HOME Casino Search Best Payouts Biggest Jackpots Best Bonuses



WINNERonline Gambling Discussion Rules & Policies

Go Back   WINNERonline Gambling Discussion > Casino Forums > BEST and WORST Online Casinos
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 11-06-2008, 04:02 AM   #1
freeloader
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1
Default Golden tiger casino

I received in spam email box with the offer of one hour free on the tomb raider slots.So with nothing to lose i gave it a go guessing that they let everybody win so they sign up.So i won 21.10 during free bonus.So i guess if you sign up i doubt they would let you cash out.Just want to ask has anybody signed up from this and what do you have to do to get the money or is it just a scam.
freeloader is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2008, 05:54 AM   #2
KasinoKing
Senior Member
 
KasinoKing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hastings UK
Posts: 658
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

It's not a scam, but it is a Casino Rewards casino - probably the worst MG group which I why I have never promoted them on my sites.

Your wining from the free-pay are bonus chips, and are subject to the following T&C's:-
Quote:
1. Bonus amounts credited to a Player's bonus account are subject to 30 times play through before they may be cashed in.
2. Different games played may contribute a different percentage of the play through - up to 100%, towards the required play-through.
3. The contributing percentages are as follows:
Slots and Parlor Games count 100% towards wagering requirements
Table Poker, Casino War and Sic Bo count 50% towards wagering requirements
Video Poker, all Blackjacks except Classic Blackjack, Craps and Baccarat count 10% towards wagering requirements
Classic Blackjack and all Roulettes count 2% towards wagering requirements
I can't see (at a VERY quick read through) that you need to deposit anything before you can withdraw your winnings, but that is possible.

Please be aware of these outrageous bonus terms:-
Quote:
11. If the casino deems that the autoplay feature has been used for the purpose of meeting bonus account wagering requirements, Casino Rewards reserves the right to void winnings.
Which means if you used Autoplay to play slots (and who doesn't?) they could use that as an excuse to withhold your winnings - totally ludicrous!


Quote:
12. Observations of playing patterns such as the playing for deliberate minimum risk, equal, zero margin or hedge betting may not be considered as playing in the appropriate spirit for the purposes of meeting bonus wagering requirements. Should the Casino deem that these practices have been utilized for the specific purpose of meeting wagering requirements, the casino reserves the right to withhold any cashins and/or confiscate all winnings.
In other words, "if you try to win they could confiscate your winnings"
But they are very unlikely to invoke this rule, especially if you play slots!

Good luck!
________________
KasinoKing.co.uk
KasinoKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13-06-2008, 08:30 PM   #3
BondedCasinos.com
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: on line
Posts: 2
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

Hi all,

someone passed a link to this thread to me. I had to register in order to place this reply, as I am that passionate.

Before you dismiss me as some kind of paid endorser, note that I offer a cash-backed guarantee on the casinos I recommend, something I know I was the first to do, and that still is very rare to find online. *even rarer if they are legit enough to back their word. That I have been a senior member at CAP (http://www.casinoaffiliateprograms.com/ )for years, with a rep power number of 8, which must be good since its only second the site owner and a few of its employees. And I feel extremely confident you can check with my peers and will find they also will tell you I am sincere and with integrity.

I'd also like to add that I have no reason to not respect the views of others in this thread, and I'll ask you do the same of mine. Respectfully disagreeing is my intention here, and I in no way wish to discredit those other posters past the one point of disagreement which I believe everyone is entitled to their opinion and to voice it.

Now that out of the way, here was my reply to the person who sent me a link to this thread:
Quote:

ya that post is nothing new. The guy saying he never promoted them obviously hasn't, because I've had very, very few problems with them over the years. As far as the bonus terms go, they are there to discourage bonus chasers and AT LEAST CR is making this known to the player before they get involved. A lot of places don't make such info available to the player ... at least not anywhere easy to find. But almost all of them have such measures in place.

there was a big stink about this with several networks over the years, and I'm pretty sure I'd remember if there had been any warnings on their casino terms about such possibilities ... as CR has made clear upfront, although I realize that the statement itself does not present a clear line not to be crossed. It does however make it pretty clear that if you sign up, get a bonus, play the minimum required to satisfy requirements, and then cash out, that they reserve the right to refuse to pay you because it portrays the player did not accept the bonus in the spirit given.

