joeyl

Ecogra ruled against a player for bonus abuse.
Casinomeister ruled against a player for bonus abuse.

Advantage Player Related Comment published by Max. >>This thread can be a record of who thinks what about bonus abuse and/or the withholding of advantage players winnings who meet the terms.

bonuslover

VERY VERY WELL SAID
The only people abusing the bonuses are the casinos themselves

theguru

Its very obvious that in this industry more and more people are realzing the edge they can recieve from using bonuses and how to play in a manner to exploit such bonuses. It is up to the casino to protect themselves through their terms from having a given promotion at their casino cause a huge revenue loss through advantaged play. Any casino that fails to do so through their own terms specified within a promotion that falls victim to positive EV for the player is solely and completely the fault of the casino itself.

In a casino not protecting themselves and knowingly offering favourable bonuses to players, they (the casinos) should be 100% responsible for any profit loss. If no terms are broken, which the CASINOS themselves create, then any cash in, regardless of the amount, should and must be honored in order for this industry to maintain some type of respectability and legitimacy.

It is an absolute disgrace that certain regulators of this industry are currently sending a message to casinos that it is ok to negate winnings even if all terms and conditions are followed based on bonus abuse by accepting and supporting such casinos decisions.

To say that a player is in the wrong for partaking in a promotion that the casino offers and MAKES THE RULES for is so absurd that I have a hard time even fathoming. If a casino does not wish to have players that simply take them up on promotions that the casino itself offers then DO NOT OFFER A BONUS AT ALL. If this is not an option for a casino, then offer a bonus which is slot play only or has such high wagering that it makes the bonus negative EV.

It is the casinos decision to offer the bonuses, not the players. The recent disgraceful acts of the Ecgora and the Casinomeister in recent months, upholding the decisions of casinos that cry bonus abuse is appalling and clear indications that these institutions are not looking out for the interest of the player whatsoever. Both are coming to a slippery slope by legitimizing this behavoir by casinos. It is essentially sending a message to casino operators that eventhough you make the rules you only have to enforce them when its convienient for you, this seems pretty absurd unless I'm missing something.

Cheers

derelict

This is such a easy question, it's upsetting that there truly is a need to ask. If a real person is playing on his or her own behalf, and is not excluded by the T&Cs, and abides by the T&Cs, he or she should be paid.

It's bizarre, but I've seen several separate instances of people recommending stupid strategies such as betting on both red and black in roulette to clear the turnover requirements in a situation where the expected outcome is a mere fraction of the bonus, and where other obviously superior strategies are available. I consider it distasteful in the act of bad faith toward the casino, and idiotic as someone who values expectation. Still, I believe these guys should be paid, provided that the T&Cs did not prohibit them from doing so. I'm pretty sure this is also the reason that Craps, Roulette and Baccarat are almost universally excluded or not counted toward wagering requirements.

On the topic of casino bonus abuse, I often receive phone calls offering me bonus cash where the only term stated is "you deposit $, we match $." I would guess that most are playable with a positive result, but without something in writing, there's the chance that they'll come back and tell me I have to bet 200x my balance on Keno. I always say that I am interested, and please send me the offer via email along with any applicable terms. They usually say something to the effect of "This is a phone only promotion."

Maybe the bonus is free and clear, but probably not, and I believe these mystery bonuses border on being abusive.

Bacchus

I think that there's two sides to every story. A lot of casinos ARE crooked, but some casinos are really being hammered by serial bonus abusers that pretend not to understand the T&C's or choose not to read them. So I really think "bonus abuse" is a case-by-case situation, and it would be silly discussing all the "bonus abuse" cases in one thread

theguru

Being hammered by bonus HUNTERS is the casinos own fault for offering a rich bonus, no one is putting a gun to their head. If a player takes a bonus offer and follows the terms then they should be paid, period. If they don't follow the terms listed on the website then the casino has discretion.

Cheers

caruso

Bonus players understand terms and conditions better than anyone, and you'll find any that any "play dumb" exponents are very much the extreme exception to the rule. They read the terms diligently and accurately and copy them as evidence in the event of problems. They certainly would NEVER choose not to read them, as that would completely defeat the object of the excercise.

As such, the above "assessment" of bonus players is extremely ill-informed and inaccurate, and smacks to me of bog standard affiliate-speak with very little idea of the subject.

Our sadly absent colleague Mary Snyder wrote a very good >>> article about bonus hunters <<< for the Bet2Gamble site a couple of years ago; read it and weap, BHer-hating affiliates:

CROGOMAN

Years ago a famous blackjack card counter, Kenny Uston, wrote that the card counters were good for the casinos because they made other casino patrons gamble more. The reason being that the card counters made the casual patrons more comfortable playing blackjack because it was proved to be a beatable game. Never mind that most casual players couldn’t play basic strategy, let alone count cards.

I think the bonus hunters have the same benefit for the casinos. The bonus hunters promote the myth that it is possible to beat the casinos, so many players who can’t do the math of determining if a bonus has a positive expectation gamble anyhow. The casino hacks should lay off the complaints. All casinos now need to offer bonuses. There is a competition in the market place. Some casinos promote themselves better than others. In a traditional casino the casino pays the winner right away. In the online world we too often experience the thrill of victory and the agony of payment. The better casinos pay up promptly. The bad casinos make excuses for not paying. Forums like these are the best places to comment on the customer service of these casinos. Bad casinos need to be noted publicly.

But I still don’t get this bit about the bonus players “abusing” the casinos. If a casino wants to offer a game of skill, they should understand they are inviting skillful players along with the punters. The UK casinos all tend to offer some kind of monthly bonus, and they are all doing well. Perhaps this is because patrons know if they win they will get paid with a minimum of weaseling from these casinos. The problem isn’t the “abuse” from the bonus hunters, but the greed of many casinos.

KasinoKing

That one sentence sums up the whole issue of 'bonus abuse' perfectly!