Warning: Illegal string offset 'type' in ..../includes/class_postbit.php(345) : eval()'d code on line 57
Online Accounts
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: Online Accounts

  1. #1

    Online Accounts

    These are so much worse than FOBTs that I have not got a single one open anymore.

    In most cases I could reopen them but would need to reverse self exclusions. In the cases of Ladbrokes and 888, I cannot because I would not take their nonsense and they got sick and tired of me. I racially abused the frog VIP manager of 888 because he's a cunt. Ladbrokes I got loads of bonuses out of for very trivial things but I went too far in the end, after the free Ipad and Ipad Mini.

    On William Hill I verbally abused other players and a dealer in the live chat, I refuse to send my ID in because they won't disclose the chat transcript without me making a written request and paying 10! I argued that I am entitled to the transcript under the Data Protection Act. They will never get a penny out of me again.

    Coral I called the VIP manager a mouse. He took offence. Good. Account is closed because they are 'investigating' me (might be something to do with my latest 'trick' which some of you think is/was fake).

    Betfred didn't pay me what they claimed they would for my 1st deposit so I made my deposit limit 1 per YEAR.

    Paddy Power I called one of the VIP escalation managers a sad wanker troll because I had previously said I do not want him dealing with my queries as he always gave me negative responses (example: "Can I have a bonus please?" "Never!"). I had to serve a 6 month ban which cost THEM thousands and now I refuse to fill in their paperwork they want me to fill so I can give them money!


    Why am I proudly boasting about the fact I have abused staff because I got annoyed about refusing bonuses? Because I am glad with the results! I no longer 'do my bollocks' online as I used to. I found many flaws in promotions which were extremely unfair to customers. Just one example was a promotion where you got free spins for playing a certain game for a certain amount of cash. When I got the free spins I won about 250, 170 of it disappeared into thin air... when I asked why, they said it was because it was possible to qualify for it for up to 5 days and that it clearly stated in the promotion terms that the maximum winnings would be capped at 400! I argued that 250 is below 400, they came back with 'but we divide it for 5 days so it is 80 per day!' What UTTER bollocks! It stated that nowhere in the promotion terms. I got paid eventually then abused them and got my account closed.

    I actually have SERIOUS ideas as to how these bastards should have to operate and not destroy peoples' lives. Mine was destroyed both by my addiction and the ease to just plough life changing money into accounts with no questions asked. Not that it was all my fault, the promotions these wankers offer are impossible to refuse at times such as 750 for 750 with just x1 wagering. I was once given 2000 with x1 wagering as a bonus because I'd done my bollocks on Ladbrokes and given a 3000 'bonus advance' which would be for my next 3 months worth of play. I actually said I wanted it because I was a bit short of cash at the time! Responsible gambling, eh? LOL! That was Ladbrokes who I have a very good case to sue.

    I had a Sporting Bet account with which there were a few very dubious things done to keep me playing including being sent a brand new Macbook Air because they had refused to send it to the actual winner because 'there was something dodgy about his account' and I was sent some salmon by post! I also had 200 deposited DIRECTLY into my bank account by their VIP manager when I had said I was 'a bit skint'!

    I've smashed a laptop up in anger, I've lost 3000 in a car park because I was playing blackjack on my iphone (I stopped having smartphones because of ease of access to online gambling before all these account closures/suspensions), I've done a whole large bank loan online in a couple of days! Not proud, just being honest.


    I know I've rambled a bit here but this is a serious post and I'd like to get some SERIOUS responses.

    Had I not had that coffee, I probably would never have written it!
    Last edited by Ruler of The World; 25-10-2016 at 03:42 AM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member feeder22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    1,370
    You're right companies should also be held responsible along with the addict, but that'll never happen in any greater respect than what we're currently seeing (self exclusion/ links to problem gambling portals etc). Money/taxes swing it to such a degree that any form of gambling addiction will always be the addict who ultimately carries blame. They can do as many neurological, social etc tests and surveys as they like, but it's like smoking the more appealing the tobacco companies are allowed to make it the more addicts they'll have. Without knowing little if anything on the subject i'd wager that the majority of people who use any form of online gambling have shown addictive tendencies in terms to their pattern of play/bets etc.
    He isn't right of course, he just thinks he is.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    29
    Well at least we know that angry, frustrated, chip on the shoulder person that you are here, isn't just confined to here. So you've essentially just admitted to racially abusing someone working for 888. Verbally abusing other players/dealer on William Hill. Abusing the Coral vip manager and calling the Paddy Power manager a trademark sad wanker troll. As usual you have some pathetic feeble justification for this. In this case it was a good thing because it got all your accounts closed. Why not just self exclude, why not just not open, why not just limit the stake. It's always someone else to blame or you'll only acknowledge minor responsibility. Of course online gambling should be banned, of course roulette machines should be banned or have there stakes significantly lowered. The reality is though at the minute they aren't and it is up to the individual to summon the strength from within to control compulsive behaviour or go out their way to seek help. If they aren't able to do so or can't be bothered then they carry the consequences which is a life lived like yours sounds.

