Bitcoin Forum

What happened::
Roobet allowed a bet of over $300 on their roolette and refused to pay the winnings of $11662

Dec 2nd I had placed a large wager on their roolette game on bronze and doubled my winnings. The next bet I went to bet on Gold and didn't lower my bet amount. Misclicked all in for $323.949 dollars. The bet actually won and I got paid $2000. The winnings totaled $11662.164 but being as the max win is $2000 they only paid $2000.

Now, I am well aware that the max win is $2000, I am not disputing that fact 1 bit. I am also aware that they are fixing a load of bugs I pointed out in their dice game, also the reason their dice is not working right now. Their support took my advice and is taking care of the problem. I was told that they are also fixing the site where you cannot bet more then the max payout would be.

The problem is, their casino accepted the bet. They should pay the total winnings. Again I'm well aware it was a misclick on my part, but the fault is theirs for not coding the site correctly and accepting the bet. Their dev even told me that they do not stop you from trying to win more then the max, but all they will pay is the max. It's not their responsibility to prevent players from playing the way they like, according to their dev.

IMO it is their responsibility to not deceive players and allow them to over bet(again this is supposed to be fixed but currently is not).
Scammers Profile Link:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2688418
Reference Link:
Bet Id: 5de55011a87b2e0b41fb9614
Bet Amount: 323.949

Shoulda paid out $11,662 in roolette on the gold win. I got $2000 for it. Yes was a misclick and I wouldn't have bet that high, but the casino allowed the bet and should have to honor it.

Don't have a reference link just bet id and bet amount. I'm sure a site rep can verify it.

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w5dab.png reference of bet ID and payout

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w5utv.png reference after verifying bet
Amount Scammed:
$9662.164
Payment Method:
Bitcoin
Proof of Payment:
PM/Chat Logs:
https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w5wcH.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w5Aqg.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w5SMI.png

Additional Notes:
Other then issues that have been addressed in their gambling thread and this particular issue, I have had no bad dealings with the casino. They're cheap when it comes to paying out bug bonuses but it is what it is.

I even offered to meet them in the middle on the win and was basically refused. I feel like the fault is the casinos for allowing the bet and the bet should be paid. It shouldn't have had to come to this but this is where it stands as of now.

Your claim is right and I also think you should be paid in full. The casino should have adjusted your stake against the max win but instead it didn't and hence should pay the full amount since they accepted the bet.

I have removed promotional materials supporting them for now. Hope they will hear you out and will pay you in full.

I have spoken with the marketing agent many times and they have always been very nice and easy to deal with. I also understand they are in the midst of fixing these errors, but at the time of the bet the errors were not fixed. Was definitely not me exploiting them in any way. I just happened to misclick, their casino accepted the bet, and I won. Should be a no brainer to pay the bet and move on, rush your devs to get things fixed faster.

Hmmm I see a lot of members with their signature campaign.
That is the problem with betting websites, as they can blindly follow the 'rules'

Hello,

I am sad to see that you have created a scam acquisition against us as we have already responded to this request on our forum launch post.

In regards to being able to bet an amount that should pay over our $2,000 max profit set in place.
   This was never a bug. Some sites do allow you to place a bet over max profit and some don't. The system we had in place allowed you to place these bets, but we've never encountered someone that has placed a bet that should pay over max profit like you have. You made this request to not allow this to happen, very apparent, in our forum launch post and as stated - we will rolling out an update for this along with our dice bug fixes (when dice comes back online). You were well aware that this was not fixed yet and you accidentally placed a bet with a value that could not pay over the max profit. We understand your frustration but this on your end was a mistake and as I do hear that you feel you should be compensated for this accidental bet, your request had not been fulfilled yet and as stated you were aware of this.

For this to be placed as a scam acquisition is a bit absurd. As we hear your frustration this is not a scam or a bug in any instance, this is just how our casino was set up. There is not much more to say than I have already, but your request had been addressed in our launch post and you were aware that we were working on catering to your request. If we were a scam, why would you continue to place bets on our website hours after this has happened? This is a jab at our integrity when we have been nothing but respectful and kind to your bug reports, requests, and as a player on Roobet.

I have went ahead and had the developers update the max bet amount, so that it can not be a win above max profit so that this doesn't happen again on Roulette and Dice - our goal is to have the same done for Mines, Towers, and Crash by the end of the day today. Dice is still disabled site wide while we finish addressing each bug that you had been reported, and were rewarded for reporting.

As we grow as an online casino and adapt to peoples needs and requests, there are surely things that we will take the communities feedback along the way. This is one of those things. We strive to provide the best gambling experience to each of our users and will continue to stick by that. I will say this again, if this issue wasn't already addressed to you - prior to this incident, it would be a different scenario, but this bet was a mistake on your end when you knew that this was a request from you directly that we were working on rolling out.

To be fair, according to their TOS they could have paid yahoo62278 nothing at all and instead refunded his bet. I don't think this qualifies as a scam, more like the right thing to do would be to pay the full amount.

https://roobet.com/roulette?modal=terms


However the site has quite a few glitches, even the TOS is full of grammar errors. They clearly need help debugging, which yahoo62278 is providing, so they should just pay up and thank him :)

---

If yahoo62278 had lost, would he have lost the full amount or just the max bet amount?

---

Edit for missing words, as usual noticed only when someone quoted my post.

All your points are completely valid - of course they could refer to their TOS and not pay a thing (as many gambling operators love to do by the way) - most likely they would love to do so but that would mean that all their marketing efforts in this forum went down the toilet...

Being completely honest though... (fun fact: the slogan is "Roobet - The honest online casino") - what are we talking about here? @Roobet You ACCEPTED a bet, somebody won, he needs to get paid --> as simple as that. There is actually nothing to discuss. PAY, fix the error and move on. I imagine visiting a casino, the dealer taking my 300 bucks and in case I won... "sorry max win is this but we were happy to take your money even though it was more than the max"... LOL

Side note: Yahoo is the one pointing these things out - I dont wanna know how many people are doing the same, losing while just not knowing what is going on... I dont think any player´s bet has been refunded by them in such scenario if he lost?!

Edit: There are casinos who accept bets over max profits?!?!?! What am I missing here? That doesnt even make sense to me?!
2nd Edit: Oh and I wouldnt call this a scam either... just unfair and unprofessional

According to their Dev

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w5UsJ.png

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w5a9C.png

I would have lost the bet and the casino would have smiled.

As far as the site paying out normal bets, withdraws or deposits working, or anything else, I have not encountered any errors. Me playing on a site hours after this happened, why wouldn't I? I'm up on the site and mostly everything works ok.

The 1 bet is all that's the issue here. You say it's my fault, I say no you're wrong. Your casino should not allow a player to bet a million dollars on something period. A safeguard(which apparently you now have in place) should have been there to stop the bet from happening. It should have capped me at $55.55 cents and paid 2k. Instead it allowed me to overbet by $267.614.

Not a shot at your integrity at all. Your casino allowed the bet. No if's and's or but's.

Well that's fucked up then. The max win isn't really shown unless you go looking for it. You have to hover on the tiny icon to see it. Does it even work on mobile?

BTW there's like 3 or 4 bugs in the screenshot below.

https://meem.link/i/a/tnaMA9.jpg
Edited 2020-11-30 to fix a broken image

Our max profit is in the same place for all of our games - yes it works on mobile.

That's very un-user-friendly to say the least. See my screenshot above for other issues too.

Feel free to PM me what resolution you’re experiencing this on and I will have our devs take a look at why your UI looks like this. Thanks.

I was reluctant to even open this accusation. I spoke with another casino owner and asked , "If a player was to place a bet on your site that was above the max win, what would you do? I know you have precautions in place but let's assume you didn't
player placed a bet and won
The question being, would you pay the win, assuming no foul play happened?

or would you tell the player sorry"

Their response, "like usual, i paid"

I did not tell the other owner what site I was referring to so as they would give the response to crush a competitor. I trust this owner and his judgement 100% and didn't feel he would just give that answer to look good.

This accusation is not against the site in its entirety, just against that 1 bet. Everything else on the site, minus the bugs I have already reported work fine or are being fixed. Roobet is safe to play on as long as you pay attention to your bets.

  From another point of view,
 if playing the Roulette, I want to bet on Even/or Od I'm able to do, and if I want to bet the same amount on a specific number I can't !? Because the reaching of the limit !??  I'ts simply an aberration!
 The proper to set, is a maximun bet amount.
 A casino working this way, is just taking not serious what he's doing

---

    which is a credit to you!