I don't necessarily agree with the approach but I understand it. You have a choice of two evils; the first being that you add in your terms upfront that if a player is buying in at the minimum requirements to get a bonus, and then is playing the minimum required play-through and then cashing out: it is pretty obvious this is what would be termed an advantage player, bonus abuser, someone not accepting the bonus in the spirit given. An obvious grab and go player who is in fact a parasite on both the casino, you and me, and all legitimate players because these are the people who caused play-through requirements to become so detailed in the first place. They are also the reason you see such vague terms in the casino's policy. Things did not start out this way! They are a reaction to an action taken.

Now the second choice is to make the play-through requirements even worse than they are now, in order to combat the bonus abuser from taking advantage of the casino's promotions to gain new players. In which case you get legitimate players looking at play-through requirements a monkey could assess as being impossible to beat, and as such the casino then gets a reputation of trapping the player's money. All the players. That is not nor has ever been a desired result to having created play-through requirements, although some unscrupulous casinos have twisted it into just that: a trap that ties the player's deposit into a play-through scheme that is nearly impossible to meet. Casino Rewards is obviously choosing to NOT take this cowardly way out, rather they will take the blunt of the accusations thrown at them in order to protect a better gambling environment for the people who deserve such, the legitimate players who are there to gamble for their entertainment, and not there to watch the clock for the second that quitting time rolls around.

It can be said that the casino should go ahead and just pay these players since they did in fact beat the pre-defined terms of the contract. *However that is exactly why they chose to add that clause in about having the option to define a player as not having accepted the bonus in the spirit given.

Contrary to popular belief, the (legitimate) casinos are not rolling in money. They survive, and are designed to operate with a profit from the percentage difference you see in the audits. Which is usually around 5% (give or take) and out of that 5% they have to pay their debts just like anyone else. While there is no argument (at least from me) that this is still a very lucrative business, asking the casinos to pay those who ... lets be honest both ways... are not there to accept the bonus in the spirit given, and by their very proven actions are what they stand accused, just trying to beat the casino because they've been given an advantage above normal house odds, does much more damage than just the cost of paying these players the measely few dollars they grind out.

Sidenote: I would be really amazed if they made enough to brag it figures out to more money per hour than a burger-flipper at the local Mickie-D's, because it is time-consuming to find the right casino offers, sign up and register everything necessary, then download the casino, then play the games long enough to meet the play-through requirements to be eligible to cash out, then go through the cash-out process which includes faxing in documents, ... I got better things to do with my time, if that were the only reason I was choosing to gamble.

Anyway the real damage done is it sets precedent which will have those undesireable type of players increase to such numbers that what is now an out-of-hand situation which threatens to send casinos in another direction entirely, to grow (quickly too I'd imagine) to such quantity that the casinos would then have no choice but to do away with any kind of bonus that can be used wrongly to such advantage as to force the casinos away from it.

They'd be forced to not offer sign up bonuses (which personally I don't think would be a bad thing), and instead put that money towards such endeavors as increasing loyalty rewards and existing player bonuses. *I have lobbied for this approach for years and would very much like to see it that way. Reward those deserving and don't put yourself in a position to have parasites feed on your blind sides.

If the casino states upfront they will not fall victim to such tactics, and while they don't phrase it this way, they are stating they won't let their legitimate players pay any further price for the actions of a group of people who have no honorable intentions in respect to the spirit in which the bonus was offered, then I don't see where anybody with legitimate intent stands to get hurt more often than they would if the bonus requirements were increased to a point where the casino doesn't have much risk in losing the free money they are giving out.

If you are one of these kind of players the terms seek to discourage, and you still choose to play at at Casino Rewards site: and you try to beat the system in an obvious method, expect to not get paid. And they know that, what these kind of terms really hurt is the casino because it will be taken wrong by a percentage of people, and legitimate players who read about these issues and have not yet been involved with online gambling long enough to realize the casino is in fact saving money that can be given to them, will not sign up to play there.

