| Posted by: Jetset at November 1, 2001, 11:03 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
"Oh, and why do I just have a SNEAKING SUSPICION that Sci Fi will survive all this pointless crap?"
I guess because this is not pointless crap, but exposes some pretty unsavoury attitudes and actions at Sci Fi.
I think one of Mark Delano's earlier posts downplayed the business power which message board postings can have, which may be the usual misplaced bravado not uncommon in these cases or another illustration of his ignorance.
Sci Fi may well survive this particular incident but with the sort of attitude and shallow knowledge so far displayed there I wouldn't be that confident about their longer term future in this ery competitive business.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: HKGambler at November 1, 2001, 8:15 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
The biggest pity is irrational people do not see themselves they are, do charge people or opinions not of their kind as their kind !
[This message has been edited by HKGambler (edited 11-01-2001).]
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: The_CPA at November 1, 2001, 8:08 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
It just dawned on me, Mark Delano started this thread, where the heck did he go? You think they put a muzzle on Mark? Maybe they are reconsidering their position and are going to take care of these folks and redeem themselves?????......Probably Not! Wishful Thinking.
P.T.Barnum , His Circus is SafeBet approved you know. Saw the sticker on the "CLOWN" trailer!
------------------
http://www.CasinoPlayersAdvocate.com
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Mrracetrack at November 1, 2001, 6:12 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Caruso stated:
"Oh, and why do I just have a SNEAKING SUSPICION that Sci Fi will survive all this pointless crap?"
Well, because there are many people who would fall into the category best described
by P.T. Barnum.
Look that one up in your Funk & Wagnall.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: caruso at November 1, 2001, 2:12 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Well now, Got2bet,
I've no intention of responding to your abusive tone in kind; you are evidently another person with whom it is pointless to have rational argument; I can flame to, and believe me I'm tempted, but I'm going to save my breath with you. It's beneath me.
I'll leave you to your petty rantings. God, it was a pleasure.
Oh, and why do I just have a SNEAKING SUSPICION that Sci Fi will survive all this pointless crap?
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Got2Bet at November 1, 2001, 7:32 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
I clearly stated:
Quote:
I expect Sci-Fi to explain how betting on the pass line and taking odds is considered a no-risk wager. And I expect you to pay in full winnings to the player who clearly demonstrated that her betting patterns were clearly not designed to abuse the system.
So excuse me if you are then the subject of derision because you tried to read between the lines.
------------------
Spearmaster
Got2Bet - Online Gambling News and Information
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: zrapture at November 1, 2001, 6:53 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Curuso,
The points your are making are understood. Here is the problem with you defending Sci-Fi casino:
This was not against their rules. They allowed this type of play. Most casinos don't, they specify that craps play will not count towards wagering requirments. Players don't flame casinos for these policies, they are fair policies. What is totally unfair is a casino changing the rules after the fact. Nobody would have had a problem if Sci-Fi decided to not allow craps for future promos. That would have been the proper action by the casino.
If your at a land based casino and the dealer accidentely showing the hole card, it is the dealers fault, not the players! The casino then needs to fix the problem not steal the players winnings.
SCI-FI is committing fraud.
DO NOT PLAY HERE UNTIL PLAYERS ARE PAID!
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: caruso at November 1, 2001, 6:42 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Original Mary:
[B]"Say, caruso, have you ever read a book on craps? You do know that playing both sides still has a house edge, right?"
No and Yes.
"...And have you found an online casino that allows multiplayer craps tables?"
No, indeed; I was beginning to wonder whether or not this WAS the method employed (and I would have been missing something!), since, upon my suggesting that the unpleasant individual in question's method of play was simply flatish-betting conservative amounts, I received such a foul-mouthed erbal attack of derision that I assumed I'd got it wrong; thanks for clearing that up.
"Playing both sides can only make money for a player *in a bonus* situation, and even then it is not guaranteed. And so what if it was? The casino decided to offer the bonus. Lasnd casinos have players doing both sides all the time, they still make money."