I know in (some) real life casinos... if an "overmax" bet is placed:

If it wins, the bet is reduced to the "max bet"... extra wager amount is then returned to the player and the payout is then made accordingly to the "max bet" amount.
If it loses, the bet is reduced to the "max bet"... extra wager amount is then returned to the player and the "max bet" amount is then forfeited as the bet was lost.

I've spent countless hours reviewing footage and tracking down patrons to recover over-payments to patrons who won on an overmax bet... AND to return the "extra" amount on overmax bets that were lost and should not have been taken.

So, personally, I have no problem with them only paying out the max. I don't see that as being "scammy". However, I would consider it a problem if you had lost... and they had then refused to return the "extra" amount that you should not have been able to wager in the first place.

Honestly, this seems more like a "customer service" issue than a "scam".


That being the case, I can't say I'd support this and I certainly don't think you've been scammed out of $9K

And the player is supposed pay attention to this ?! ???

There is a bit of a difference here that they don't make the max bet amount known and you kinda have to figure it out by finding the max win amount and dividing it by whatever the multiplier is. Combined with the fact that they would happily collect a $5000 loss for a $2000 max win.

I can't think of a good excuse for an online casino to not enforce the max bet upfront. I'd be more concerned if they turned my webcam on to track me down ;)

That's really bad that the autobet could force people who are running strategies such as martingale to end up placing bets with higher and higher house edges that wouldn't even allow the "strategy" to function properly by winning their full sum of losses back.

Let's look at it the other way: suppose someone found a bug that allowed them to place bets that changed the house edge in their favour (for example, they'd be betting against a -5% edge instead of a 2.7% edge). Would Roobet have paid them out, as they want players to play the way they like?  :P

The error allowing players to bet over a max win is supposed to be fixed now.

I haven't tested it due them raising concerns about me playing hours after the roulette error.

If it is fixed great, they won't have the same issue pop up.

I didn't say that...


I agree that it was indeed poor implemented. As for collecting overmax losses, has there been a verified instance where this actually happened? If so, has the user made a claim for the erroneous overmax bet amount to be refunded? If so, was it denied? If Yes, Yes and Yes... then I would definitely agree that the Casino is in the wrong and any overmax bet amounts should be refunded.


Me neither... but I try not to attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence... To me, this looks like a poorly implemented system (followed by bad customer service, insofar that it was explained and handled poorly)... as opposed to out and out deception on behalf of the casino.

"we like to let players play how they like" is not a great explanation. ::) ::) ::) If it was, I'd like to point out that "I like to play with 0.00000001 sat bets with 9999999999999x payout at 99% chance" #ICanHazBetNow? :P


^-- This. I hope they at least gave you a "bug bounty" for your time and hassle.

So you're saying you raised the house edge to ~80%, and that's the way you've designed your casino.
If the bet would have lost, you wouldn't refund it, so if it wins, you should pay. It doesn't matter that the click was accidental, those things can happen, and many people have lost due to accidental clicks too.

I've never encountered an online casino that allows bets that break max profit. Please share examples!

Not doing the right thing once puts an eternal shame on an online casino.

My honest review on this case is, Roobet should allow yahoo62278 to withdraw his won fund. Whatever mistake its came from website, not from the end of yahoo62278. Since there was possibility of lost fund so yahoo62278 were on risk. But luckily yahoo62278 won the fund instead. Refusing withdrawal of that fund isn't right decision for Roobet. What I understand from OP, he had tried to discussed with Roobet about withdrawal, Roobet failed to convince yahoo62278 and result is scam accusation. Roobet should know that even a newbie bitcointalk user could open scam accusation so why yahoo62278 can't? So they should think first about their reputation instead of money. I think it wasn't very big amount by the way.

This thing doesn't make much sense, are your members expected to have calculator next to them when gambling? And somehow i doubt that casinos with "mechanic" like that will keep going in the long run. There must be some kind of protection for users, and it has to be user friendly to keep retention high.

I worked in gambling industry for years and saw my share of mistakes/similar issues, and what proved to be the smartest  move was to man up , pay the win (in some cases casino and gambler found some middle ground and from what i noticed, @yahoo62278 suggest that as well) , and make sure that kind of thing doesn't happen.

Think it this way, it could have been even worse for you, someone could  bet much higher amount, and then it would be even bigger issue for you. Keep in mind, sorting these kind of things in customer favor is also good advertisement, and way to go in this business in the long run.

They allowed him to withdraw his funds, they just haven't credited yahoo with the correct amount.

If you bet $300 on odds of 36x and the bet is accepted then I agree - this should be paid, whetehr you like it or not.

Not paying the $9k to yahoo would only cause bad reputation moving forward - I'd also advise Roobet to do the right thing here.

This is correct. They paid $2000 to my account and the other 9662 was just a mirage.

Looks like Hhampuz disagrees with my neg on them.

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w4lbm.png

Doesn't look like anyone else is tagging them either, so maybe I should move this to reputation instead of scam accusation? My feedback is correct and I don't think countering is really warranted. Opinions?

Yes I was willing to meet in the middle since I made an error and they made an error IMO.

I agree with Hhampuz here, they were not untrustworthy to you as you already knew the max wining amount for the bet was 2000$. You even knew they were still bug fixing but it was not a bug as they mentioned.

Neutral comment about one could not get high winnings paid could be suited.

Could agree with you and disagree with you. Yes I knew some fixes were happening at some point, but if the games were not operating correctly, then they should've been shut down like the dice was. Instead a misclick happened and the bet was accepted.

max win is 2000, then max win is 2000

you admit miss clicking

sure they should code it so you can not over bet

THAT DOES NOT MEAN IT IS A SCAM and that is not what flags/tags are for.

This actually appears to  me as a case of clear blackmail or extortion on yahoos part. Trying to leverage again the trust system to force OVER PAYMENT.

You knew you could only win 2000, you admit you did not intend to bet that much and it was YOUR MISTAKE.

It is a bit skanky of them to leave it like this, but they are obviously leaving it to idiots to make mistakes to add to their edge.

You can't say someone is scamming you because you made a mistake. Withdraw the flag and stop using it as clear leverage to force them to over pay you for YOUR MISTAKE.

ARE you saying you will remove your red tag if they over pay you beyond the stated max 2000 bet??

Agreed.
It looks like a conflict of interest for Hhampuz, since he's managing Roobet's signature campaign (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5199919.0).

You are wrong and right.

Yahoo is in the wrong calling it a SCAM.

Where is the deception??

Hhampuz would usually go along with him but since it is a conflict of interests he is going the other way.

LOL the trust system hey haha

No objective transparent rules = clusterfuck

This is why ALL conflicts of interest need to be removed where ever possible

People on DT should not be running sig campaigns nor promoting them. they should be wealthy bitcoin enthusiasts that are not bottom feeding scum bags that will do or say anything to make some btc dust.

I'm not on DT :).

On topic: No conflict of interest here, the $150/week I make with Roobet won't matter much if I'd lose it. My opinions are my own and I am entitled to them, just as you are to yours. I don't want to make things personal here since I like yahoo so this is the path I've chosen.

You are !

You are not wrong at your end since you are victim on this case. Other DT's didn't tag means they were not on any conclusion yet. It doesn't prove your feedback isn't appropriate, Hhampuz countered your feedback means he isn't agree with your feedback and scam accusation.


I don't know if someone else will agree with me or not, but I will leave my opinion,
1. Yahoo62278 know that maximum win bet 2000$ but it was happened by misclick.
2. Roobet had bugs and they were not aware about that.

So finally yahoo62278 won the bet. Due to both side mistake. So I think it would be reasonable to pay at least 50% of wining money pay to yahoo62278. Roobet should learn from it and this would be a lesson for them and other casino as well.
Now depends on both party if they become agree with it they might proceed and mark this thread resolve..

Again repeat, this is my opinion only. I am not forcing anyone or not going to tag or counter feedback for that.

Hope somehow both party would be come a solution.


Edit;
Topic title didn't say about scam from beginning and since topic has moved to reputation, look like fine now. Subject should be discusse in order to come conclusion.

In this instance this is NOT a scam. There is no deception. The mistake was with yahoo. You should NOT use the trust system to blackmail/extort people to pay for  your own mistakes. I would suggest yahoo looking up the definition of a scam/scamming.

There is clearly a conflict of interests don't be foolish. However, since you are correct in this case no point battering that point out.

Neutral would be the correct use of the trust system.

They should fix "the bug" really though. How hard can it be?

@Coolcryptovator 

you agreement or not is irrelevant. The clear definition of scamming requires a deception or attempted deception at the very least. He has admitted he was NOT deceived and made a mistake.

Do you understand yet??

