BC.GAME - CASINO-SPORTBOOK, OFFICIAL SPONSOR LEICESTER CITY!

[pusaka]

It's hard to bet on these matches, I bet and lost hahaha 
Several unlikely results so far

Like today it will definitely be very annoying for those who bet on PSG, maybe many bet on over seeing their convincing appearance, but instead the results are disappointing., PSG did not score a single goal.

Benfica vs Auckland is the first match today, Benfica's odds are @1.01 and @75.00 for Auckland.
There should be no surprises with odds like these, but we don't know what will happen next, fatigue or maybe boredom will hit the players in the European teams because of the tight schedule.

Honestly I also see this match as difficult to predict and in fact the result really happened from some matches that were not right from what I thought. One of them is maybe we don't really understand the strength of the opponent, so that makes us a little confused.

Because honestly for some teams I don't really know about the depth and how they are, it's different when I see some teams that come from Europe or have big names. To bet on this is our respective choices, and I myself am very careful to make bets and maybe I wait until the time I can really see the strength of the existing team.

[darbitmobilerecovery]

With all the respect of the world, 75.00 odds for a team who is nearby to amateur (they are semi-professional) and after they allow 10 goals in the first match, is a fucking joke to see the bookies giving us only 75.00 odds on them to win, i mean they have to had at least 150 odds or even more.

[hopenotlate]

With all the respect of the world, 75.00 odds for a team who is nearby to amateur (they are semi-professional) and after they allow 10 goals in the first match, is a fucking joke to see the bookies giving us only 75.00 odds on them to win, i mean they have to had at least 150 odds or even more.

The problem in giving more than 100 odds to a team to win is to determine the odds for the other team : I might be wrong but I cannot remember I ever saw odds smaller than 1.01x , assuming it's the smallest available allocating more than 100  it would give a guaranted win by betting on both sides.

[salad daging]

With all the respect of the world, 75.00 odds for a team who is nearby to amateur (they are semi-professional) and after they allow 10 goals in the first match, is a fucking joke to see the bookies giving us only 75.00 odds on them to win, i mean they have to had at least 150 odds or even more.

The problem in giving more than 100 odds to a team to win is to determine the odds for the other team : I might be wrong but I cannot remember I ever saw odds smaller than 1.01x , assuming it's the smallest available allocating more than 100  it would give a guaranted win by betting on both sides.

Odds 1.01x is certainly a guaranteed win like a top European team against a lower class amateur team, but in the match I saw the betting market where Benfica had no odds to win, the bookie did not give odds even though it was 1.01x.
There is Benfica - X 30 - Away 60 before the match started a few hours.
If Benfica can't win by more than 2 goals then this team seems to have a problem with the final finish.

[rdluffy]

With all the respect of the world, 75.00 odds for a team who is nearby to amateur (they are semi-professional) and after they allow 10 goals in the first match, is a fucking joke to see the bookies giving us only 75.00 odds on them to win, i mean they have to had at least 150 odds or even more.

The problem in giving more than 100 odds to a team to win is to determine the odds for the other team : I might be wrong but I cannot remember I ever saw odds smaller than 1.01x , assuming it's the smallest available allocating more than 100  it would give a guaranted win by betting on both sides.

Odds 1.01x is certainly a guaranteed win like a top European team against a lower class amateur team, but in the match I saw the betting market where Benfica had no odds to win, the bookie did not give odds even though it was 1.01x.
There is Benfica - X 30 - Away 60 before the match started a few hours.
If Benfica can't win by more than 2 goals then this team seems to have a problem with the final finish.

Interesting to note that the Benfica vs Auckland game is paused due to bad weather
And it's only 1x0

The odds are now:
Benfica > No odds
Draw > 30.0
Auckland > 50.0

Has anyone here already placed a bet at 1.01?
In particular, I would never place a bet like that, especially in soccer, even though Bayern have scored 10 goals, Benfica are only 1 goal ahead.

[Jaycoinz]

With all the respect of the world, 75.00 odds for a team who is nearby to amateur (they are semi-professional) and after they allow 10 goals in the first match, is a fucking joke to see the bookies giving us only 75.00 odds on them to win, i mean they have to had at least 150 odds or even more.

