|
|
Joined: 10/29/2014(UTC)
Posts: 76
|
Suppose you've taken a 100% match bonus at casino XXX that has the T&C that you can't wager more than $6.25....Now you go and wager $20 (either intentionally or unintentionally) and suddenly hit it BIG! Lets say you have $2000 in your account after the WR is complete....... Now you know the casino will confiscate your winnings the moment you try to withdraw them. On the other hand, if you just keep the money in there and play it slowly month after month, you should hypothetically be able to get most of it out through monthly CB after a year or two..... Question: Would this work, or are affiliate commissions audited as well, and just like the winnings/balance would be confiscated, so to would any of the commissions GC receives as a result of the player obtaining it by violating bonus rules???? ............... FYI; I'd be curious to know if anyone here has ever tried this personally. I've never broken a bonus T&C (that I'm aware of), however being from Canada, web-wallets like Skrill and Neteller aren't allowed. And despite the fact that you can deposit into a casino using a credit card, you cannot withdrawal back onto it from a casino (weird eh!). In fact there is a whole ton of casinos listed here on GC where its very easy to deposit (most places accept credit card), but withdrawing is either not possible or has a big fee....I actually have a balance in EnergyCasino right now, which I'm debating whether or not to leave in there and play slowly on something like BJ or Baccarat and hopefully getting it out via CB over 1-2 years, lol (I'll prolly just pay the freakin fees!). Edited by moderator Friday, January 30, 2015 5:59:25 AM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/29/2014(UTC)
Posts: 76
|
Just another example: Suppose you think you can't withdraw because you deposited at a rogue (ex. lets say CasinoTitan)....Would trying to get your money out slowly via CB be any more effective?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 294
|
Hi James
Thanks for the interesting post.
I don't think your plan would work.
Gambling City only gets commission when you lose. You can only claim for the Cash Back scheme when you lose. Gambling City shares its commission with you.
That doesn't help you get your money from the casino.
Assuming the casino zeroes our balance at the end of each month (most do), you would need to lose $100 for every $15 you claim via CB.
Or am I missing the point?
Thanks very much for being such an active member.
Graeme
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/29/2014(UTC)
Posts: 76
|
Originally Posted by: Graeme  Hi James
Thanks for the interesting post.
I don't think your plan would work.
Gambling City only gets commission when you lose. You can only claim for the Cash Back scheme when you lose. Gambling City shares its commission with you.
That doesn't help you get your money from the casino.
Assuming the casino zeroes our balance at the end of each month (most do), you would need to lose $100 for every $15 you claim via CB.
Or am I missing the point?
Thanks very much for being such an active member.
Graeme The casinos zero out the balances each month? I'll definitely have to email and ask, because I was sure they didn't. Most of the time I always withdrawal my money so there usually isn't anything in there, but I always assumed it would never get removed if it was there. I mean, you would hear people complaining about that if this was a regular occurrence! Assuming they didn't remove your balance, you could play with it next month and possibly get money out through CB that month (if you lost). You would have to redo this over and over again each month (playing lets say 15-20% of your balance THAT MONTH and saving the rest of you balance for a future month). Of course some months you would win money and would hence get nothing.......Like I said, possibly a long-term process! (Just something to think about for those who have lets say $5000 or some other big amount in their account and don't think they'll be able to withdraw it).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 4/30/2010(UTC)
Posts: 294
|
Hi James
I meant the casino might agree to zero negative balances for Gambling City, not the player. This actually doesn't affect the player at all, except to the extent that if there is a large negative balance which is not reversed, Gambling City would generally have to exclude that casino from the CB scheme because there would be no commission to share with a player who loses
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/29/2014(UTC)
Posts: 76
|
Originally Posted by: Graeme Hi James
I meant the casino might agree to zero negative balances for Gambling City, not the player. This actually doesn't affect the player at all, except to the extent that if there is a large negative balance which is not reversed, Gambling City would generally have to exclude that casino from the CB scheme because there would be no commission to share with a player who loses Ah ok, mind you I assume it is standard practice to zero out negative balances though, yes? For ex. If I won $5000 my first month (putting the casino at a -5000 balance), then left the money in there until next month and then wagered and lost $100, then I would still get the 15 $/% from this despite the fact that the casino would still have a negative balance of $4900 yes? FYI: The above is an example of a long-about way to get your money out. But again, its one I'm curious about because perhaps some casinos WOULD NOT zero out negative balances (btw, I imagine from the casino's standpoint this would be viewed as an undesirable practice)...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 7/2/2011(UTC) Posts: 611 
|
Based on the theory of averages, you are correct and in many years (about 10 playing one bet of 10% of his starting amount on a game like blackjack), one would be able to dump the casino balance to Gambling City cash back little by little.
But there might get in the way some various other facts like that if the casino goes unresponsive at some point in time or encounter a large negative balance towards Gambling City (as Graeme described), cases when when Gambling City will be forced to remove the casino from the cash back deal. Or simply the casino feels something suspect and checks what's going with that big balance being neither withdrawn but simply played out at a slow rate and find out why the trick and terminate the player balance followed by casino account closure.
|
 1 user thanked Constantin for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/29/2014(UTC)
Posts: 76
|
Originally Posted by: Constantin Based on the theory of averages, you are correct and in many years (about 10 playing one bet of 10% of his starting amount on a game like blackjack), one would be able to dump the casino balance to Gambling City cash back little by little.
