Ban from a Casino for Nothing Other Than Winning Too Much Money

[ethereumhunter]

The problem is most of the casino is connected to each other so they share information about certain customers that gives them a hard time then later on him too. The person we are talking about here is a high roller with a very good analysis skills which means this person is a threat to casino industry.

Not only physical casino but also online casino is banning user or limiting their bets if they are winning too much. No business will allow someone to continuously drain their bankroll while they have a lot of customers contributing to the profit which they can focus on.

Yes, that information will be shared with other casinos to be careful of people with such high luck. Every casino owner will protect his business and limit the bets of people who usually win a lot of money. And if casinos can limit those people's bets, they can still gain an advantage over other gamblers who will lose more often.

Well, it's okay for people who are limited in their gambling and it might be an opportunity for that person to reduce their gambling activities. Think of it as a way to prevent a gambling addiction that the person may already have.

[1714835539]

1714835539

[1714835539]

1714835539

[Fundamentals Of]

Although a casino has the right to choose which client they want and which client they don't want, I think they're mostly happy that clients are playing. Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. If these high rollers win, of course the casino will not be happy. But these casinos know that luck doesn't linger. They know that sooner or later, this luck will expire and its their turn to make money. House edge always prevails in the end.

OP and everyone, at the end of the article, it says "Contrary to rumours, he is not actually prohibited from visiting any of the city’s popular areas; rather, he simply encounters significant roadblocks from some locations that wish to keep him out." Dana White clarified that “It’s not that I’m banned from casinos, it’s just that they don’t want me to play there.”

He's just given a certain limit. He's not banned.

[tiCeR]

Although a casino has the right to choose which client they want and which client they don't want, I think they're mostly happy that clients are playing. Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. If these high rollers win, of course the casino will not be happy. But these casinos know that luck doesn't linger. They know that sooner or later, this luck will expire and its their turn to make money. House edge always prevails in the end.

OP and everyone, at the end of the article, it says "Contrary to rumours, he is not actually prohibited from visiting any of the city’s popular areas; rather, he simply encounters significant roadblocks from some locations that wish to keep him out." Dana White clarified that “It’s not that I’m banned from casinos, it’s just that they don’t want me to play there.”

He's just given a certain limit. He's not banned.

Yes but they do offer high roller gaming in the first place, which shouldn't surprise them that high rollers also come to them.

But think about the interesting complexity here: on the one hand they want players to know that their casino is provably fair and that there are huge payouts possible because those payouts get very likely publicly known. Maybe not necessarily who won it, but that someone won it, which then again is good advertisement for them. On the other hand if they restrict or ban players who won big time, how will other high rollers react to that? They have reason to believe that they get banned as well. Although I assume that in any case they pay the player the money. But if those machines are provably fair, I don't fully understand why a casino would ban a high roller. He was lucky and that was part of their calculation.

[Fundamentals Of]

Although a casino has the right to choose which client they want and which client they don't want, I think they're mostly happy that clients are playing. Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. If these high rollers win, of course the casino will not be happy. But these casinos know that luck doesn't linger. They know that sooner or later, this luck will expire and its their turn to make money. House edge always prevails in the end.

OP and everyone, at the end of the article, it says "Contrary to rumours, he is not actually prohibited from visiting any of the city’s popular areas; rather, he simply encounters significant roadblocks from some locations that wish to keep him out." Dana White clarified that “It’s not that I’m banned from casinos, it’s just that they don’t want me to play there.”

He's just given a certain limit. He's not banned.

Yes but they do offer high roller gaming in the first place, which shouldn't surprise them that high rollers also come to them.

But think about the interesting complexity here: on the one hand they want players to know that their casino is provably fair and that there are huge payouts possible because those payouts get very likely publicly known. Maybe not necessarily who won it, but that someone won it, which then again is good advertisement for them. On the other hand if they restrict or ban players who won big time, how will other high rollers react to that? They have reason to believe that they get banned as well. Although I assume that in any case they pay the player the money. But if those machines are provably fair, I don't fully understand why a casino would ban a high roller. He was lucky and that was part of their calculation.

They offer high roller gaming of course. They offer all kinds of VIP treatments and privileges. That doesn't just come in an exclusive table, lower house edge, high maximum, etc. This also come even in non-gambling related perks like complementary presidential suites, wine, meals, etc. But all of this is with the assumption that the casino would earn from them because the rule is that the house always prevails.

The house edge always wins in the end. But when luck comes into play and these high rollers are racking up millions, that's the time the casino would start to worry a little and do certain things to somehow control the lucky gambler. Limiting bets is one of them. The expectation is that these rich people are just throwing money away for having nothing else to do with their time and riches. But sometimes luck changes things.

