1x wagering made sense

[STT]

I had this even when the bonus was used and gambled multiple times to qualify for the win and withdrawal.  They still needed me to additionally deposit then withdraw for security reasons apparently which was ok because I had already won just gambling the bonus, I was very lucky that day so hard to complain about the modern day basic requirements.

[alegotardo]

What if the money is laundered, deposited on a gambling site and used to gamble in a way that 50% to 70% of the money is still remaining after wagering and it is withdrawn? Or the launderer make money from it and withdraw the money and th le profit? That does not make the money clean.

Casinos like the rules because it is a huge advantage for them.

I agree.... betting 1x is not going combat money laundering, at most it will create behavioral data for the anti money laundering department to analyze, and the "bettors" can greatly reduce their losses if they bet on low volatility games.
But, for a person who handle with illegal money, if they lose around 30% they will still be in a profit, because any other way to making the money clean also has "costs" and risks that are npt low.

But, I do not think that casinos do this just because it is also beneficial for them.... nothing casino wants to have your reputation tarnished in some scandal associating it with criminal practices, a casino can make a lot of profit just from clean money from real bettors, so I do not think they only do the bare minimum required by law.

[famososMuertos]

In the early 2000s, I visited a casino where they charged a 10% fee if you didn't place any bets; was it a commission, or a way to guard against money laundering? It was literally stated in their terms and conditions.

Back then, many people felt it was safer to keep their money on a site like PokerStars than in a bank; a sentiment voiced by a very famous Spanish player. It was a crazy time; I believe the ".es" domain extension initially just for players in Spain and later expanded to include France; was created in response to that kind of talk.

So, the reality is that the "1x" wagering requirement is largely a formality.

[Darker45]

Actually, if we take a much closer look at this policy, it doesn't make any sense at all. What does 1x wagering requirement really prevent? Strictly speaking, nothing at all. Even originals are allowed in the compliance of this requirement in many casinos. If I need to launder money, wagering my raw deposit a single time is not a hassle at all. I'd be more than willing to do that to clean my money.

And what about brick-and-mortar casinos? It's much easier to launder there.

[Natalim]

In the early 2000s, I visited a casino where they charged a 10% fee if you didn't place any bets; was it a commission, or a way to guard against money laundering? It was literally stated in their terms and conditions.

Commission probably.. for AML ( pretty sure nope).

Back then, many people felt it was safer to keep their money on a site like PokerStars than in a bank; a sentiment voiced by a very famous Spanish player. It was a crazy time; I believe the ".es" domain extension initially just for players in Spain and later expanded to include France; was created in response to that kind of talk.

You really is a crypto guy.. because back then we dont trust banks, we only trust crypto.
still remember the words that blockchain do banking without bank, thats how we think of crypto so we don't trust for its being centralized.

So, the reality is that the "1x" wagering requirement is largely a formality.

There were requirements listed here, https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/licensees-and-businesses/lccp/online
that 1x wagering requirement is not included.

[Julien_Olynpic]

It's important to understand that a user may deposit funds into the casino platform by mistake, and then, ideally, they shouldn't be playing with that money to be able to withdraw it. Furthermore, a user may mistakenly deposit only a portion of the amount rather than the entire deposit. For example, you might want to play with a small amount, say, $10, but mistakenly deposit $10,000 into the platform. Should you bet with the mistakenly deposited funds in this case? In my opinion, no.

[boyptc]

And they're even treated well there as vip which they like.

Well, I don't know if they are treated like VIPs or not.
Being treated like one would imply they have lost a significant amount of money to the casino, so the casino can offer perks and other good benefits to those gambler who also happen to me money launderers.
Brick and mortar casinos don offer VIP treatments to people based on their volume alone, then actually need to lose money to the casino in order for the casino to give hotel rooms, use of their limosine, access to their VIP restricted areas in the casino and free drinks.

But I would not be surprised some of those casinos actually welcome dirty money being deposited and exchanged into chips. As some people has said: Money does not smell...

Most of the money launderers have got a lot of money and that makes sense why they go to the physical casinos too.

They've got a bunch of money to launder there and so, they're exchanging it in chips or any sort of currency there.

A certain threshold for them to become VIP and treated well there, that's with my observation in some local casinos before and I think that it's still happening these days.

[Maslate]

It's important to understand that a user may deposit funds into the casino platform by mistake, and then, ideally, they shouldn't be playing with that money to be able to withdraw it.

