Efti

Thanks, I've been kind of in and out here but hope to post more regularly from now on I tend to have the opposite reaction to being faced with too many games - I end up just playing the same few old favourites, even if I was originally in the mood to try something different.

This seems like a classic example of a FU clause to me, where the player can't win no matter what Even the dodgier sites I've played at all make it clear that any bonus is considered complete when no funds are left to wager with. I would never willingly play at a casino that deems otherwise. Could it be that there was a small balance left from the free spins? Many sites set a small minimum sum (like 0.5 or 1 credit) below which wagering for a particular bonus can be voided, while some require the balance to read zero. A stuck game round could also be the culprit.

I opened this thread hoping to see some proper definition, data, methodology etc. on the topic of RTP, which is one I have a basic grasp of but am keen to understand more fully. However, it seems the OP is more interested in pushing a conspiracy theory based solely on patchy anecdotal evidence. And that's fine - we all have our own personal pet peeves or suspicions about gambling, especially online... I just hoped this would be a different kind of discussion based on the title.

This is an issue I increasingly come across these days and one that certainly influences what games I chose to play and at which casinos. Obviously, everyone has their own criteria and opinions of what constitutes a 'perfect' place to gamble and I often see discussions over who has the fastest payouts, widest selection/variety, biggest jackpots etc. Yet site layout or software design doesn't seem to come up much, even though it is such a crucial part of the online casino experience, especially now that most operators offer games from multiple providers (unlike when I started playing). Players can have have literally hundreds of games to choose from, but the vast choice can quickly become overwhelming if not presented properly. Aside from the basic groupings like card/table games, video poker and slots, some online sites put little effort into categorizing or organizing their product in a way that customers can easily go through and pick what they want. Even basic features like alphabetical ordering or a search bar are not guaranteed to be available, let alone the ability to sort by game provider or other options like the number of paylines or jackpot size.

Thanks for the suggestions It's the AskGamblers side I'm having problems with as I'm just not getting any confirmation text after inputting my phone number.

This seems like a great idea - too bad I've been unable to verify my mobile number(s) despite repeated attempts on separate occasions

A situation like this one is why I'm often wary of bonuses these days, when once upon a time I wouldn't play without them. I agree the timing and wording of the email offer is ambiguous, even if the casino is 'technically' in the right.

I would operate on the assumption that it's option d. That's based mostly on my experience with promotion eligibility, though, as I usually play with small amounts and have rarely (if ever) come close to reaching any set deposit limit.

Also want to point out a glaring factual error at the end of the article: should be the 2005 Gambling Act as Tony Blair was definitely not PM in 2015.

Just saw the news on the website and agree it's pretty major. Not a UK resident but suspect that, like the passing of the UIGEA in the US that ultimately changed the entire online poker landscape, this could have a more profound effect than is immediately apparent.

Wonder why the Instagram account is not linked at the bottom of the forum, though it is on the main site pages?

Not familiar with that site but it's good news indeed if they're moving towards a more player-friendly rewards system

Not had time to go through the entire thread but just the few pages I've read make my jaw drop Wish I had the guts, funds and luck to spin some of those big results.

It wasn't always this way, of course When I started playing online casino way back when, bonuses had far lower wagering requirements and fewer game/bet restrictions. I routinely cashed out on almost all the match deposit promos I claimed before table games were effectively banned from contributing to WR, which at the time was usually no higher than x20. Now it's all about bonuses being graciously granted by casinos in order to 'extend playing time' - in reality, to trap customers into draining away their funds on high house edge slots with a snowball's chance in ***** of completing the almost impossible playthrough

I also played poker online quite a lot until several years ago. Even had vague pretensions of doing it more seriously, possibly making a living from it, until the US ban changed the entire landscape for the worse... Out of curiosity more than anything else, I recently popped onto the poker room at a major online bookie. Players were very few from what I could tell (no overall numbers advertised in the lobby as used to be the norm) and the games tight, based on average pot sizes. @copyyy has already detailed some of the reasons why and I'd already observed the situation for myself some time back. Still, I was a bit surprised and obviously disappointed at the barren rock garden I recently found, even if it wasn't one of the networks cited above.