Then you get into the argument that these players are losing out because as I mentioned CR has been the top of my reputable list for nearing ten years and I've had only one complaint in all that time and that one was due to the player misunderstanding when they were to get credited for a high hand bonus at the poker site. That's an outstanding record in my book, by any standards, but especially when you know the incompetence, greed and over-indulged egos that lurk out there in the virtual casino world. This means the players who choose to not sign up lose out on a casino that is IMHO ranks above the majority in many key areas of importance, the most being they pay on all withdrawals, even the big money such as the recent winner of the 5.5 million from BlackjackBallroom.

Before you tear into me about my remark "all the withdrawals" , I meant that in terms of legitimate withdrawals that do not involve any controversy about a stupid bonus. I'm talking about even the biggest of amounts of money, and not in respect to them paying that small amount in difference between what the bonus abuser deposited and what they were able to take out. If I only had to worry about not getting paid on those kind of withdrawals then I'd probably play at a lot of casinos I currently wouldn't touch. Because I want to know I will get paid when I win the big money, and I know Casino Rewards will pay me if I accomplish that dream.

If I can trust them to pay me those big amounts, then I think I can trust them to be able to look at my proven play history and determine I am not a bonus chaser, that I do not deposit and play the minimum, only then to cash out. You bring me a complaint about a player not getting paid on a large amount that didn't involve some kind of fraud or bonus chasing and I'll reconsider my point of view.

One last thing, Casino Rewards, the network accused of trying to avoid paying the small withdrawals by those profiled as not accepting the bonus in spirit given, is the same network that just recently bought the failed network of casinos that included Golden Reef, Challenge, Nostalgia and Music City, who closed their doors with while still having all those player's money trapped in their accounts, CR honored all outstanding debt to the players thus ensuring nobody got hurt. Rather an odd act of charity to come from some place willing to stoop to cheating bonus chasers out of a few dollars, wouldn't you say? Or is it that Casino Rewards has taken their stance based on principal, rather than on trying to save a few dollars?
BondedCasinos.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14-06-2008, 04:24 AM   #4
Nodepositcasinos
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: at home
Posts: 19
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

I agree with BC. Because there are a lot of bonus abusers around and get lucky enough to win thousands with just small deposits, this is not what online casinos are looking for. To prevent or discourage fraudulous players the casino has to protect themselves from being ripped off. And once that happens decent players with money in their accounts can loose it due to closure of the casino, nobody wants to see this happen. As i am an affiliate for 2 years now I have never had problems with players playing at casino rewards casinos including golden tiger casino. The recent buy of the new casinos golden reef music hall etc. has been well incorporated in their program and players did not see the money in their accounts disappear. The latest jackpot winner of 5 million got his cheque from blackjack ballroom a proud casino from casino rewards! So if anyone has doubts just let me know.
Nodepositcasinos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2008, 08:10 AM   #5
KasinoKing
Senior Member
 
KasinoKing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hastings UK
Posts: 658
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

Quote:
Originally Posted by BondedCasinos.com
It does however make it pretty clear that if you sign up, get a bonus, play the minimum required to satisfy requirements, and then cash out, that they reserve the right to refuse to pay you because it portrays the player did not accept the bonus in the spirit given.
Sorry, I can't be bothered to read your whole post, but I must comment on the above extract (before Caruso does!).

That statement is total bull****!
The casino says you must wager X before you can cash out.
The player wagers X - he MUST be allowed to cash out without penalty.
What you're saying is the casino says you must wager X, but actually you need to wager X + Y (with Y being some secret figure the player does not know) or the player could be labelled an abuser!

Imagine if you went in a shop and saw am item you wanted with a 10 price tag on it. You take the item, give the assistant 10 & go to walk out the shop. But then the assistant calls the police & accuses you of being a thief because the real price of the item is 12, only they don't tell customers that because if they did they might not buy it...

I'm a player who has been making money off casino bonuses for 7-years and not one single time have I ever had winnings confiscated. (That's mostly due to my high-risk playing preference). But I still say it's down to the casinos to write clear, concise, totally unambiguous T&C's with none of this 'if the management deems...' BS. The player meets the rules, he gets paid. It should not even be possible for him to break the rules if only the casinos would employ the software available to them.

