[SCAM ACCUSATION] SCORAS.io voided $1,900 Blackjack winnings, returned only $500

[bigeviljoe]

I am opening this SCORAS Scam Accusation regarding SCORAS.io and a disputed withdrawal involving my referral, Player ID 471837429.
I previously cooperated with SCORAS as a streamer/affiliate.
One of my main SCORAS contacts was Nick - Telegram @nickscoras, who originally contacted me regarding streaming and promoting SCORAS.
Another SCORAS contact involved in this dispute used the Telegram account @affiliatescoras and identified himself as Andreas from SCORAS.

Summary of the dispute
The player deposited $500 at SCORAS and played Blackjack.
A withdrawal of $2,400 was requested.
SCORAS did not pay the requested $2,400.
Instead, SCORAS returned only the player's original $500 deposit and voided/refused to pay the remaining $1,900.
The player also reports that his SCORAS account was subsequently blocked.
Player ID:
120901294
Deposit:
$500
Withdrawal requested:
$2,400
Amount returned by SCORAS:
$500
Amount voided / unpaid:
$1,900
Game:
Blackjack
Disputed amount:
$1,900

SCORAS' stated reason for refusing the withdrawal
I contacted SCORAS regarding the player's case.
Andreas from SCORAS stated to me in writing:
"His withdrawal was not paid because his blackjack play violated our terms, specifically: prohibited betting pattern."
He also wrote:
"This rule applies to all players and is listed in our Terms and Conditions."

He then stated that if the player believed the decision was a mistake, the player could contact SCORAS support directly with his account ID and the case would be reviewed again.
The player did contact SCORAS directly.
However, according to the player, the decision was not reversed and his account was blocked.
SCORAS later gave me the following response:
"The decision on this account stays the same. Because of the rule violation, the winnings were voided and his $500 deposit was returned to him in full, in line with our Terms and Conditions."

This is important because SCORAS itself confirms in writing that the player's winnings were voided and that only his original $500 deposit was returned.
The remaining $1,900 was not paid.
SCORAS representative said he would fix the issue

After I challenged the decision, the SCORAS representative asked me:
"How much money do you want?"
He then wrote:
"I'll fix this issue."

I responded:
"The withdrawal amount was set at $2,400. Only the $500 his deposit was paid out to him. I request that the remaining $1,900 should be paid out to him."

Despite telling me that he would fix the issue, SCORAS subsequently maintained its previous decision and the remaining $1,900 was not paid.
SCORAS continued asking me to promote the casino
Another relevant part of this situation is that SCORAS continued trying to arrange additional promotional streams with me while this withdrawal dispute remained unresolved.
After discussing the player's unpaid withdrawal, the SCORAS representative asked:
"So what about the stream? Would you like to do one today?"

I refused to continue promoting SCORAS while the $1,900 dispute involving my referral remained unresolved.
Communication with Nick - @nickscoras
My primary SCORAS contact before this dispute was Nick - @nickscoras.
Nick originally contacted me regarding cooperation and streaming SCORAS.
When issues concerning referred players were previously raised with him, Nick told me that he did not want to discuss individual players' accounts with me and that the players should contact SCORAS directly themselves.
That is what happened in this case.
Player ID 120901294 contacted SCORAS directly regarding his withdrawal.
According to the player, the withdrawal was still refused and his account was blocked.
I also preserved screenshots of my Telegram correspondence with Nick.
A significant part of Nick's side of our previous Telegram correspondence was later removed from the chat, leaving primarily my own messages visible.
I am attaching the screenshots I preserved so readers can see the available communication themselves.
Communication with @affiliatescoras
I also communicated with the Telegram account @affiliatescoras.
The Telegram profile used SCORAS branding and contained a link to scoras.io.
The person communicating through this account identified himself as Andreas from SCORAS.
During our conversation regarding Player ID 120901294, he initially appeared willing to resolve the dispute.
He wrote:
"How much money do you want?"

and then:
"I'll fix this issue."