Lol c'mon man, 150odds for a team ? I mean they lost 10nil but it doesn't mean that there should be given that amount of high odd, I mean they are also big team or European clubs too who have lost that amount of goals before but that doesn't mean on their next game or competition the odd given to them should be so high fucking high, it's football and anything can happen so just give them a break .

[The Cryptovator]

How do you ensure meaning traceable transaction?

they dont look at mine they deleted most of them, and they will not give you a full wallet history they say they cant access that and refuse the data
https://imgur.com/a/Gf8NJ1U

Who deleted your data exactly? They might delete your data from their website only if they like to do so. But no one could delete your transaction data from the blockchain. Every piece of data should be visible to the block explorer. BC game support responded on your allegation thread. Also, I raised some concerns there to show from your end. But you are just spamming and not providing what we are asking. Your problem won't be solved unless you help from your end.

I will say don't panic; if you really made the deposit, they won't skip it. But you need to cooperate instead of just blaming after blame. The amount is pretty small, and they won't scam you for such an amount; at least I don't believe they will ruin their reputation for this small transaction. All you need to do is provide proper evidence.

[ptaylor78]

After returning from a one-month timeout, I deposited 1,000 USDC and increased my balance to 1,560 USDC. Since I had recently reset my 2FA, BC.Game applied a 24-hour withdrawal lock to my account.

To protect my balance during this period, I enabled a $60 daily loss limit through the Responsible Gambling settings before placing additional wagers and notified live support in advance, clearly stating my concern and intention to safeguard my funds.

Despite this, the system allowed me to continue making unrestricted bets, including 12 consecutive losing bets within 6 minutes, resulting in a loss of $1,661 USDC. Only after my balance dropped to $2.60 did I receive a system notification stating I had reached my loss limit. By that point, the intended protection had already failed.

Loss Limit Activation:

I activated the $60 daily loss limit on my BC.Game account on June 19, 2025, between 9:30 AM and 10:00 AM.

Immediate Concerns Raised:

At 10:08 AM, I contacted Live Support to express concern that delays in processing my withdrawal and 2FA reset seemed intentional, possibly to allow time for me to lose my balance. I informed the agent that I had set the loss limit specifically to prevent this from happening.

Undisputed Timeline:

BC.Game does not dispute that the loss limit was active prior to my subsequent bets. Instead, they refer to a hidden disclaimer that "there may be a certain delay in betting settlement." I was not aware of this disclaimer—it is buried within settings and directly contradicts the tool’s clearly stated claim that the limit "takes effect immediately." This inconsistency undermines the credibility of the tool and defeats its purpose as a responsible gambling safeguard.

Losses Incurred:

Between 11:36 AM and 11:44 AM—more than two hours after activating the limit—I placed 12 consecutive losing bets, totaling $1,661. The loss limit failed to intervene, despite my losses exceeding the $60 threshold by more than 27 times.

BC.Game’s Shifting Explanations:

One support agent explained that users should wait a few minutes between bets after activating the limit for it to work properly. Another agent contradicted this, saying delays may occur only in the first couple of minutes after setting the limit, while still insisting the tool "functions properly." They also claimed it typically activates immediately, but some cases "may experience delays." These shifting explanations do not account for why the tool failed hours after activation and expose the tool as unreliable, misleading, and not fit for purpose.

Unfair and Deceptive Conduct:

Offering a loss limit tool that users reasonably rely on for protection—then allowing losses that massively exceed that limit—amounts to unfair and deceptive conduct. The presence of a vague disclaimer does not absolve BC.Game of responsibility when the tool fails to operate as advertised. I was induced to rely on a safeguard that BC.Game failed to enforce, resulting in avoidable financial harm.

Violation of Responsible Gambling Standards:

Responsible gambling tools must be automatic, enforceable, and binding—not suggestive. A loss limit is not a courtesy warning; it’s a directive. Allowing further wagering beyond the user-defined threshold is a fundamental failure that contradicts the tool’s intended function and accepted industry standards.

Comparison to Industry Norms:

I play at several other online platforms (Stake, Razed, Shuffle) using the same Pragmatic Play games, where loss limits are enforced in real time. BC.Game’s implementation falls far below this standard, raising serious concerns about the platform’s integrity and consumer protection practices.

