Forum

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Not much detail to go on but I’m guessing it’s one of two things here:

1. There is a maximum cash out on winnings obtained via bonus.

2. You had bonus funds in your account still when you played roulette and those winnings were subsequently voided.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Winningbird wrote:

It must be one of those days.. I’ve blown my wage too ?. I told you, I can give advice but I can never take my own advice ?

I’m upset with my self, but nothing can be done now. Live and not learn more than likely ?. Going to have a break from the slots after tonight and wait for a massive bollocking from other half tomorrow when I tell him I need money. He’s already got the face on with me and tried to kick me out 2 times this week. Men pffft ??

Glad I have you lot here to vent to

@winningbird was it the ol’ pay comes in at midnight, wait up for it to hit the bank, deposit, rinse and repeat? I’ve been there. I can sympathise. Hope you manage to get something worked out. I guess it sounds bad in a way, but I always found the thing that gave me comfort after a bad day like that was knowing up and down the country, there were plenty of other people in the same boat. Not because I wanted them to be sharing in the misery, but it just gave me a sense I wasn’t alone, that all these other people I’d never met and didn’t know knew exactly how I felt because they could feel it too. Comforting, just in a kind of grim way.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Also even for the ones like Casino which do affiliation payments on an ongoing sign up’s losses, a lot of people don’t realise it’s a portion of net loss not gross. So people see that a casino offers affiliates e.g. 25% of the losses of anyone they sign up and think it means if they lose £100, the affiliate gets £25.

Understandable, but very wrong. £100 is the player’s gross loss. After the game providers have taken their very sizeable chunk, tax has been paid and the casino has deducted applicable charges on their side, the amount the affiliate gets is much closer to 25p than £25.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Just Basics wrote:

argyl53 wrote:

I also would like to say that if said casinos or people who say its not a lie, gave me unrefutable evidence that they dont rig certain games. I would then lay down my battered sword and say well done sir, you win.

But the problem is…no one HAS given me solid unrefutable facts or evidence that they dont rig certain games. So i will carry on believing what i think is the most obvious to me.

Simple question; when someone is accused of a crime, is it on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt they are guilty, or is it on the accused to provide irrefutable proof they are innocent?

There will never ever ever be a case where a casino is proved beyond reasonable doubt that they are guilty. It simply cannot and will not happen. Its waaaaay beyond that now mate. They are too deep and too high above to ever get put in that position.

I dont care about that. All i care about is calling out unfair and manipulative practices.

The prosecution offers no evidence.

Case dismissed.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

I also would like to say that if said casinos or people who say its not a lie, gave me unrefutable evidence that they dont rig certain games. I would then lay down my battered sword and say well done sir, you win.

But the problem is…no one HAS given me solid unrefutable facts or evidence that they dont rig certain games. So i will carry on believing what i think is the most obvious to me.

Simple question; when someone is accused of a crime, is it on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt they are guilty, or is it on the accused to provide irrefutable proof they are innocent?

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

If they used envelopes instead of screens, the accusation would simply switch to “they know what’s in each envelope”.

The guy in the video keeps going “look! it’s a wee television, it’s a wee television!” as if that proves anything. Obviously they’re screens, how else did anyone else think it was going to work? Doesn’t show it’s rigged or not randomly allocated. If you don’t trust that they’re running a fair game, the obvious advice is don’t play it. Personally I wouldn’t play it not because of any suspicion of foul play but because as I said previously, it’s a laughably crap game where the odds are stacked against you in the best case scenario anyway.

Games like this are all but a licence to print money and I ask again, if you have a licence to print money would you risk losing it just to print a few counterfeit notes on top?

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Just Basics wrote:

All we do is go round in circles mate. Its great.

Btw your comments are just as flawed as the ones dissagreeing with you.

We will never get past this debate unless we unite in the Riggness!

Then I’d like to throw it out there it should be easy for you to answer and counter the points I’ve made in this and dozens of other threads, instead of falling back to basically “yeah well whatever, I say they’re rigged anyway and you can’t prove they’re not”. It comes back to the basic philosophical axiom that if you make a claim, it’s on you to provide evidence for it, not for other people to prove it wrong.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Well I won’t bother going in circles, but yeah I find it amusing how all these games are rigged when people lose but never when they win. Let he who has insisted on returning a big win to the casino on the basis that the game was clearly rigged be the one to cast the first stone…

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

And again may I ask – if you had a legit legal licence to print real money, why would you risk losing it to produce counterfeit notes? You wouldn’t.

 

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

brizman wrote:

The people that categorically say ‘its not rigged’ have as much proof of this as the people who say it is. Just because someone tells you its regulated and fair..doesn’t mean it is

No, this is exactly the difference. “It’s rigged” is an unsubstantiated opinion. “It’s run by a company which is under UK Gambling Commission licensing and audited in accordance with those regulations” is a hard fact which can be independently verified.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

The single most effective way to maximise profits is to have games which already have a built in profit margin by design. Rigging of any sort introduces huge logistical complications in the entire pipeline from design to deployment to regulatory auditing.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

It isn’t rigged, it doesn’t need to be rigged, it’s already a piss-poor game with terrible odds and return versus your total bet expenditure. I’ve been watching a lot of this recently and you can easily spend £100 just to “qualify” for a live game with – what? A 1 in 8 chance of a box which has more than your total stake, punctuated by offers ranging from less than your bet to less than 1.5x your bet. Looks like a true mug’s game, you’d be better off just opening live roulette and sticking everything on red.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Meh, sure, in about the same way there’s a chance an invisible pygmy called Gumdrop Whimsy follows me around all day…..technically possible, can’t be conclusively proven wrong, but ultimately no reason I would believe it to be true.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Just Basics wrote:

I will just agree to dissagree with you mate. I do get Where your coming from. And i get that it could be all 100% legit.

<span style=”font-size: 1rem;”>I play slots 5 times a week. And used to play online poker Every day for years. And Im hugely massivley down. Yeah im pissed off ive lost so much. But the gut feeling i have is that online gambling is in no way fair. Infact i feel its more corrupt than ever now. My Gut has always served me Well mate. And Im sticking with it.</span>

Posting pictures of big wins and stating youve won thousands is all fair and well. But thats only if its real. My opinion is that maybe 10% is reality. And the other 90 is pure fake to entice the sheeple.

Sure, all I can say is I’m not an affiliate or streamer and I’ve seen those big wins happen, I’ve had them happen for me and I know that thousands of ordinary players hit those kind of wins every day. There are of course thousands more who don’t, they play and lose…but, you know, when Bonanza pays one person 5000x, it’s made possible because the design of the game and its odds is such that a hundred other players that day gave it however many spins and didn’t win shit. That’s how it goes. But the idea that there is some mass conspiracy involving streamers, casinos, the game manufacturers and presumably the regulator to allow certain people to “force in” particular wins or results is one for which there is no evidence.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

JB – you do not play as much as Nickslots. He plays slots for up to 8 hours, almost every single day. The reason it appears streamers hit more of these monster wins is purely because they play so much more than the average punter. But it’s nonsense to say only streamers hit these huge wins, just look at the Big Wins submitted to this site alone over just the last couple of months. I’m no streamer or affiliate and in my time slotting I hit dozens of monster features in the 500x – 2000x range on loads of different games and that was from a fraction of the playing hours big streamers are putting in. Every single hour of every single day thousands of players are winning thousands of pounds every hour. These monster features are not rare or special when you look at the market overall.

As for my evidence that players want these volatile games, the evidence is in their popularity and people’s playing habits. If volatile Megaways titles didn’t do well in the market, providers would stop pumping development resource in to making them – as I said, that’s basic economics. If you look at what people are playing on YouTube, the figures casinos are publishing and the sheer number of new megaways games coming out this year, that is clear evidence the market is lapping them up.

[Author]

Posts