However, the $1,900 was not subsequently paid.
Later, after I informed him that I had preserved screenshots of our conversation, the response from this SCORAS contact was:
"Fuck off"

I am attaching the screenshot of this exchange as well.
The central issue SCORAS needs to explain
SCORAS claims that the $1,900 was voided because the player's Blackjack activity constituted a:
"prohibited betting pattern"

I am therefore asking SCORAS to provide the following information publicly:
1. The exact provision of the Terms and Conditions allegedly violated by Player ID 120901294.
2. The version of those Terms that was applicable when the player deposited and played.
3. The specific Blackjack bets or betting pattern SCORAS claims violated that provision.
4. The relevant betting history relied upon by SCORAS when making this decision.
5. An explanation of why the alleged violation justified voiding the entire $1,900.
6. The reason the player's account was blocked.
7. An explanation of why a SCORAS representative initially told me "I'll fix this issue", while the $1,900 ultimately remained unpaid.
Merely stating "prohibited betting pattern" without identifying the exact conduct and the exact rule allegedly violated does not allow the player or the community to independently assess whether voiding the $1,900 was justified.
Evidence

I am attaching screenshots documenting the communications described above, including:
- SCORAS discussing Player ID 120901294
- SCORAS stating that the withdrawal was not paid
- SCORAS alleging a "prohibited betting pattern"
- SCORAS confirming that the winnings were voided
- SCORAS confirming that only the original $500 deposit was returned
- the SCORAS representative asking "How much money do you want?"
- the representative stating "I'll fix this issue"
- my message confirming that the requested withdrawal was $2,400 and that $1,900 remained unpaid
- SCORAS continuing to ask me about another promotional stream
- the Telegram profile and communications involving @affiliatescoras
- the response "Fuck off"
- my preserved communications involving @nickscoras
Requested resolution
We request payment of the remaining $1,900 to Player ID 120901294.
If SCORAS pays the outstanding $1,900 or provides material evidence that changes the facts of this case, I will update this thread accordingly.
Until then, the $1,900 withdrawal dispute remains unresolved.

https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0v7H3.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0v9sw.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0vB79.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0viaN.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0v8ta.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0vKLo.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0vDGl.png
https://talkimg.com/images/2026/09/26/U0vbqT.png

[yahoo62278]

I am opening this SCORAS Scam Accusation regarding SCORAS.io and a disputed withdrawal involving my referral, Player ID 120901294.
I previously cooperated with SCORAS as a streamer/affiliate.
One of my main SCORAS contacts was Nick - Telegram @nickscoras, who originally contacted me regarding streaming and promoting SCORAS.
Another SCORAS contact involved in this dispute used the Telegram account @affiliatescoras and identified himself as Andreas from SCORAS.

Summary of the dispute
The player deposited $500 at SCORAS and played Blackjack.
A withdrawal of $2,400 was requested.
SCORAS did not pay the requested $2,400.
Instead, SCORAS returned only the player's original $500 deposit and voided/refused to pay the remaining $1,900.
The player also reports that his SCORAS account was subsequently blocked.
Player ID:
120901294
Deposit:
$500
Withdrawal requested:
$2,400
Amount returned by SCORAS:
$500
Amount voided / unpaid:
$1,900
Game:
Blackjack
Disputed amount:
$1,900

SCORAS' stated reason for refusing the withdrawal
I contacted SCORAS regarding the player's case.
Andreas from SCORAS stated to me in writing:
"His withdrawal was not paid because his blackjack play violated our terms, specifically: prohibited betting pattern."
He also wrote:
"This rule applies to all players and is listed in our Terms and Conditions."

He then stated that if the player believed the decision was a mistake, the player could contact SCORAS support directly with his account ID and the case would be reviewed again.
The player did contact SCORAS directly.
However, according to the player, the decision was not reversed and his account was blocked.
SCORAS later gave me the following response:
"The decision on this account stays the same. Because of the rule violation, the winnings were voided and his $500 deposit was returned to him in full, in line with our Terms and Conditions."

This is important because SCORAS itself confirms in writing that the player's winnings were voided and that only his original $500 deposit was returned.
The remaining $1,900 was not paid.
SCORAS representative said he would fix the issue

After I challenged the decision, the SCORAS representative asked me:
"How much money do you want?"
He then wrote:
"I'll fix this issue."

I responded:
"The withdrawal amount was set at $2,400. Only the $500 his deposit was paid out to him. I request that the remaining $1,900 should be paid out to him."

Despite telling me that he would fix the issue, SCORAS subsequently maintained its previous decision and the remaining $1,900 was not paid.
SCORAS continued asking me to promote the casino
Another relevant part of this situation is that SCORAS continued trying to arrange additional promotional streams with me while this withdrawal dispute remained unresolved.
After discussing the player's unpaid withdrawal, the SCORAS representative asked:
"So what about the stream? Would you like to do one today?"