[Silberman]

Although a casino has the right to choose which client they want and which client they don't want, I think they're mostly happy that clients are playing. Sometimes they win, sometimes they lose. If these high rollers win, of course the casino will not be happy. But these casinos know that luck doesn't linger. They know that sooner or later, this luck will expire and its their turn to make money. House edge always prevails in the end.

OP and everyone, at the end of the article, it says "Contrary to rumours, he is not actually prohibited from visiting any of the city’s popular areas; rather, he simply encounters significant roadblocks from some locations that wish to keep him out." Dana White clarified that “It’s not that I’m banned from casinos, it’s just that they don’t want me to play there.”

He's just given a certain limit. He's not banned.

Yes but they do offer high roller gaming in the first place, which shouldn't surprise them that high rollers also come to them.

But think about the interesting complexity here: on the one hand they want players to know that their casino is provably fair and that there are huge payouts possible because those payouts get very likely publicly known. Maybe not necessarily who won it, but that someone won it, which then again is good advertisement for them. On the other hand if they restrict or ban players who won big time, how will other high rollers react to that? They have reason to believe that they get banned as well. Although I assume that in any case they pay the player the money. But if those machines are provably fair, I don't fully understand why a casino would ban a high roller. He was lucky and that was part of their calculation.

Casinos do what they can to distinguish from a gambler that just got lucky and won big and a professional gambler, on the first case they will do what they can to keep that gambler as their customer, as given enough time they will recover their money, this is the comp system that you see at regular casinos and it is why you are offered free drinks, food or even a hotel room in order for you to keep gambling with them, however if a casino identifies you as a professional gambler then you will get banned, as you represent a loss of money for casinos in general.

[tiCeR]

Yes but they do offer high roller gaming in the first place, which shouldn't surprise them that high rollers also come to them.

But think about the interesting complexity here: on the one hand they want players to know that their casino is provably fair and that there are huge payouts possible because those payouts get very likely publicly known. Maybe not necessarily who won it, but that someone won it, which then again is good advertisement for them. On the other hand if they restrict or ban players who won big time, how will other high rollers react to that? They have reason to believe that they get banned as well. Although I assume that in any case they pay the player the money. But if those machines are provably fair, I don't fully understand why a casino would ban a high roller. He was lucky and that was part of their calculation.

They offer high roller gaming of course. They offer all kinds of VIP treatments and privileges. That doesn't just come in an exclusive table, lower house edge, high maximum, etc. This also come even in non-gambling related perks like complementary presidential suites, wine, meals, etc. But all of this is with the assumption that the casino would earn from them because the rule is that the house always prevails.

The house edge always wins in the end. But when luck comes into play and these high rollers are racking up millions, that's the time the casino would start to worry a little and do certain things to somehow control the lucky gambler. Limiting bets is one of them. The expectation is that these rich people are just throwing money away for having nothing else to do with their time and riches. But sometimes luck changes things.

I get all of that but a serious casino also knows its own financial limits and if they themselves aren't caught by greed, the higher roller offerings they make would from the very beginning be adapted to their own financial abilities. But yes I get what you said, sure luck can kick in for the gamblers as well. But when I think about these massive casinos in Las Vegas, I don't know what kind of high rolling they offer such that luck could kick in that they have to limit certain players out of a sudden. Even if one or two people could have played mega millions instead that day, $10 million wouldn't put those casinos at risk would they? I am not a high roller so I don't know what's at stake there!

[Oilacris]

Let's take a moment to think about this and tell me if I am correct. All of the people whom I have observed getting banned from gambling at casinos by the casino management, aside from misconduct and other offenses, are individuals who keep winning significant amounts of money. For instance, consider Dana White.  

He has been prohibited from playing at some of the city’s best casinos, including the Wynn and the Palms, due to his high-stakes gambling habits.  The UFC president is an avid gambler who has won substantial sums of money while spending hours at the tables in his chosen state of Nevada. But after some of his spectacular winning streaks, large hotel and casino locations like the Wynn have previously given him trouble. https://www.insidesport.in/accused-of-bankrupting-hotel-dana-white-explains-getting-banned-racking-up/#:~:text=He%20has%20been%20prohibited%20from,his%20chosen%20state%20of%20Nevada.

The way I perceive it is that if a person who is not cheating or engaging in illegal gambling activities consistently wins, the casino is highly likely to ban that person, just as they did with Dana White.

