I... don't understand. Were OP from restricted country? I can't find this info on any of OP's story.

And, OP, I noticed a piece of info I initially missed when I first responded to your thread, were the withdrawal being processed and they allowed you to clear up your wallet? They said, "your withdrawal is released from our side and the account is closed"?

That's strange, I can see it on my account just fine. I even take a look into their deposit guide and it listed USDT on their list. Though those facts are rather futile, Betcoin.AG has proven the availability of USDT through an even more concrete way, by Blockchain transaction on their platform.

Anyway, how's that complaint on AG? I still can't see it. Have you submitted it?

Yeah, unfortunately changenow has a lot of accusation against them. Their representative hasn't been active for a while. I can try to shoot them a PM, but I don't think that'll reach them. I think you'll get a better chance of reaching them and catching their attention by raising your issue on bestchange's page.

For the time being, can you perhaps upload some evidences to support your claim? You can use talkimg

Reuploading through talkimg for an easier understanding of the situation. OP, please upload your next images through talkimg, it's an image hosting created by member of this forum, it'll make things easier.

Now, moving to your case, just to be sure we get a better grasp of the situation, the email service you use to register is protonmail? Just like the one you use for contact? I can't see it through the snippet of email you provide. Can you perhaps provide another one that shows them in full?

I'll notify FJ's representative about this and invite them to give their side.

Okay, thank you for the... clarification. Where do you get or implied it from? A quick search on GekkeBelg's post seems bear zero result of him talking about this specific technic, so I think he doesn't make it public.


And determine the best platform to place the bets according to those comparison. Thus, value betting.


Now, that is the good practice of using ToS from casino's side. That thing works both ways.


Please rephrase.

Umm... two scammers... who? On the link you provided, it's rather clear that --coming from the seemingly impaired and dented logic of yours-- the scammer is blackjack.fun. But here, on this thread? Who exactly do you refer as a scammer that BGC defended? GekkeBelg? The casino? Which casino?

---

Now, regarding GekkeBelg, I've been silent and observing this thread from a corner for quite some time. I personally think this is unfair for BGC, as I am the one who asked him a follow-up about his investigation and [I believe] I made him publish this thread.

To lay it out in the open, I am in a very tight position.

As stated on my last [and only] post here, I reached to GekkeBelg and exchanged one or two PMs regarding this [and his absence from this thread]. I am not sure how much liberty I have to brush this topic without violating the confidentiality entailed a PM, how much can I say without him considering me violating the private nature of the information he gave me, and I've been mulling over the best approach to address this issue ever since.

So I think the best approach will be to disregard everything and start new.

I think, I can safely say that GekkeBelg is a value bettor, he made it known on one occasion,


though on other [earlier] cases, he denied such practice


Do casinos prohibit this strategy? Well, as several users already mentioned here, no. At least not those who had conflict with GekkeBelg. I take a quick stroll on those casinos and can't find value betting on their ToS or sports-rules [I am currently reaching some casinos' representatives to get a better understanding of their view on this, just to be sure] with exception of WinTomato who explicitly describe they prohibit this strategy.

Does that automatically translates that GekkeBelg is, WinTomato aside, innocent here? I say, "no".

As many people know [at least those who has the privilege to experience adulthood], we live in the massive gray, it is not a simple yes or no, he's wrong so she's right, there are many shades in between, and this is where GekkeBelg resides.

He had/has experience with casinos. Plural. He probably experimented on them, see who tolerate his strategy and who won't; looking for those who will limit him, those who will refund his money and lock the door behind his back, and those who take a bold action and refuses his winning.

It's suffice to say he understand that, although it is not against rules, casinos are very much against this practice. And he pushed his luck by trying every casino, hopping from one to another. There even a slight probability that he weaponized it, upon learning that casinos are prohibiting the practice from WinTomato [the one who happen to have the rule on their ToS], he made sure to check every casinos he played doesn't specify this on their ToS, so when it's used against him, his situation is bulletproof.