I refused to continue promoting SCORAS while the $1,900 dispute involving my referral remained unresolved.
Communication with Nick - @nickscoras
My primary SCORAS contact before this dispute was Nick - @nickscoras.
Nick originally contacted me regarding cooperation and streaming SCORAS.
When issues concerning referred players were previously raised with him, Nick told me that he did not want to discuss individual players' accounts with me and that the players should contact SCORAS directly themselves.
That is what happened in this case.
Player ID 120901294 contacted SCORAS directly regarding his withdrawal.
According to the player, the withdrawal was still refused and his account was blocked.
I also preserved screenshots of my Telegram correspondence with Nick.
A significant part of Nick's side of our previous Telegram correspondence was later removed from the chat, leaving primarily my own messages visible.
I am attaching the screenshots I preserved so readers can see the available communication themselves.
Communication with @affiliatescoras
I also communicated with the Telegram account @affiliatescoras.
The Telegram profile used SCORAS branding and contained a link to scoras.io.
The person communicating through this account identified himself as Andreas from SCORAS.
During our conversation regarding Player ID 120901294, he initially appeared willing to resolve the dispute.
He wrote:
"How much money do you want?"

and then:
"I'll fix this issue."

However, the $1,900 was not subsequently paid.
Later, after I informed him that I had preserved screenshots of our conversation, the response from this SCORAS contact was:
"Fuck off"

I am attaching the screenshot of this exchange as well.
The central issue SCORAS needs to explain
SCORAS claims that the $1,900 was voided because the player's Blackjack activity constituted a:
"prohibited betting pattern"

I am therefore asking SCORAS to provide the following information publicly:
1. The exact provision of the Terms and Conditions allegedly violated by Player ID 120901294.
2. The version of those Terms that was applicable when the player deposited and played.
3. The specific Blackjack bets or betting pattern SCORAS claims violated that provision.
4. The relevant betting history relied upon by SCORAS when making this decision.
5. An explanation of why the alleged violation justified voiding the entire $1,900.
6. The reason the player's account was blocked.
7. An explanation of why a SCORAS representative initially told me "I'll fix this issue", while the $1,900 ultimately remained unpaid.
Merely stating "prohibited betting pattern" without identifying the exact conduct and the exact rule allegedly violated does not allow the player or the community to independently assess whether voiding the $1,900 was justified.
Evidence

I am attaching screenshots documenting the communications described above, including:
- SCORAS discussing Player ID 120901294
- SCORAS stating that the withdrawal was not paid
- SCORAS alleging a "prohibited betting pattern"
- SCORAS confirming that the winnings were voided
- SCORAS confirming that only the original $500 deposit was returned
- the SCORAS representative asking "How much money do you want?"
- the representative stating "I'll fix this issue"
- my message confirming that the requested withdrawal was $2,400 and that $1,900 remained unpaid
- SCORAS continuing to ask me about another promotional stream
- the Telegram profile and communications involving @affiliatescoras
- the response "Fuck off"
- my preserved communications involving @nickscoras
Requested resolution
We request payment of the remaining $1,900 to Player ID 120901294.
If SCORAS pays the outstanding $1,900 or provides material evidence that changes the facts of this case, I will update this thread accordingly.
Until then, the $1,900 withdrawal dispute remains unresolved.

Quoting for reference and curious as to what a prohibited betting pattern is in Blackjack?

[SCORAS]

This case is completely finished and there’s nothing else to talk about.
I will share tomorrow, proof that this case is finished over two weeks ago

[scorasScam]

I'm the player referred to in this thread — the one who deposited, played, and had my $2,400 withdrawal cut down to $500.

I want to add my side directly.

I was referred to SCORAS by bigeviljoe. I deposited $500 and was given a matching $500 bonus, with a wagering requirement of x15 on the full amount (deposit + bonus) — effectively x30 relative to the bonus itself. I completed that wagering requirement playing blackjack on Evolution live tables — meaning every card, every shuffle, every round is dealt and recorded by Evolution, not by SCORAS. A player only chooses to hit, stand, double or split. There is no way to manipulate that game from the player's side.

After meeting their own wagering requirement in full, I requested a withdrawal of $2,400. SCORAS did not pay it. My personal manager, Nick, told me the amount was "under review" and gave no reason. Over the following days he repeatedly told me things like "nobody is gonna help you, only me," and when I simply asked about the status of my own withdrawal, he told me I was making "threats." He promised a decision "within 48 hrs, I guarantee" — that deadline passed with no decision.

