|
Betcoin just added horse racing. There's now 3 books with a full race book. Nitrobetting, Betcoin and mBet.
|
|
|
|
|
ralle probably right but my other guess would have been Fortune Jack although I haven't made a bet there in a little while so not sure since I haven't looked at a bet slip in some time. Just going from memory.
|
|
|
|
I'm glad that you mentioned Fortunejack because that is one of the books that I've been debating on their KYC ranking. That may be changed. Anonibet hasn't done any KYC that I know of and their rating is 1, the lowest degree of KYC.
FortuneJack should have at least 2 ratings in the KYC part. Their KYC policy isn’t limited to the restricted jurisdiction only, they also apply this to new users who take the deposit, free spin or reload bonuses. Anonibet team had confirmed it to me that they don't request for any kind of personal documents. '1' in the KYC part stands for a little chance while the KYC requirement is 'zero' on Anonibet. For your Betcoin question ~snip~
I had positive experience on Betcoin.ag partner casino (Playbetr). I also have good experience of playing at Betcoin. But you can't deny that they reserves the right to ask the user to complete the KYC verification at any time, and for any reason. Anyway, you can link my thread under the resources if you wish. I don't have any problem with that. You look like some kind of a commissioner. Anonibet doesn't pay at all, they shouldn't have a rating at all. Read my posts about them, and read other users' posts as well. You are on the forum for so long and you have so many posts and do not know this about this office, you are exactly the same as Anonibet, you are a scammer. They were downgraded based upon your case. "C-" is appropriate as "C" books aren't recommended. This goes back to 2014. They were once the top rated book and slowly declined. They were the only "A" rated book at one time. "A" rated books
Anonibet A (2011) : Earn up to 10% of your losses each month.
"B"rated books
|
|
|
|
I'm glad that you mentioned Fortunejack because that is one of the books that I've been debating on their KYC ranking. That may be changed. Anonibet hasn't done any KYC that I know of and their rating is 1, the lowest degree of KYC.
FortuneJack should have at least 2 ratings in the KYC part. Their KYC policy isn’t limited to the restricted jurisdiction only, they also apply this to new users who take the deposit, free spin or reload bonuses. Anonibet team had confirmed it to me that they don't request for any kind of personal documents. '1' in the KYC part stands for a little chance while the KYC requirement is 'zero' on Anonibet. For your Betcoin question ~snip~
I had positive experience on Betcoin.ag partner casino (Playbetr). I also have good experience of playing at Betcoin. But you can't deny that they reserves the right to ask the user to complete the KYC verification at any time, and for any reason. Anyway, you can link my thread under the resources if you wish. I don't have any problem with that. You make valid points on FJ and Anonibet. I changed KYC ratings accordingly. As far as Betcoin, they do not do it for any reason. They do it for abuse for multi-accounting only and they have been correct every time they went to arbitration. This is why I pointed out that written rules do not equal what actually happens and you have to do research instead of just looking at ToS. You can go back 7 years when that wasn’t the case but that’s their current policy. Do not use a VPN at Betcoin and you won’t have any problems. Take their bonuses and don’t use a VPN. |
|
|
|
@Peeps Place, I was following the discussion between you and 'Darker45' about my KYC related topic. You have said this in your last post Some of the information in KYC details is incorrect. I'm not sure if he got the information from the terms of service but what is written down and what actually happens isn't always the same.