But there might get in the way some various other facts like that if the casino goes unresponsive at some point in time or encounter a large negative balance towards Gambling City (as Graeme described), cases when when Gambling City will be forced to remove the casino from the cash back deal. Or simply the casino feels something suspect and checks what's going with that big balance being neither withdrawn but simply played out at a slow rate and find out why the trick and terminate the player balance followed by casino account closure. 10 years sounds too long. Lets see, wagering 10% once per month would cost you 0.05% of your overall balance (assuming BJ games costs you 0.5% as a result of having a 99.5% return)....So 100% / 0.05% = 2000 wagers......2000/12 = 166 years lol.....I hate math! How did you get your answer? Yes I had the same concerns as what you mentioned. If your the type of player whose money just cycles between the casino and their bank account, maybe its worth a shot at some of the bigger names like 32Red or VPL (places you know are legit and won't go out of business). Certainly it would avoid some banking fees too (especially for those of us who can't use web-wallets).........Peronally I don't think I would want to do take that risk (and that from someone who has some pretty big fees!).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/29/2014(UTC)
Posts: 76
|
Originally Posted by: James Originally Posted by: Constantin Based on the theory of averages, you are correct and in many years (about 10 playing one bet of 10% of his starting amount on a game like blackjack), one would be able to dump the casino balance to Gambling City cash back little by little.
But there might get in the way some various other facts like that if the casino goes unresponsive at some point in time or encounter a large negative balance towards Gambling City (as Graeme described), cases when when Gambling City will be forced to remove the casino from the cash back deal. Or simply the casino feels something suspect and checks what's going with that big balance being neither withdrawn but simply played out at a slow rate and find out why the trick and terminate the player balance followed by casino account closure. 10 years sounds too long. Lets see, wagering 10% once per month would cost you 0.05% of your overall balance (assuming BJ games costs you 0.5% as a result of having a 99.5% return)....So 100% / 0.05% = 2000 wagers......2000/12 = 166 years lol.....I hate math! How did you get your answer? Yes I had the same concerns as what you mentioned. If your the type of player whose money just cycles between the casino and their bank account, maybe its worth a shot at some of the bigger names like 32Red or VPL (places you know are legit and won't go out of business). Certainly it would avoid some banking fees too (especially for those of us who can't use web-wallets).........Peronally I don't think I would want to do take that risk (and that from someone who has some pretty big fees!). Nevermind I see how you got this I think. Wagering 10% of balance once per month (on BJ lets say) should approximately result in CB of 1.5% (15% x 10% = 1.5%) once every two months (if assume there is a 50:50 chance that you will win or lose, then you won't receive CB for half of your months). Since 100% / 1.5% = 66.7, then you will have received 100% of your balance after getting CB 66.7 times. Since you receice CB once every two months (on avg) and 66.7 x 2 months = 133 months, you will of received your entire balance after 11 years and 1 month!. Was this your approach?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 7/2/2011(UTC) Posts: 611
|
Yep, that's 100% correct assuming a perfect coin flip. And if you assume there is a 0.5% house edge, then you lose 6 units every year from your total roll. That should result in a 10 years and a half period. But most likely is that you will boost early (in a 2-2.5 years period @ BJ). But it is quite important what game you pick. For example if you pick baccarat and always bet banker, even if the house edge is double (1.06%), you are expected to last much longer in the game because you are betting on a more probable outcome (only the fee drains you). If I would have this choice, and there would be no limit on the bet I can place, I think I would just bet it all and try to get the 15% at once. If I win, then I'll be betting my full balance again next month (if I lose then, that's 30% of the original value I couldn't withdraw) and so on. Edited by user Friday, January 30, 2015 6:29:17 PM(UTC)
| Reason: added some extra details
|
1 user thanked Constantin for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/29/2014(UTC)
Posts: 76
|
Originally Posted by: Constantin Yep, that's 100% correct assuming a perfect coin flip. And if you assume there is a 0.5% house edge, then you lose 6 units every year from your total roll. That should result in a 10 years and a half period. But most likely is that you will boost early (in a 2-2.5 years period @ BJ).
But it is quite important what game you pick. For example if you pick baccarat and always bet banker, even if the house edge is double (1.06%), you are expected to last much longer in the game because you are betting on a more probable outcome (only the fee drains you).
If I would have this choice, and there would be no limit on the bet I can place, I think I would just bet it all and try to get the 15% at once. If I win, then I'll be betting my full balance again next month (if I lose then, that's 30% of the original value I couldn't withdraw) and so on. From an intuitive standpoint, this appears less profitable. Just the odds of getting at least 60% of your balance back is a tad south of 25% (if you won twice and then lost you would receive 60%). Obviously every-time you do win, your min CB doubles, so you could also win a ton! However I also feel like that from a psychological standpoint, this could be scary. Imagine you have $1000, you win...next month you wager $2000 and you win........next month you have $4000 (fyi: I'm sure by this point you've exceeded the max bet limit) and from a psychological standpoint, the thought of losing $4000 in one go sounds horrifying! Also I think you would have to consider switching games, to say European Roulette and wagering on a 1:37 individual number with 4-5 smaller wagers that are within the betting limits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 7/2/2011(UTC) Posts: 611
|
Well, I've accounted the other factors in my choice. If something goes wrong with the casino (or they figure out what you're doing) within less than 20 months (in which you would statistically win about half) then you get less than the 15% that you could cash in on the first month (or 30%) of the second month of applying this strategy. Also $15 once in two months feels like nothing, $150 or $300 at once, nice.
|
1 user thanked Constantin for this useful post.
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
|
|