I was then told by SCORAS Compliance that my winnings were voided for "anomalous wagering characteristics" — later phrased elsewhere as a "prohibited betting pattern" — with no specific rule, no specific hand, and no specific bet ever identified. I had met the exact wagering requirement they themselves set. I asked repeatedly what exactly I did wrong beyond that. I never received an answer beyond vague language.

SCORAS agreed in writing to refund my original $500 deposit, subject to KYC. I completed KYC through their own verification link. Even after that was approved, it took SCORAS several more days and multiple unanswered emails before the $500 was actually paid, on 10 September — five days after they first said it would be "within 24 hours."

The remaining $1,900 in winnings has never been paid, and SCORAS has never told me what specific action of mine supposedly violated their terms, given that I completed the exact wagering requirement they set.

I have kept screenshots of every gaming session in question, with round IDs and results, and have filed formal complaints with the licensing regulator and with Evolution Gaming directly, requesting that they verify these sessions from their own logs. If there really was a rule I broke, I am still asking: which one, and which hand?

[Dobryi192]

This is not the first time I’ve noticed how the manager Nick offers bonuses seemingly hoping that players will lose their deposits. However, if players manage to wager successfully and want to withdraw their winnings, Nick starts looking for reasons that don’t actually exist in order to avoid paying them.

This is not the first time I’ve seen similar posts, and I hope the relevant authorities will pay attention to this situation and investigate the project Scoras.io.

I strongly advise everyone to be cautious when dealing with this project and with Nick. From what I have personally observed, there appears to be a system where players are encouraged to deposit money, but if they somehow manage to win, their accounts may be blocked and their winnings may not be paid.

[PX-Z]

There is really a suspiciously off on casino who blocked user's funds upon withdrawal, decided to return the users deposit and keep the winning amount, then give a their reasons, as for this case, what, card counting?

This case is completely finished and there’s nothing else to talk about.
I will share tomorrow, proof that this case is finished over two weeks ago

Make sure you include all the proof that the OP's referral is really cheating or doing the prohibiited pattern that you end up returning its deposit instead of getting the whole amount if the user really is cheating or what.

This is not the first time I’ve noticed how the manager Nick offers bonuses seemingly hoping that players will lose their deposits. ...

And you are? Are you related to the two above, (the referral and affiliate?) You seem like made this account just to reply on this specific thread.

[Slow death]

This is a very difficult case for you to win, mainly because you should have investigated the casino before opening an account, making a deposit, and playing there. In the review conducted by Casino.guru, they noted a specific point regarding this issue that they deemed unfair; however, since by all indications this is covered in the terms of service you agreed to, they are entitled to refund your deposit while keeping your winnings.



source: https://casino.guru/scoras-casino-review

I went looking on the casino's site for the section of the terms of service that Casino.guru is referring to, but I couldn't find it; I don't know if they modified or removed it later. In any case, you’ve already posted about your situation on Casino.guru, but you can also file a formal complaint against them there; that way, Casino.guru will review your case and the evidence they present. File a complaint here: https://casino.guru/complaints/all

[Dobryi192]

I am also an interested party in this matter, as I stream as well and decided to stop working with them after seeing many negative comments about this project.

This is not the first time I have seen posts on forums claiming that they block accounts, offer bonuses, and then block the accounts if players manage to win.

As I understand it, Nick himself gains the players’ trust and operates according to a system designed to extract money from them. He deliberately offers bonuses knowing that they are difficult to wager through, and if a player manages to find a way to complete the wagering requirements and has a chance to withdraw their winnings, they block the account.

[ryzaadit]

-snip-

Abuse Behavior on Blackjack are bullshits!
The reason has been proven by people who are experienced with card counting who tried to count the cards in an online casino.

Provider - Setup for Blackjack Table (Evolution Games, Pragmatic Play or other provider):

• They have 8 decks
• The shuffle is not even half the deck

Even if you are a professional card counter and count the cards from the beginning with zero mistakes and the count is high enough to place larger bets. It's still not possible to favour the player's % chance. The reason: cause the shuffle doesn't even reach the end of the deck, in Landbase Casino they shuffle the deck really in the end of the deck. The closer the shuffle is to the end of the deck, the better the % chance for the player (especially card counting).

These are proofs: a card counter tested the counting on an online case, and also a video showing why card counting in online casinos is not possible:
[1] https://youtu.be/vjiVpO1hlvk?si=Hdc5BFRy2de2ynXN
[2] https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_vPCYLO6gHY

[SCORAS]

Let's make this very clear, because apparently this needs to be repeated.