Induced Reliance and Breach of Trust:

Had I known the tool wouldn’t function reliably, I would have self-excluded and withdrawn the next day. Instead, I trusted that a loss limit would offer immediate protection. BC.Game not only failed to provide this but also refused to refund any of the losses that occurred well beyond the specified threshold.

[aylabadia05]

Three matches with three teams included in the list of favorite picks that have passed the analysis, try to consider again and there is still time to return to make a new betting list with the odds available at BCgame.

Inter Milan have a good chance of winning against Urawa Reds. Dortmund also has a good chance to get the toga points.
River Plate takes on Monterrey. Monterrey in the first match was able to hold Inter to a draw.

[Boiyboomers]

I have requested "one year self exclusion " for my account on December, 5th 2023. Last week I contacted the support team, but one of their support said I have requested permanent exclusion. Ofcourse it was a mistake, I lost my account now.

[logfiles]

I have requested "one year self exclusion " for my account on December, 5th 2023. Last week I contacted the support team, but one of their support said I have requested permanent exclusion. Ofcourse it was a mistake, I lost my account now.

Are you sure you picked up the one-year option? I believe the whole self exclusion process after selecting the period you want is automatic, right?
If that's the case, then the error might have come from your side and not the casino

According to this notice, BC.game has no option for one year exclusion

After your 24 hours cooldown ends, you have 24 hours to extend your self-exclusion period by 1 day, 1 week, 1 month, 6 months or permanently

So it's likely you clicked on Permanently thinking it's one year.

[salad daging]

The odds are now:
Benfica > No odds
Draw > 30.0
Auckland > 50.0

Has anyone here already placed a bet at 1.01?
In particular, I would never place a bet like that, especially in soccer, even though Bayern have scored 10 goals, Benfica are only 1 goal ahead.

Auckland are their lowest underdogs at the moment and a team that has conceded a lot of goals - no wonder the bookies are not giving Benfica a chance because they already know that the Portuguese team will win 100% against Auckland.

Who were they who bet on the total over 5 goals? Unfortunately, they were hesitant about this because the last one didn't bet but bet on another team with over 1.5.
It seems that Auckland are one of the lowest teams at the moment in the Club World Cup.

[TopTort777]

I have requested "one year self exclusion " for my account on December, 5th 2023. Last week I contacted the support team, but one of their support said I have requested permanent exclusion. Ofcourse it was a mistake, I lost my account now.

Was there anything valuable on your account left? If there was nothing left, maybe you can just make another account and dont stick to the past? I dont know what would drive people to return to their old and empty accounts? History of bets, that can trigger some emotional memories? I can suppose that people might worry about high level account and higher rakeback % or smth like that, but do people really pay attention to such things? For me, a win was always more important than money I would be able to recover later.

[rdluffy]

I have requested "one year self exclusion " for my account on December, 5th 2023. Last week I contacted the support team, but one of their support said I have requested permanent exclusion. Ofcourse it was a mistake, I lost my account now.

Excuse me for asking, but what would be the advantage of deleting the account for a specific period of time?

Can't you create another account now?
Would you like to recover because your account has a good VIP level?

[Zwei]

I have requested "one year self exclusion " for my account on December, 5th 2023. Last week I contacted the support team, but one of their support said I have requested permanent exclusion. Ofcourse it was a mistake, I lost my account now.

Was there anything valuable on your account left? If there was nothing left, maybe you can just make another account and dont stick to the past?

that would be against terms of service as once you permanently exclude yourself (even by mistake) the casino is required to never let you play on their site again. if he created a new account, he would just get banned.

I can suppose that people might worry about high level account and higher rakeback % or smth like that, but do people really pay attention to such things? For me, a win was always more important than money I would be able to recover later.

well, an account with a high level gives you higher rewards, and that will technically increase your RTP indirectly. so yeah, people do pay attention to that.

[Raflesia]

Has anyone here already placed a bet at 1.01?
In particular, I would never place a bet like that, especially in soccer, even though Bayern have scored 10 goals, Benfica are only 1 goal ahead.

I always miss matches like this because even though the results may be obvious, especially Auckland, even though it is a football club, its contents are still players, even workers and students, so it is not possible to face a superior club with a myriad of professional players and supported by odds that are not too decent. I will miss 1x2 for matches like this even though it will definitely be profitable.

