- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
A different post got me wondering about bonus abuse.
Thankfully none of my accounts have ever been closed because of bonus abuse, so I don’t have much experience with it. But where does it really come from?
Now I know I can sometimes appear to be (or be) naive, but I assumed that it evolved from “bonus hunters”. People just opening accounts to take advantage of bonuses. Get a bonus, play a little, get lucky and cash out – and thus the ever increasing tightened bonus terms and conditions.
But I suppose there could bonus teams, bonus sharks and even secretive bonus hunting forums for developing and instrumenting bonus attacks & schemese.
I would imagine that they also involve stolen credit cards, stolen ID’s, hacked accounts and all sorts of other nefarious methods of trickery and theivery.
The most popular form of casino promotion seems to involve highlighting bonuses, even whole sites dedicated to just one type (no deposit bonuses etc). Obviously that type of activity is just attention getting salesmanship.
Surely the casino sites have the primary job of defendng themselves. But as an affiliate can I really innocently get caught up in an abuse situation without any way to prevent it or without any recourse beyond removing a program.
Now I surely wouldn’t want this to become a “how to abuse casino bonuses” post. But does anyone have any futhur insight as to how these abusers operate, or even ways to prevent it?
@rmeeuwsen 242372 wrote:
But where does it really come from?
Amazing after all these years a readily available definition for “bonus abuse” still doesn’t exist – eh? IMO the best fitting one might “often used excuse giving persmission to the casino to rob the player when ever they see fit.” …
I’ve always thought that bonuses should be something that are given to VIP players and in the form of no requirements of play-through. Instead the casinos have tuned these luring traps over the years with outrageous requirements designed to minimize their investment in future players that they hope pan out instead of what I would consider a true “comp” …
If anyone out there has a clear defintion of “bonus abuse” I’d love to hear it.
my 2 cents: I don’t think there is a ‘canned’ definition for “bonus abuse” but rather several different ways of describing it.
Since the word is used by casinos, I’m approaching it from their perspective: a bonus is issued to compensate a player before, during or after a deposit; the bonus is supposed to give that player more play time and afford him a chance to also win.
The bonus has terms and conditions attached, so that in 99% of the cases, the casino feel legitimately protected from having issued a bonus…
Those T&Cs (the “wagering requirements”) obligate the bonus to be ‘turned over’ a certain number of times, so the casino can at least break even on the cost of that bonus – in other words, the bonus needs to be exposed to a certain amount of ‘usage’ so that there is ample chance for it to be lost (but hopefully not such an extreme amount of usage, that the player himself feels abused)…
Now, what is the “bonus abuse”? If we assume that the bonuses are issued to standard ‘gamblers’ – people seeking entertainment, and hope, through chance and skill to win – the assumption is, they will gamble in a normative way: if they win a round, they will react accordingly, if they lose a round, they will react accordingly (eg. usually conservatively).
One kind of bonus abuse works against that above proposition: a player places his bets regardless of the outcomes of his rounds because he’s playing against a known statistical outcome. For example on BJ, he should have a near 50-50 chance of winning (or losing): he places his bets in a flat or even increasing pattern regardless of how the round ends. He may lose 6 times in a row, but continue flat betting – or more logically, doubling his bet – so that when he wins, he at least recuperates the losses from the previous rounds.
The lack of randomness in his game play raises flags at the casino; and if he is disciplined as well, he knows when to stop – when his session ends with him in the green, or at worst, close to zero, but almost never at a loss. It is that robotic, un-random behavior that can lead casinos to feel that the bonus is being “abused”.
There are other styles, such as making initial huge bets, to rack up a quick large balance (followed by very conservative game play, to husband the winnings).
When bonuses are cashable, bonus seekers tend to wager very conservatively; when bonuses are sticky, they go all-out and make very risky big stakes.
Fundamentally, the casinos are looking for ‘randomness’ and normative behavior in the betting patterns.
—-Ironically, many gamblers know all this and don’t even use bonuses anymore – they do the same thing with their own money. The only recourse for casinos is to limit the players’ bet limits, to reduce the risk they pose.
…but psychologically bonuses still give punters a feeling of ‘wealth’, that they can afford to take a risk because there is ‘extra’ money in their account. As a result many players still prefer to receive bonuses instead of declining them…
Bonus abuse comes around a lot where I am focussing on with some websites at the moment; no deposit free spins. What the players do is they make multiple accounts to claim the free spins, just as long untill they make a profit. They then make the necesary deposit and cash out, never to be heard from again in that casino; they will go on to the next.
Thing is, they never make big profits, and some casino’s dont even let them cash out, because they have made multiple accounts. But sometimes they use VPN and use a different ip every time, then the casino can not do so much against this kind of abuse. In the long run though, its just a small fraction of the players that abuse.