This matter was already resolved. The agreement was made with the player, the $500 was returned, and the case was closed. We are not going backwards and we are not renegotiating a settlement that has already been agreed upon.

What is particularly confusing here is that the person creating this accusation isn't even the player involved in the dispute. It is the streamer who referred him.

If the player has an issue with the settlement, he is perfectly capable of contacting SCORAS himself. Instead, the player has blocked us, while his referrer is now opening a public accusation on his behalf. That makes absolutely no sense.

The player himself agreed to the $500 resolution. We accepted it, returned the $500, and considered the matter finished. We also have the email correspondence confirming the resolution.

That agreement is not changing.


Let's also put the player's history with SCORAS into context.

This wasn't some player who deposited once, had a problem and was immediately treated badly by SCORAS.

This user has previously cashed out successfully and has had positive experiences with SCORAS. He has also had a VIP relationship with us and was given opportunities and treatment that went considerably beyond what a normal player receives.

He was invited to spend time with our Dubai team, including activities such as jet skiing and going clubbing, and was given multiple opportunities to enjoy a genuine VIP relationship with the casino.

So let's not rewrite history now and pretend that SCORAS has always treated this person badly.

The relationship was good. The withdrawals were processed. The VIP relationship existed. There was no reason for us to have any issue with this player until the promotional funds became an issue.

The problem arose because promotional funds and bonuses provided to the player were, in our view, abused in a way that was not acceptable under the conditions attached to those promotions.

We have rules for promotional funds for a reason. They are not free money with no conditions attached.

And because of that, we made our decision.


And no, we are not changing it.

It doesn't matter if another account is created on Bitcointalk.

It doesn't matter if a second account appears, a third account appears, or someone else decides to repost the same story.

It doesn't matter how many negative reviews are posted.

It doesn't matter how many accusations are made.

We will not reverse an agreement simply because somebody decides to create more noise around it.

If someone believes that opening additional accounts, creating additional threads, or repeatedly posting negative comments is going to pressure SCORAS into changing a settlement that has already been agreed upon, they are mistaken.

The facts remain the same:

• The player had the dispute with SCORAS.
• The player communicated with SCORAS directly.
• The player agreed to the $500 resolution.
• SCORAS accepted that resolution.
• The $500 was returned.
• The matter was considered closed.
• The player subsequently blocked us.
• Now, roughly two weeks later, a third party has decided to reopen the matter publicly.

And there is another important point.

The player has apparently deleted the Telegram conversations that would have provided additional context regarding what was discussed and agreed. That's his choice. Fortunately, we still have our emails and screenshots of relevant communications.

We are not going to publish every private conversation just because someone demands it. But if it becomes necessary to establish what was actually agreed, we have documentation to support our position.

We also aren't interested in continuing an endless public argument where the same allegations are simply reposted through different accounts.

A settlement is a settlement.

You don't get to agree to a resolution, receive the agreed amount, consider the matter finished, and then come back weeks later through a third party demanding a completely different outcome.

That is not how this works.

If the actual player wants to contact SCORAS directly, he is welcome to do so. If he has evidence that genuinely contradicts the agreement we have documented, he can provide it.

But having a streamer post the accusation, creating additional Bitcointalk accounts, posting negative reviews, or attempting to create public pressure does not change the facts.

The settlement stands. The $500 was returned. The player agreed to it. The matter was closed.

And to be absolutely clear:

SCORAS is not budging on this.

[scorasScam]

I'm the player. Answering directly, since you've now made this about me personally.

You keep repeating that I "agreed to the $500 settlement." Show the message where I wrote that. What actually happened: I asked for my $500 deposit back because SCORAS refused to pay it for days, while I repeated — in writing, over and over — that voiding $1,900 in winnings with no stated reason was not acceptable. Nick told you I "confirmed" $500 was enough. I never wrote that to anyone at SCORAS. If you have it in writing from me, not from Nick, post it.

Getting back money that was already mine is not a settlement of a dispute I never agreed was over.

On the actual accusation: I played live blackjack on Evolution tables. Evolution deals every card, runs every shuffle, and logs every round independently of SCORAS. A player's only inputs are hit, stand, double, split. There is no way to manipulate that outcome from my side. If SCORAS believes otherwise, name the round, the hand, and the specific action that was supposedly improper. "Prohibited betting pattern" and "anomalous wagering characteristics" are not answers — they're phrases with nothing behind them, and you still haven't given a straight one after weeks of being asked.