Is that wrong? Umm, I'll say that's actually clever and that's how ToS should be used.

But are those ethical and acceptable? Well, I'll leave this to every individual to decide.

I personally think that this thread has served its purpose, to inform us that there is more than meet the eye with GekkeBelg. He's sharp and knows his way around. So next case with him, [note to self] it's probably a good idea to touch it with one-meter-long pole and a healthy pinch of salt.

Unless... if LM is in the mood of spilling some tea? Beans, perhaps? I am readying my pen and notebook. LOL.

That's actually... not the point I asked, whether you're like or dislike web design. The point I wondered was that people tends to instinctively look for more info at the bottom of a web's page, as that's where usually web designer and companies put their technical info. Working on and studying the field of coding should logically bring you, even if that's the a smallest degree of it, familiarity with web design, which means you should have more tendency to look to this part. And demonstrably, I assume, you look for betcoin's master license info at the bottom of their page, yet you somehow failed to look into GC's page and go straight to google once you can't click a button.

Might be irrelevant to your situation, pure curiosity.

OP, I'm curious about one thing, that I took to bed last night and still can't figure it out. You said you're a software engineer who are familiar with basic html formats, it wouldn't too far fetched to assume you're quite familiar with web design too, yet it didn't cross your mind to try to look at the bottom of GC's page to find their contact? You just click one button and, "oh, ok, it didn't work. Let me google their contact."

I believe I am as good as blind when it comes to coding and web design, yet that's one of the first place I come [me, a "muggle" on the world of coding] whenever I try to find the website's contact.

How? Why? So many questions.

Proof? That LM and I were DMing each other?

Your statement that, "I myself believe what I see and feel because I am a realist" can be contradictive. You do aware that the two doesn't necessarily mutually exclusive? While, at times, they can support each other, there are times they contradict each other too. Believing what you see would imply you base what you believe on an observable materials, while believing what you feel has a possible tendency that you perceive things from what your emotion say, neglecting facts.

For example, the statement that LM and I DMed each other, someone who base their belief on observable materials will accept things as fact because they see the proof of it, they will only make that DM statement because they see it themselves, e.g.: screenshots. While someone who base the belief on their feeling will have a possible tendency to made [up] the statement based on their emotion, which could be clouded, e.g. spite, thus, impaired.


How is this relevant and were you trying to put words into people's mouth? I don't think anyone ever accuses you on "cheating and exploiting the big part of 24 USDT", what people say [and you admitted] was you taking advantage of the bug by repetitively exploited it to passive-agressively show someone that you know what he did.

Oops... OP, it'll be a very nice opportunity for me to put a disclaimer, lest you lose and proven to be abusing betcoin, then you come and say it's all my fault because I instructed you to go with AG.

That arbitrator above is my mere suggestion. You were asking and I am simply providing one that will handle sportsbet related issue. I am not encouraging or forcing you to take them. Do your own research and weight everything prior to deciding which to take.

As betcoin said, they will take one mediation, and once a ruling is made by that arbitrator, whatever it is, that's it.

---

p.s.: OP, got your PM, thanks.

Hmm?



And you decided to google, perhaps, "Gaming Curacao contact", and [though our result will likely differ, but I believe the order will more or less the same, given the keyword matches] you choose to click on one that clearly have different name?



Anyway, just to satisfy my curiosity and stave off any doubt, do you mind to provide that email from CEG?


You're sportsbet related, so I think AskGamblers will fit better. To avoid any confusion and misaddress, this is AskGamblers: https://www.askgamblers.com/

Oh wow, what a lucky coincidence, is it not? Do you mind to show us the email sent by CEG saying that? It's quite an interesting mistake, given you said that you reached their licensor because that info is available on their page, so you should see GC, mostly on their footer, the seal of validation one, as shown below,



I wonder what make you lost so far on CEG's complaint site, they have a very different logo, especially as that seal of validation is the one that tipped you off what licensor they're under.