@arkyt 242381 wrote:
Amazing after all these years a readily available definition for “bonus abuse” still doesn’t exist – eh? IMO the best fitting one might “often used excuse giving persmission to the casino to rob the player when ever they see fit.” …
I’ve always thought that bonuses should be something that are given to VIP players and in the form of no requirements of play-through. Instead the casinos have tuned these luring traps over the years with outrageous requirements designed to minimize their investment in future players that they hope pan out instead of what I would consider a true “comp” …
If anyone out there has a clear defintion of “bonus abuse” I’d love to hear it.
I would certainly agree that unreputable casinos can use the bonus clause to get out of paying legitimate wins.
As for reputable casinos, if a player is playing within the terms and conditions as set by the casino, then I don’t see how they could realistically claim ‘bonus abuse’ and void all winnings. They should reword their t&c’s (without of course giving a potential abuser a ‘how to abuse bonuses’ guide to use elsewhere.
@the_soc 242390 wrote:
my 2 cents: I don’t think there is a ‘canned’ definition for “bonus abuse” but rather several different ways of describing it
Great in depth discussion on ‘normal play’.
But is it really abuse? The name of the activity is ‘gambling’. If I open one account and follow the casino T&C’s and hit a winning streak I could be wagering randomly or in a steady focused manner as you describe. If I ‘hang around’ just long enough to make the winnings cashable I am still up against the house edge and actually gambling.
Being short sighted, I think I have ‘beaten’ the casino and want to do it again elsewhere. The next time I may not be so lucky. The odds will catch up to me eventually and I will end up with a net loss. Unless there is something I do not know – that’s what the game is all about, isn’t it.
Aren’t the wagering requirements just a way for the game odds to ‘take back’ any short term wins.
@rmeeuwsen 242414 wrote:
Great in depth discussion on ‘normal play’.
But is it really abuse? The name of the activity is ‘gambling’. If I open one account and follow the casino T&C’s and hit a winning streak I could be wagering randomly or in a steady focused manner as you describe. If I ‘hang around’ just long enough to make the winnings cashable I am still up against the house edge and actually gambling.
Being short sighted, I think I have ‘beaten’ the casino and want to do it again elsewhere. The next time I may not be so lucky. The odds will catch up to me eventually and I will end up with a net loss. Unless there is something I do not know – that’s what the game is all about, isn’t it.
Aren’t the wagering requirements just a way for the game odds to ‘take back’ any short term wins.
Touche, rmeeuwsen… Very valid points here. There really seems to be a fine line. What is the “right”?
@Top Casino 242412 wrote:
Bonus abuse comes around a lot where I am focussing on with some websites at the moment; no deposit free spins. What the players do is they make multiple accounts to claim the free spins, just as long untill they make a profit. They then make the necesary deposit and cash out, never to be heard from again in that casino; they will go on to the next.
Thing is, they never make big profits, and some casino’s dont even let them cash out, because they have made multiple accounts. But sometimes they use VPN and use a different ip every time, then the casino can not do so much against this kind of abuse. In the long run though, its just a small fraction of the players that abuse.
It was a very long time ago (before UIGEA) that I was one of those few people that were lucky enough to be able to cash out a ‘no deposit bonus’. The amount was about $100 and did require me to deposit $20 first. But since then I think the terms have been tightened up even further to make it even rarer to win enough.
I usually just advise players to view them as ‘get acquainted’ bonuses rather than opportunities to get something for free. But as long as I play by the rules that the casino sets up, there should be no reason to deny a cash out.
@JillO 242415 wrote:
Touche, rmeeuwsen… Very valid points here. There really seems to be a fine line. What is the “right”?
Thanks.
I’m not trying to argumentative, I just see the ‘other side’ of the story. As far as I am concerned, everyone has valid points – it is just that there is more to it.
So far, I haven’t heard real bonus abuse examples – except of course for players that try to evade T&C”s with multiple accounts. Those are definitely abuse situations – but are there others?
@Top Casino 242412 wrote:
Bonus abuse comes around a lot where I am focussing on with some websites at the moment; no deposit free spins. What the players do is they make multiple accounts to claim the free spins, just as long untill they make a profit. They then make the necesary deposit and cash out, never to be heard from again in that casino; they will go on to the next.
That sounds like account abuse NOT bonus abuse …
@arkyt 242426 wrote:
That sounds like account abuse NOT bonus abuse …
well, lets keep it on account abuse to be able to abuse bonuses.
I too was wondering some time ago about this same question, because of my focus on the search key phrase free spins. So what I did was ask two diferent affiliate managers what they meant with; I am afraid of bonus abuse. And the answer I gave above was what they have told me. After a few months having my freespin site live, and looking into my affiliate reports, I can only agree to what they have said. But up to now without major losses for the casino nor myself.