On the VIP trip — I don't see what jet skiing has to do with whether $1,900 in winnings from a fully wagered bonus should have been paid. If anything, it confirms I was a real player you were happy to have around, right up until I won.

On the deleted Telegram messages — yes, I deleted a chat with a manager I no longer wanted contact with, after being told repeatedly that asking about my own withdrawal counted as a "threat." That's not hiding anything; you have the same conversation on your end if you actually want to post it. I invite you to post the full chat, unedited, not selected quotes.

The bitcointalk account posting this is bigeviljoe's, because he referred me and saw what happened to his referral. I've also posted directly under my own account in the same thread, with the same facts. Two people describing the same unanswered question isn't "noise" — it's two people asking the same thing you still haven't answered: which rule, which hand.

[scorasScam]

A few more things worth putting on record, since SCORAS keeps talking about "abused promotional funds" without ever addressing any of this directly.

When the bonus was offered, Nick's own words were: "A gift to you" — and when I pushed back on the review delay, he wrote: "No, all the casino has done this for you. We made you a very good deal." That's SCORAS's own manager describing this as a gift, not a conditional promotional instrument they'd later be entitled to claw back in full, including money I staked myself.

And even calling it a "gift" aside — I still met every condition attached to it in full. The x15 wagering requirement on the combined amount was completed exactly as set, on Evolution live blackjack, with nothing hidden about how or where I played. So this isn't even a case of a gift with conditions I skipped. The conditions were met. Full stop.

When I first started with SCORAS, I told Nick directly that I only play live blackjack on Evolution — he called it "one of the best." I then wagered through this bonus on exactly that, in full view of SCORAS the entire time. At no point, before, during, or after, did anyone tell me blackjack wasn't eligible for the wagering requirement.

And it really was in full view. I was in SCORAS's VIP group, where Nick and the team were watching my wagering happen live, round by round, while I worked through this exact bonus on blackjack. Not one message from anyone saying blackjack didn't count, or to switch games, or that this was a problem — while it was happening, in real time, in a group they controlled. Nick removed me from that group only after I'd finished wagering and the withdrawal was requested.

If blackjack genuinely wasn't eligible for this wagering requirement, that's a five-second message to send while watching someone play it live for days. Nobody sent it. Silence during, an accusation after.

You can't call something a gift when offering it, watch someone meet every condition on it live in your own VIP group without objection, and then call it "abused promotional funds" the moment it wins.

[SCORAS]

Since you have now responded personally, we will clarify our position one final time.

Nothing has changed from our side.

This matter was dealt with approximately 15 days ago. You requested the return of your $500 deposit, completed KYC, and the $500 was paid. From our side, the matter was concluded on that basis.

We do not agree with your current characterization that SCORAS simply refused to pay you because you won.

You have won at SCORAS before, and your previous legitimate winning withdrawals were paid.

You've also had a very good VIP relationship with us. You received additional offers, personal attention and were even invited to spend time with our Dubai team.

So the issue was never that you won money.

This particular case involved promotional funds and wagering activity which, following review, we determined violated the applicable promotional conditions. The issue was not whether Evolution's cards could be manipulated, and nobody has accused you of manipulating Evolution's games.

Your original $500 deposit was therefore returned. The additional $1,900 associated with the disputed promotional play was not paid.

You disagree with that decision. We understand that.

But we are not changing it.

You are free to post your position, contact the regulator, contact Evolution, or pursue whatever legitimate dispute-resolution channel you consider appropriate. We will provide our records and respond through the appropriate channels if required.

What we are not going to do is spend another several weeks going backwards and forwards on Bitcointalk over the same matter.

Approximately 15 days have passed since the $500 was returned and the matter was considered concluded from our side. Reopening it publicly now does not change our decision.

Your previous winnings were paid. Your $500 deposit was returned. The disputed promotional winnings remain voided.

That's our position, and it is final.

[scorasScam]

Appreciate you narrowing it down — that's actually progress. You've now confirmed nobody is accusing me of manipulating Evolution's games. So the claim is specifically about "wagering activity" on those same, unmanipulated results.

Here's the problem: your own compliance email on 5 September described the flagged activity as "irregular stake-size sequencing" and "elevated wager-size volatility." At the time, in the same conversation with Nick, I described exactly the opposite — flat $50 bets, no volatility. So which is it? If you have a specific betting pattern in mind, this is the moment to name it: the stake sizes, the sequence, the round numbers. Not a category, an actual pattern.

I was in your VIP group the entire time this "wagering activity" happened, being watched live by your own team, and nobody flagged anything until after I asked to withdraw. If there's a real pattern, it should be trivial to show it now.