Hmmmm... looks like I missed that whole part of the thread... :-\

So, they're claiming that it wasn't a "bug" as such... but were (planning on?) implementing a "fix" after having already been advised by Yahoo of the possible problems... but left the "broken" system up... then this accidental bet happens, even though Yahoo was fully aware that the system could allow a potential overmax bet but only pay $2k max? :o ???

If what they're claiming is true... then it would seem that we have culpability on the part of Roobet for continuing to operate a "broken" system... but also culpability on the part of Yahoo for knowingly using said "broken" system. :-\


Scam? no... total clusterfuck? yes

Exactly - as mentioned before, this is not a scam in my opinion but it is completely lame behaviour. I am not sure if the damage done is not already more than those ~11k - there now is this thread, there is the discussion in their ANN etc. I will never understand such businesses but okay, you get what you deserve....

Intent matters though. If yahoo purposefully attempted to place max bets knowing the casino would not pay out, then it's an issue. There isn't evidence of this. However, this isn't a scam accusation more than it is a reputation issue. It's not okay that Roobet is allowing users to place bets that exceed the max win because they are gaining the benefit of a large bet loss without the downside of having to potentially pay out that large bet. Good that this thread was moved to reputation. It's a bit deceptive but it's not clear that Roobet did this with malice considering no other players faced this issue. It's reasonable to give them the benefit of the doubt here but it's grossly irresponsible.

IMO what's most fair:

A settlement payment of some sort would be best because there is negligence in both parties. Paying out the full 9k is excessive but somewhere along the lines of x0.3 - x0.5 of the win amount would be appropriate.

Well if they specifically mentioned there was a bug for that specific problem and the onus was on the player to decide whether knowing that they wish to proceed, and whether they can not mess up and accidentally over bid. Then I see 0.3 as excessive.

But perhaps it " could " be worth it to them to offer 1k extra if he removes all the screaming about scamming and all other shit that does not make it clear HE made the mistake and he was aware such mistakes were possible on the players part if they chose to proceed during the phase the hole is getting plugged.

Really though they (casino) could have a valid case for calling extortion or blackmail on yahoo using the trust feedback here to leverage his "compensation" when it was his own decision to proceed and their own mistake, and making undeniably false claims of scamming him.

If yahoo got another 1k he should feel pretty lucky, and they should plug the hole asap.

You really only like to twist things in the worst way don't ya. Ok lemme break it down for the mentally retarded users of the forum. The bet should never have been allowed to be placed PERIOD. i raised my bet amount and went all in the bet prior on a different color. The next bet, I went for gold but didn't lower my bet. Yes that is my mistake.

Their mistake is allowing a bet over the max payout PERIOD. Whether it was going to be fixed soon or not, the bet should not have been allowed or it should have capped me at $55.55 for a 2k win. Instead they allowed the bet to play on. Even their Dev said, they will let players bet over the max win because they don't want to change how a player plays. They are comfortable knowing the player will not be paid.

There is no freaking extortion going on here. They allowed the bet, they owe me the difference. The neg is just. If you want to harass users then go harass your usual suspects and stay outta my business.

Right, but Roobet can't take advantage of players losing bets without paying the max win. They have all the upside which is not fair. If a player takes the risk of placing a bet, the casino must uphold a fair payout if the casino allows the bet to go through. This is a huge blunder by Roobet which is why their best course of action is coming to a settlement with Yahoo with a partial payment ranging from x0.3 - x0.5 the won amount. Arbitrary, I get it, but it's shitty situation where both parties aren't necessarily right or wrong. Agreed that they should plug the hole but it's irresponsible for a casino to allow players to wager more than they can payout.

From a PR standpoint, I don't understand why Roobet wouldn't settle this off site. Paying a settlement is cheap compared to the bad PR but that's their prerogative. 

There are a lot of cases in land-based casinos that there were malfunctions towards the games in casinos. [1] (https://easy.vegas/games/slots/malfunctions). Ideally, to address these kinds of errors, the manufacturers/developers should be responsible. Some of the cases there were resolved only with minor prizes or "compromise" type of results, but there is a key difference between land-based casinos and online games are the verification.

Luckily, it can be checked with the provably fair. You get the client seed, server seed, and nonce. Verify. When that's done, you would see that you won.

IMO, Roobet should pay what they owe. Lucky for yahoo that the bet won.

*Additional Reference
More Casinos Realize They Can Blame Software Glitch And Not Pay Out Big Prizes (https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070125/000836.shtml)

---

[1] - https://easy.vegas/games/slots/malfunctions
[2] - https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070125/000836.shtml

After having a look on this matter it seems to me that entire topic is figuring two different word. One is "misclick" and another one is "mistake". Yahoo62278 already mentioned that it was a misclick by himself where maximum win for that bet was 2000$. On the other hand due to bug issues this bet were placed which was totally unexpected for "Roobet" team and platform controllers.

Let me share few opinions from my side;

▪︎ I don't think yahoo62278 is liable for "misclick" where its "Roobet" authorities fault. As a crypto user i use stop limit option when i trade on exchanges. As an example if i set an stop limit for my trades but it doesn't work properly than obviously exchange have to bear my losses. As a platform user we are not controlling your admin panel or website backend and its your responsibility to keep everything perfect. So in my opinion first word "misclick" mentioned by yahoo62278 was not his fault. Anyone can put any amount value and submit their bet but accepting that bet is totally platforms owners fault.

▪︎ Second word "mistake". In this area i wanna give thanks to "Roobet" team for accepting their own fault and they should make a conclusion as soon as possible to maintain their reputation and platform standard.

I am not taking anyone's side here but platform owners need to show much professionalism to continue their business. Making mistake is a part of our daily works but finding solution is the best thing. Hope "yahoo62278" and "Roobet" team will find a better way to solve this matter.

"Yahoo62278" your luck was enough wide for that misclick bet :). Maybe first time in betting history and you saved "Roobet" from future unexpected limit exceeding bets.

Man this is exploitation...!!! Yahoo accepts that he knows the maximum amount is capped at 2KUSD.

He says his over-bet was a "misclick". This conveniently gives him the leverage that "Would the casino refund his over bet amount if he did not win?". If you look at the conversation as well as the chats with their support, it looks like the problem had been solved between them. Now, by flagging them, he is using his considerable clout to label them as dishonest and a scam. It is understandable that letting go 9K is a big deal.

At the risk of earning a lot of ire, I'd say a lot of things don't seem entirely "honest" on Yahoo's side too. He says "It was a misclick". The casino says "you were well aware as you told us not to allow bets over max wins and we were implementing it".

Now, could this be an honest mistake on the casino's side that the devs did not envisage this scenario. It could be because, well, why would we have "bugs" in the code then?
Is the "misclick" an honest mistake on Yahoo's part and then asking them to meet them on the middle in terms of the "compensation" he deserves?? And then opening this flag against them knowing they need to defend their position?? Well, that is a matter of opinion as well as what you think about Yahoo. It is clearly as subjective judgement, the leverage of which lies entirely with Yahoo who is a well-respected member of the community.

Roobet are an upstart. They had a good sig campaign going around and are just gaining ground. BTC ecosystem needs these startups. Members like Yahoo and the other DTs/ Legendaries going with the reasoning "Well they did it, they should pay up" must consider that this is not entirely convincing in Yahoo's favor. I think they have been responsive and if the flag continues, it'll be nothing else but exploitation of the considerable leverage that people like Yahoo have here.

I just feel sad that at the end, its always Money that wins.

PS: I want to add that the whole point above should be read in the light of Yahoo not being "The Yahoo" but some normal account. People know that Yahoo is trustworthy and professional. Imagine if a relatively unknown account said, I "misclicked", people wouldn't be so quick to give the benefit of doubt. Aspersions are raised on much smaller issues here at the forum. In giving Yahoo the benefit that it was an honest mistake, shouldn't Roobet be given some leeway for being a BTC upstart (What do i know, they may be loaded for all i know), considering they have been responsive and paid in earlier mistake too. They should probably add some bug bounty like last time.

I believe it all comes down to the following:

If yahoo62278's account balance is $ 11662, then yahoo62278 should receive $ 11662.

Let me break it down to you.

You knew the max win is  2000 = YES
You knew there was a bug that was currently being fixed that could allow this to take place= YES OR NO?

the 2nd question is VERY important.

If the answer to the 2nd question is YES then YOU HAVE ZERO CASE AT ALL.

If the answer is no then you have a case to complain about it being unfair that idiots can OVER BET.  You still have ZERO case to claim it was a SCAM since there is ZERO DECEPTION AT ANY POINT.