I haven't updated the 'KYC details' column for a long time, but those were the requirements when I added the casinos in the list. Now the casinos are asking for different kind of documents to verify the source of funds of the users, and I'm aware of it. Even some casinos are requesting the user to complete the identity verification by making a video call if they suspect that the user has submitted fake or edited documents. I will try to adjust those informations on my next update. Apart from these, is there more incorrect details in the 'KYC details' column? Hi Mahdirakib - thanks for the post in my thread. I also said that your licenses were correct and that your thread is a great resource. In fact, I was going to ask if you minded if I linked your thread to my other resource section. As far as the KYC details being somewhat off, I'll mention the top two books I have rated Betcoin and Nitrobetting since they are heavily vetted because of their ratings. Also, you mentioned Betcoin in my thread. In your thread here Nitrobetting is omitted. The only real concern of your thread here is that books such as Betcoin are in the same category as the others "if needed" although their KYC is different. They only KYC if you use multiple accounts. They don't punish people based on guessed jurisdiction unless they use multiple accounts to abuse bonuses or circumvent limits. In fact, Betcoin agrees to third party arbitration and has never lost a case. I would put Nitrobetting in that same category. Other casinos seem to target winners and then punish using jurisdiction. They confiscate winnings or both deposit and winnings. Losers are left alone. It's crooked in my book and I'm not going to put any book using those tactics in the "A" category. Your thread is excellent. The best here as far as licenses and I'd like to link it if fine with you. I'll link under other resources https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=717790.0I think that a lot is changing in the casino policy in terms of establishing requirements for passing KYC identity verification. This policy, in particular due to recent events with lawsuits against Binance and Coinbase, will certainly tighten. And while the anonymity of a player in a casino where payments are made in cryptocurrencies is the main advantage of such casinos and a much needed feature for millions of players who require anonymity, KYC requirements are increasingly being used in a real game. Including in the casino, where the administration of the casino did not set this requirement before. Almost all casinos have become afraid of violating the requirements of local regulators, who only do what they see what else American regulators come up with. Alas, for objectivity, you need to periodically review the TOS of the casino in the part of the introduction of KYC and OP will be very good if you follow the changes and mark it in your table. To keep the data in the table up to date. And the table is generally excellent and useful to many. You may be right on Coinbase and Binance but I feel a little differently since they were sued by the United States. My feeling is that the US doesn't dictate anything in CR or Curacao. People may be sued when they enter the US but that doesn't change anything in CR or Curacao. There are a couple of books in Costa Rica, Nitrobetting and Betcrypto. They are pretty easy going with KYC unless you use multiple accounts or bet from the country of CR. |
|
|
|
Your thread looks pretty good now with the new updates, but I can't agree with the KYC rating of Betcoin and FortuneJack. The KYC verification requirement is common (at least medium requirement) on every Curacao licensed casino, while you have given '1' rating for those two casinos. Where the '1' stands for very little chance. I'm wondering why you have given '1' rating for Anonibet! Has Anonibet ever asked for any kind of personal documents from anyone? BTW, don't forget to give me a reply here. I'm glad that you mentioned Fortunejack because that is one of the books that I've been debating on their KYC ranking. That may be changed. Anonibet hasn't done any KYC that I know of and their rating is 1, the lowest degree of KYC. For your Betcoin question, I'll post the same reply as was given in your thread: Hi Mahdirakib - thanks for the post in my thread. I also said that your licenses were correct and that your thread is a great resource. In fact, I was going to ask if you minded if I linked your thread to my other resource section. As far as the KYC details being somewhat off, I'll mention the top two books I have rated Betcoin and Nitrobetting A+ since they are heavily vetted because of their ratings. Also, you mentioned Betcoin in my thread. In your thread here Nitrobetting is omitted. The only real concern of your thread here is that books such as Betcoin are in the same category as the others "if needed" although their KYC is different. They only KYC if you use multiple accounts. They don't punish people based on guessed jurisdiction unless they use multiple accounts to abuse bonuses or circumvent limits. In fact, Betcoin agrees to third party arbitration and has never lost a case. I would put Nitrobetting in that same category. Other casinos seem to target winners and then punish using jurisdiction. They confiscate winnings or both deposit and winnings. Losers are left alone. It's crooked in my book and I'm not going to put any book using those tactics in the "A" category. Your thread is excellent. The best here as far as licenses and I'd like to link it if fine with you. I'll link under other resources https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=717790.0To add a little not in your thread, if you ever have a concern about jurisdiction or KYC, contact the book and ask if it's ok to play there. Do this in confidence as sometimes it's best to do that way for the individual case. Ask about VPN use since both those books don't like it. They know you aren't using multiple accounts if you aren't using a VPN. If you contact the book and get the ok to play there, you have recourse if they decide to use jurisdiction to confiscate your money. |
|
|
|
@Peeps Place, I was following the discussion between you and 'Darker45' about my KYC related topic. You have said this in your last post Some of the information in KYC details is incorrect. I'm not sure if he got the information from the terms of service but what is written down and what actually happens isn't always the same.