I'm not asking you to reopen a negotiation. I'm asking you to answer the one question that's been open from day one — because neither I, nor my affiliate, nor any of your users have ever actually seen any evidence.

[SCORAS]

At this point, this is becoming increasingly confusing.

You are posting from the account that has identified itself as the player, but your latest response is now referring to "my affiliate", while this entire thread was originally created by the affiliate/referrer supposedly speaking on behalf of the player.

So now we have multiple newly created accounts discussing the same case, with the player and affiliate apparently speaking for each other throughout the thread.

We are not going to spend our time trying to establish who is controlling which Bitcointalk account or who is currently speaking on behalf of whom.

It doesn't change anything.

We have already given our response directly to the player.

The player has won at SCORAS previously and those legitimate winnings were paid. His original $500 deposit in this case was also returned.

The disputed amount relates specifically to promotional wagering activity that was reviewed and determined by us to violate the applicable promotional conditions.

We have explained our position.

The decision is not changing.

If you, the affiliate, or anyone else involved wants to continue posting about the same matter, that is entirely your choice.

If you want to pursue it with Evolution, the regulator, CasinoGuru or another legitimate dispute-resolution service, you are equally free to do that. We will respond through the appropriate channels if required.

But SCORAS is not going to continue an endless Bitcointalk argument between multiple accounts over a decision we have already made and communicated.

The $500 deposit was returned. Previous legitimate winnings were paid. The disputed promotional winnings remain voided.

That's our final response on this matter.

[scorasScam]

To clear up the confusion — I'm the player. bigeviljoe is my affiliate; that's simply the term for the streamer whose referral link I signed up through, and I'm his referral. That's not some separate account speaking for me, that's just how affiliate programs work. He posted first because he saw what happened to a player he referred; I've been posting under my own account since.

None of that changes the actual question, which you still haven't answered: name the stake sizes, the sequence, the round numbers that supposedly constitute a "prohibited betting pattern." You've now described the flagged play twice, with two contradictory characterizations, and never once with an actual number.

And to be clear, this isn't about reopening a settlement or getting more money back. This is about proving that voiding $1,900 was actually lawful. If you had a real, specific violation, showing it costs you nothing and ends this thread. Refusing to show it, while insisting the decision is "final," isn't proof of anything — it's just a refusal to be checked.

[Mahdirakib]

~snip~ I'm not asking you to reopen a negotiation. I'm asking you to answer the one question that's been open from day one — because neither I, nor my affiliate, nor any of your users have ever actually seen any evidence.

They aren't going to share the evidence here in a public forum. In the last post, Scoras representative has shown their willingness to share the records (evidence) they have through an appropriate channel. So, you should take this complaint to a mediator now. The game provider won't be helpful in solving this dispute. You may submit a complaint on CasinoGuru if you want.

You should submit the complaint yourself if you are the actual user who suffered the issue.

[scorasScam]

~snip~ I'm not asking you to reopen a negotiation. I'm asking you to answer the one question that's been open from day one — because neither I, nor my affiliate, nor any of your users have ever actually seen any evidence.

They aren't going to share the evidence here in a public forum. In the last post, Scoras representative has shown their willingness to share the records (evidence) they have through an appropriate channel. So, you should take this complaint to a mediator now. The game provider won't be helpful in solving this dispute. You may submit a complaint on CasinoGuru if you want.

You should submit the complaint yourself if you are the actual user who suffered the issue.

Thanks — appreciate the direction. Just to clarify, I already have. I've filed complaints with the licensing regulator and with Evolution Gaming directly, with session and round IDs, and I'll look into CasinoGuru as well.

Posting here isn't instead of that, it's alongside it — this is a public forum, and I think people deciding whether to deposit with SCORAS deserve to see this before they run into the same thing, not after.

[Cointxz]

Thanks — appreciate the direction. Just to clarify, I already have. I've filed complaints with the licensing regulator and with Evolution Gaming directly, with session and round IDs, and I'll look into CasinoGuru as well.

As @mahdirakib already pointed out, reporting it to the game provider will not solved everything since the issue is on the bonus system of the casino and I doubt a license provider complaint will work quicker compared to a mediator case which highly suggested on your case.

Posting here isn't instead of that, it's alongside it — this is a public forum, and I think people deciding whether to deposit with SCORAS deserve to see this before they run into the same thing, not after.

This is a fair sentiment too but make it on proper way that it’s not look like a spam. You are repeating what you post here and on the ANN thread. Just stick on this scam accusation thread since Scoras is also replying here.