So if you had stopped there you may have been better.

When you started a SCAM thread, and even on this thread are calling him a scammer in the initial post. You already could be said to have caused his site damages.

When you start using the TRUST system and this forum to add leverage to getting compensation for something that is CERTAINLY partly or perhaps TOTALLY (if you knew the bug was there and still decided to use the site of your own free will) you own fault. That is again blackmail and extortion by many DT's standards.

I mean it is quite possible for them to argue you are using FALSE accusations and the trust system to extort them for your own mistake. I mean they paid you the 2K right??


This question is the MOST IMPORTANT

You knew there was a bug that was currently being fixed that could allow this to take place= YES OR NO?

If it is YES then you have no leg to stand on.

He did say this in the initial post:

So I guess he did know. Yet, people here are basically trying to convince this BTC upstart to "pay up in the name of professionalism". This is pretty self-centered hand wringing. If its all so professional, maybe people should stop talking in such glowing terms about the philanthrophic and idealistic vision behind bitcoin. Just accept that its all money, honey.

I would love to quote the story about "people inside the money machines of the world" that i read on the blog of some old adopter here. It was in the Signature of one of the prominent members. Can't find it at present.

Fuck this is a shitty situation, it’s a coin toss for yahoo or the site. Shit, sorry dude this isn’t cool.

It really is 50/50 there is a solid case for both sides of this.. personally I believe you should give some and the site should as well. 

I don’t believe you should of tagged them, I do believe this thread is the best way to get a resolution that suits both parties. Especially with all the bug work you are doing..  fuck this is hard. IMO the site should compensate you as they took the full bet and you couldn’t cancel it. On the other hand you knew there were bugs and had been helping, yet as you said if it had lost the site would of told you “tough titties”

Good PR for the site would be a public settlement and IMO it should be 50% of the total winnings. You win? They win by making it right.

More importantly I don’t have the temptation of taking TOAA off ignore seeing all his posts

I proposed it previously, but look like no one responding on that, yahoo62278 or Roobet. That means no one agreed on this proposal.


By considering the current situation I can't agree with you. Both side have mistakes and both of them should paid for that.

I wouldn't counter nor would I add a red tag as you mentioned they already fixed the bug. If they left it as it was then I would consider red trust since allowing overmax bets can be "high risk". Your own red trust is probably appropriate because they did take your bet and customer support seems to be confirming that they would have taken the whole amount if you had lost so they should pay the win too.

If you had lost and they took your $300 (or if someone else comes forward with proof of losing over max bet) then I'd say you could add an "implied contract" flag on them.

Overall I'm not happy with their handling of this so I'm adding a neutral to make sure there is a record of some sort even if this particular scenario gets resolved.

Have we even got the story straight here.

Some are still claiming it was a bug, then I see it mentioned it was an intentional design (for some reason)


If you choose yourself to bet on a site where they have told you

1. max win is 2k
2. you can bid as much as you want but you will only get a max win of 2k

then you choose to go ahead and use the site under those conditions and then  bid MORE THAN YOU NEED to win the 2k, then THE SITE HAS MADE NO MISTAKE nor HAS IT SCAMMED YOU.

What is the FAIR??

Fair would only come into this if YOU WERE FORCED into using their website knowing how the 2 rules above. You chose to use it under those 2 rules right? Nobody MADE you use their site knowing their operating policy at the time (however unfair it does seem)

The title says their mistake
You claim you were scammed by them and they are scammers

Both seem bogus claims and are libel or actually by DT members standards defamation and blackmail/extortion rolled into one big clusterfuck.

The casino have counter arguments that could actually make it plausible you are extorting them using the trust system and using false accusations to do so.
You are also opening the fucking flood gates for any other user that spots this thread that feel this applies to them also.

If they offer you 1k you have done well out of it considering everything.

If they offer you  500 bucks take it.

If they offer you  your entire stake of 300 (extra) whatever it was ,take it

If they say you get not one penny more and they will let it go. Drop the issue and make sure you have not left any false accusations or any other reasons for them to claim damages.

I think we are being more than generous suggesting 1k. If they gave you that I would be shocked. However, if they are going to allow themselves to be leveraged using the feedback here (however inaccurate) when clearly it was the users mistake so easily now. Others will try similar in the future.

When you KNOW and are fully AWARE of the conditions you will be operating under and you CHOOSE to go forward then FAIR becomes something that is pretty subjective when you start claiming it is their mistake YOU DECIDED to go ahead and then make the fuck up yourself.

Yes the original conditions to us do not sound fair but is it fair you decided to proceed under those conditions and then cry for them to change those conditions you were willing to proceed under.

Fair gets rather complex.

As you know we don't really like you since you are a known supporter of undersirables here and have previously attacked honest members and made false accusations against them.

However, that does not matter/has not factored into this opinion. If this had happen to myself I would have accepted the 2k gladly and just said to myself it would be poor class and embarrassing to make a fuss in public about conditions I clearly went forward under, for those only to be brought into play due to MY OWN mistake. If I got anything extra even a refund on my entire stake amount that I over bid on. So all the winnings you go PLUS whatever ever you Over bid. I would have been very happy with.

If a person spots a clear weakness in the reasoning above then feel free to point it out. There is always an outside possibility we have got something wrong and need to adapt that opinion. It is not something we have investigated at length.

Weird case. An interesting one. Upon reading, both sides have legit reasons. As a person with minor in law and a degree in accounting, I give a slight edge on yahoo62278. 

I had a slight background in programming and I know starting a casino does have priorities. Setting maximum winnings is a priority and very important but isn't at par with setting maximum bets? If you program a certain limit on winnings then you gotta have to set the maximum bets too. These two features are like bow and arrow which won't work without supporting each other.       

In the end, I agree with Coolcryptovator and TMAN proposals that both sides will meet halfway.

Given that the maximum win is $2000 and that the maximum bet whilst maintaining house edge (in this particular instance) is $55.55, shouldn't yahoo get $2000 + ($323.949 - $55.55)?

And check out this scenario which complicates things in regards to betting:


Suppose someone bets $1000 on red.
It would be -ev to bet on any other option that pays out red numbers. ???

But depending on the outcome, both sides will have differing arguments...

This is what we are suggesting, his winnings plus the over betting amount is the most sensible conclusion to it.

i am new here but this is stupidest suggestion i ve ever seen
edit> no offense i have noting against you just saying ,i read all comments

if there is a maximum win $2000 as he appeared $11662? I think it is one line of code enough to solve that, and the winner will never see a number higher than 2000.
the obvious omission of Roobet devs side. Yahoo has nothing with that and they need to pay them his full win. Mistakes happen and they must accept it.
Any discussion about accidentally click is meaningless, he could also lose then he would be to blame for his loss, but it is not, he wins and casino refuse to pay them.

Why? It's a fairly logical solution and it's exactly what "brick and mortar" casinos do... they return the overmax bet (in this case that would be $323.949 - $55.55)... and then payout what needs to be paid out... which in this case, is the max win of $2000.

To me, the bigger questions in all of this is... has anyone else playing on the site placed an "overmax" bet? ???

This community is seriously becoming sycophantic and a circlejerk.

If this had been a newbie account, the first question would have been "So you misclicked, huh?". They would then have been flayed on the point that "So you knew they were fixing the bug". How many times have you seen discussions regarding newbies explaining their "honest mistakes" and the community coming down heavily on them.

Yahoo has a reputation for being professional. He should get his extra bet refunded and any bug bounty that the casino wants to offer. Yet, all these people coming here conveniently accepting that his mistake is not even open for discussion, aren't being completely unbiased.

As long as there an evidence this will still be an issue to be discussed, Not all of the users here care about for some reputation of the gambler.
But if I'm also on yahoo62278's position I may exactly dissatisfied to this even if its a misclicked bets. But also I may agree as well to TMAN to go on a 50/50 basis to both parties, with that both parties can move on and fix what needs to be fix.

---

And as for the negative, Disagree... This is not a scam, first of all yahoo62278 has been paid back the only thing is its not what he expected to received.

It is not really important how we will call it, it is important that they should pay the full winnings.

It is extremely funny that somebody's explanation is 'we let the players bet how they want'. Yea, the world is full of idiots wanting to bet 1000$ on a roulette number to win 2000$. That by itself is borderline scam and fixing it does not change the fact it was explained like that in the first place.

If the bet was taken, paying the bet is the only way forward.

I for one will never play at Roobet after a situation like this, how you handle your mistakes says more about a company than anything else.

From reading all these posts it looks like there isn't any one side who wins here.
What don't you guys reach a compromise in order to settle this?