  4. #4
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    29
    Let's not forget as well that people like you existed before bookies having roulette machines and online gambling. I would imagine you were gambling way before this. People like you with them tendencies will always find a way. If you bar yourself from every online site you'll go the bookies more. If you exclude yourself from some bookies you'll go others. If you were barred from every bookies you'd probably go the casino more often. If you barred yourself from every casino you'd go the horse track, dog track, private card games you name it you'll find it. So the issue always essentially comes back to the same thing. Upto the individual to control themselves.

  5. #5
    Whoever you are, CJS, you obviously have it in for me and there is no real basis for you to feel that way.

    Some of what you say regarding this is correct, however, fundamentally you are completely wrong. By FAR the most convenient way to gamble away an absolute fortune in a very short space of time is online gambling. There are no checks carried out, no questions or requirements for proof of earnings, jobs, etc. They should have a Gamcare security feature on every debit/credit card meaning you have to be registered with them, have a gambling limit set for you and so on. That way, a person earning 20K per year can't lose 20K online no matter how many accounts he opens because they are all on this checking system and it cannot be overridden by casinos.

    I get what you are saying about ultimately it being down to the gambler showing restraint, but bringing gambling into our homes is taking the piss.

    What I was trying to get across was that they love bonusing people who are clearly addicts who feel they get 'looked after' by these cunts. You might not believe how vindictive the individuals in charge of accounts can be and how I was egged on plenty of times to gamble more as I was 'due a decent run' or told my luck couldn't get any worse. The Coral wanker deserved abuse, he is lucky I didn't smash his face in last time I saw him.

    But going back to it, here, yet again, is a thread I started to have a DISCUSSION only to be ambushed and slated again and again. Even the scumbag casino people are the good guys when they're up against me!

    Me vs. ANYONE = me at fault. Regardless of what the reality of the situation is.
    Last edited by Ruler of The World; 25-10-2016 at 07:22 PM.

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    29
    EVERYTHING is correct that I said. It all boils down to you playing the blame game for your recklessness. I have already stated that I believe online gambling should be banned outright. Some people who gamble online responsibly may disagree with that and ask why. I'm not a smoker and to be honest I would probably advocate a ban them also. Again lots of people would disagree. This pie in the sky cloud cuckoo land talk about proof of earnings and job and such is just nonsense. It would be far more difficult to control and monitor than you think and I am sure if people were determined enough to gamble they would find a way around it. You can place restrictions on your card and account anyway via your bank. Ultimately though there are ways to override these and the issue still comes back to self control. Nobody is bringing gambling into homes. You are choosing to gamble whilst at home. This would still apply if you put several 5 hundred pound horse bets on or threw a grand on football or golf bets via the bookies and then watched it at home. What you say about the bonuses I guess you can interpret as immoral on their behalf. It's not illegal though and I have zero doubt if you were them and doing their job for a salary then you would fulfill your job expectations and do the same. They are a business after all and you are the customer /mug punter who plays all their negative expectation, guaranteed long run losing games, to heavy stakes. Let's turn the tables and imagine someone who had a gambling problem on slot machines in pubs and frequently put hundreds in them. All their wages basically but they couldn't help themselves. Let's go way back and imagine you've just left a couple of pound in a cop the lot, and you know how harsh they played after being done. Guy says to you "Did you get anything out of this mate". Honestly are you going to say yes mate I made over 2 hundred on it and you will lose hundreds on it if you stay on it or are you going to say not much mate slightly down. I rest my case, you can't have it both ways. People, businesses etc are in it for themselves and to make money. Please though stop with the bleating and persecution complex. Your original post confessions showed you've exhibited angry irrational behaviour plenty of times and outside of here. That type of person will provoke a certain type of response. I will at least say that your post showed honesty and it was interesting.