[SCORAS]

We will respond to this one final time, because at this point our position has been made very clear.

You have now clarified that you are the player and that bigeviljoe is the affiliate/referrer. Fine. That clarification is accepted.

You have also stated that you have already submitted complaints to the relevant external parties and intend to pursue other dispute-resolution channels.

That is exactly where this should go from here.

You continue asking us to publish internal account-review information, betting records, stake sequences, round information and evidence publicly on Bitcointalk.

We are not going to conduct an internal account investigation publicly, post by post, simply because you continue requesting it here.

If a regulator, mediator or appropriate dispute-resolution service requests relevant records from us, we will respond through the appropriate process.

That is the correct environment for evidence to be reviewed properly.

You are entitled to disagree with our decision. You are entitled to make a complaint. You are entitled to post your version publicly.

But repeatedly demanding the same information on Bitcointalk does not obligate SCORAS to publish private/internal account-review material publicly.

Our position on the actual case remains unchanged.

You have previously won at SCORAS and legitimate winning withdrawals were paid.

Your original $500 deposit in this case was returned.

The disputed $1,900 related to promotional wagering activity that was reviewed and determined by us to violate the applicable promotional conditions.

The decision remains unchanged.

If an authorized third-party dispute-resolution service or regulator reviews the case, we will deal with them directly and provide what is appropriately required.

We are not going to continue arguing the same case indefinitely on Bitcointalk.


IMPORTANT SECURITY CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE TELEGRAM "AFFILIATE" ACCOUNT

There is also something important we need to correct and put publicly on record after reviewing the screenshots that have been posted as evidence.

The Telegram affiliate account shown in those screenshots does NOT belong to SCORAS and is NOT controlled by SCORAS.

We can see why people may believe it belongs to us. The account is presented using SCORAS branding and is apparently representing itself as connected to our affiliate operation.

It is not our account.

To avoid any further confusion, the issue is not whether SCORAS has someone with the name Andreas.

The issue is that the specific Telegram affiliate account shown in the evidence is not an official SCORAS account and is not controlled by our company.

Therefore, we do not recognize conversations originating from that account as official SCORAS affiliate communications.

The communications involving Nick that we recognize are a separate matter.

But the alleged affiliate Telegram account being presented as SCORAS correspondence is not an affiliate account operated by us.


PLEASE BE CAREFUL

Until further notice, please do not make affiliate deals, financial arrangements, promotional agreements, or share sensitive information with Telegram accounts claiming to represent the SCORAS affiliate department unless you have independently verified them with us.

At present, our official affiliate communication is being handled through email.

We are currently working on registering and establishing an official Telegram presence specifically for our affiliate operation.

Once that official Telegram account is ready, we will announce it ourselves through our official channels.

Until then, do not assume that an account is ours simply because it:

• uses the SCORAS name;
• uses our logo or branding;
• links to SCORAS.io;
• calls itself a SCORAS affiliate account; or
• claims that the person operating it works for SCORAS.

Those things can easily be copied and do not establish ownership of a Telegram account.

If somebody approaches you on Telegram claiming to represent SCORAS Affiliates, verify that person with us through our official channels before agreeing to anything.


And this is also relevant to the evidence being presented in this thread.

Screenshots from an account that does not belong to SCORAS should not automatically be represented as screenshots of official SCORAS communications.

We categorically reject the suggestion that this particular Telegram affiliate account is an official account operated by SCORAS.

If somebody wants to establish otherwise, then the ownership and control of that Telegram account should be independently verified.

From our side, we have checked it: it is not our affiliate Telegram account.

We are putting this information publicly on record both for this dispute and, more importantly, to protect other players, streamers and affiliates from potentially communicating or making agreements with an account they incorrectly believe belongs to us.

To summarize our position:

• The player dispute has already been addressed and our decision remains unchanged.
• We will cooperate with legitimate regulators or dispute-resolution channels where required.
• We will not publish an entire private account investigation on Bitcointalk.
• The specific Telegram affiliate account shown in the posted evidence does not belong to SCORAS.
• Communications from that account should therefore not be treated as verified official SCORAS affiliate communications.
• Our affiliate communication is currently handled through email.
• An official SCORAS affiliate Telegram presence is currently being established and will be announced officially when ready.

That is our position. We have nothing further to add publicly regarding the player's case, and we strongly encourage everyone to verify any Telegram account claiming to represent SCORAS before engaging with it.