I haven't updated the 'KYC details' column for a long time, but those were the requirements when I added the casinos in the list. Now the casinos are asking for different kind of documents to verify the source of funds of the users, and I'm aware of it. Even some casinos are requesting the user to complete the identity verification by making a video call if they suspect that the user has submitted fake or edited documents. I will try to adjust those informations on my next update. Apart from these, is there more incorrect details in the 'KYC details' column? Hi Mahdirakib - thanks for the post in my thread. I also said that your licenses were correct and that your thread is a great resource. In fact, I was going to ask if you minded if I linked your thread to my other resource section. As far as the KYC details being somewhat off, I'll mention the top two books I have rated Betcoin and Nitrobetting since they are heavily vetted because of their ratings. Also, you mentioned Betcoin in my thread. In your thread here Nitrobetting is omitted. The only real concern of your thread here is that books such as Betcoin are in the same category as the others "if needed" although their KYC is different. They only KYC if you use multiple accounts. They don't punish people based on guessed jurisdiction unless they use multiple accounts to abuse bonuses or circumvent limits. In fact, Betcoin agrees to third party arbitration and has never lost a case. I would put Nitrobetting in that same category. Other casinos seem to target winners and then punish using jurisdiction. They confiscate winnings or both deposit and winnings. Losers are left alone. It's crooked in my book and I'm not going to put any book using those tactics in the "A" category. Your thread is excellent. The best here as far as licenses and I'd like to link it if fine with you. I'll link under other resources https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=717790.0 |
|
|
|
~snip~
The days of Bitcoin casinos not implementing KYC have passed or are still ongoing, but only for gamblers who don't use big money, so they are free to gamble in crypto casinos. But big money gamblers should be prepared to do KYC if the casino asks. And anonymity is indeed one of the things that makes Bitcoin casinos grow faster, especially in the recent Covid time. But even though KYC will eventually become mandatory, we can still play gambling using our personal wallets because there are casinos that provide this facility. We probably won't be asked to do KYC by connecting our personal wallet with our gambling account. But the advice that still works is don't use big money in gambling so that the casino doesn't investigate your account. There are casinos that do not do KYC unless you use multiple accounts. They even allow large amounts. You can find KYC ratings here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=717790.0A rating of 1 will only KYC if you use multiple accounts. I should have thanked you for leading me to this old yet comprehensive and seemingly updated thread, but I guess it badly needs more update. Betnomi, Wolfbet, and others, for example, have KYC on their ToS, and not just on multiple accounts. I guess Mahdirakib's Information of Crypto Casinos License and KYC requirements is much more detailed as far as KYC on crypto gambling sites is concerned. You might want to compare notes. Anyway, when it comes to KYC these days, whether it is demanded from you or not upon sign up is not really the only issue. It is an issue that almost all casinos and betting platforms reserve the right to demand KYC from a user anytime. For somebody who's really disgusted with KYC, that is enough to discourage him/her. On the terms of service, all the sportsbooks say that they may ask for KYC except Sportbet.one and Anonibet. In the case of Anonibet, they may confiscate money if they feel that you are playing from a restricted country. All sportsbooks take a different view on KYC. Mahdirakib's has a nice thread. The license and license operators are correct. He even takes screen shots which is nice visual. Some of the information in KYC details is incorrect. I'm not sure if he got the information from the terms of service but what is written down and what actually happens isn't always the same. That said, his thread is still a great resource. |
|
|
|
I think the main reason why Bitcoin quickly developed into a sort of a gambler's currency was that it offered a certain level of anonymity to the gambler. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but there was a time when KYC was never a thing in Bitcoin gambling. So Bitcoin became a sort of an underground gambling currency. Gambling in Bitcoin means privacy.
Later on, however, although Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies remain to be heavily used in gambling, with stricter regulations, KYC becomes a requirement for gambling platforms. Although it is not mandatory every time a user signs up, it could be required anytime. For me, if KYC becomes compulsory upon sign up, I might as well gamble with fiat.
