Forum Forum Home Bandit’s Posts Today’s Posts

[Mr Mr B WANTED $395 Blocked]

Yes Bio and you completely left out half of the proposed solution invalidating your opinion entirely.

They could pay the money back and the industry could 100% ban them.

How this would happen, intrinsically I don’t know but it really doesn’t seem like rocket science to me. As I said, they can DNA test the hell out of people online to the extent they could indeed sell a persons whole identity. It can’t be that hard to do it industry wide including stores too.

A 100% ban virtual and physical.

[Biohazard WANTED $675 Outlaw]

I didn’t leave anything out, so no, nothing has been invalidated.

I don’t think under any circumstances a casino should refund a player because they’ve spent too much. Why? Because actually, I’m absolutely certain that this would only encourage irresponsible gambling. Think about it… if you’re considering whether to deposit your last remaining funds after a tilt session, and then you realise that if you do, and can’t afford food, the casino would just bail you out, why wouldn’t you do it? It’s a no risk situation for you.

I can understand your point about a ban following that so that you basically have only one chance at this, but there are both downsides and workarounds to that also. I just don’t think that is anywhere close to a good solution.

That being said, it’s a suggestion, so don’t think I’m just here to shoot you down, I’m not, I just have quite a strong opinion on that particular statement on this topic.

[thatfamousjimmy WANTED $23 Outlaw]

Mickeyvondickey wrote:

Maybe I’m getting the wrong end of the stick here and I’m not defending them as many are shady as fuck, but why should casinos do more than they already are?

Put it in to context in other industries:

Do the firms Jack Daniels, Smirnoff and Guinness have to take responsibility for the countless lives and families lives’ that alcoholism is accountable for ruining each year?

Same with the tobacco industry and same with the fast food industry.

@Mr B – I’ve heard you mention that casinos dont give a fuck about the lives they ruin and I 100% agree with you. 

The question I have for you is:

In an ideal world, what should they do that they are currently not doing? What would be your wishlist if you had the power to change the industry regs at the click of your fingers?

 

For me it’s a simple case of asking for ID documents and proof of wealth BEFORE you are allowed to deposit. Surely that would solve 99% of problems?? The only people that would put off is addicted gamblers that want a quick fix, underage gambling and fraudulent attempts. Perfect! Can never understand the logic of letting people deposit thousands unverified… apart from the hope they will lose with no questions asked.

Like underage gambling is as easy as changing your date of birth by a few digits. Spending thousands on a debit card. They win gambling company won’t pay out, they lose the gambling company takes the money! Say a 15 year old gambles, loses all their money, doesn’t contact the company as scared they would get in trouble, do you think the company will refund them honestly? Even though the law has been broken.

Even issues like someone using partners debit card so don’t get winnings etc would be stopped. And the send proof of a debit card you had 8 years ago too!

Anyone got thoughts on this?

[Mr Mr B WANTED $395 Blocked]

Biohazard wrote:

I didn’t leave anything out, so no, nothing has been invalidated.

I don’t think under any circumstances a casino should refund a player because they’ve spent too much. Why? Because actually, I’m absolutely certain that this would only encourage irresponsible gambling. Think about it… if you’re considering whether to deposit your last remaining funds after a tilt session, and then you realise that if you do, and can’t afford food, the casino would just bail you out, why wouldn’t you do it? It’s a no risk situation for you.

I can understand your point about a ban following that so that you basically have only one chance at this, but there are both downsides and workarounds to that also. I just don’t think that is anywhere close to a good solution.

That being said, it’s a suggestion, so don’t think I’m just here to shoot you down, I’m not, I just have quite a strong opinion on that particular statement on this topic.

I know you didn’t leave anything out but you attacked the two issues separately, not combined. I didn’t suggest doing one without the other at that point. The two would be hardwired ie one can’t happen without the other being guaranteed to happen.

That’s why I ignored the whole shoot you down thing. You shot it down by breaking the two events apart. One cannot happen without the other, in the suggestion. If you want to pick it apart, do so knowing that.

[Mr Mr B WANTED $395 Blocked]

@thatfamousjimmy can you imagine going into argos to buy a toaster. making the purchase, waiting for the item for a manager to come over and say “you paid with your wifes debit card, you’re not getting the toaster or a refund.”

[lainey87 WANTED $5 Blocked]

Yes it’s dumb, I couldn’t even watch the video it’s not even fun.. something isn’t right. Nobody has 100k to gamble. This guy isn’t a celebrity. So 100k is a LOT of money to him. It’s either fake cash the casino have given him to promote the casino as they do with streamers, or he’s got a real gambling problem. I’m up 5k from gambling. I lost 700 the other day after chasing a 100 loss. But throwing away 5k? I’m not that daft.. all’s I can say is it’s either fake cash or you have a serious problem. U can’t even say o well it’s only 100k if u loose, so something isn’t right. Starting to think it’s fake cash to be honest. This guy doesn’t have 100k to loose, so it doesn’t add up

[PsychicSnail WANTED $111 Outlaw]

The OP makes some semi-valid points, which would be totally valid apart from one thing. Every video Steve tells everyone not to be a knob-end and try to do the same thing. He usually repeats this several times during these suicidal missions, and we can all see how close he comes to total failure. If anyone is actually influence then that’s there lookout. None of us can take responsibility for the stupidity of others.