Aside from those violators,abusers and other people or players who do really milk out the site by some illegal or exploit doings then also this one included on the list on which those have those called
"profitable gamblers" or winners.  . Of course they would really be liking to get rid of that person/player because it would really be causing that huge damage into their business and would affect out
significantly in speaking about their revenue which it is always been that bad on any business and this is why if there would really be some possible viable reasons that they could attached them with
then they would really be making those false issues and leaves out that question on what the heck happened and why i was blocked. hehehe. They dont really like those lucky
dudes and we do know that there are really that instances something like this.

[mirakal]

Some reputable casinos never do that as they chose to stay fair to their loyal customers. However, we can't blame the casino either if they resort into that kind of decision since it's really clear that if they let their players win consistently, they will fall into bankruptcy in less time. But I don't think banning is the best option, instead they can restrict their account for some days and then continue to gamble after that. That is one way to show that they still care for their loyal customers.

[Kasabus]

The problem is most of the casino is connected to each other so they share information about certain customers that gives them a hard time then later on him too. The person we are talking about here is a high roller with a very good analysis skills which means this person is a threat to casino industry.

Not only physical casino but also online casino is banning user or limiting their bets if they are winning too much. No business will allow someone to continuously drain their bankroll while they have a lot of customers contributing to the profit which they can focus on.

Yes, that information will be shared with other casinos to be careful of people with such high luck. Every casino owner will protect his business and limit the bets of people who usually win a lot of money. And if casinos can limit those people's bets, they can still gain an advantage over other gamblers who will lose more often.

Well, it's okay for people who are limited in their gambling and it might be an opportunity for that person to reduce their gambling activities. Think of it as a way to prevent a gambling addiction that the person may already have.

Exactly. We are not just seeing here the welfare of the casino, but even with the gambler as well. If these players will be limited from betting, the advantage is that they can prevent a lot of losses so they can save more from their funds, and most importantly they will avoid gambling additiction. Although it's an initial act for casinos to protect their bankroll, but it's also a way to prevent theirselves from consistent losing.

[Sandra_hakeem]

I feel it's more about the casinos that issued this bans... Maybe they don't wanna be a victim of bankruptcy just by a single stake.. anyone can decide what they want for their establishments.
You see, alot of strategies to bypass 'em casino's systematic manipulation has surfed the internet and, anyone would wanna try them on different casinos to see Which one cuts,..that exactly might be the problem at this point.

Sandra 🧑‍🦰

[Mahanton]

The problem is most of the casino is connected to each other so they share information about certain customers that gives them a hard time then later on him too. The person we are talking about here is a high roller with a very good analysis skills which means this person is a threat to casino industry.

Not only physical casino but also online casino is banning user or limiting their bets if they are winning too much. No business will allow someone to continuously drain their bankroll while they have a lot of customers contributing to the profit which they can focus on.

Yes, that information will be shared with other casinos to be careful of people with such high luck. Every casino owner will protect his business and limit the bets of people who usually win a lot of money. And if casinos can limit those people's bets, they can still gain an advantage over other gamblers who will lose more often.

Well, it's okay for people who are limited in their gambling and it might be an opportunity for that person to reduce their gambling activities. Think of it as a way to prevent a gambling addiction that the person may already have.

Exactly. We are not just seeing here the welfare of the casino, but even with the gambler as well. If these players will be limited from betting, the advantage is that they can prevent a lot of losses so they can save more from their funds, and most importantly they will avoid gambling additiction. Although it's an initial act for casinos to protect their bankroll, but it's also a way to prevent theirselves from consistent losing.

Avoiding on getting addicted or something that could save up some funds because of being restricted, then yes its good but you would really be having that kind of frustration when you are in that kind of boost state or condition specially when you do know that you are winning and then suddenly they do decide on restricting you on your gambling session which we do know that it doesnt really give out that good feeling on this case.
If a certain casino is really that afraid in terms of getting bankrupt then it would really be just that normal that they should really be setting out those max bet for possible max win so that they wont really be that
totally get zeroed on the time that a huge win happen or those big wins. Its true that this is the nightmare or the risks of this gambling site business or venture on which into those people who do make out those
huge wins despite on making use of small money or bets because we know that in gambling then everything does have that chance on hitting those jackpots or something that it is really significant. If they would really be blocking out a certain user then it should be fine as long they arent owing something like locking up their winnings and as a user or player then its impossible that you wont really be able to assess such condition
which its obviously that they dont really want nor like you on playing into their site.

[BitDane]

The casino has to protect their bankroll, so seeing people getting banned or limited in a casino is the norm of their action. May it be an online casino or a land-based casino  this kind of unethical rule is taking place. One example is a thread created by dimonstration titled Restricted on casino bonuses where he was restricted on any casino bonuses because he is on 20/20 winning streak. 