That is not in the vocabulary of the casino, the moment you deposit your money, they don't care if it's a mistake or not they will expect you to play.  
if it's in the TOS then maybe but if there's no such thing as money deposited by mistake not being covered with the 1x requirement then that is not going to be justified,  
you have to follow the rules , you have no choice.

Furthermore, a user may mistakenly deposit only a portion of the amount rather than the entire deposit. For example, you might want to play with a small amount, say, $10, but mistakenly deposit $10,000 into the platform. Should you bet with the mistakenly deposited funds in this case? In my opinion, no.

This is answered by my reply above ( same treatment).

[TheUltraElite]

The point is that the wrong type of people will do things that lead to honest people having to pay the prices. Indeed the people who are laundering money will use exchanges, casinos to store and shift coins. But by wagering it on the casino they end up mixing it with the rest of the casino money and now the casino is safe from troubles.

However this means problems for the players but I guess there is no solution to this problem unless the person who is entering the casino avoids it altogether.

[Peanutswar]

[...]

According to FATF, gambling platforms can be used to move money without actually gambling, especially for money laundering. Maybe this is more common with illegal or unlicensed casinos that don't have the same controls.

So the 1x wagering rule is not just there to make withdrawals harder, it can also help stop casinos from being used just to move money around.

[...]

Well basically there is a risk with the unregulated casinos because they might even freeze your assets with their own will and terms of course, so its the players risk now if they made a deposit to the casino because of this and then make a withdrawal probably if that's related into a dirty money for sure they might freeze your assets too so basically you cant even use your funds once get froze by the platform. Still basically I'm not a fan of having a wagering requirement because most of the time people get encourage to make deposits only due to advertisement which is sometimes.. false one... so instead they wanted to make a withdrawal to save their funds.

[viljy]

This isn't just about the mandatory 1x wager.....  Incredibly strict compliance procedures are being introduced, as well as other restrictions. For example, in roulette, you can't bet on both red and black at the same time. You can't bet on all outcomes of a sporting event. In poker, you can't lose money to another player too quickly and recklessly. All of this, according to FATF representatives, is intended to prevent money laundering.

Well, the restrictive measures are the right ones. Just think about it: a bet on red and black is just a way to wager the deposit, with a 97.3% chance of winning. That is, the client is not making such bets for the purpose of gambling. It doesn’t even matter what purpose they have - whether they’re laundering money or using the casino as a mixer; what matters is that the casino is intended for gambling, and this type of bet is not gambling.

The same goes for betting. That’s why bans are being introduced. For example, what would a bet on over and under look like at the same time? This is either something suspicious and illegal, or it’s something akin to extreme autism (in which case the person needs a guardian, not a bookmaker).

[stadus]

Well basically there is a risk with the unregulated casinos because they might even freeze your assets with their own will and terms of course, so its the players risk now if they made a deposit to the casino because of this and then make a withdrawal probably if that's related into a dirty money for sure they might freeze your assets too so basically you cant even use your funds once get froze by the platform. Still basically I'm not a fan of having a wagering requirement because most of the time people get encourage to make deposits only due to advertisement which is sometimes.. false one... so instead they wanted to make a withdrawal to save their funds.

Maybe call it "scam" rather than freeze, because that freeze word looks very legit to me, its what the regulators do. you said there's a risk on unregulated casinos so when they freeze your asset ( balance) that means they are trying to scam you if you did not violate any of their rules. But this kind of risk will be minimized if we choose a reputable casino even if their license is not issued by a reputable provider.

[len01]

This is not exactly a secret, and most bettors here already understand it, but there are also some beginners who may not be aware of it. In fact, a 1x wagering requirement can make things easier for someone who wants to launder money. They can eventually find certain games that allow them to meet the 1x wagering requirement without suffering a significant loss.

[WhoYouCantKill]

It's important to understand that a user may deposit funds into the casino platform by mistake, and then, ideally, they shouldn't be playing with that money to be able to withdraw it. Furthermore, a user may mistakenly deposit only a portion of the amount rather than the entire deposit. For example, you might want to play with a small amount, say, $10, but mistakenly deposit $10,000 into the platform. Should you bet with the mistakenly deposited funds in this case? In my opinion, no.

Indeed situations like this can happen to anyone, but then again, it could also be suspicious to just make a heavy deposits without intentions of gambling with it. So the safest approach should be to treat an accidental deposit as a transaction error, and not as a gambling fund.

The first step of someone in such a situation should be to contact the platform immediately to notify them that it was an accidental deposit and hopefully they should be able to resolve it. Sometimes, they might request to make the refund on the same address that made the deposit, just to make sure that you were actually the one who made the deposit in the first place.