  7. #7
    Absolutely irrelevant comparison, doing a Cop The Lot and letting the next punter play & what online casino reps do.

    Everything you said is NOT correct, it's just correct in YOUR opinion.

    You showed you know nothing about the situation in the outside world these days when you babbled on about sports bets you can place in actual betting shops! You won't get that sort of money on, you'll be lucky to get 200-300 on anything BECAUSE they want to monitor the big punters online.

    You can put 10,000 on a game of blackjack online, the most I've done is 2,000! I could never do that in real life with real chips! That's the difference, you just see numbers, you can't walk up to a cash desk and physically remove the cash and yourself from the building!

    Land based casinos have limits, whether you ask for them or not and if you punt heavily they demand information about you and your job - that is a fact! Why do the online scum get to escape all of this?

    Gambling should not be allowed online, end of story. IF people are addict gamblers, they should be forced to go out and be inconvenienced just like smokers are these days if they want to continue with their habit.

    These gambling companies have just simply gone too far now.

    Finally, when I said I 'racially abused' the French VIP manager of 888, I merely called him an ignorant frog.
    Last edited by Ruler of The World; 25-10-2016 at 07:21 PM.

  8. #8
    somebody put him back in his box

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    29
    I know nothing about the situation in the 'outside world' thesedays. Ha ha. Lectured to and told whats what by someone who sounds like they do their absolute. If that supposed expert knowledge costs what you've given them to learn then I guess it ain't worth having. So you telling me if you fancied more than 2-3 hundred on a football team this weekend then you couldn't go to different shops or get one or two mates to throw bets on to get more on. Don't be daft. What you don't seem to understand either is that some people can very easily afford to put 5k a hand on a very low house edge game (best practice) like blackjack. Business men who are worth multi millions, sports stars etc. Not all of these would be comfortable unveiling their private financial information just to appease problem gamblers like you who play out of their league and get in way way too deep. I don't think online gambling adds anything particularly positive to society so like I said outlaw it if necessary. It still doesn't absolve people of ultimate responsibility for their actions irrespective of the dubious carrots that they dangle to the likes of yourself. Ask yourself this. Before online gambling were you still losing big money gambling? If they outlawed online gambling would you still do most if not all of your money gambling, albeit perhaps slower. I suspect if you're honest then you will answer both yes and then once again we go back to self control. No matter how many side issues raised or how many times we go around it will always come back to that.

  10. #10
    You really are stubborn and ignorant! Yet again you prove yourself wrong! If you had to run around many shops to bet large on something, you would be far less likely to go through with it than if you could just go home and back it online for as much as you like!

    CAN YOU REALLY NOT GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK HEAD THAT CONVENIENCE IS THEIR ULTIMATE WEAPON!??

    You are clearly just a smart mouth twat who cannot get it through his thick head that EVERY form of gambling OUTSIDE the home is now very well legislated but ONLINE is NOT! Thus, people are easily able to blow their life savings online if they are having a bad day or night and they CANNOT do it outside!

    Even land based casinos now control your spend, go to one and find out how! Even if you present your ID, even if you become a member and no matter how wealthy you are and what you earn, they have to check IN DEPTH as it is now THE LAW!

    To answer your questions NO and NO are my honest and factual answers so if that doesn't shut you up, you clearly are as ignorant as you've shown throughout this thread so far! In which case, you can waffle on all you like because your opinion counts for fuck all.
    Last edited by Ruler of The World; 26-10-2016 at 07:25 AM.

  11. #11
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    29
    God it's like a broken record your posts. So we've now reverted to the archetypal you really are ignorant start to your post. The standard name calling has also come out. Surprised you haven't accused me of being racist. Suppose given your opening post that would look a bit odd wouldn't it. Yes you're just stating the obvious. Yes I know about the casino legislation, yes I agree it's the fastest way to do money in blah blah blah. Still think anyone earning a grand even 2 grand a week could very easily blow all their money gambling without going online. So you're saying prior to online gambling you didn't lose much gambling and now you've stopped online gambling you no longer do the majority of your money gambling. I don't know you to verify this. Others may be in a better position to say.