The days of Bitcoin casinos not implementing KYC have passed or are still ongoing, but only for gamblers who don't use big money, so they are free to gamble in crypto casinos. But big money gamblers should be prepared to do KYC if the casino asks. And anonymity is indeed one of the things that makes Bitcoin casinos grow faster, especially in the recent Covid time. But even though KYC will eventually become mandatory, we can still play gambling using our personal wallets because there are casinos that provide this facility. We probably won't be asked to do KYC by connecting our personal wallet with our gambling account. But the advice that still works is don't use big money in gambling so that the casino doesn't investigate your account. There are casinos that do not do KYC unless you use multiple accounts. They even allow large amounts. You can find KYC ratings here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=717790.0A rating of 1 will only KYC if you use multiple accounts. |
|
|
|
|
Add the following to NR:
Luckyblock.com
Weiss.bet
Betplay.io
SP7vip.com
|
|
|
|
Update | SportsBooks | | | Rating | | | Year | | | Country | | | KYC | | | MISC | | | Promos | | | Support | | | BCT thread | | | | | --------------------- | | | -------- | | | -------- | | | ---------- | | | ------ | | | ----------------------------------- | | | ------------ | | | ---------------------- | | | ------------ | | | | "A" rated books | | | Nitrobetting | | | A+ | | | 2013 | | | Costa Rica | | | 1 | | | Racebook, Poker, Sports Bonus | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Betcoin | | | A+ | | | 2013 | | | Curacao | | | 1 | | | Two sets of lines and limits | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | MBet | | | | | | 2017 | | | Cyprus | | | 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | "B" rated books | | | Stake | | | B | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | opened as casino 2014 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Bistler | | | B- | | | 2015 | | | Curacao | | | 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Fortune Jack | | | B- | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | 1 | | | opened as casino 2014 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | "C" rated books | | | Betfury | | | C+ | | | 2020 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Cloudbet | | | C+ | | | 2013 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | Sports Bonus | | | | | | | | | | | | | Roobet | | | C+ | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duelbits | | | C | | | 2020 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sportsbet | | | C | | | 2016 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Maverickgames | | | C | | | 2020 | | | Isle of Man | | | 5 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Owl | | | C | | | 2021 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Rollbit | | | C | | | 2021 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Trustdice | | | C | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Anonibet | | | C- | | | 2011 | | | - | | | 1 | | | Sports Bonus | | | | | | | | | | | | | Betnomi | | | C- | | | 2020 | | | Curacao | | | | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Parlayplus | | | C- | | | 2019 | | | - | | | 2 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wolf | | | C- | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
Thanks for all the discussions. I read a lot of comments. That many people disagree with kyc. But I haven't seen anyone commenting that there was fraud or KYC abuse from gambling sites. Hope I didn't miss that comment.
Is it just over-worrying?
Probably. The general opinion is that when you send KYC documents they are potentially compromised, but this happens even on large exchanges like Coinbase, where data can be hacked or even sold by them. In general, the more reputable the casino or the site in general, the less likely it is that there will be a problem with your data, but once you have submitted it, you can't be sure of anything. The information on the databases is stolen and sold. No one from a casino is going to come out publicly and say that information has been compromised. In fact, the casino may not even know since most of the time it's an inside job and an employee just sells the information. |
|
|
|
To us, being winner-friendly means providing a welcoming environment to players from all backgrounds and all capabilities, with a core value of not limiting or closing winning accounts. On the casino side, this means we support our players throughout their experience and encourage them to play and win. On the sportsbook side, we aim to give our players the tools they need to make informed betting decisions through sharing analytical content with them and we never limit or close accounts. https://alphabookbet.com/ Any reviews on these? Thanks for the input LEVSKI. Alphabookbet is a fiat book requiring KYC so a review hasn't been done on them. |
|
|
|
Just wondering if your list includes the consideration of the KYC data storage as per the topic? Because I only see that list only ranks the casino KYC through their implementation. High ratings for those who didn't required it that much while low rating to those who strictly required it. ...//::::
I don't mind submitting KYC as long as the casino is reputable.
This is the point and we all agree on that, but look at this example that he just posted, quote, can it be reliable? Many only look at promotions. -
The casino that he use for example is not reputable and obviously a mediocre casino that offers too good to be true promotion just to attract players. @lionheart pertains to casino that already have a brand here in the forum. You have it right. A rating of 5 means that KYC is mandatory. A rating of 1 means that the casino will leave you alone unless you use more than one account. A ranking of 3 means that there is a chance of KYC even if you haven't used more than one account. It can also be for a small amount. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=717790.0 |
|
|
|
If you are playing at a NR, please post a review.