________________
KasinoKing.co.uk
KasinoKing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2008, 11:30 AM   #6
GrandMaster
Moderator
 
GrandMaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,940
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

Oh yes, the "spirit of the bonus", in other words, if the player loses, fine, if he has the audacity to win, he is a bonus abuser.
GrandMaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15-06-2008, 11:38 AM   #7
USA2112
Member
 
USA2112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: TGN
Posts: 66
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

Quote:
Originally Posted by BondedCasinos.com
Before you dismiss me as some kind of paid endorser, note that I offer a cash-backed guarantee on the casinos I recommend, something I know I was the first to do, and that still is very rare to find online. *even rarer if they are legit enough to back their word. That I have been a senior member at CAP (http://www.casinoaffiliateprograms.com/ )for years, with a rep power number of 8, which must be good since its only second the site owner and a few of its employees. And I feel extremely confident you can check with my peers and will find they also will tell you I am sincere and with integrity.
Alrighty then...

Quote:
The guy saying he never promoted them obviously hasn't, because I've had very, very few problems with them over the years.
There may have only been a few problems over the years "which can happen" but what problems were they, were they serious, did you have players that weren't paid?

Quote:
As far as the bonus terms go, they are there to discourage bonus chasers and AT LEAST CR is making this known to the player before they get involved. A lot of places don't make such info available to the player ... at least not anywhere easy to find. But almost all of them have such measures in place.
So because they post the term its OK for casinos to take advantage of any player "emphasis on any" that plays their sign up bonuses just because they want too, and the right to confinscate winnings from players based on that decission only. Sure the terms are there for players to read before signing up, but if the casino decides a player has abused this term, who's to say the casino has made the right decission about the player who claim their bonus, this is what's most important. Seems the casino could just use this term for which ever player they choose and not just players they consider to be bonus abusers.

Casinos need to try and combat bonus abuse by players, but at what cost, many legit players are getting caught in the crossfire when casinos make their decissions "based on their terms" with who is and who isn't a bonus abuser. Giving an open door for casinos to just make these types of decissions without merrit or why is much worse than an occasional bonus abuser getting away with $40.
Quote:
... as CR has made clear upfront, although I realize that the statement itself does not present a clear line not to be crossed. It does however make it pretty clear that if you sign up, get a bonus, play the minimum required to satisfy requirements, and then cash out, that they reserve the right to refuse to pay you because it portrays the player did not accept the bonus in the spirit given.
The above makes no sense, if a player follows and meets the requirements set by the casino in the terms for their bonus the player should be paid. No if ands or buts about it. And if the casino decides not to pay the player for what ever excuse they see fit to come up with, it would seem they are more concerned about how much the player would have given after the fact and not what the casino will give in the appropriate spirit for the purposes of meeting bonus wagering requirements for the player.
Quote:
I don't necessarily agree with the approach but I understand it. You have a choice of two evils; the first being that you add in your terms upfront that if a player is buying in at the minimum requirements to get a bonus, and then is playing the minimum required play-through and then cashing out: it is pretty obvious this is what would be termed an advantage player, bonus abuser, someone not accepting the bonus in the spirit given. An obvious grab and go player who is in fact a parasite on both the casino, you and me, and all legitimate players because these are the people who caused play-through requirements to become so detailed in the first place. They are also the reason you see such vague terms in the casino's policy. Things did not start out this way! They are a reaction to an action taken.
This is no excuse for casinos to have vague terms in their policies, without reason why. This is a bussiness and casinos have an obligation to post terms that are stated clearly and fair for all players, and not to post terms that are manipulative because of a few rogue players.
Quote:
Now the second choice is to make the play-through requirements even worse than they are now, in order to combat the bonus abuser from taking advantage of the casino's promotions to gain new players. In which case you get legitimate players looking at play-through requirements a monkey could assess as being impossible to beat, and as such the casino then gets a reputation of trapping the player's money. All the players. That is not nor has ever been a desired result to having created play-through requirements, although some unscrupulous casinos have twisted it into just that: a trap that ties the player's deposit into a play-through scheme that is nearly impossible to meet. Casino Rewards is obviously choosing to NOT take this cowardly way out, rather they will take the blunt of the accusations thrown at them in order to protect a better gambling environment for the people who deserve such, the legitimate players who are there to gamble for their entertainment, and not there to watch the clock for the second that quitting time rolls around.