It is the right of the casino to accept or reject a player so we cannot do anything about their action but find another platform to play with if in case we are restricted due to excessive winnings.

[panganib999]

The casino has a business to protect, and a bankroll to ensure is filled at all times. People like Dana White if allowed to play in their casino will surely bankrupt the whole stuff in no time, so they have no choice but to actually ban them from playing in their gambling dens. I don't think this is inherently a bad thing as for me, being so good at a game where the average person will have to rely on blind luck to win is also cheating, especially if it's done with the purpose of gaining money in the process. Dana is not only draining the casino's bankroll by playing in there, you also have to understand that whoever sits with him in the table is more than likely to lose which is detrimental for business and a genuinely awful experience. There's a good reason for him getting banned, don't make it sound as if he's the victim here.

[btc_angela]

I don't think that the casinos are going to go bankrupt though, they just want to not lose money that's it. Dana is really a dog at every thing he does and very lucky as well. However, Dana can still continue to other casinos if I'm not mistaken and then continue his gambling activity.

Yes, bankruptcy is not an issue as these mentioned casinos are well-known and big.

Dana won't choose to play there if, in the first place, these casinos are not popular and top-rated. He can actually contest the verdict of these casinos but why should he? Waste of time indeed. There are lots of casinos he can choose from and he's always welcome there.

Having Dana as one of the whales of that casino is a big marketing too and can lure more whales on that casino.

Yes, most likely he won't waste his time and as I have said, will go to other casinos as this is the case as we have seen videos of him playing on other casinos with big bet on a black jack.

And that I think is also the competitive nature of Dana, I mean he can fight it out, but he thinks he should move forward and chase for more wins. So for sure, in the next coming months we will see him in another video, and continue to be a big whale and just insane bet that we could only imagine as a regular gambler.

[ethereumhunter]

Exactly. We are not just seeing here the welfare of the casino, but even with the gambler as well. If these players will be limited from betting, the advantage is that they can prevent a lot of losses so they can save more from their funds, and most importantly they will avoid gambling additiction. Although it's an initial act for casinos to protect their bankroll, but it's also a way to prevent theirselves from consistent losing.

So actually, this can also provide benefits for the player because he can protect himself from negative things that can arise as a result of gambling that might become excessive. We know that winning several times can make us addicted to gambling and want bigger wins and that is greedy. But when we have been gambling for longer and only experience defeat, it can also result in the loss of the winnings we have earned and what is even worse is that we can become addicted to gambling. But it depends on the thoughts of each gambler because what we think is not necessarily what they think.

[Jody.Drummer]

Exactly. We are not just seeing here the welfare of the casino, but even with the gambler as well. If these players will be limited from betting, the advantage is that they can prevent a lot of losses so they can save more from their funds, and most importantly they will avoid gambling additiction. Although it's an initial act for casinos to protect their bankroll, but it's also a way to prevent theirselves from consistent losing.

So actually, this can also provide benefits for the player because he can protect himself from negative things that can arise as a result of gambling that might become excessive. We know that winning several times can make us addicted to gambling and want bigger wins and that is greedy. But when we have been gambling for longer and only experience defeat, it can also result in the loss of the winnings we have earned and what is even worse is that we can become addicted to gambling. But it depends on the thoughts of each gambler because what we think is not necessarily what they think.

Bena, of course this will be very useful and beneficial for gamblers, indirectly it is clear that the restrictions of this casino will be able to minimize so that something unwanted does not happen, for example, the most feared is addiction, As you said when they gamble too much even though for example they can always get a win but that's not the problem but later when luck is no longer on their side then obviously they will definitely continue to play to pursue victory as before and their assumptions are like this "maybe today I'm unlucky and I'm sure if I try it one more time it will be able to get a win like the previous time", their mindset will continue to say like that even though on the other hand they have lost a lot.

I still think there is nothing better unless they try to stop, because as you said it is exactly right, when you win you will definitely be greedy and when you lose you will definitely be curious and keep trying. So I hope they will be wiser in gambling and more realistic in seeing gambling which is clearly not a place to make a living.

[slapper]

~snip~

Avoiding on getting addicted or something that could save up some funds because of being restricted, then yes its good but you would really be having that kind of frustration when you are in that kind of boost state or condition specially when you do know that you are winning and then suddenly they do decide on restricting you on your gambling session which we do know that it doesnt really give out that good feeling on this case.
If a certain casino is really that afraid in terms of getting bankrupt then it would really be just that normal that they should really be setting out those max bet for possible max win so that they wont really be that
totally get zeroed on the time that a huge win happen or those big wins. Its true that this is the nightmare or the risks of this gambling site business or venture on which into those people who do make out those
huge wins despite on making use of small money or bets because we know that in gambling then everything does have that chance on hitting those jackpots or something that it is really significant. If they would really be blocking out a certain user then it should be fine as long they arent owing something like locking up their winnings and as a user or player then its impossible that you wont really be able to assess such condition
which its obviously that they dont really want nor like you on playing into their site.