  12. #12
    Of course I could do 2000 a week without gambling online, but it would be a lot harder to blow all I saved up if I saved up say 20000 without online gambling.

    For example, I wouldn't carry 20000 around with me, even if I went to the casino I go to, THEY have put a limit on my play at 5000. They can obviously control this as I would be going to the cash desk to use my card for transactions above what I can get out of the cashpoint. Were I to be in a chasing mood whilst playing online, I'd easily be able to deposit the lot with no questions asked!

    I wouldn't go putting 20000 through the bookies because I know that once you're over about 1000 down there's no point chasing in their with the 500 limits on the terminals - you just know you've got no chance. That's not to say I haven't lost more in 1 session at the bookies but that's why I know not to bother beyond 1000 these days.

    Calling someone a frog is a trivial racist comment at best rather than blatant, deep rooted racism but it was me who said I had racially abuse that French tosser so fair play!

    So I speak from experience, the laws have changed a lot in recent years to protect people who are prone to losing the plot like I am. I had no choice except to close my accounts and I am glad I did so.
    Last edited by Ruler of The World; 26-10-2016 at 01:03 PM.

  13. #13
    Senior Member bubbles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    North West
    Posts
    942
    is there much difference between calling someone a garlic smelling frog to a curry smelling little paki Ruler? serious double standards you seem to have. if you want serious discussions leave all name calling and other insults out.
    Going skint....

  14. #14
    Moderator JG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    6,462
    To be fair to Ruler he does get a lot of stick on here. Past history aside, he has made a frank, interesting and pertinent original posting and thankfully this time a thread has evolved with reasonable shreds of credibility and intelligent discussion.
    The subtle and not so subtle digs at him are getting tiresome. Yes, he doesn't always respond in a suitable manner, but can we not all evolve and have an intelligent chat? I know we all like pressing buttons from time to time, but in this age of mostly crap fruit machines can the usual protagonists ease up on the button pressing please?

    I think the law falls short in upholding responsible gambling on line. A few moments of madness could wipe out a six or seven figure savings balance in an alarmingly short space of time. Yes, that money could or should be tied up as a less liquid asset but that skirts the issue. Whilst I agree with CJS that ultimate responsibility does fall at the individual's feet I see no harm, but positive benefit in being afforded some protection against complete carnage. We're supposed to be a caring society that offers protection for vulnerable individuals, not lets them wander unaided into a proverbial field of land mines.
    There's some interesting anecdotes there Ruler that don't surprise me at all.
    My own experience of on line gaming is rather varied itself.
    I've had fun and games with poker. Creating an on line poker win rate of minuscule BigBlinds/hour that'd make the minimum wage look like a lottery win. I've pulled a few grand in over all time on heads up sit and go tourneys for low stakes.
    I've tilted onto roulette on a fairly small scale compared to some, but one night it culminated with me having a grand left in my poker balance. That went all on red. I placed the bet, spun the wheel and switched the speakers and monitor off before the ball landed. Then off went the computer. I ruminated the next two days, plucking up courage to log back in. Optimistically imagining my jubilation at winning back my tilt on one spin. So that evening the computer went back on, hands shaking I keyed in my log in details and put my hand over where the balance would be. I moved my hand slowly from left to right.......2! Oh sweet joy! I had wo......no......no.....it was 200 not 2000. I had done my brains in and been offered a 200 bonus. Sick.
    Of course that was a pittance compared to my Stan James Hi Lo Gambler session. Mole are you reading this? Possibly Richard's worse tip ever, 'play hi lo gambler for a real fair game', well I did and 34k later I hadn't gambled out to anywhere near the max 15k jackpot. 'Well it played well in demo' was the response I got after revealing my bad luck. Years later in transpired via a thread on Casinomeister that the game was not as random or fair as it made out to be. So I was unwittingly playing against worse odds than implied. I just chalked it down to the dirty tricks brigade and it was a hard lesson that on line is where the mob now reside, not Vegas (although after paying $260 for a 30 cent bonus on Flintstones I might reverse that thought). In fact I haven't played on line, bar some games in demo, since then. I'm self excluded from most sites anyhow. It sounds like your fiery nature helped you far more than hindered you Ruler. Their loss.
    Last edited by JG; 26-10-2016 at 09:22 PM.
    JG

  15. #15
    Moderator JG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    England
    Posts
    6,462
    Annoying duplicate
    JG

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •