Topic: Before you take sides - page 5. (Read 742 times)

We will not know whether the story is original or fake but it is clear, we only know that the casino as the business owner will not like it if there is a gambler who managed to win a lot of money. Casinos might not give them anything because the gambler can win it easily because of his luck. And that is normal because the casino wants to protect its business and avoid great losses. Besides, we can't do anything if the casino finally decides like that and only the rules. Indeed, the casino still allows us to play but we already feel uncomfortable playing gambling in Kasinon. And if that has happened, we can move to other casinos that can provide comfort in playing gambling.

Back to the original rule that the casino House will never lose. Even though there are claims from gamblers who say they win too often, it is clear that this is just nonsense. Even local casinos never say so to prohibit gamblers from winning, but does that really happen?
Casinos with well-known reputations take advantage of people like this with their influence and there is compensation that can be achieved by both parties. It doesn't matter if his followers gain or lose, because everything he gets comes from other people's losses.

You're on the Internet, people are quick to judge here but that don't mean that people are invested too much on which side they think is bad or good, they just simply look at the surface and decide then and there which is not wrong but at the same time a bad practice. Now if there are evidence that can help the accuse solidify their claims, I don't think that it needs a lot of thinking power to choose which side plus anyone should be capable of critical thinking so don't be too overthinking that people taking sides for the heck of it.

but I think some of the gamblers' opinions could be right, I mean the casinos feel they are strong and the words of an unclear gambler will not be listened to by other people.
unless the player who comes is a rich person who has the effect and power to say that.
I'll tell you one thing, if you are RIGHT but you don't have relationships and power then you can easily be said to be WRONG by those who have these things.

It's hard to find honest gamblers and casinos, both of whom may want what they want, namely money, so as long as the case includes screenshot evidence, it will definitely be enough to prove that the accused is guilty and the guilty must also provide strong evidence to dispel the accusation. the accuser, as long as everyone has evidence everyone will definitely side with one of them.

I personally don't really take sides with anyone unless the two of them are met with the evidence they include, maybe I will side with the one that is strongest, but in reality what we get is that no one is truly honest and open and has the same interest in getting money. The gambler will of course try as hard as possible to get his money, while the casino, apart from wanting the gambler's money, also on average cannot prove proof because of security. mostly it is the casino's reputation that deters honest gamblers 

What do we perceive from the casino's perspective? Businesses run on profits, not wishes. Can we truly believe they're spotless? You mentioned, “Reputable casinos do their strong research...”, but who defines reputation? Do we agree on review websites that encourage casino trust? It's an interesting problem because the house always wins, right? Even though punters and they know it, we dance this everlasting dance. That's captivating. Electronic avatars, shimmering, jingling games, are trusted to be programmed fairly. But if you win too often in their digital halls, maybe they'll find a way to win back?

I agree with you, banning winners from their casino is not a good business practice and will probably lead to some blowback. There are so many different review sites online of gambling websites that the news will spread quickly and this could ruin the brand name of the casino. Not sure why the number of people claiming to get banned from casinos rose so much in the last few weeks. It doesn't make any sense that there is now a higher number of winners than there was a few months ago. The casino games are still the same and our winning chance didn't change at all. Also, the casino have all the statistics, if there really would be a rise of people winning large sums of money then the casinos need to react. They are private companies that operate to make a profit, what includes to payout big winners from time to time. What I found so surprising is that why would a casino ban people from ever coming back to their tables? Wouldn't they want to win the money back they lost? The statistics are still on the side of the casino, with the house edge they are more likely to win next time the gambler plays. 

You are also making assumptions and not first hand witness. You are not insider of the casino and you have not been banned so you are saying it from the probability point of view. And not real as well. Your trusted friend can disappoint you one day so you don't fully support him or her when did see what really happened between them, you can only speak your side and leave the rest so that when investigation came up you will still be a neutral man in the case.

In most time those things happen in the submitting process of KYC because they KYC is not clear or misinformation in the KYC documents and others. My argument on this casino. The gambler deposit funds successful to the casino wallet, and play games and win games, then he should be given his wins without stress. It is his money and not theirs so why the stress. Casinos are for business, so if a gambler wins big everytime, they will ban the person if they noticed him. Because is you have to loss for them to gain and pay workers so frequently winning would affect them be a big company or small company they will ban you. Or if they didn't ban you then they would manipulate the system for you and you will loss massively. Therefore, casinos ban gamblers account for many reasons and not necessarily that the gambler is always at fault.

In sportsbooks, it's common to see gamblers getting banned or limited because they win too much, but with casinos, you almost don't see it happen unless they catch you breaking the rules. I agree that the stuff we read from other gamblers should be taken less seriously because i've seen some of them explain their situation and make things sound like they've done nothing wrong until the casino steps in to explain their reason behind the punishment.

Unfortunately, it's the opposite since gamblers would do almost anything to get their money back even though they lost it fair and square.

One who abide the rules means that he is wrong therefore he cannot accept the right way of earning. Believing others blindly is a big mistake in every situation may be its gambling or something else.