Let me try to reach Razer and ask him to give an update from Rollbit's side or if he'll allow me to be more detailed about this case.

As for why OPs of many threads did not post an update when their case got resolved in favor to them, a better half of it were because the root of those problem are from their side, like being too quick and impatience in withdrawal process, not understanding that a bet is voided for reason that's outside the sportsbook's control, bet took a bit too long to be credited, etc. coming here and admit that all they need is a bit patience will understandably... require a big heart.

---

There was. That part I can say with confidence.

As for why he didn't share any evidence of it... I'll need Razer's consent to give more details, suppose he doesn't fill this case himself.

Should you ask, you will be provided. But yeah, it happened anyway, so there's no point in discussing it any further.


Which casinos are these? And I assume you reached them through live support? Because this should be the first correspondence you have with a casino representative on the forum?

Betcoin's representative whose been in touch with you, Emma, is actually polite, if we may infer from a snippet shown on your screenshot.

All things considered, yes, David is still easily reachable. There are other casino representative on this forum who will blatantly ignore a scam accusation. One even specifically asked me to stop reaching them to ask them to resolve a case...which rather piled up [of which I obliged].

Every pun intended, it sounds like a big gamble, is it not? They let you withdraw, hoping you'll double down by depositing more instead of folding? Predictable move and a sure-bet if you're a gambling addict who will not be satisfied by his losing, but [un]fortunately, you're not, so that's a big IF from their side.


Oo...kay, you certainly know how to escalate things. I was thinking about a mediation by an arbitrator, like AG, before going that far, but as you've raised it to their licensor, betcoin --like other casinos-- will usually focus their resources on that resolution method and refrained from commenting further on any other media, given the decision made by the licensors are final.

As such, they'll usually --and justifiedly-- will not address anything further on this thread.

I hope you can update us with their final decision once it's made, though I am somewhat sure Betcoin.AG will update us if you don't, or --at the very least-- PM me with the result so I can update it on my list and the forum members will eventually learn about it.

I'd like to inform you that resolution time on a licensor is considerably longer than an arbitrator, like weeks. So if you don't get a reply within days, it's completely normal.


Huh?

They require documents to verify things themselves, one that Binance will not ever provide to them. One can't just simply say "I'm verified on this platform, here is link to my profile, you can consider my account on your platform as verified as well, because that platform is better than yours."

But, given you've escalate this to the licensor, it's no longer relevant.


Umm... just to clarify, betcoin actually have one of the cleanest reputation when it comes to dispute. On this forum only, not one even left unattended, and they managed to mark every cases against them as "resolved", which rather impressive. Personally, if I ever want to scam a casino, I will not go with betcoin. They're... scary.


Nope, no idea who Davis is. But, David? Yeah, he's the representative.

And despite his outburst that he showed here, I have to agree with yahoo62278, he's actually easy to deal with. My communication with him on every cases I attended were satisfactory, he gave facts. Plain and simple, yet still friendly.

Well, statistically speaking, I think almost every casino representative here are very well mannered. I guess he [and them] just have a short fuse for people who they're sure abusing their platform, or perhaps some severe allergies.

Hmmm... a software engineer with familiarity of basic html formats but needed to look for a guide to post image bbcode and --after given and read the format-- tried another format to see if he can align the image center-wise... ok, sure. Moving on,


It doesn't interest me because I find it quite logical and explainable. They got suspicious with your account between the first withdrawal and the second. Hence, the KYC was only requested by the second withdrawal. Even if it's not the second withdrawal, it's something inevitable. Suppose that they ask for KYC during your 11th withdrawal, the question then will be "why do they ask me on my 11th and not the first ten?" Or if they asked for it right from your first one, the question will be, "they asked KYC for 700 USD withdrawal?"

There is no end to this, don't you agree?


Umm... how do you propose they do it? They emailed Binance and say something like, "hey yo, can you send me the KYC document of this user? I know he's KYC verified on your platform. Yes, we know KYC is a private documents, but if you can show me his, you did me solid. Much gratitude."?