No, your post does not address the irrefutable points that I made above. HE knew the conditions , HE CHOSE to accept the conditions, HE fucked up and brought into play the conditions HE knew HE agreed to operate under.

Get it now?

He should have chose to go somewhere else.

Give him the amount he over bet on back as we suggested earlier.

The fact you are calling your opinion irrefutable is all the proof I need to not discuss this with you any further.

I do not care at all what happens here, I just provided my opinion about a really borderline policy which is shady enough to at least discuss it and make everybody aware of it.

I'm not placing any bets there, period. And that's the last I will say about this topic.

I know a few users have stated that this is a shady practice or borderline. Well, most gambling sites have it in their terms that if a bug has been found whether it is known by them or not that the bet would be refunded, and not paid out. As Suchmoon points out Roobet also has this written in their terms. Gambling websites are perfectly in their right to wave off any bet that was the result of a bug within the system, and refund the initial bet amount. Instead, Roobet actually paid to the maximum win which I think is the best possible scenario in this.

You could argue that this is common sense to not allow users to bet if the amount goes over the maximum win. However, several bigger gambling sites allow you to do this. If I recall correctly Skybet  used to have a cap of 100k on certain sports. The return will always show that you are going to win just 100k, and not over which seems to be the only difference here. For example, if you were betting £20, and it displays the maximum bet is 100k you can still bet more than that on their website. So, in theory you could bet £25, but it still displays the win amount to be 100k.

The only difference I can gather from this discussion is on Roobet it displays that you'll win more. However, if they have stated that their maximum bet is x amount then the normal process that other gambling sites would have taken would have been to apologize, and refund the original bet amount rather than paying out for the win. This is subjective, and can sometimes lead to users feeling outraged, but what has happened here is one of the better outcomes of this situation as per their terms which you agree to when signing up, and using the website they don't actually have to pay out if the bet is subject to a bug of the system.

It is an annoyance for the customer, but if the customer knows about this in advance, but still bets knowing they would only be paid the max bet amount then that isn't any better than a gambling site which has it in their terms that they will only pay out to the maximum bet amount.

If you had lost the bet amount then that would have been a different circumstance, and would have been a even bigger shitstorm, because if you knew that you could potentially get that bet refunded, because of their policy of only allowing a certain amount to be won then the gambling site could suggest that you purposely bet over the amount just in case you lost, and have the potential to get a refund, and not lose any money. I'm not suggesting that is/was the intention, but that would have been a moral debate that I think a lot of users would have been split on, because there's two sides of the story.

Roobet have now fixed it according to this discussion so this can't happen in the future so something good has come out of this discussion at least. You have been paid to the maximum win amount, and Roobet have at least honored that where other gambling sites with less integrity would have likely refunded it.

Nice strawman attempt...

Which POINTS do you want to refute ... HE knew the conditions , HE accepted the conditions, HE fucked up and brought into play the conditions HE knew HE agreed to operate under.

All the proof you need hey lol

Actually roobet didn't admit it was a bug but fixed the non-existent bug anyway. And the max win was not displayed if you didn't click on an obscure icon, so basically you could enter $500 and click 36x without being aware of any limitations - what would you expect to happen? In case of a win I would expect to get $18k. So I strongly disagree with roobet's attempts to have their cake and eat it too. They need to be either 100% transparent about limits without digging around and without needing a calculator, or have strict limitations in software, or both.

Legally they're right but I don't think yahoo was planning to sue them anyway. Legal doesn't mean honest however.

I've not used roobet or any gambling site for that matter for a long time. I've only picked up information from this thread, and some of it was based on my interpretation of that. I was definitely speaking from a more legal point of view, and more objective point of view. Morally, I'd rather not get into it as I don't know the specifics. For example, you mentioned that the icon was small, and looking at the screenshot it is fairly small. However, how are we to determine what would be big enough. Ideally, it needs to be in plain view rather than being hidden behind an icon that you have to click or hover over.

So, my interpretation of this whole scenario was wrong. Let me be clear, the win amount displayed once betting the amount was displaying wins over $2k? I thought it may have been similar to that of skybet (at least how it used to be) in that once betting you could go beyond the maximum return bet, however it would always display the absolute maximum you could earn. If, its the other way around then is it a little more morally misguided.

I'm not sure but I think the max win display would always show $2000 even if you entered a larger bet, and Yahoo never was shown an $11000 win. IMO that's the only technicality that keeps roobet from being an outright scam in this scenario.

correction: yahoo says he was shown the large win so yeah...

Actually every bet you win or lose is displayed in a box on the left. On roulette ot shows all the bettors and their amounts in each round. Then when the wheel is done spinning, the winners are displayed in green with the amount they won, and losers are shown in red with - at their amount bet.

https://talkimg.com/images/2023/06/07/w4qGl.png

I was talking (and I think Welsh was too) about the win amount. Were you ever shown that you could or did win $11+ thousand or was it your calculation based on your bet times 36?

In the box I just showed you up above $11,662 and some change was shown won.

Ok, I take it back then. That is more fucked up than I thought. I'm starting to think you have grounds for a flag.

LOL... that wasnt clear to me either... Man, THEN all this is a big farce really and even though it doesnt change that legal shit, its completely unprofessional, lame and pathetic. How the fuck do you explain a notification that your player won $11k and then say "well, sorry dude, max payout is $2k".  As a side note, this could get interesting even from a legal perspective...

Unfortunately legally the TOS trumps anything that might or might not be shown on the screen to the player I think. Particularly the clause about software errors. Unless there are laws in their jurisdiction that would invalidate such TOS clauses. But still showing a win and not paying it out is a shitty thing to do regardless of CYA TOS.

Let's be rational for a minute, did they accept the bet? Did they show an 11k win? Did they pay the win? Are they still communicating? Have they offered a reasonable solution?

The answers are yes, yes, no, no, no.

They have since fixed the bug that they refuse to call a bug from what they posted in their Announcement thread. I have not played there since they complained that I was still playing there.

When I spoke with another site owner and asked how they would approach a situation like this and their answer was pay up and move on, it really showed me the difference between 1 site vs the other.

When you read over this thread, you have a large group saying pay that man his money. You have a smaller group saying pay that man something. You have an even smaller group saying give him a bounty and be done with it. Then you have the smallest group of all saying ToS say refund the bet and be done.

I could find ways to agree with every single opinion in this thread. So many valid points have been brought up. I would say the best solution would be to offer a bug bounty and move on, but the last bug bounty they offered was a whopping 25$ which is not really a bug bounty at all. It's a cheap thank you. Most sites who are being saved potentially thousands of dollars offer .250-1btc for bug bounties from what I've seen in the past.

These guys are a new site and i'm sure paying out a large sum like that would be a big hit to them. I'm not trying to kill the casino. Any new businesses for BTC are good as long as they operate correctly. For the most part, they have started out ok.

Situation that has been handled poorly from both sides and likely damaged the reputation due to their side trying to ignore the situation. It could have and should have been handled differently by both sides. I'm still here but they decided responding was not an issue.

It's the holidays, the money would be nice to have. I also see their side as well. My initial goal was not to try and ruin the site, I even said the site is fair to play at as long as you pay attention to your bets. Haven't tried calling them an outright scam at all. I'm not sure how to proceed from here. I would like to see this resolved but doesn't look like that's going to happen.

Really?
Polo has screwed me many times lagging closing a margin position when volume hits the fan.. You mean if that didn't sell/buy immediately when I hit the button as usual I should get my BTC back?
As a matter of fact, I think I have been banned from the polo trollbox more than once for merely complaining about these issues..

I have always chalked this up as "That what you get for trading an exchange"..

It happens on many popular exchanges.. I think I recall news stories about everyone bitching about exchanges crashing during the big dump from $20K, and their sells not going through, stoplosses not popping..
I'm pretty sure they all got what they got and that was the end of it..

If you are setting up a limit order on an exchange and screw up in the boxes, miss a decimal anywhere, your bankroll could be by by..
I recall a few sensational obvious misclicks, we could all see low liquidity shitcoins sent to the moon by an order of magnitude on the charts, and I have never seen a misclick trade get rolled back by a legitimate exchange..

What are they going to do? Take back someone else's legitimate order fill because you screwed up?

This is difficult because many say it should not be possible to place a ridiculous order, one obviously insane like betting more than you can win, but their is nothing stopping you on an exchange from slapping the books 1 or 2 orders of magnitude higher than you intended because you filled the price boxes out wrong..
Better look twice, like sending a TX..

I don't know much about casinos but I have made my fair share of misclicks on exchanges (filling out the sell side rather than buy side for example), and have ate them all.. If I could have all them misclick losses back, it would be nice..


