Forum

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Haz40 wrote:

I get that completely and sorry there is a but. When my lass was asked for bank statements she withdrew 5 amouts. 4 were round £100 to £200 and one was for 2k. In fact the first withdrawal was 2k. The 4 other withdrawals were approved and in the bank within 24 hours. The 2k withdrawal was pending for 3 days been available to reverse until proof of earnings were submitted. Why were the other withdrawals approved yet the biggest wasn’t even though the 2k withdrawal was made first. Fortunately the money was received eventually but why did they approve further withdrawals? My guess is the obvious. It was a hell of a lot more money than the other withdrawals.

Obviously I can’t answer definitively on this particular case, but in general based on normal casino behaviour, there are a few things which could have been at play here:

1. The larger withdrawal was off a small deposit, or a single very big win and was being security checked to ensure its legitimacy and that it wasn’t the result of a fault or manipulation. This is normal, in fact you will generally find the bigger the size of the withdrawal the longer it takes to be verified by the casino back office.

2. The smaller withdrawals were processed then the larger withdrawal pushed the total withdrawals on the account over the verification threshold. There is an amount you are allowed to withdraw in aggregate before casinos are required to conduct these checks on you. In this scenario, the casino is trying to do right by you by releasing as much of the money to you as it’s legally allowed to before requiring you to undergo verification checks.

3. The fact that 5 withdrawals were made at around the same time triggered an automated flag on the account for AML checks, blocking the back office staff from approving it until verification had been entered. I can tell you that sort of thing happens in the financial industry too – part of my job is building and maintaining software used for client accounts and we’ll have directives from the regulator which mean if X, Y and Z happen, we have to make the software embargo transfers and withdrawals until checks have been carried out, so there’s nothing the people on the helpdesk can do about it. “Computer says no” – it says no because our lawyer’s interpretation of the regulator’s rules were that we had to make the computer say no in that situation. We can’t risk a customer support agent trying to be helpful inadvertently causing us to break the law and get a massive fine.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Exactly, KYC annoys players, the casinos don’t want it. Guess who’s never going to come back to a casino again and deposit and lose all their salary and winnings? Someone who tried to withdraw and couldn’t, that’s who. Casinos want you to be able to withdraw because they know many players are going to redeposit and pump those winnings back in a day or two later. It’s not in their financial interest to try and keep you from doing that.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Mr B wrote:

Why is argyl doing it again ? it = ignoring basic facts to defend the industry. has a really biased viewpoint and maintains what is written by the industry is exactly what happens when in fact, we know it isn’t.

“SOME” casinos take the living piss while others simply don’t. That’s not the law. That IS corruption in the industry. I have made this perfectly clear. KYC is being abused to cause problems and delay payments. FACT.

Taking the money for a new TV at Argos and then DEMANDING identification if the TV stops working is generally fucked up.

Going on to LeoVegas and depositing £1000 with your debit card to then give up and withdraw £300 to be told “you must go out and purchase a form of ID that will range between £15 and £88 to get your withdrawal processed” is fifteen shades of bollocks. Strangely enough, the debit card is enough to go to the bank and withdraw thousands without having your gum swabbed. Last I recall I wasn’t piss tested at the ATM.

KYC when they want money back. KYC is not a gambling addict by accepting everything they have until they withdraw.

Industry regulation that is sporadic and only on withdrawals.

I’ve shared my own experiences playing and withdrawing online which differ from yours. I don’t know why you interpret someone else having a different opinion or experience to you as a personal attack, it isn’t.

I’m not biased towards casinos at all, I’ve just never seen any remotely convincing evidence that they’re out to shaft you. Funny how I’ve always stuck to bonus terms, verified my ID (via a very simple email process on over a dozen casinos, none of which took more than 24 hours to complete) and never had a problem withdrawing amounts ranging from £50 to £5000 at a time.

