

but really, making a small or large profit is the reason players want bonuses, and the chance for a small or large loss with playthrough to procure a lot of wagering traffic is the reason casinos offer them. the bet size does not determine whether we win, only the cards do. so i agree there was nothing abusive in your play pattern, only that the game you played was prohibited from that bonus to which you were tied, and thus you've failed to meet wr in best case, or fatally breached terms, forfeitting bonus & winnings and facing account lockdown in worst case.

why didn't you stick to those casinos you "knew for a fact" allow pontoon, rather than trying to use the smallest traces of ambiguity to justify your actions at this one? you can't seriously expect us to believe you had no idea it was a form of blackjack, and that you have frequently played where "all blackjacks" are excluded and you get no problems with playing pontoon and it's never come up with the casinos before now. in any event, due diligence would suggest to get it confirmed before possibly damning yourself.

edit: i notice you seem to have been affirmed pontoon is allowed, are you basing that only on the "bonus wagers on bj..." point 13.14 i think it was? because if the sign up bonus terms say no bj/pontoon, it doesn't matter what the general terms say, so why do you seem so renewed that pontoon is okay? at first you were conceding all bj was disallowed and trying to place pontoon outside the sphere of bj, but now you think pontoon is allowed, so have they changed it to allow all bj's (except switch and surrender which would of course not count for wagering via the general terms) or taken down the additional word pontoon (which would still disallow it as it's a form of bj, but would be doubly misleading via the fact that they felt the need to include it alongside the "all forms of bj" part and would then take away that word)? so have the terms changed, or do you just think that 13.14 justifies bj wagers with non-bonus chips notwithstanding any other exclusions or provisions? i urge you to review this.

 

[tristan727]

Let me get this straight, I had some kind of bonus advantage here, because I;

a)deposited $400

b) received a non-withdrawable $200 bonus.

c) Had to wager $12,000 before could withdraw anything

d) played at $10/hands?

What kind of advantage is that really? It is worst bonus scheme I have ever heard of.

The only thing I am learning here, is that when there is the slightest doubt over the terms, it goes in the casino favour. When a term is crystal clear however, it goes into the casino's favour. Those terms regarding specifying when playing with a deposit can only exist for these type of cases - it can't possibly mean anything else - it is their whole raison d'etre! Anyone reading those terms could come to no other conclusion that as long as they didn't play with the funds allocated to the bonus, they can play as they like. Just that they can't withdraw until they have wagered $12k on allowed games...it doesn't mean anything else.

 

[Casinomeister]

Admin Note: Thread moved, renamed

Thread moved to this section since this is clearly a bonus issue. Also renamed to "wofacai bonus issue: Pontoon = Blackjack?" from "A fraudulent Playtech Licensee".

 

[Casinomeister]

Let me get this straight, I had some kind of bonus advantage here, because I;

a)deposited $400

b) received a non-withdrawable $200 bonus.

c) Had to wager $12,000 before could withdraw anything

d) played at $10/hands?

What kind of advantage is that really? It is worst bonus scheme I have ever heard of.

But if you were playing a disallowed game, then this thread is going nowhere.

 

[tristan727]

No-one has yet shown any term here where it says you cannot play this game - in fact I have shown where it is allowed to be played...only that it does not count towards the wagering requirement of the bonus.

 

[spearmaster]

The only thing I am learning here, is that when there is the slightest doubt over the terms, it goes in the casino favour. When a term is crystal clear however, it goes into the casino's favour. Those terms regarding specifying when playing with a deposit can only exist for these type of cases - it can't possibly mean anything else - it is their whole raison d'etre! Anyone reading those terms could come to no other conclusion that as long as they didn't play with the funds allocated to the bonus, they can play as they like. Just that they can't withdraw until they have wagered $12k on allowed games...it doesn't mean anything else.

This is getting a bit out of hand.

Pontoon does not equal blackjack. However, pontoon DOES equal a type or form of blackjack.

Blackjack types are not allowed for the bonus. Furthermore, playing a disallowed game does not count towards playthrough.

As far as I am concerned, that is quite clear - but you chose to try and make it appear as if pontoon was not a type of blackjack.

How does that become "when there is doubt over the terms, it goes in the casino's favour"?

And yet again - the casino has not said why they are closing the account. But suddenly, everything is in their favour according to you.

This is symptomatic of what many other players claim when they are only concerned with winning the argument, regardless of who is right or wrong. "Fairness" goes out the door as soon as it doesn't go the player's way.

Given the many instances where members of the forum, as well as Casinomeister himself, have supported the player in cases where terms were not crystal clear, I think you have done nothing but shoot yourself in the foot.

 

[pangloss]

No-one has yet shown any term here where it says you cannot play this game - in fact I have shown where it is allowed to be played...only that it does not count towards the wagering requirement of the bonus.

You must be pulling your hair out in frustration. Let me say this.

You have advocated your position with crystal clarity. BJ is not Pontoon - any casino hack knows that.

No bets were made using bonus funds.

No game is disallowed but some are restricted from bonus wagering calculations.

The casino altered bonus T+Cs post play. They have failed to adequately communicate both before after the event. You have every right to expect a prompt and speedy resolution.