As you say, "in a bonus situation"... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: caruso at November 1, 2001, 6:32 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
"What part of the word "CHEAT" do you not understand? Flat betting is ALWAYS a risk. Betting PASS or DON'T PASS is ALWAYS a risk. How the hell do you think land-based casinos have survived so long if this type of bet is NOT a risk?"
The answer to your question is so blatantly obvious I don't need to give it; I can't believe you need to ask this - have Mary fill you in, she seems to know; I don't intend to respond to any more flaming postings.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: babe at October 31, 2001, 8:55 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
If I ran a crap game, I would love to see equal action on pass and don't pass, I wouldn't need a bankroll. On every decision, the losers would pay the winners and I would collect haif the action when a 12 is rolled. Real casino would prefer this too as they prefer the slow steady grind to the hugh swings. There is no such thing as a no risk bet at craps. Some bets have lower risk than others but none are no risk.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Got2Bet at October 31, 2001, 5:04 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Sheesh, Caruso. If the damn casino is stupid enough to give away such a large bonus it deserves to dig its own grave.
If you post a T&C, and the player meets all the conditions, you do NOT have the right to say "Just kidding..." You either pay up or you get the hell out of the industry, period.
What part of the word "CHEAT" do you not understand? Flat betting is ALWAYS a risk. Betting PASS or DON'T PASS is ALWAYS a risk. How the hell do you think land-based casinos have survived so long if this type of bet is NOT a risk?
And who the hell offered the bonus in the first place? The player surely didn't go begging the casino to give him/her some extra play money...
There are times when I fly off the handle. This, unfortunately, will ALWAYS be the case when I see someone spout total nonsense and claims to have a knowledge of the industry.
------------------
Spearmaster
Got2Bet - Online Gambling News and Information
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: The Original Mary at October 30, 2001, 10:13 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
"Anyway, sorry so long, I'll try keep it shorter in the future. I guess I have just come to love the industry over the past 2 years and want to try to help all ends! I know, give it up, right!"
Long's fine. Just put in some paragraph breaks!
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: The_CPA at October 30, 2001, 9:08 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Jondo,
I think your pointing in the right direction. I think a fair number are hurting for money. I mention this on another thread. Too many casinos, not enough players to fill them up. They are spending entirely too much to get fresh blood in their casinos. IE: someone recently put the number between 2 and 400 just to get one player. I can beleive 200, 400 is an exagerated. They are forced to compete and pay whatever it takes to get people in, if not they have no chance at all. Not a ery good feeling, I'm sure. A tid bit some of you may not know and I didn't either until I opened a portal is how much they truly do spend. As a new portal you get relagated to PAY Per click engines in the beginning. I almost died to see that some of the ery casinos I am trying to promote; are my own worst ememies,{in a nice way now!}, paying over 5 bucks just for a click thru. You can imagine how quickly that adds up. So yea, the competition is fierce, the aquisition cost is high. The result is portals competing with ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: The Original Mary at October 30, 2001, 5:51 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
At what point, past meeting the stated requirements for wagering, does a player leave the category of "bonus abuser" and turn into a "real gambler"?
At +10%? +20%?
If there is a number at which the casino feels content with the play, why not just put that into the minimum requirements? Why are players put in the position of looking at play requirements, assuming that they are not sufficient, and having to factor that in their play?
How can it possibly be acceptable to take endor misrepresentation as standard behavior when it is so unnecessary? All I'm asking is that casino operators tell the truth in their promotions.
Those that do--that have bonus requirements that overcome the bonus advantage granted the player--are not troubled by "bonus abusers". They don't have to waste CSR time or management time on complaints.