Writing “FACT” in capitals after a statement does not make it a fact, or any more of a compelling argument. As I’ve said before, I don’t doubt for a second a casino will cheerfully revoke your winnings if you’ve been found to breach terms, but the requirement to verify your identity and the source of wealth for your deposits is not their decision. Now that actually is a fact and one you’re free to check with the Gambling Commission, by all means please don’t take my word for it. Casinos objected to the recent KYC source of wealth measures being introduced – why would they do that if it was something that gave them a smoke screen with which to withhold players’ money?

https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/for-gambling-businesses/Compliance/General-compliance/AML/How-to-comply/Anti-money-laundering-compliance-advice.aspx

https://www.gamblingmetropolis.com/what-are-online-casino-kyc-procedures/

As I say, the reason I know about the reality of AML and KYC procedures is because I work in the financial industry where we are subject to the very same bureaucratic rules in scrupulous annual audits and the penalties we face for not complying with them.

You claim the regulator is not independent or doesn’t take action against casinos, but this simply isn’t true, as shown by the numerous compliance cases and fines they’ve levied against online casinos in recent years.

For you as a player, this is not complicated, it’s really really simple: if you can’t show photographic ID, proof of address, proof of card ownership or you’re not willing to show the source of your income you use to make deposits, don’t play, because you’re setting yourself up for tears later on when you try to withdraw.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Haz40 wrote:

At one site i was told my withdrawal had to go back on the card i had made the majority of my deposits with as i was using new card same account. I was asked to provide proof of the old card which i no longer had. The missus was asked to provide bank statements with another. I had major problems with another who let me deposit using a business debit card then refused withdrawal as they didn’t accept business cards yet allowed multiple deposits. I’m not tarnishing them all with the same brush but some i wouldn’t trust at all. I’m not naming any of these sites because some are the main ones people play at.

I’ve never been asked for bank statements, but it does happen as part of AML/KYC checks to verify that your money is coming from a legitimate source. Wise thing to do when you deposit using any card to any casino is take a photo of the front and back at that point, so you have them to send even if they later expire or get lost / whatever. You can still withdraw to a cancelled card and you’ll get the money in your bank account.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

I also maintain that with every company having different expectations of DNA test that surely a minimal need is being surpassed deliberately to cause issues.

I’ve never been asked for more than photo ID, proof of address and proof of card possession, either at LV or any other casino I played at and I made deposits and withdrawals in the thousands (£32k in, £22k out at Casumo alone). On VideoSlots I had an expired card they were asking for proof of, I just told them it expired over six months earlier and I no longer had it, they removed it from my account and it was fine. I’m not LeoVegas nor do I know your account history so I can’t tell you why they want whatever particular card verified, but in my experience casinos operate to one of two models when it comes to withdrawals: either any withdrawal has to go back to the same card that was used to make the deposit it came from, or you have to withdraw (and subsequently verify) to whatever card you’ve used most frequently / made the most deposits from. These rules again come from regulatory requirements the casinos have no say in.

Many MANY people will give up and cancel a withdrawal, in the hopes of win or loss, depending if you are the customer or the company.

That is on the player. If the money’s important to you, don’t gamble it, it’s not rocket science.

Money laundering : Yes, I fully agree that most customers are mob based cocaine dealers who’s £28.52 withdrawal should rightly be deemed suspicious.

Again, it is not the casinos who have this suspicion, it’s simply the industry regulation. Casinos are not going to risk a multi million pound fine for breaching AML and KYC rules because you deem you should be above the law when it comes to these checks.

I 100% maintain that the industry is rife with corruption.

I know you do. If I believed that, I wouldn’t deposit and play.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Redbet and Mr Green are the same company, I think? Also usual bit about the casino don’t control the games, it’s nothing to do with them if you’ve had a bad run on one particular site, it’d have been the same if you’d played the same games at the same times on any other casino. I had a net profit from playing at Redbet, for example – one of only two casinos I can say that about.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

This stuff that casinos do is generally for legal and regulatory compliance. I do agree that you actually should have to verify before you’re allowed to deposit in the first place and indeed I was always very careful to read the terms in full when I played with bonus money – casinos are profit oriented businesses and of course if there’s some technicality they can legitimately jump on to say you violated the terms and conditions so they don’t have to pay you, that’s what they’ll do.