I think if a casino has a clear disclaimer that "You can bet more than you can win!!", they are not necessarily a scam for allowing you to be an idiot...
Just as on an exchange, all you are doing is taking advantage of the greater idiot..

If I put up a "casino" with the odds of "Bet 1BTC and 1/100 chance you are returned 2BTC", am I a scammer, or are players just idiots?

If I put up a "casino" and say "Bet whatever you want but you can only win 2000", am I a scammer for allowing you to bet like an idiot?

On the exchange market you just thank the lesser idiots for their money..


I do not have a clear opinion on this case because I am not sure to what degree the casino culture etiquette unusually enforces protecting idiots from casinos that allow them to make ridiculous bets, but exchanges I am used to will surely let you make ridiculous trades, misclick or not..

Should a casino not allow you to make an absolutely stupid bet?
Like betting against Trump 2020 for example? (Ha Ha I Joke)

@Suchmoon, sorry to say this but that is just more of your confirmation bias that has been visible in this thread since you first responded. You are hell-bent on the technicality, completely ignoring the fact that OP has said from the beginning that he "knew the limit" but he "misclicked". If it was a misclick, quite clearly he wasn't hoping to get (353 X 36).

I would give the benefit of doubt to a user who was, say, actually hoping to get 11K by risking 353 USD. How does that come into picture when OP has said:

• He knew 2k USD was the max limit
• He misclicked which means he wasn't intending to bet the whole amount in the first place

In my opinion, the grouse is that even though he won, he isn't getting as much money as he possibly can. Either by holding the casino accountable on a technicality, or by them offering to meet him halfway. That is why I see this thread and the flag as little more than "persuasion".

Like someone said in the beginning, INTENT MATTERS. While you want to stick to the technicality, you (and a lot of others) are willing to ignore the grey area of INTENT. This would not have been the case if the tables were turned. If Roobet has been an established Sig campaign payer and a newbie had come up with the same "misclick", everyone would have been telling them "Dude you won 2K USD, Don't get greedy, I am sure that 2K USD is like a 1000 days of lunch-money for you". We would also be having a lot of virtue-signalling and uncomfortable questioning about the circumstances of said misclick.

I am interested to know what you make out from these two statement:


If i started a website as a developer with my own time and money in this increasingly getting desolate corner of bitcoin ecosystem (where people seem to think that adoption will come from casinos and mixers), had someone trustworthy know about the max bet, and then have the same person come back and try to extort, I'll be salty as fuck. Especially when i have been respecting the said person because apparently they have a reputation.

OP has pointed out that they are not responding. Well, they have responded initially and its quite possible that they are waiting to see which way the wind blows. Reputations can get shattered in an instant here if you are up against BCT's "Big boy's club".

---

PS: I have been going on and on about this "INTENT" thing in my previous replies. I have also been pointing out how this space is increasingly getting sycophantic and hierarchic where people don't want to rub the established members the wrong way. Nobody of any reputation seem to want to share thoughts on this. Am i the only one who is feeling this way??? Somebody please let me know if that is the case.

I wish someone like @QuestionAuthority were here. I am glad that at least @TMAN said that its a 50-50.

I'm not ignoring the intent but what was the intent really? Do you think yahoo62278 intentionally clicked 36x for a chance to stick it to roobet? That sounds very very unlikely given the probabilities involved.

On the flip side, roobet's admission that the game was broken, the were fixing it, but didn't disable it, sounds quite negligent.

The bottom line for me is that yahoo62278 bet money, was shown an $11k+ win (took me 4 pages to figure that out LOL), but didn't get it. That's somewhere between a shitty and a scammy casino, I'm still deciding which one it's closer to. If he hadn't been shown more than $2k then I'd be leaning towards "shitty".

I don't know why you're so worked up about tangential stuff like "big boys club" or whatever. I don't owe anything to yahoo62278 and he doesn't owe anything to me and it seems that our opinions don't even quite match on this subject. If he gets pissed at me or vice versa we'll be fine I think. Maybe you should leave that out of the discussion and focus on the facts.


It would be for casino's own benefit to make sure that the software is bulletproof and doesn't actually allow stupid wins, even if it allows stupid bets.


We'll see who has the last ha ha :)

My thinking on this goes something like this. Quoting from another reply:
The website and yahoo were on very collaborative terms post launch. This could have gone many ways if they had a strategy to mitigate this. Including this being considered a "foul" or "disqualifying" move of some sort and him just getting refunded despite hitting. I said in the first reply itself, that thinking along these lines is a subjective judgement. (Like what if a newbie said the same thing?) Also, thinking from the viewpoint of the developers behind this.


Doesn't it matter that he already know that the 11K WOULD NOT pay out, Even if it showed that?? Despite that, he raised a flag on them. If its completely about being an upright user and holding the casino to "technical standards" then shouldn't we just rely on the TOS for that?

Its not like the potential win is shown beforehand. I don't know what are the implicit norms when compared with other sites. Max win does show when you hover on that ? symbol beside "bet amount".
I know its not a popular opinion. Its only natural that there is groupism. Yet, when post after post refuses to acknowledge that Yahoo as a user was well aware of this. He got paid 2K. Good for him. Yet, raising a flag like this isn't entirely justified. And IF it is for the benefit of the community, then he shouldn't make it about him getting paid. On a forum like this, people with influence should be held to better standards and, ideally, vice-versa. I have ranted about this in my earlier replies too and I get it that its more of an ideological debate. And its not just groupism that I mentioned.

Sadly, OP has NO case.

https://support.paddypower.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/45/~/what-is-the-maximum-payout%3F

https://www.onlineroulette.ca/guides/maximum-payouts.php

https://www.ibas-uk.com/examples/betting/maximum-payouts/

You can find more information about cases like this by a simple google search.

where is my long sentence¿

Here are some quotes from their TOS:

CHANGES TO THE TERMS OF SERVICE

We may revise and update these Terms of service from time to time in our sole discretion. All changes are effective immediately when we post them, and apply to all access to and use of the website thereafter. However, any changes to the dispute resolution provisions set forth in Governing Law and Jurisdiction will not apply to any disputes for which the parties have actual notice on or prior to the date the change is posted on the website.

Your continued use of the website following the posting of revised Terms of service means that you accept and agree to the changes. You are expected to check this page from time to time so you are aware of any changes, as they are binding on you.

APPLICABLE LAW AND JURISDICTION

These ToS are governed by the Laws of Curaçao and parties submit to the jurisdiction of the Curaçao courts.

They can do whatever they want and whenever they want. And Laws of Curaçao is a complete joke.

Use reputable bookies.

Pinnacle

Bet365

Williamhill

europebet.com (Only Skrill and netletter payments) There is no way you will have any problems with them and the soccer markets are huge.

NOTE. I am not advertising mentioned bookies in any way.

There could have been a problem trusting a newbie's initial report but in this case roobet confirmed what yahoo62278 is saying so I don't really see how that's an issue with his rank or standing or whatever you're still trying to ascribe to this. And sure, the viewpoint of the developer is "don't pay out", no surprises here. I also suspect even their "official" max bets are way to high for their bankroll, they know little about risk management, and even less about software QA, but that's neither here nor there.


He didn't raise a flag as far as I can see.


There are many shitty things that can be done while staying within TOS (which I could rant about for 4 more pages - they should really talk to a lawyer and to a person who knows English) and this is one such thing.


Again, he didn't raise a flag and he presented his claim in a fairly reasonable way. Nobody else piled on with flags or negatives either. You're way off base here. Multiple users saying things that don't align with your own opinion doesn't mean there is a conspiracy here.

I totally support yahoo with this case and ethically  he deserves to get paid the full winnings , it's not like he won 100X of their max profit it's barely a 6X max  and worth satisfying a regular customer

honestly I haven't seen anything similar in the past with bitcoin sites but since they will take the money if the players lose then they should pay if one of their players hits
hope both parts will reach an agreement regarding this

EDIT : in the first line  I was considering that 2000 is max profit but if it's max payout then the amount yahoo won is really big compared to their risk tolerance
I left neutral feedback for the site as well then removed it cause I honestly don't know what should happen here

Neutral feedback with warning about their house limits is probably just about right for this case. Roobet did not commit a scam or a clear violation of any rules but customers should know their policy in this shady situations.

You can best see how much a site values customers by the way they decide to treat cases just like this one where they are not obliged by law to pay up but it would have been a right thing to do and good marketing decision. The money is quite big in this case but not big enough that respectable gambling site wouldn't be able to cover it without second thought.