[st stevenkelly33 WANTED $23 Blocked]

I agree with this somewhat. It’s about the perception Bandit gives if you chase it hard enough you’ll get back what you put in. The first high stakes RK video from a few weeks ago was probably the most exciting slots video I’ve ever seen. If that was a one off occasion I wouldn’t of replied to this thread. This new video where he is over a 100 thousand in then pulls it back like the last time gives the impression just to keep going and you’ll eventually get a few tops. For me personally I’m ashamed to say it but I spanked my last £200 in my bank on RK on 40p stakes chasing a few tops today after watching the recent upload. That’s on me because I should of known better, but if I didn’t watch the video earlier, I’d of ended up washing the car or cutting the grass with the good weather today. Instead I’m trying to do a Bandit and ended up leaving myself skint for the foreseeable future. I know it sounds bad saying it, but part of me wants to see Bandit upload a video or two showing some major losses to show the reality of slots to ordinary guys like me.

[Anonymous WANTED $81 Inactive]

The logic that £160K is “free money” and it’s “OK to lose  £105K” is fucked on many levels

It’s the same as most kids do in the bookies, “I made £2K this month so it’s OK to lose £1000” (or £2000 or £20000)

[The kyle WANTED $0 Blocked]

Hey I know the bandits going a bit crazy with deposits and stakes its money he has won and I think he will play like this till he gets burnt he’s on a good run and he’s not jumping off that crazy train yet

[The kyle WANTED $0 Blocked]

Hey guys the bandits come along way I remember when he did 40 60p spins in the very early days his gambling was very controlled it still is his bankroll allows him to play ridiculous stakes but the average gambler can’t comprehend this

[Be Berniebaby WANTED $1 Outlaw]

I like the Bandit. He comes across as a decent guy. But I agree with the OP. He’s came along way from his early days and thats down to his entertaining videos and likeable character. This has allowed his affiliation income to blossom to the point where his gambling has become truly unmeasurable.  He may of had a spare 100k to gamble funded by previous wins but previous wins were funded by affiliation. So it’s ironic that he preaches responsible gambling to the very people who provide him an income yet his actions in this latest video is fundamentally the essence of irresponsible gambling.

He must be bored doing “normal “ stake videos for his masses as the cannot top the pure excitement of the stakes he plays on RK

[al allang84 WANTED $4 Outlaw]

The OP has a point, some of the numpties here really think losing 100 quid is no different to losing 10 grand.  Of course its the bandits cash and he can do as he pleases but  I think more people like the 2 quid videos.  One thing I have found on both this forum and the casinogrounds forum is when somebody dares to mention they think a streamer is being irresponsible then the masses gang up like a pack of wolves and start being aggressive.

Also the argument that the bandit bets as big as this because he is wealthy is dog shit as I know some very wealthy gamblers and even they say these reel king gambles are utter madness.

[Biohazard WANTED $675 Outlaw]

Mr B wrote:

Biohazard wrote:

I didn’t leave anything out, so no, nothing has been invalidated.

I don’t think under any circumstances a casino should refund a player because they’ve spent too much. Why? Because actually, I’m absolutely certain that this would only encourage irresponsible gambling. Think about it… if you’re considering whether to deposit your last remaining funds after a tilt session, and then you realise that if you do, and can’t afford food, the casino would just bail you out, why wouldn’t you do it? It’s a no risk situation for you.

I can understand your point about a ban following that so that you basically have only one chance at this, but there are both downsides and workarounds to that also. I just don’t think that is anywhere close to a good solution.

That being said, it’s a suggestion, so don’t think I’m just here to shoot you down, I’m not, I just have quite a strong opinion on that particular statement on this topic.

I know you didn’t leave anything out but you attacked the two issues separately, not combined. I didn’t suggest doing one without the other at that point. The two would be hardwired ie one can’t happen without the other being guaranteed to happen.

That’s why I ignored the whole shoot you down thing. You shot it down by breaking the two events apart. One cannot happen without the other, in the suggestion. If you want to pick it apart, do so knowing that.

I never broke the two events apart? I’m treating them as you called them out, as one entity.

All I’m saying is, I don’t believe the ban element is a feasible solution to the shortfalls of the casino repaying the money back, that’s all.

[Smokingbeagle WANTED $59 Outlaw]

What part of this is how I can afford to do this shows winnings and please don’t try this at home do people not understand !

FFS if you are a gambling addict trying to stop why are you watching gambling videos you fucking moron

[Author]

Posts