When a "bonus abuser" comes to the board and says, "Hey, I met the requirements, I didn't get paid... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: DONGAMBLER at October 30, 2001, 5:46 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Caruso considers playing intelligently within the rules of the casino a bonus abuse situation. He thinks the players set the rules and not the casino. He is another clueless mouthpiece who here trying to impress everyone with his superior knowledge of gambling, which he has prominently displayed in this thread.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: jondo at October 30, 2001, 5:43 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Confusing isn't it. It would be nice if Caruso or the Video Poker guy could convince sci-fi to define no risk betting and what they consider legit betting. I can think of a half dozen hedges in craps that are perfectly legit but could fall into this no risk area.
I got my money from sci-fi with no hassle. I am glad. I have had my share of this crap. My opinion's that these joints have to show immediate profit because they play on a short bankroll. They can not afford to let the long term even out the swings. Either that or online players are by large sharper than average and there is not enough squares to go around.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: zrapture at October 30, 2001, 4:55 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
WTF Curuso,
Is it OK to play optimal strategy to make the house edge as small as possible? Or is that being greedy as well?
Next thing you know casinos will consider playing basic stategy "bonus abuse" as well.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: The Original Mary at October 30, 2001, 3:03 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Say, caruso, have you ever read a book on craps? You do know that playing both sides still has a house edge, right?
And have you found an online casino that allows multiplayer craps tables?
Playing both sides can only make money for a player *in a bonus* situation, and even then it is not guaranteed. And so what if it was? The casino decided to offer the bonus. Lasnd casinos have players doing both sides all the time, they still make money.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: caruso at October 30, 2001, 2:26 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
I am asuming the unpleasant individual in question is not a hacker, and has NOT found some way to play with a confederate at the other side of the table, making opposite wagers - clearly both thses ARE fraudulent (problem?)
The only alternative: player deposits $2000, receives bonus $700. He chooses to play craps.
Are you telling us that you cannot imagine how such a player could utilize this situation, playing at minimum risk, and irtually GUARANTEE a profit? Effectively, he IS playing a "no-risk" game.
You see, you're all shouting "pay up, lying, cheating scumbags" with a short-sightedness which is STAGGERING, particularly so for members of apparently reputable regulatory bodies.
You should be mentally ticking off the misguided, greedy individual in question, and hoping that, once all the noise has died down, you will have an online gambling industry to return to, which you will be able to continue to "enjoy", relatively incident f... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: The Original Mary at October 27, 2001, 6:58 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
"The player in question wagered on pass for some rolls and on don't pass for other (but not simultaneously). Since we all know that betting pass and don't pass is a no risk wager then this player was taking no risk ."
Just to clarify for readers who might not appreciate Woody's humor, I do believe s/he is employing sarcasm here.
As for "doey/don't" betting being "no-risk" betting, mathematically it has risk; it's just that in most of the bonus situations, a player will walk away from a casino a winner. What I don't understand is why the casinos care, since the edge distributed across the entire population of players they serve would be just the same; i.e., the casino overall isn't out any extra money accepting "doey-don't" bets as well as "do" or "don't" bets.
So, if the purpose of a bonus is to make a player like a casino and return at another time to play again, I would think that offering the bonus to "doey-do... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Woody0 at October 27, 2001, 5:48 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Well, I think I know the answer. The player in question wagered on pass for some rolls and on don't pass for other (but not simultaneously). Since we all know that betting pass and don't pass is a no risk wager then this player was taking no risk .
Funny, I saw a player recently in Atlantic City betting both sides simultaneously and as far as I'm concerned he loses at about twice the rate of players on one side of the action. The return betting both sides in craps is close to 97.2 cents on the dollar.
Why online casinos consider betting both sides simultaneously no risk is interesting and peculiar (uninformed?).
Roulette betting both red and black or even/odd makes an easier calculation and with an American wheel having 0 and 00 she will get back 94.73 cents for every dollar bet. If I ran an online casino I would encourage betting both sides of the action provided my bonus was 5% or less of the action.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: HKGambler at October 27, 2001, 8:50 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Mark Delano-
Give me a break! How long do you think you would sustain playing your tricks?