That feeling when you're on a roll, winning, and then boom! The casino puts a limit on your session. Quite annoying, huh? But let's face it, wouldn't you want some safety nets in place if you were the owner of a casino? It resembles a tug-of-war match between the player and the casino. You want to win large, and they want to safeguard their money. It requires careful balance

Now, setting max bets for max wins? They made a wise decision by doing that. Who wants to be bankrupt, after all? The excitement of gambling, though, isn't it mostly derived from the remote possibility of winning the big prize. Isn't that the dream? Furthermore, if they ban a user, it's their loss as long as they're not hoarding your winnings, right? Who wouldn't want a player like you, after all? Continue to have fun and play responsibly at all times

[Hypnosis00]

I feel it's more about the casinos that issued this bans... Maybe they don't wanna be a victim of bankruptcy just by a single stake.. anyone can decide what they want for their establishments.
You see, alot of strategies to bypass 'em casino's systematic manipulation has surfed the internet and, anyone would wanna try them on different casinos to see Which one cuts,..that exactly might be the problem at this point.

Sandra 🧑‍🦰

- cheating is the reason they will say if asking them.

But the truth is that they don't want to see someone get this winning streak because if they still let this person win, that will drain their income, and banning a gambler could be their last option. To say it was too unfair, yes it is but we can't stop the casino operators from doing that. We could say that these casino operators have no way to give a gambler a chance to win but instead, they love us to keep losing.

[Negotiation]

The problem is most of the casino is connected to each other so they share information about certain customers that gives them a hard time then later on him too. The person we are talking about here is a high roller with a very good analysis skills which means this person is a threat to casino industry.

Not only physical casino but also online casino is banning user or limiting their bets if they are winning too much. No business will allow someone to continuously drain their bankroll while they have a lot of customers contributing to the profit which they can focus on.

Yes, that information will be shared with other casinos to be careful of people with such high luck. Every casino owner will protect his business and limit the bets of people who usually win a lot of money. And if casinos can limit those people's bets, they can still gain an advantage over other gamblers who will lose more often.

Well, it's okay for people who are limited in their gambling and it might be an opportunity for that person to reduce their gambling activities. Think of it as a way to prevent a gambling addiction that the person may already have.

Exactly. We are not just seeing here the welfare of the casino, but even with the gambler as well. If these players will be limited from betting, the advantage is that they can prevent a lot of losses so they can save more from their funds, and most importantly they will avoid gambling additiction. Although it's an initial act for casinos to protect their bankroll, but it's also a way to prevent theirselves from consistent losing.

I agree because here with the welfare of the casino gamblers can control them very easily and know about the harmful aspects of gambling. They can trigger your gambling addiction when the opportunity to make easy money comes along and the most dangerous time for a person is when they are prone to temptation. If you have been gambling for a certain period of time these patterns will actually help you avoid your personal extremely dangerous time.

[ethereumhunter]

Bena, of course this will be very useful and beneficial for gamblers, indirectly it is clear that the restrictions of this casino will be able to minimize so that something unwanted does not happen, for example, the most feared is addiction, As you said when they gamble too much even though for example they can always get a win but that's not the problem but later when luck is no longer on their side then obviously they will definitely continue to play to pursue victory as before and their assumptions are like this "maybe today I'm unlucky and I'm sure if I try it one more time it will be able to get a win like the previous time", their mindset will continue to say like that even though on the other hand they have lost a lot.

I still think there is nothing better unless they try to stop, because as you said it is exactly right, when you win you will definitely be greedy and when you lose you will definitely be curious and keep trying. So I hope they will be wiser in gambling and more realistic in seeing gambling which is clearly not a place to make a living.

This means that behind the ban, we have benefited because we can prevent problems that could arise if we were still given the freedom to get the bonuses. We also must realize that casinos cannot always give bonuses to people with a high level of luck because it will affect their financial position. So if that happens to us, we already have a choice of what we can do and we are free to move to another casino if that is what we want so that we can still get those bonuses from other casinos.

Trying to stop would be better than gambling, especially excessively, because we could lose a lot. And if we only chase wins, we can become greedy because we want bigger wins which won't always happen. We must remember that gambling is just entertainment and we cannot expect to make money from gambling. We have to be wise in how we treat gambling so that we don't experience serious problems like other people have experienced.