But I will also add in my time gambling online I played at over a dozen licensed casinos including Casumo, Redbet, Videoslots, Energy, LeoVegas and Rizk and I never had a problem withdrawing total amounts in the thousands from any of them, nor did any of them make the verification process difficult. It was just a matter of sending in ID, proof of address and a photo of the front and back of the card(s) I used to deposit and being careful to stay within the published terms whenever I used a bonus. Tbh I rarely took bonuses because I find the wagering on them in most cases is ridiculous and more or less unbeatable anyway.

Unfortunately the regulatory law and bureaucracy around ID and AML checks is very cumbersome, I know this because I work in an industry subject to it myself and the penalties come annual audit time for not being seen to have ticked every box and dotted every i can be immense – huge fines in the millions or a block on trading. The bottom line for me is UK licensed casinos do not deliberately try to screw you over as the player and withhold your winnings from you. They don’t need to, the games already make them a guaranteed profit margin and they operate in a saturated market dominated by consumer choice where reputation is everything. If you read the details of people’s complaints about casinos refusing to pay, 99% fall within either a breach of bonus terms which the player could have easily avoided, or failure to provide the right documents. Casinos don’t want to have to do this “know your customer” shit, from their point of view it’s bad for business because it just pisses off the players. They’d be quite content to let money launderers run their funds through them and lose 3% to the casino in the process. It’s not the casinos who decided you have to send them copies of your bank statement and sign declarations about your income, but they’re not going to risk a multi million pound fine for not doing it.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Worth mentioning that Videoslots are using lower RTP versions of game from certain providers such as PnG who make this option available. The distinction is that VS themselves cannot manipulate or lower the RTP on a game, so it’s not like they can just pick any game and make it pay less.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

It’s unfortunately very easy for a glitch like this to make it in to a game. I can understand an expectation that it would have been picked up during testing prior to release but on the other hand the reality of building software for a living for coming on 20 years now means I can also appreciate how fuck ups like this happen and don’t get noticed until you’re in production and people are actually using your product.

But as members here will know from my many threads on the topic, I do know quite a bit about how slots work and the backend (which is in charge of your game results and therefore wins) is completely separate, this was clearly just an unfortunate frontend bug. Obviously there are few bugs more irritating than one for a slot player which gives them the impression of a bigger win than they got and manufacturers do work very hard to try to avoid them. But pont is, the reason the terms always say malfunction voids pays is not to screw you the player but because you simply will get occasional flaws in programming….we are after all fallible humans.

You never actually won a retrigger, that’s the reality. As a player I can appreciate that’s a bitter pill which will piss you off, as a programmer I can appreciate these things happen despite good talent and robust processes.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Not nearly as long as some people but I’ve done 14 hours straight online, entirely off a single £200 deposit. Great day that was, cashed out about £2.5k around 2am never having staked higher than 75p on any spin, any game. When I was regularly playing online, I’d typically go for about 6-8 hours before I found I got bored and would start doing silly high stake roulette spins just for a bit of excitement. Lost many a hard earned accumulated balances that way, though of course I also got a few monster hits.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Had a bash on this on free play the other day; 200 spins to land the bonus, gave me ask the audience with 80% on A, donked me immediately with correct answer B (5%). Glad I never played it for real.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

The Bandit wrote:

Roedgaard72 wrote:

I assume the play within their means. As for Nick he is part of a multi million business (not trying to defend). What I find strange is the streamers that started out saying the play at 1£ stake because people can relate to that and 1 year later they play 5-40£ spins regulary and even 100£ spins on BOD (yes some sites allows that).