Your so-called official statement only demonstrates there was a blazing fire, but no hint on who set the fire?
In order for you to pass this examination, you must answer within 100 words the following COMPULSORY QUESTION:
How betting on the pass line and taking odds is considered a no-risk wager?
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: MrStiv at October 27, 2001, 7:38 am | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
That's an awfully long post, but it still manages to avoid what is perhaps the most important issue of all:
HOW IN THE HECK IS BETTING ON THE PASS LINE AND BACKING IT WITH FREE ODDS BETS (OR DON'T PASS AND LAYING ODDS) CONSIDERED A "NO RISK WAGER?????????????"
This whole thing got started because that's the "justification" Sci-Fi Casino and its management used to steal someone's money, and it's complete BS. We want an answer.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Jetset at October 26, 2001, 10:38 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
SciFi management what were you thinking of to breach privacy on a player's identity on the basis of a simple approach from VPR? Privacy is paramount on the internet, and I am pleased to see that you at least had the sense to subsequently request VPR to remove the player's name from BJ21. The damage had by then, unfortunately been done.
Whilst I support your right to defend yourself against immoderate language, threats and extortion I have a feeling that you are presenting one side of an issue which clearly requires independent mediation.
Your characterization of the OPA as a group of "scammers" is also way out of line imo and shows an alarming ignorance of that organisation and what it has accomplished and represents for both players and casino members.
Before you dig yourself in any deeper it would be wise to get professional advice from someone you know and trust.
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: Got2Bet at October 26, 2001, 9:47 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Mr Delano -
I expect Sci-Fi to explain how betting on the pass line and taking odds is considered a no-risk wager. And I expect you to pay in full winnings to the player who clearly demonstrated that her betting patterns were clearly not designed to abuse the system.
Anything less is not acceptable - I expect this to be done in a timely manner - like completed by next week.
Posting statements without responding to issues that have been raised is like putting a band-aid on a gaping wound.
------------------
Spearmaster
Got2Bet - Online Gambling News and Information
| | Static Link |
| Posted by: The Original Mary at October 26, 2001, 9:35 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Mark,
thank you for opening dialogue here on this board. Can you answer some questions for me that arise from the correspondence posted by your affiliate, VPR Man, on www.bj21.com?
1.What is SF Casino's official position concerning the OPA as a player mediation agency?
2.What is SF Casino's policy about releasing player identity information to inquiring third parties?
3.What is SF Casino's policy about releasing player correspondence to inquiring third parties?
4.Since the player represented himself as an OPA member/officer, did SF Casino approach a third party, regulatory agency, or the OPA about releasing player information, including correspondence? Or for mediation, confirmation, or assistance?
5.What legitimate industry dispute resolution authority is acceptable to Sci Fi Casino?
6.How much does Sci Fi Casino pay to Real Time Gaming for Safebet certification?
What troubles me is that while adopting a posture of reasonableness... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Sci-Fi-Casino at October 26, 2001, 9:17 pm | | Topic: Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino Forum: Winner Online |
Official Statement from Sci-Fi-Casino:
As you may already have read over the last few days, Sci-Fi-Casino has been forced to endure a scathing attack on several message boards.
Following is the history of the situation regarding Casino Avenger, a player who was denied a bonus because he was not eligible. This situation was resolved 5 months ago to both the casino’s and the player’s satisfaction. Please take a look at the following e-mail extracts:
May 25, 2001 Casino Avenger wrote:
“…you have every right to take that bonus back.”
May 28, 2001 Casino Avenger wrote:
“ I am not contesting the bonus of $200…”
May 29, 2001 Casino Avenger wrote:
“Mark, Thank you.. I am a representive of the OPA.. …I will forward your letter to XXX and have him contact you … Thanks again for working with the OPA on this issue.”
Again, we thought this situation was fully resolved.
Suddenly and without warning, Casino Avenger began posting slanderous stat... | | Read Entire Entry |
|