The same thing could be done with free play bonuses I assume. But other than this I do not really see how people can abuse first deposit bonuses with the high wagering requirements and other T&C’s.
@rmeeuwsen 242414 wrote:
Great in depth discussion on ‘normal play’.
But is it really abuse? The name of the activity is ‘gambling’. If I open one account and follow the casino T&C’s and hit a winning streak I could be wagering randomly or in a steady focused manner as you describe. If I ‘hang around’ just long enough to make the winnings cashable I am still up against the house edge and actually gambling.
Being short sighted, I think I have ‘beaten’ the casino and want to do it again elsewhere. The next time I may not be so lucky. The odds will catch up to me eventually and I will end up with a net loss. Unless there is something I do not know – that’s what the game is all about, isn’t it.
Aren’t the wagering requirements just a way for the game odds to ‘take back’ any short term wins.
The distinction outwardly is subtle: “a winning streak” is legitimate as is “wagering randomly” (ref the quote above), but where a casino may see ‘bonus abuse’ is a systematic accumulation of wins using one of the betting patterns I described above – things very un-random and quite robotic. “Hanging around long enough” is also fine; by contrast the bonus seeker does the opposite – as soon as he wins or reduces his losses to a zero he stops (and logs out to refresh).
Here is the big difference between gambling onland and online: on land, I think what I’m describing as ‘bonus abuse’ would attract the pit boss’ attention and may get that player shown the door. Online, there is no shame – no one will look at you suspiciously if you play one or two rounds of roulette for every login you make: login, spin, win, logout…
With discipline like that, you can beat the casino – and lots of players are doing just that (with and without bonuses)
@the_soc 242446 wrote:
The distinction outwardly is subtle: “a winning streak” is legitimate as is “wagering randomly” (ref the quote above), but where a casino may see ‘bonus abuse’ is a systematic accumulation of wins using one of the betting patterns I described above – things very un-random and quite robotic. “Hanging around long enough” is also fine; by contrast the bonus seeker does the opposite – as soon as he wins or reduces his losses to a zero he stops (and logs out to refresh).
Here is the big difference between gambling onland and online: on land, I think what I’m describing as ‘bonus abuse’ would attract the pit boss’ attention and may get that player shown the door. Online, there is no shame – no one will look at you suspiciously if you play one or two rounds of roulette for every login you make: login, spin, win, logout…
With discipline like that, you can beat the casino – and lots of players are doing just that (with and without bonuses)
What you are referring to in your earlier post is not anything different than finding roulette or blackjack strategies to win. Players finding the optimal strategy. Like the doubling strategy you refer to, which is called the martingale strategy. This has nothing to do with bonus abuse in my honest opinion. It is legitimate and casino’s can not and should not do anything about it.
This being said, with the optimal blackjack strategy for example, the casino has less than 1% advantage over the player. If the player then also uses a bonus, it might be profitable for players to clear a bonus playing blackjack because of the extra money they make with the bonus. This is countered by the casino’s by excluding games like roulette and blackjack from wagering, or discounting the weight put on them.
@the_soc 242446 wrote:
The distinction outwardly is subtle: “a winning streak” is legitimate as is “wagering randomly” (ref the quote above), but where a casino may see ‘bonus abuse’ is a systematic accumulation of wins using one of the betting patterns I described above – things very un-random and quite robotic. “Hanging around long enough” is also fine; by contrast the bonus seeker does the opposite – as soon as he wins or reduces his losses to a zero he stops (and logs out to refresh).
Here is the big difference between gambling onland and online: on land, I think what I’m describing as ‘bonus abuse’ would attract the pit boss’ attention and may get that player shown the door. Online, there is no shame – no one will look at you suspiciously if you play one or two rounds of roulette for every login you make: login, spin, win, logout…
With discipline like that, you can beat the casino – and lots of players are doing just that (with and without bonuses)
I am intrigued.
Are you saying that there really is a legitimate way to ‘beat the casinos’. I assume you picked the game of roulette merely as an example of a simple no strategy game with a low house edge bet (red/black, even/odd). But even with European roulette there is a 2.70% house advantage (I’m sorry if this is beginning to sound like an advertisement).
Does it really matter if you “login, spin, win, logout” or just “login, spin, win, repeat”. It could just as well go like “login, spin, lose, logout” or just “login, spin, lose, repeat”. The game odds are consistent and over time you will lose.
Even with ‘zero house edge games’ (now this is really beginning to sound like an advertisement,sorry)(But hey, if you are trying to give me some website ‘plugs’, then thanks) you are still just trading wins for losses and over the long term you will come out even. In the short term, you could run into a winning streak (no matter how random or robotic the play). Bonuses would give you an edge here, but the casino does not give you a bonus on these games.
I’m sorry, but I just don’t see it as abuse or even workable.