The “you used to play 60p” is often thrown at me. Here are my own reasons. When i started, there was Nick, Kim, Paul and David (Slot win) that was pretty much it, the norm was 60p, i had very little experience on online slots outside of Raging Rhino and Bruce Lee, both of which i used to regularly play on way higher stakes up to as much as £9 odd on Bruce. I spent the first few months of my channel learning games, learning what to expect, what to chase, what not to chase, even doing this at 60p stake left me in a £24k down hole! I raised the stake one day, all the way up to £1.80 and bang, i had a £3,700+ win on Game of Thrones. That led me to place my norm at £1.50 – £2 and tbh to this day, my norm stake is still around £2/3

 

I’ll try to articulate why I enjoy the videos at £2 stakes and not the ones at £30, £40 stakes. Although £2 is a little bit higher than I typically played at (unless I’d had a good day and got my balance up to around a grand), it’s very relatable to watch. I can feel the same excitement when you hit a Captain Venture bonus on that stake as I did when I was playing. It gives me the same rushes, the same fulfilment of sensation as I’d get from playing myself. I can empathize and picture it being me celebrating a 500x feature win, or being annoyed that the gamble lost or whatever.

When the balance is £70k and it’s £40 a spin, or a £2k feature buy, for me it’s like I might as well be watching a video of someone on free play using pretend money. The bets don’t even matter at that kind of balance. There’s no feeling of jeopardy or consequence, no thrill of success. It’s like playing poker with matchsticks, I don’t care if I lose matchsticks, I’ll make completely different bets, calls and bluffs than I would if it was real money at stake.

So the entertainment for me in watching a streamer is at a particular stake range I feel I can relate to. If it’s outside that, i might as well just load up High Voltage on demo mode and bash it at £20 a spin….matchsticks.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Malkychamp wrote:

Greedy? Well no they play on that stake as its max stake with the bonus attached to the deposit. Playing on lower (normal) stakes mathematically they will bust out more often so its actually more profitable to play max stake and give yourself the best chance to beat the wagering

I wouldn’t in all my own experience as a gambler agree with your maths there. It all depends what balance you have to play with and £5 on £500 balance including bonus is 100x to wager. That’s nothing, you’ll bust out almost certainly on that kind of stake, every time. When I was playing, my initial load would be 500x my planned stake level and that got me plenty of features and decent profitable cashouts. I’d say 500x is about the minimum really to have a reasonably good session. On a balance of £500 I’d be staking £1, maybe £1.50 at a stretch depending on the game. Even those stakes on many games could yield £2k, £5k even £10k if you’re super lucky.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

Outside of my own threads, it’s not an argument I’m taking part in anymore.

The claim which originally piqued my attention was that a slot game cannot have a genuinely random result on each and every spin while also having a designed RTP of less than 100%.

I have conclusively proven that claim to be wrong. Not theoretically, not hypothetically, not in my opinion…..whether this is possible or not is no more a matter of debate or opinion than whether the squared length of the hypotenuse of a right angled triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the two other sides. Yes it is, we can mathematically prove it to 100% certainty and it’s that simple. I’ve shown the maths of how a slot can be random and have a designed RTP and broken down the explanation in to plain English over a dozen times. Conspiracy theories on whether the whole industry is corrupt are an entirely different matter and don’t interest me.

[ar argyl53 WANTED $419 Outlaw]

I, for a period of 1 hour at any time this month, if you can decide between you, will SHOW you what the back office of a casino looks like. Ill show you what can and cant be done. Ill show you how players are tracked, how bonuses are given, how the CRM will send you bonuses through segmentation, and stop most of these stupid threads about casinos rigging things. They cant. If they could then 4 of the ones we built last month wouldnt have paid out at a loss.

@eejit101 it doesn’t matter, pointless exercise. There is nothing and no volume of evidence you can show some people which will persuade them the games aren’t rigged and controlled. You could show them the full source code of a real slot they actually play and it wouldn’t make a difference, the answer would just be “oh yeah but the one I play is rigged, this is just what they show other people”, you’ll just be told you’re part of the conspiracy and cover up (which involves hundreds of people who’ve all taken an unbreakable vow of silence, I guess).

You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves in to. Honestly, don’t waste your time.

[Author]

Posts