@Suchmoon.
Not a flag but negative trust rating is the persuasion tactic that I opposed. There was some bias initially and it has taken care of itself.
I too have explained my opinion enough and the points therein. Conspiracy or not, it is what it is. I'll just agree to disagree with you.

Regards..

None of that matters since these points are still clearly true

Very curious if they would have paid the user in case their bet lost ,  I mean to re-imburse them a % of the bet amount as obviously his bet  in case of a win would have been much higher then the max profit . But most likely they would've classified it as an user error , and no compensation would have been done.

Just an update for everyone. I logged in to their site today to see where I finished in their tourney and ended up 5th for 25$. Which BTW sucks cause I was in 1st by a huge chunk last I checked. Probably lost to their "sponsored" players. They openly admit to having players play for them and stream it on twitch or something like that. Not sure how it works.

Anyways, 1st time visiting the site since they complained and tried chatting, they now have me blocked in their chat as well as look to be avoiding this topic. Looks like they're just gonna hope this whole situation goes away, but that's petty poor customer support IMO.

Your "misunderstanding" with Roobet was a big marketing opportunity for them. That they accepted their mistake and pay off your entire gain, they would get a lot more positive feedback than signature campaign or giveaway. Ignorance and blocking make things worse.

What a pathetic & unprofessional way to solve the "issue" with you - how can a "company" be so dumb instead of actually even profit (maybe not financially in the very beginning but in terms of marketing) from such an issue?

Little anecdote:

I have worked for a big online shop and last year around christmas, someone from the commercial staff priced the article accidentally wrong so it was available in our shop for only around $10 instead of $50 - the article was sold out within one day - some blogs where superb deals are being promoted posted our article etc. - and we only realized that the other day. Now we had to decide: Cancel all those orders and sending an email to our customers saying sorry bla bla - BAD publicity - or move on, deliver the article and actually make best out of it - we went for the 2. option... We sent all customers who bought the article an email where we stated, that obviously santa claus came a little earlier this year but we are happy for our customers and that we cannot wait to get their feedback on our article. Then we promoted some articles related to the one mentioned in order to do some cross-selling in addition and even attached a coupon code for free delivery! We are talking about a financial loss of more than ~250k € here and this is how we handled the situation. In the end, we received so much positive feedback and publicity, all the blogs and news sites wrote about what happened and how our company handled it - we couldnt have been happier!

Sorry, my little anecdote got a bit longer but hey, this is something I will never forget.

Playing on Roobet was on my to do list for a while actually though I'm glad my procrastination perhaps saved me from a simular fate as the OP.

I'm just disgusted tbh by how this played out. No backbone because you know the next tough spot they are in, this will happen again. Shame on you and all the other sites taking advantage of people.

I'll change my negative feedback once you take some responsibility.

So you are basing your negative on what could have happened? Good to know.

Taking a bet and not paying it out due to weak reasons such as the ones provided by Roobet is why there is negative feedback. Not sure what you think you know unfortunately

But there is no issue with pointing out several bugs to a site and then while knowing all of these bugs are there you bet a pretty high amount on several more games.. Opportunistic? Perhaps. But then again I assume you are the one yahoo talked to regarding this before making this thread so I won't expect anything less.

It seems to be a Russian site on a shoestring budget, probably with too much bankroll risk already. My guess is they figured that whatever goodwill this would bring - not worth it.

Not trying to excuse them, just an observation.

I agree with you, thats also what I thought... Buuuut: Especially those Russian projects many times are well backed financially (incredible shit going on with yobit and their cryptotalk - yeah no gambling operator, just saying).

Generally speaking though: Yeah, there seem to be looooots of crypto gambling sites and they just cannot all be properly backed up financially, that is just impossible. Having a look at our crypto gambling section here, there are literally hundreds of so called new gambling sites/casinos/sportsbooks, it is crazy and when you have a look at their website... you quickly realize how seriously many of those sites can be taken. Yes, there are exceptions but most of the time... they must be on a very tight budget. I am really wondering how they are all doing it - is it so easy to launch a crypto gambling site anyways?! Yeah, online gambling is huge and I have been involved in that market for many years but what I am noticing with crypto gambling... madness really, wild wild west at its finest!

Be that as it may, the error and bugs were the sites fault, not the OPs. Gotta take some responsibility for that which I haven't seen happening at all. (roobet actually agreed with OP in the start but unfortunately those were only empty words with no meaning behind them as we now see looking back)

I've seen other 'new' sites that took larger hits than $11k due to their bad coding, unethical practices or simply due to negligence that at least made attempts on a compromise of sorts.

I meant more along the lines that customer service and customer satisfaction may be perceived differently in some eastern locales than it is in the rotten capitalist West ;)

As for finances, running a gambling site is a bit different than running an exchange. I think (all other things being equal) you can start an exchange on a fairly small budget since you're not facing the same risks and variance as you would with a gambling site.

Ooooh - I thought you referred mainly to the budget thing. :D

Well - even more surprising than that we have dozens of 0815 crypto gambling sites being launched each and every day. :D

Come on now, I'm not one to pick fights or hand out negative trust to people for trivial reasons so why not post from your main? Thanks for creating an account just to reply to me though.

I'm no longer managing Roobets signature campaign but I guess it don't matter anyhow.

While I also disagree with hhampuz regarding this issue (as mentioned before, not a real scam for me but still highly unprofessionable and just LAME), seriously hhampuz is one of the guys around I trust they would not be biased just because of a campaign management job... Yeah, at first glance you could say he isnt unbiased but after all... he is not a corrupt Greek like me... is he! ;) That being said, he is welcome to express his opinion - isnt that what such a forum is about? Especially when critical issues like this come up?

Oh... and I still think roobets behaviour sucked/sucks big time!  ::)

That still makes you a spineless coward.

I'm of the belief that you should always post from your main account if you have something important to say. Whether the majority agrees with you or not is no reason to not post from your main account.

Users shouldn't tag other for their opinions or disagreeing with 1's opinion. Yes I'm aware it happens but it shouldn't. You shouldn't face persecution over your beliefs. I was screwed, I wasn't screwed. It's your opinion and should be left at that.

I watched this thread for a while and so far I see player placed bet, casino accepted that bet, player won bet and then casino refused to pay.

Where is it stated that player won't be payed if they bet $300 and win $11000?

In ToS?

Here?

https://i.imgur.com/eFXFAdK.png

Where?

The player has to hover over that tiny info icon next to where it says bet amount and then it will show the max profit...

What tiny info icon? Only icon I noticed on registration is ToS and I don't see any tiny icons inside ToS.

Wait a second, it is a game, right? Before placing a bet player has to play a game called "find the secret rule".

This tiny icon...
https://talkimg.com/images/2023/11/15/zhcw3.png

I didn't come to gambling site to hover over tiny icons therefore I won't hover over it. I am not interested what is inside.

If I place a bet and I win I expect from gambling site to pay me. There was no malfunction in roulette game, yahoo's bet was pretty much valid bet.

Yeah that’s why I compared that with going to a land based casino, putting 300 bucks on the roulette table „all good even though it’s more than max bet and WONT be refunded if you lose but if you win, you ll only win a fraction“... lol

This is actually the worst if you ask me... I bet losing customers who placed more than max bet, weren’t refunded were they...

There is no proof of that, however, why would anyone ask for refund if they wanted to bet for example 2000$ and casino accepted bet?

If I bet 2000$ it means I bet 2000$, either lose or win. It is gambling FFS, not walking in the park.

Yes but if they refer to that „rule“, this would be extremely unethical wouldn’t it?! Gladly accepting bets that don’t make any sense for the player... you either do it one or the other way... Obviously noone would ask for it but believe me... tell them about this issue and they will. ;)

It would be unethical to ask for money which they lost - bet is a bet, at least from where I am coming from.

---

Roobet should pay yahoo his winning and no one can change my opinion.

$11000 is very bad way for gambling site to lose costumers, final line, it is -EV and it should be piece of cake for casino to get that money back. Not professional if you ask me, as I can see from this thread they already lost 2-3 potential costumers. Definitely not a good start.

That's not how land based casinos work... if you place over max bet... you'll be refunded your "over max" bet (ie. how much you bet over the maximum) regardless of win or lose.

So, if you win, then they simply pay out as if you placed max bet, and then also give back the over payment... if you lose they take max bet only and give back the over payment.

Yes mate and thats exactly what I am saying the whole time - you will be refunded your "over max" bet in any case - that wouldnt happen at roobet though! If yahoo lost that $300 bet, they wouldnt have refunded anything at all! And thats what makes the whole story even worse...