Now you're being rather ridiculous. You're comparing an exchange with a casino? No matter how big the exchange or the casino is, I believe they have different detection and security system. You're comparing an apple to orange.


Betcoin.AG, I will have to agree with this one, to avoid the suspicion of selective scamming, can you please be a bit more precise and add 1,900 to the pool instead of 1,400?

While for OP, I believe betcoin's representative has offered you a solution to get things more binding? Aren't you going to consider to pursue this path?

I managed to get some insight regarding this case from Razer. I would prefer if OP can actually update us with the development of this case himself, but it seems OP are not going to return. So, without going into so much details, the reason why OP's withdrawal is pending to be processed is due to a safety and security reason of Rollbit's players and how OP managed to get ahold into those coin.

They simply needed some time to clarify the transaction and ensure everything is good.

I didn't get into the final result of this case, but I think it's safe to assume that it's resolved; be it in favor of OP where the clarification matched and they processed the withdrawal, or in favor of the other player's safety where an attempt was thwarted. Because, if I were OP, seeing the amount is subjectively not small, I'll update this thread regularly rather than went offline, once their representative is getting to the bottom of the case.

I certainly hope that everything is straightened up nicely, but --as I previously stated above-- as I don't think OP will come back, I think it'll be safe to mark this one as closed from the above explanation?

It is not necessarily that a gambling platform restrict access for user residing in certain country simply due to the law of that country, for instance, prohibit gambling activities and casino business. Even when a country allows gambling activity, when a casino or a provider does not have a permit to operate on that country, they'll still put these countries as prohibited territories. It is for the sake of compliance and licensing.

As for withdrawing the winning amount, though every casinos has their own approach on ToS violation, majority of them will refund only the sum of initial deposit or if the user is at total loss. When a user who violates ToS is in overall profit, the rest of the winning amount will be confiscated to "recover" the casinos' monetary loss from those violation.

This should answer why Rollbit also didn't allow withdrawal of OP's winning amount, as OP already withdrawn more than the sum of his deposit

This question comes from someone who questions people's IQ, because he has a very high IQ, on every chance he gets and is supposedly so good at finding bugs in casinos? Really? Can't you umm... draw a conclusion by yourself?

[I am quoting the post in whole to give audience a better understanding of what I mean]

This... these are interesting.

Let me start with the thread you read as a guide, I initially suspected that you read that one, but I wanted to be sure. An interesting point worth to mention is that the guide actually only instructed you to copy and paste the link generated by imgbb, the OP failed to mention that he added extra code on his guide, namely,




As you can see, on step three he wrote that all you need is copy, go to your page and paste, and on step four he actually added "center" code, but he didn't write that on his instruction. Yet, you're so clearly managed to copy that exact instruction, as shown by the full code of your original image,


One may assume and argue that you're simply a careful reader, that you look closely to the image provided and realized the missing code. Yet at the same time, if we follow the assumption that you're a careful reader, how could you missed four posts below the one you linked [the one that explains newbie needs to pay], that suggest images to be uploaded through a website that's built by our community member?

This is rather contradictive with the trait of a careful reader. But let's keep that for a moment and go on with the next point.

As posted in full above, you fluently utilize horizontal line and snipping quotes, breaking my post into points to address the points I raised. You learned those format... from my post? Quite a brilliant newbie who is very clueless about the forum's feature that he needs to [thoroughly] read a guide about posting image, isn't it?

Now, if we consider that all of those knowledge are from your other, much older account... well, multi-acc itself is not prohibited by the forum, many users utilize alt-account from time to time when they want to make controversial posts but concerned that it'll backfired and ruined their reputation.

But, for someone who's being accused by a casino for multi-acc, if he's not the wrong party here, that he does not abuse the casino's rule, I think --and most logic dictate-- he'll very much prefer to complaint with his older account, which arguably hold better credibility than a newly created account. Unless... he can't post with his older account for some reason? Say, like, he already have a bad reputation with that older account?

Food for thought.