Best of luck, you may need it. Seems "the casino is always right" is becoming a mantra around here in the face of deteriorating online casino performance at almost every level.


...

 

[Casinomeister]

...Best of luck, you may need it. Seems "the casino is always right" is becoming a mantra around here in the face of deteriorating online casino performance at almost every level...

That's probably the stupidest comment I've read all day. Why don't you do us a favor and take a long walk on a short pier.

To everyone else: so far, I don't have a response from the casino that will shed further light on the issue yet. It's on its way, and when I receive this, I'll let everyone know.

Pontoon is a form of Blackjack - like Spear said, to argue this is just plain silly. And the terms and conditions dating back to February disallow Pontoon for bonus play. As far as I know, the player made a deposit, collected the initial player bonus, won some money, tried to cash out and was locked out after his account was audited.

But the player's PAB states this:

I signed up to this casino and wagered over 12,000 on an allowed game. I employed no techniques to utilise the 200 sign-up bonus - in fact I didnt really need it all, nor did I have any choice about being given it.

Am I missing something? Didn't you say you were playing Pontoon?

This is from your original post:
I have found to my cost. Anyone who meets their sign-up bonus conditions & then dares withdraw, is labelled a bonus abuser, and deposit returned, all profit revoked. The withdrawal is declined due to 'security purpose'. I know this from my own experience, and a fellow gambler....so it is the norm apparently.

But it was not until this post that you discovered that "oops, played the wrong game."
https://www.casinomeister.com/forums/threads/wofacai-bonus-issue-pontoon-blackjack-game.17759/

You are a seasoned player - you admit that you have been playing online for ten years. Why did you decide now to not read the terms and conditions of the bonus? (I have shown that the no pontoon term has been there since Feb.)

How about shedding some light on who this other player is. Did he also not read the terms and conditions and played Pontoon as well? That seems very odd to me that you would mention this.

How about giving us a complete run-down (step-by-step) on what exactly happened? That would help. Thanks!

 

[phynqster]

From experience Pontoon is always considered Black Jack on the casino's end. It is when players try to knit pick a point like this, makes the casinos do the same. I know of a casino where they ran a promotion of 100.00 for every black jack in 24 hour period. When a player went to cash in over 1,000,000 the casino tried to claim that a Black Jack = an ACE and a BLACK JACK only. All other Ace and 10 value card was a 2 card 21. I do not know what the final outcome was, but that is the kind of shit non accrediated casinos can pull when players, pull this type of thing.
2nd point, any time I had a player play Pontoon, win lose or draw, I labled him a bonus abuser for any further sessions. I have yet to run in to just a "recreational player, who plays Pontoon".

 

[mikepipe]

And couldnt that be a brillant last post for this thread?
( I dont OP expect to bring any further points).

 

[kavaman]

Its clear that pontoon is a blackjack variation, there is no question in that. However as the player played 10 unit bets and did not touch the sticky bonus funds the casino is a bit harsh to return his deposit and keep the winnings. The right decision here is to make the player wager the wagering requirements on allowed games, on a balance that he has.

Just my opinion

 

[swampwitch]

The right decision here is to make the player wager the wagering requirements on allowed games, on a balance that he has.

IF the casino was of a mind to do anything of the sort, it would be more along the line of having the player meet WR's with the original deposit plus bonus.

Just an opinion also.

 

[Casinomeister]

From experience Pontoon is always considered Black Jack on the casino's end. It is when players try to knit pick a point like this, makes the casinos do the same. I know of a casino where they ran a promotion of 100.00 for every black jack in 24 hour period. When a player went to cash in over 1,000,000 the casino tried to claim that a Black Jack = an ACE and a BLACK JACK only. All other Ace and 10 value card was a 2 card 21. I do not know what the final outcome was, but that is the kind of shit non accrediated casinos can pull when players, pull this type of thing....

I don't think the player was ever paid in full - another reason why this casino is in the rogue pit (starts with a C and ends with an S).

So far my suggest would be to return the player's deposit and bonus fund, and let the guy play again on ALLOWED games. But since Tristan had a go at the casino ("a fraudulent Playtech Licensee"), I doubt the casino will consider this and just close Tristan's account.

This is one of the reasons why you should try and take care of all problems tactfully. Sure it's fine to bring these issues out into open discussion, but if you are trying to convince a casino operation that you're right/they're wrong, the last thing you should be doing is bitching them out in the public fora.

I'm still wondering who this other gambler was that Tristan mentioned at the beginning of this thread. Did he also play Pontoon by mistake? If so, what a coincidence.

 

[pangloss]

I'm still wondering who this other gambler was that Tristan mentioned at the beginning of this thread. Did he also play Pontoon by mistake? If so, what a coincidence.

Here's what the T+Cs state at CentreBet Casino (PlayTech):

"Bets placed on all versions of Baccarat, Roulette, All Video Poker, Casino War, Sic Bo, Blackjack, Pai Gow Poker and Craps will NOT be counted towards wagering requirements."

That's pretty clear don't you think? Except for one thing - all and sundry are playing Pontoon each and every single month of the year without a moments hassle with cashing out the bonus each and every month. See here:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Case closed. Pontoon is NOT BlackJack, never has been, never will be.


....