You are basing that off of what one support agent replied to yahoo in one email. I am sure that if you were to bring it up they would 100% refund the over amount. Either way this thread is turning into cancer so I'm done.

---

Which it now does.

Hhampuz... this should happen AUTOMATICALLY shouldnt it?!?! (Edit: I know they fixed it in the beginning of Dec but that doesnt change the facts at all)

As a side note: They will be closing shop rather sooner than later anyways - all the drama with yahoo and people in their ann are also making jokes of them "NOT honest online casino" - yeah, gamblers tend to complain bla bla bla but there are things people are right with.

I am also out - There is no need to discuss this further because everything is crystal clear... Well, too bad for them I am afraid... What happened here and how they handled the whole situation started as a bad joke and became a desaster.

---

Regardless of the result, this is the conclusion that should have happened:

Payout of 36x or 0x based on maximum bet amount.
Difference between maximum bet amount and wagered bet amount is refunded.

Done.

I think everyone should stay on topic and not deviate to Ad Hominem attacks.

Hhampuz and many others in this thread revert to bringing up assumptions about worn signatures, talking with OP, being affiliated with roobet/ being a competitor, etc. and try to discredit valid inputs which I don't even bother replying to (and you shouldn't either).

I also don't think 'just because a land-based casino is doing something' that we should accept such a 'debatably low' standard either.

Roobet did the literal bare minimum - only gave out what they claim is their obligated duty to payout and a minuscule bounty. (I give bigger bounties away for feedback on typos so that's simply insulting)

My opinion at this point is that they don't care about players nor their responsibility to their players either. All we can do is put out the warnings so hopefully, the next person avoids having to deal with this shoddiness.

Thanks @ OP for the warning as to what I agree is scammy behavior, I certainly will not try play here at all.

@ Roobet, feel free to discuss this further with me as I'm always open to dialogue but I think you should be ashamed.

Its hard to keep trying to get people to see the other point of view. It is far too convenient to jump to the conclusion of "Customer first, yayyy". In a p2p global economy, maybe it is time for people to realize that things don't always work just one way. People working on shoestring budgets WILL take into account the whole interpersonal thing going on here. Them blocking Yahoo on chat shows this. In eastern cultures, a lot of things are decided not just contractually but even on personal relationships. You may not agree with that but that is YOUR cultural baggage. People who are actually working in such settings are definitely coming to the same conclusions. (https://strukton.com/en/Articles/Blogs/2018/03/Our-first-train-in-India).
I'd love to quote the very competent Mr. Klaassen on this for people who don't want to read the full article:

You screw someone twice over by bringing out a "bug" you already knew about, incredibly lucky or not, you can be sure as hell they won't speak to you..

Yahoo single-handedly manages some of the lowest paying services out here, and works on the principle of "Quantity over Quality" himself. It is quite pretentious that he is posturing as if he doesn't understand how these shoestring services work or how much of a hit it'd be for them by giving him another ~2K-8K USD.

Also, this'd all be so much better if the owners of this bloody casino came over and refunded his over bet amount and added something as a bug bounty.

They knowingly allowed player to place bet, yahoo placed whole $300+. They accepted that bet. So how OP screwed them? He won?

Why is this relevant for this thread? Pretend it is some newbie account who is gambling for first time.

---

If it is stated (not hidden) that max profit is $2000 and they calculated $55.55 for that bet, then player actually made $2000 - $55 = 1944.45 profit. It is either not $2000 or they messed up while calculating bet amount.

Maybe they wanted to say maximum win amount? Nah, confirmed, it is profit:

The main problem is asymmetry.

If yahoo lost his bet, he would just lose ALL his money and the conditions of the bet would apply. However, if he won, he would not win the full price, so the bet conditions do not apply.

This is dishonest. You know the code wasn't properly designed and you let it run online anyway, hurting players money and balance (when users misclick or when they are newbies).

Lawfully they are fine what they did, but when it comes to morally the community seems divided. I think its down to the individual whether they want to use Roobet. I honestly thought they would have sorted this out just to make themselves look good, but they chose not too, and I imagine they'll lose loyal customers because of it.

Although, the thing is with the betting industry users don't care as long as they're getting their gambling fix. I've known many of gambling addicts who have been screwed by the casino they've been playing in, but still continue to play on because they just can't do without it. I'm not very familiar with this betting niche, but Roobet don't seem overly concerned about it.

I don't like the treatment of blocking Yahoo, and for that reason alone I'd probably avoid Roobet in the future.

That was exactly my point all the time, completely lame really... I have said enough though so now I am really out. Glad someone also agreed that this is the worst thing about all this.

I hopped on last night for a bit, not because I cannot do without them, but I cannot lose there. Have never been down on the site since they opened, so I may as well take some of their bankroll away from them.

I have never argued that the site was dishonest over anything except that 1 bet. TOS or not, what happened IMO was not the correct action. Some agree, some don't, that's their choice. As well as the bug bonuses offered for everything I found were laughable.

Regardless, their dev messaged me and restored my chat. Not that I plan on chatting much. I did notice the reset my stats as well, so I am no longer able to look up old bets.

Its Christmas, there will likely never be a resolution that I agree with, so no point in continually bitching over what happened. People are aware of the situation and it will always be a mark on them. So I think the best action is to lock this thread and move on. People can check their profile and see the situation and make their own decisions.

I'll leave this open for the rest of the day so users can put any final remarks, good or bad, but when I log off tonight this will be locked.

Thanks to everyone for your opinions, whether you agreed or disagreed with me. I think at worst we got to see a semi healthy discussion on casino dos and don'ts and how people view how the situation could've or should've been handled. So many good points of view to look at and think about.

Reopened this thread to let everyone know roobet contacted me and finally partially took care of the issue. Their teams marketing manager Ant reached out and we had a chat.

Again thanks to all for your opinions and support.

No surprise here.
I've had multiple issues on the site regarding bugs.
The first was an auto bet system I had in place on their game called "Crash", where I'd double my bet on a loss and reset it to normal on a win (using their auto bet option).
I had lost a few times in a row which spiked my bet up a bunch in comparison to my bankroll and had won to offset my losses + a bit of profit. Well the system was bugged and it doubled my bet on a win which I did not instruct the auto bet feature to do.
To add to that point, I was not the only person that this happened to since there was a small community of us all trying to work this system to make a bit of extra cash. We all agreed that this bug did occur, and we all lost money because of it.
Well, me and another member of the site brought it to RooBet's attention and they said that their system is completely fine and they found no bugs. Well to be fair we ran this system for about 48 hours, and within 12 hours they said that they couldn't replicate the bug. Maybe if they tried it for longer than 12 hours they'd run into this issue? Just seems like they do not care about their customers.
Big red flag to me, just screams out scam. I would avoid this website completely.

The best part is, they said since I didn't have video proof they couldn't do anything about it. After this I decided I would record 24/7 and see what I could find.
Around 5:50AM last night I discovered on my recordings that they actually didn't pay me out for a bet I placed with my crash system. I contacted support and they said again, "Well if you dont have video we cant do anything" . Its completely irrational to ask a customer on your gambling website to record their screen 24/7 but since I knew how they scammed me before I did indeed have video proof.
I sent it to them and they gave me my money back but they still will not acknowledge the fact that their system is bugged.

I would advise NOT to play on this site and to go elsewhere.

No offense but if you cannot provide proof what do you expect them to do? You need to have proof and ant will take care of ya

Since yahoo62278, the original complainant had remove his negative rating to Roobet, maybe it's time for Isildur (official) to evaluate the trust his gave to Roobet and maybe change it to neutral.

Nifty, glad it got worked out.   I'd agree if the bet is taken it should pay out but also the company wants to limit their risk involved in any one game.  I can see why they'd not want to honor outlier 'errors' as such.
   Its also very much the case that gambling is a leisure pursuit, its not open market risk where you have to get a lawyer to read through the prospectus before taking a gamble.  Its really advisable for any site to avoid leaving the customers feeling like the rules were tricky or deceptive even, obviously we all get sour enough from losing out the normal risk route nevermind overly intricate or small print type failings.

Fair (succinct) point :p

I am glad to see this issue is resolved finally.
It shows that we can all talk to each other and correct our mistakes.
Nothing is set in stones.
I also deleted my feedback for Roobet, and I hope others will consider changing their feedback.

I am also removed my negative feedback. it doesn't make sense if they fixed the thing after all and also in your case.
As I say in my previous comment here, they did the wrong thing and instead of turning all this into their positive promotion, they entered into a problematic debate here. that they immediately reacted rationally, now they would have a maximum reputation here.
Whatever I actually think everyone deserves another chance, hope they learned a lesson.