It can be said that the casino should go ahead and just pay these players since they did in fact beat the pre-defined terms of the contract. *However that is exactly why they chose to add that clause in about having the option to define a player as not having accepted the bonus in the spirit given.
Then once again, based on the casinos decission of whether a player is abusing their terms, is the casino making the right decission. Or is it possible another legit player is having their money stolen. This can't be ignored, sure casinos can make mistakes, but how many casinos purposely cheat players also.
Quote:
They'd be forced to not offer sign up bonuses
This should have happen along time ago with free hour play and free chip offers, and would be more profitable for casinos and affiliates alike with nice match offers only. "Of coarse without the casino trying to create crappy terms" The biggest part of players abuse with bonuses is free play and free chip sign up offers and is the fault of the casinos and noone else.



Quote:
Then you get into the argument that these players are losing out because as I mentioned CR has been the top of my reputable list for nearing ten years and I've had only one complaint in all that time and that one was due to the player misunderstanding when they were to get credited for a high hand bonus at the poker site. That's an outstanding record in my book, by any standards, but especially when you know the incompetence, greed and over-indulged egos that lurk out there in the virtual casino world. This means the players who choose to not sign up lose out on a casino that is IMHO ranks above the majority in many key areas of importance, the most being they pay on all withdrawals, even the big money such as the recent winner of the 5.5 million from BlackjackBallroom.

Before you tear into me about my remark "all the withdrawals" , I meant that in terms of legitimate withdrawals that do not involve any controversy about a stupid bonus. I'm talking about even the biggest of amounts of money, and not in respect to them paying that small amount in difference between what the bonus abuser deposited and what they were able to take out. If I only had to worry about not getting paid on those kind of withdrawals then I'd probably play at a lot of casinos I currently wouldn't touch. Because I want to know I will get paid when I win the big money, and I know Casino Rewards will pay me if I accomplish that dream.

If I can trust them to pay me those big amounts, then I think I can trust them to be able to look at my proven play history and determine I am not a bonus chaser, that I do not deposit and play the minimum, only then to cash out. You bring me a complaint about a player not getting paid on a large amount that didn't involve some kind of fraud or bonus chasing and I'll reconsider my point of view.

One last thing, Casino Rewards, the network accused of trying to avoid paying the small withdrawals by those profiled as not accepting the bonus in spirit given, is the same network that just recently bought the failed network of casinos that included Golden Reef, Challenge, Nostalgia and Music City, who closed their doors with while still having all those player's money trapped in their accounts, CR honored all outstanding debt to the players thus ensuring nobody got hurt. Rather an odd act of charity to come from some place willing to stoop to cheating bonus chasers out of a few dollars, wouldn't you say? Or is it that Casino Rewards has taken their stance based on principal, rather than on trying to save a few dollars?
No comment, except this group of casinos has had some shady dealings in the past so I can't say I agree, and I don't promote them.

Last edited by USA2112 : 15-06-2008 at 12:21 PM. Reason: error
USA2112 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16-06-2008, 10:25 PM   #8
BondedCasinos.com
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: on line
Posts: 2
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

Hi all,

I'm pressed for time (as seems always) and i think i've made my pov pretty clear.

I will address one thing
Quote:
Quote:
... as CR has made clear upfront, although I realize that the statement itself does not present a clear line not to be crossed. It does however make it pretty clear that if you sign up, get a bonus, play the minimum required to satisfy requirements, and then cash out, that they reserve the right to refuse to pay you because it portrays the player did not accept the bonus in the spirit given.

The above makes no sense, if a player follows and meets the requirements set by the casino in the terms for their bonus the player should be paid. No if ands or buts about it. And if the casino decides not to pay the player for what ever excuse they see fit to come up with, it would seem they are more concerned about how much the player would have given after the fact and not what the casino will give in the appropriate spirit for the purposes of meeting bonus wagering requirements for the player

as I stated originally ... I don't necessarily agree with the approach chosen but i do very much understand it. Many online casinos, not just CR, are trying their best to find a working solution to the bonus problems brought by bonus chasers.

