[WVU]

This question has been asked and not answered. Back in 2001 I participated in a roulette promo at Casino On Net that held a nice juicy 93% advantage for the player.

Many players took advantage of this promotion which lasted for 2 hours. Basically the casino was paying out 2 x the normal payout for a zero and 7 if they were to hit. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that a 70-1 payout on a wheel that had 37 spots (single zero) gave the player a nice advantage.

This casino paid out $4,000,000 in "extra" payout during that 2 hour promotion according to their subsequent adverts which at the time was twice their monthly advertising budget. Myself, along with about a dozen other players teamed up with our own accounts in order to share the risk and spread out the variance. My "team" collected 1.65 million in bonus money. My personal share was well into 6 figures.

It did take some politics, but eveyone that I know of was paid everything in their accounts even though the casino admitted to a gross error in presenting this promotion. The promotions manager was eventually fired as a result, but players themselves were not affected by the oversight.

So casino on net paid out on a 4 million dollar mistake, so there is precedence here regarding paying out on faulty promotions.

[Chopsticks]

That is pretty insane.

All of this casino craziness these days also reminds me of that Betfair case that went on months ago where people had amounts confiscated, even after it had reached their bank account because of some sketchy bonus offer.

Did you have to turn over the bonus money in that casino on net promo??

[pokernut9999]

Seems hard to believe they were that stupid.

[donjuan]

It's the responsibility of the casino to have preventative measures to keep them from getting killed without falling back on just stealing the money back. Whether that's a max win before account review (whether percentage of deposit size or overall win), it's their job, not the players'. Particularly when they have no posted rules about it.

[WVU]

Seems hard to believe they were that stupid.

It was well documented. See Casino on Net 007 roulette promotion.

[Shelton]

they got 12 people hooked that will lost back 4 million 3x

[diondublin]

This question has been asked and not answered. Back in 2001 I participated in a roulette promo at Casino On Net that held a nice juicy 93% advantage for the player.

Many players took advantage of this promotion which lasted for 2 hours. Basically the casino was paying out 2 x the normal payout for a zero and 7 if they were to hit. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that a 70-1 payout on a wheel that had 37 spots (single zero) gave the player a nice advantage.

This casino paid out $4,000,000 in "extra" payout during that 2 hour promotion according to their subsequent adverts which at the time was twice their monthly advertising budget. Myself, along with about a dozen other players teamed up with our own accounts in order to share the risk and spread out the variance. My "team" collected 1.65 million in bonus money. My personal share was well into 6 figures.

.

When you say 'bonus money' here, what exactly do you mean?

[WVU]

When you say 'bonus money' here, what exactly do you mean?

It was a promotion. Anyone playing roulette during the advertised 2 hours of the promotion was going to get a double payout on their wager if they had money on either "0" or "7" and either of those numbers came up. Everyone was on their own roulette wheel as it was single player roulette.

My team simply placed max wagers on both 0 and 7. ($100 on each) We didn't play any other number. The wheel spun ~570 times for me in those 2 hours and I hit my number 32 times so I was right at expectation. We preloaded our accounts before the promotion to handle the swings. I loaded 25k, much of that through ************ and paypal as that was the preferred method at the time. Some team members could only get 10k in their accounts. About half of our team busted out before the promo was over. The bonus 35 x the wager was not added until 24 hours after the promo ended as stated beforehand.

We shared the 1.65 million according to the percent of the total wagers you got in so those who busted out early did not make as much as those of us who lasted. My 25k bank was at 15k by the end of the promo. I remember my first spin was a 0 so I got off to a nice start. The luckiest player on our team was at like 55k at the end of the 2 hours. The entire team was on conference call during the whole promo so we could keep tabs of the hits and to make sure the casino wasn't rigging the wheels. Every team member sounded off and recorded every time they hit 0 or 7.

After the bonus was added the next day the only requirement before cashout was to wager 2 x the bonus. I personally cashed out about 90% of my balance and then I found another edge on their BJ game when comps were added so I gave them several million in action on several accounts before they finally cut all of us off from bonuses. None of us had any problems getting paid.