But on the other hand, I think this match is still worth doing with over and I did that in yesterday's match where over 3 with odds that were quite attractive to me gave more profit in the bets that occurred.
But for over, sometimes this is still a risk, it's just that if you look at the previous statistics, I also feel that over is better to be used as a bet than 1x2 with odds of 1.01 because for me something like this is not like a bet.

[Findingnemo]

But for over, sometimes this is still a risk, it's just that if you look at the previous statistics, I also feel that over is better to be used as a bet than 1x2 with odds of 1.01 because for me something like this is not like a bet.

It may look like an attractive strategy to make unlimited money but with simple match it's the worst idea if someone assumes betting on 1.01 odds matches to win money.

And I thought how many matches it will take to double our initial bet amount by playing lower odd bets like 1.01? Then it's whooping numbers like 70 matches required with 100% winning rate and if we lost 1 match the balance will be wiped and need to start over so just mixing it up randomly makes life stress free.

[Raflesia]

But for over, sometimes this is still a risk, it's just that if you look at the previous statistics, I also feel that over is better to be used as a bet than 1x2 with odds of 1.01 because for me something like this is not like a bet.

It may look like an attractive strategy to make unlimited money but with simple match it's the worst idea if someone assumes betting on 1.01 odds matches to win money.

And I thought how many matches it will take to double our initial bet amount by playing lower odd bets like 1.01? Then it's whooping numbers like 70 matches required with 100% winning rate and if we lost 1 match the balance will be wiped and need to start over so just mixing it up randomly makes life stress free.

It can even be more
Making a bet with odds of 1.01 maybe for those who have big money it can still be done because at least it can give a little bigger return but for small-scale bets it doesn't mean anything, for example when we bet at that odds with $100 then the winnings we will get are only $1 and that for me is not really worth it.

Even though it can get an instant profit but something like this is definitely not gambling and it doesn't fit into my version of gambling so I prefer to avoid this because not only do I not like this scheme, I also realize that I'm gambling with small money so there won't be any fun even if I win with odds of 1.01.

[Findingnemo]

~
Making a bet with odds of 1.01 maybe for those who have big money it can still be done because at least it can give a little bigger return but for small-scale bets it doesn't mean anything, for example when we bet at that odds with $100 then the winnings we will get are only $1 and that for me is not really worth it.

Even though it can get an instant profit but something like this is definitely not gambling and it doesn't fit into my version of gambling so I prefer to avoid this because not only do I not like this scheme, I also realize that I'm gambling with small money so there won't be any fun even if I win with odds of 1.01.

The question is whether the odd 1.01 is worth the risk which is irrespective of the bet amount because the rewards will be based on the bet amount, if it's 100 dollar bet we will get 1 dollar more, the same goes for 1000 bet which will give us 10, so in my opinion it's too big a risk for merely nothing so it's better to take high risky bets with low bet amount than these and in those games even one win can give a decent chunk.

[Zwei]

~
Making a bet with odds of 1.01 maybe for those who have big money it can still be done because at least it can give a little bigger return but for small-scale bets it doesn't mean anything, for example when we bet at that odds with $100 then the winnings we will get are only $1 and that for me is not really worth it.

Even though it can get an instant profit but something like this is definitely not gambling and it doesn't fit into my version of gambling so I prefer to avoid this because not only do I not like this scheme, I also realize that I'm gambling with small money so there won't be any fun even if I win with odds of 1.01.

The question is whether the odd 1.01 is worth the risk which is irrespective of the bet amount because the rewards will be based on the bet amount, if it's 100 dollar bet we will get 1 dollar more, the same goes for 1000 bet which will give us 10, so in my opinion it's too big a risk for merely nothing so it's better to take high risky bets with low bet amount than these and in those games even one win can give a decent chunk.

100% not worth the risk imo, you are risking a large bankroll for so little returns, and the odds will catch up to you eventually. no matter how guaranteed a win looks, a game isn't over until it's over.

this is old, but there was someone who lost a $1.4 mil bet on 1.008x odds: https://x.com/darrenrovell/status/1614603901021437954
risking 1.4 million to win $11,200 is one of the dumbest bets i ever seen.