You will not tell a lie to anyone when you don't involved in gambling because neither you will abide the rules nor you will clarify yourself by telling lie to others. A person who is wrong will never believe that they are wrong but will show off that they are trustworthy person but the system is wrong therefore they leave that business but actual truth is unknown by follows.

Problems like these false claims are some of the importance of joining a forum like bitcoin talk. This platform gives both the casinos and gamblers the privilege of submitting their case and defending themselves. The scam accusation section in the forum is like a law court where each party will put forth pieces of evidence to prove their case. And the members of the forum will deliberate on the matter and come out with recommendations. Any party found guilty will receive the appropriate sanctions. From these proceedings, I have keenly observed that it is not all scam accusation against a casino that is true. Some are the fault of the gambler or they simply refused to read or obey the terms of service  

most of the cases related to "big casino" are just people that have made some scam and try to to hide these reality with such allegations on forum . there are really few cases that have always been resolved since if a player has reason to highlight an issue, anyone has interest to close such issue.

If gamblers break the rules, casino should punish them immediately and not wait until they start to win big for them to search and start reviewing if the gamblers have broken any rules in the past for them to use as a reason to ban them from playing. That is also bad. Punish offenders immediately, do not overlook the rules they break and allow them to continue to deposit money in the casino to play with, and when then start winning you remember their crime, that is bad.

I had already commented on this in the two threads I saw that talked about this subject, and as I said in those two threads, I don't really believe that casinos don't like people who play with a lot of money and win, that's because all casinos know a lot Well, at the end of the day people are losing more money at the casino than winning money at the casino, and even if a person won money at the casino that person would go back to playing at the casino using the same money they won at the casino and in the long term that person I would lose all my money at the casino. In other words, there is no point in winning a lot of money at the casino and continuing to play, because at the end of the day the person will lose everything.

The only way for people to really beat the house would be if they won a lot of money and never played a game of chance again, and see that this person would have to win an amount that exceeded all the losses they had since the first day they started gambling. play and many people don't realize that. They think that since they've won a lot, they're already beating the house, but they don't sit down and do the math on how much they've already lost in that casino. That's why I repeat myself again, casinos do not need to prohibit customers who bet with a lot of money, of course each casino has its maximum bets based on the money that the casino can pay out at most.

It is true that you need to hear the other side of the story before believing such. I do see that there have been stories that are against the casinos that I know of but then, I'll later on figure out that the mistake comes from the person that accuses these casinos. They're making false stories and want to be taken on the side of the majority, but in fact, they're the one that has made the violation or made the mistake. It's easy to make stories that will show how terrible are the casinos and will take the sentiments of the readers. But, without verifying if the story is real, that's how the process will go. So, do not take sides if the story isn't verified yet and you are not able to confirm that. From the time, you hear something is wrong with that casino and make it look like they're terrible enough but in your belief, there's an odd feeling that the story can't be real or right. Because when you hear them out and answers the accuser, you'll find it out that the accuser is the one that has done the terrible thing and he just want someone to be on his side for doing that wrong doing and violation against the casino.

It is an SOP to verify the information and validity of the story before taking sides.  I agree that most people often tell a story where they had experienced injustice when in fact they are the one who is committing the breach of terms.  We have seen many of such stories here in the forum when a newbie account threw accusations of injustice to the casino because their account where banned or their fund withdrawals were suspended.  But when both sides of the story were given we found out that the one who has the accusation is actually the one who is committing illegal activities.

And I think a reputable casino can definitely use various means to detect whether a gambler is cheating or a cheater and even if the casino gets information from other casinos, they will definitely do thorough research and monitoring of cheating or suspicious gamblers. And if the casino has strong suspicions then they have the right to make a decision because the casino does not want to be harmed by cheating.
and for that we also shouldn't believe in one of the two too easily until in the end we know who is actually wrong and right.

Many gamblers here who complain on the forum are later proven to be liars. I've seen dozens of these people over the years, but there are also legit cases like when a casino is trying to discourage a player from withdrawing by having enormous KYC requirements, almost impossible to complete without taking a lot of time and spending some money.
I wish gamblers were more honest when it's their fault.


If he's good enough to count cards, I'd applaud him. Not many people can do that.

There's already a thread about that and my opinion is top casinos will not do that because the community thinks that they don't deserve to be in a top spot, top casinos have the funds for members' withdrawals because there is more money coming in if there's huge winning, there's a possibility that small casinos or newly launched casinos are the ones who are likely to restrict gamblers when they cannot keep with winners' withdrawals.
That's a big difference between playing in small casinos and big casinos, big casinos have a reputation to protect, and they need to sustain withdrawals instead of restricting them.

In most cases involving reputable casinos, the main reason why gamblers get banned is the suspicion by the house they are cheating. Sometimes it's not possible to prove with evidences, but strong suspicions are usually enough for the casino to have its verdict. Anyway, I think we shouldn't take any sides without having a clear understanding of the situation, because both sides involve human beings and where there are human beings, there are strong propensities to fraud, lies and manipulation of public opinion. Each case is one case and must be analyzed individually.