[TopTort777]

It's important to understand that a user may deposit funds into the casino platform by mistake, and then, ideally, they shouldn't be playing with that money to be able to withdraw it. Furthermore, a user may mistakenly deposit only a portion of the amount rather than the entire deposit. For example, you might want to play with a small amount, say, $10, but mistakenly deposit $10,000 into the platform. Should you bet with the mistakenly deposited funds in this case? In my opinion, no.

Wish I would be that rich to be able to make such mistakes and deposit money somewhere by accident Even if person has copy pasted casino deposit address by mistake and originally wanted to make transaction on different address, is there a problem to make number of 1.01 bets and wager? Chance of losing will be that person fee for a mistake made. If mistakenly sent money would be allowed to withdraw without doing nothing, how can a person learn from that mistake and not repeat it again? And even if casinos would allow to withdraw mistakenly deposited funds without wagering, how will it be possible to prove and convince casino that it was a mistake and there were no hidden meaning in that transaction?

[Outhue]

Anyone that complains about 1x wagering don't know what they are doing, because you want to gamble and you are definitely going to deposit some one into the casino's account that you created, there is no way you won't wager and it's just a 1x requirement, something that's most easier to beat, just one click and it's all over, it is surprisingly how people are making a big deal out of this 1x wagering and casinos aren't just doing it for nothing.

[Cointxz]

What if the money is laundered, deposited on a gambling site and used to gamble in a way that 50% to 70% of the money is still remaining after wagering and it is withdrawn? Or the launderer make money from it and withdraw the money and th le profit? That does not make the money clean.

Casinos like the rules because it is a huge advantage for them.

There is a fiat gambling site that I have used before that do not require wagering before you can withdraw the money that you sent to it.

Your point is valid and correct.

However, isn’t it costly for launderer to lose a huge percentage of their deposit just to launder money on casino due to this x1 wagering while there’s a lot of mixer available that will cost less fee, much quicker and doesn’t ask for KYC.

Casino truly like this x1 wagering requirements but also it helps them to slow down launderer instead of not having one.

[eisen33]

This report is from FATF...

I remember reading a thread before where users were complaining about casinos requiring 1x wagering before they could withdraw. Now this report makes that rule easier to understand.

According to FATF, gambling platforms can be used to move money without actually gambling, especially for money laundering. Maybe this is more common with illegal or unlicensed casinos that don't have the same controls.

So the 1x wagering rule is not just there to make withdrawals harder, it can also help stop casinos from being used just to move money around.

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is alerting countries of how to spot abuse of the gaming and gambling sectors, including criminals using gambling platforms to move money without actually gambling, making multiple small transactions ("smurfing") to avoid detection and unusually large or co-ordinated bets on events flagged for possible competition manipulation.

Analysis by the FATF has identified new opportunities for criminal abuse in the gaming and gambling sectors, following an increase in market size globally, a rise in the use of online platforms, and as payment methods allow rapid, anonymous transactions across borders.

I think it’s obviously, on the one hand, the casino is trying to prevent people from using it to launder money. On the other hand, they have their own interests, because players each have their own goals, while the main goal of casino owners is to make money. And while you’re wagering 1x, there’s always a chance that you’ll lose some of that money. So basically, everyone is pursuing their own interests.

[Futurexxx]

Are we misinterpreting the meaning of 1x wagering requirement?
Because to the best of my knowledge, 1x wagering is the exact amount of money that was deposited, but if we are talking about 2x, then that's ideal because we have to gamble and double the money deposited, but that's by the way.

 If a 1x wagering requirements is given in a casino before withdrawal can be made, it will not stop those that launder money because all they just need is to gamble with a fraction of it and topple the money they deposited, so that they can withdraw, so I don't think that it's enough to stop a money launder from laundering money if they really wanted to.

[PostQuantumBTC]

Are we misinterpreting the meaning of 1x wagering requirement?
Because to the best of my knowledge, 1x wagering is the exact amount of money that was deposited, but if we are talking about 2x, then that's ideal because we have to gamble and double the money deposited, but that's by the way.

This is what I am thinking before, but that is what they are calling it. The gambling site call it 1x a wager requirement which means if you deposit $100, you have to use the whole $100 to gamble. You can gamble with the $100, but at least earn money with even lowest possible odd.

But on many gambling sites, the requirement to withdraw money can be up to 2x or even higher than 2x.