5Dimes made a series of mistakes in their casino this week. They don't argue against the criticism and that they need to take better care of the casino product. If not for the lack of safeguards, which they believe are addressed now, these disputes wouldn't have happened. That includes a 2nd player who won 3x the amount playing this same game.
The book's mistakes aside, we (all of us) have to look at the facts independently when forming an opinion on if the player may have been wronged. There wasn't much to argue on the player's behalf. As Tackle says, he deposited $50 after years of inactivity and learning the payout was in the neighborhood of 390%. He bet small to start and built up exponentially to be sure he could only advance his roll and brought the balance to over $30,000 in two hours. Whether you argue the player was smart and advantageous or a shot taker... or the casino was at fault for setting it up this way, the question is what should happen in an obvious mistake?
This casino issue closest resembles a bad line with an extra zero or maybe more so a line left up well into the game. It was an obvious gross error. Except in this case, there was no funds at risk or chance of losing. You could play this game by just hitting deal and win. It was closer to an ATM than a game of chance. Outside of the argument that a book should pay for its mistakes, there is nothing that suggest the player risked, earned, or won money playing this game.
The free-play the player received was in line with what a player might get for reporting a book's mistake. The player's activity when he was last active included 5 past-posted horse bets that he conceded to. While not relevant to the complaint itself, it likely had a part in what kind of inconvenience bonus the player received in the final chat with 5dimes.
The book's mistakes aside, we (all of us) have to look at the facts independently when forming an opinion on if the player may have been wronged. There wasn't much to argue on the player's behalf. As Tackle says, he deposited $50 after years of inactivity and learning the payout was in the neighborhood of 390%. He bet small to start and built up exponentially to be sure he could only advance his roll and brought the balance to over $30,000 in two hours. Whether you argue the player was smart and advantageous or a shot taker... or the casino was at fault for setting it up this way, the question is what should happen in an obvious mistake?
This casino issue closest resembles a bad line with an extra zero or maybe more so a line left up well into the game. It was an obvious gross error. Except in this case, there was no funds at risk or chance of losing. You could play this game by just hitting deal and win. It was closer to an ATM than a game of chance. Outside of the argument that a book should pay for its mistakes, there is nothing that suggest the player risked, earned, or won money playing this game.
The free-play the player received was in line with what a player might get for reporting a book's mistake. The player's activity when he was last active included 5 past-posted horse bets that he conceded to. While not relevant to the complaint itself, it likely had a part in what kind of inconvenience bonus the player received in the final chat with 5dimes.