[shari91]

I think the level of expectation should be quite different between a casino running a 2hr promo involving one game - which I assume they advertised in the hopes of attracting more people to play - and a casino that had a number carried down in a pay table. Especially if that game is merely one of a minimum of 373 games offered in the casino. (The actual number of games is higher at 5Dimes but I stopped counting at that point.)

I think yes, if you run a promo - especially one that only lasts 2 hrs - then you should be held responsible if the payout table isn't right. Withstanding some sort of technical meltdown, we should reasonably expect that the book would be able to post the proper table and monitor the game for such a short period of time.

With 5Dimes and the game Tackleberry was playing, I can more reasonably accept that an error may occur due to the number of games on offer. And from what I've read, the large number of games and the variety of bonus options is one of the main reasons people play at the 5Dimes casino to begin with.

Again 9/11 of the bonus payout lines should have been set at 8.17. Instead, 11/11 were set for 8.17. That to me smells of a data entry error although some say it's a math error which to be honest I still don't quite understand but I'll take their word for it.

[WVU]

oh no doubt there is a distinct difference in this promotion I described versus the 5 dimes disaster, but just proving a point that some places do pay out on their obvious mistake.

5 dimes clearly is not Casino on Net. Casino on Ne (now casino 888) is a much bigger outfit. We carefully calculated what we thought they could handle in losses beforehand and we were correct. The point is we went into this knowing that our advantage was 93% and also knowing the chance of losing money was remote. We went through great efforts to keep the promotion of the public boards because we knew they would not pay out 40 million which is likely what it would cost them. Even the 4 million they spent on this was a bit more than we figured.

[shari91]

Ah I see what you're saying.

And thank you for this example. I was looking for previous cases that would at least be somewhat similar to the 5Dimes one and I think my Googling skills suck because I couldn't come up with much at all.

[WVU]

I lived them Shari. I could fill this board with examples similar to this one. 100% bonuses with 1 and 2 x rollover...Unlimited 20% loss rebates with 1 x rollover...20% bonuses with only 2 x bonus rollover...etc

There have been many. Most would pay out. I would not have targeted 5 dimes on something like this because I know their history of dealing with bonus players.

[shari91]

I lived them Shari. I could fill this board with examples similar to this one. 100% bonuses with 1 and 2 x rollover...Unlimited 20% loss rebates with 1 x rollover...20% bonuses with only 2 x bonus rollover...etc There have been many. Most would pay out. I would not have targeted 5 dimes on something like this because I know their history of dealing with bonus players.

With my admittedly very limited knowledge of online casinos, I'm trying to decide at what point would I think an advertised bonus shouldn't be honoured. To me it's the same as your roulette promo - a bonus is usually splashed on a book's homepage or at the very least the landing page of the casino and the new sign-up page, and advertised online elsewhere. If a book is offering a bonus to entice players' action, then I think they should do due diligence about the ad they post as it's a marketing tool and usually it's the only offer going at the time. I think the only time I'd consider siding with the book at all is if they were hit within the first 30 minutes to 1hr of the ad going live. Maybe even an hour's too much as they'd have time to monitor the action coming in at that point. Whatever the proper time frame and % ceiling is, I think most people would agree that a book should be able to get their one bloody promo right or at the very least, correct it immediately if it is indeed posted wrong.

With Tackleberry's case though, after looking at the pay table and especially after I manually started to count how many games were available, I could see how an error like this could occur. Not that there's ever an excuse for errors but at least I could understand this one to a certain extent. And I know I'll just sound naive but the whole idea that Tony was just free-rolling people with this particular game doesn't have much weight with me. With 373+ games, I can't see the point of only choosing one game, buried near the bottom of one of many pages, to use as your freeroll gimmick.

Thanks again for this WVU. You've shared a lot of info with me the past couple of weeks and I really appreciate it. You've definitely helped speed up my learning curve quite a bit.

[slash]

Aaah WVU. We are talking a TG here :-)

[WVU]

Aaah WVU. We are talking a TG here :-)

yes sir, good times