But as to that statement not making sense, I think it makes perfect sense. If you plan on buying in at the minimum, playing the minimum to meet the requirements,... that they still may choose to not pay you.

The only people who this really stands to effect are first of all new players who have not yet proven to the casino they are legitimate players come there to play at that casino ... and not just because they saw another opportunity which gave them better than house odds.

and secondly of that group, the only ones effected are those who are going to play like a bonus chaser. Pretty simple and straight forward to me.

And the only ones who are really worried about this term are those who are what they stand accused.

The smart move is ... if you're that kind of player ... is to move on and find greener pastures because you won't be finding it very hospitable at these casinos.

Its a lot more upfront than what many online casinos do ... using stall tactics etc towards these type of players and they make little effort to hide their actions ... or rather inactions.
BondedCasinos.com is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-06-2008, 02:28 PM   #9
Nodepositcasinos
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: at home
Posts: 19
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

I think it is all about integrity. I do not think golden tiger casino will enforce the rules that literally. Those should be rewritten I agree.
If golden tiger casino or other casinos from casinorewards caused troubles on my forum I would immediately stop promoting them. But since I have players coming back and did not get complaints, I guess they do not confiscate winnings because of autoplay etc. Ofcourse this does not proof anything but again once players start complaining the T&C's have to change for the benefit of the player otherwise I do not see the necessity to keep CR on my sites. Players must get a fair treatment there is no in between for me.

Freeloader : did you get your winnings or not ?
Nodepositcasinos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-06-2008, 05:01 PM   #10
USA2112
Member
 
USA2112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: TGN
Posts: 66
Default Re: Golden tiger casino

Quote:
Originally Posted by BondedCasinos.com
as I stated originally ... I don't necessarily agree with the approach chosen but i do very much understand it. Many online casinos, not just CR, are trying their best to find a working solution to the bonus problems brought by bonus chasers.
Their also creating problems for legitimate players. There's much better ways for casinos to deal with bonus abusers, one would be not to offer promotions such as this one with deceptive terms that gives the casino the benefit of deciding who they will confiscate funds from with no just reason, except to claim they are a bonus abuser.
Quote:
But as to that statement not making sense, I think it makes perfect sense. If you plan on buying in at the minimum, playing the minimum to meet the requirements,... that they still may choose to not pay you.
All players are welcome to claim promotional offers from casinos that's why casinos offers them and should not be accused when signing up. If the casino wants to exclude certain players from the offer then point that out in the terms, it is simple enough to do. This offer is only for those players who plan to go on and keep depositing in our casino, anyone signing up for the offer and plans to play the minimum requirements and make a minimum deposit to cash out on this offer is not eligible and your funds will be confiscated. The casino wouldn't do this because they know very few people would sign up for the offer. Bottom line is, casinos need to make their terms clear and fair for all players to sign up at their casino and not try to be deceptive with their promotional offers.

Quote:
The only people who this really stands to effect are first of all new players who have not yet proven to the casino they are legitimate players come there to play at that casino ... and not just because they saw another opportunity which gave them better than house odds.
How could anybody prove to be a legitimate player with any casino if the player has just signed up, even if for the better than house odds as you say. This makes no sense at all it is not possible.
Quote:
and secondly of that group, the only ones effected are those who are going to play like a bonus chaser. Pretty simple and straight forward to me.


And the only ones who are really worried about this term are those who are what they stand accused.

The smart move is ... if you're that kind of player ... is to move on and find greener pastures because you won't be finding it very hospitable at these casinos.
This type of promotion and terms effects affiliates and legitimate players more than a few people the casino sees fit to call bonus abusers. Fact is when casinos stop offering promotions that attract bonus abusers they wont have to worry about those type of players. No casino has the right to include all players in their game of charades when it comes to their terms because of a few bad palyers.
USA2112 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:30 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Partners: Winneronline UK Poker Forum Online Roulette Bingo Alley Online Casino Free Online Bingo Best VIP Casino

Copyright 1999-2006 ALI Online Inc. All rights reserved. Service Terms