Not rated.
Housebets.io (2023)
betcrypto.cr (2023)
dexsport.io (2023)
vbetftn.com (2023
thanks for this list here, and I wanna to ask who checked them for patouts? I try to test drive all the books and take a withdrawal before putting up a rating. All the "A" and "B" books must have withdrawals within 1 hour on average. It's best if multiple people post on withdrawal times. Poster reviews help all. |
|
|
|
Update: Added Support pages as well as Bitcointalk threads. | SportsBooks | | | Rating | | | Year | | | Country | | | KYC | | | MISC | | | Promos | | | Support | | | BCT thread | | | | | --------------------- | | | -------- | | | -------- | | | ---------- | | | ------ | | | ----------------------------------- | | | ------------ | | | ---------------------- | | | ------------ | | | | "A" rated books | | | Nitrobetting | | | A+ | | | 2013 | | | Costa Rica | | | 1 | | | Racebook, Poker, Sports Bonus | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Betcoin | | | A+ | | | 2013 | | | Curacao | | | 1 | | | Two sets of lines and limits | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | MBet | | | | | | 2017 | | | Cyprus | | | 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | "B" rated books | | | Stake | | | B | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | opened as casino 2014 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Bistler | | | B- | | | 2015 | | | Curacao | | | 2 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Fortune Jack | | | B- | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | 1 | | | opened as casino 2014 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | "C" rated books | | | Betfury | | | C+ | | | 2020 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Cloudbet | | | C+ | | | 2013 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | Sports Bonus | | | | | | | | | | | | | Roobet | | | C+ | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Duelbits | | | C | | | 2020 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sportsbet | | | C | | | 2016 | | | Curacao | | | 3 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Maverickgames | | | C | | | 2020 | | | Isle of Man | | | 5 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Owl | | | C | | | 2021 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Rollbit | | | C | | | 2021 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Trustdice | | | C | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Anonibet | | | C- | | | 2011 | | | - | | | 4 | | | Sports Bonus | | | | | | | | | | | | | Betnomi | | | C- | | | 2020 | | | Curacao | | | | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Parlayplus | | | C- | | | 2019 | | | - | | | 2 | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | Wolf | | | C- | | | 2019 | | | Curacao | | | - | | | - | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
So, there is a thing I don't understand. There are casinos that have Curacao license but at the same their KYC requesting is very different, some of them rarely ask you for KYC while some of them ask it moderately or frequently.
Can someone explain why is that so? Logically, all casinos should follow the same rules and if one manages to get without asking KYC frequently, why can't another casino, that operates under the same license, do so?
It does make logical sense for all the Curacao books to have the same KYC rating. In reality, Betcoin and Forunejack leave players alone unless they multi-account to abuse bonuses or circumvent limits. They will even allow those from the US to play without repercussion. Those two have a KYC rating of 1. Then there are the other Curacao books rated 3 and 4 that seem to use their license and TOS as a weapon to confiscate money from winners. They leave those alone that lose money, but will go after winners using jurisdiction. Using the US again, they will take winnings or whole balances from those playing in the US. The amount is irrelevant at some of those books. While I agree that AML and KYC rules have to be enforced, a one time rollover is sufficient. To weaponize Curacao laws to take money from winners warrants a lower KYC rating. Players should not use multiple accounts. Be very careful of jurisdiction when playing at books rated 3 and 4. Nitrogen is another book with a rating of 1. They allow players from most countries except for Costa Rica where they are located. There are a couple others such as Russia but for the most part, they leave players alone and will not target winners. |
|
|
|
Please post comments, reviews, praises and complaints here.
I noticed Rollbit doesn't have a promo or bonus page, so I suggest linking their blog page as an alternative since that's where all of their weekly challenge(promos) are posted. Also, Betzus and BC.game can be added to the not rated list. I linked both of their ANN thread to save you some time. Thanks as always ralle. The Rollbit promo has been added as well as the 2 NR. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
