I just can't understand why casinos don't do the following: give 100$ bonus to all players, but with the withdrawal condition the player would need to play up to 20x with 10$ bets; 200$ bonus as a condition of withdrawing the bonus the player would need to make 30x bets with 20$ value of each bet and for the guys who have a lot of money the casinos could just increase the value to something like 500$ of bonus but as a condition the player would have to make 20X but betting 50$ in each game, this would be a criterion that would make a profit for both parties: the players and the casinos. Of course there would be players who would have already lost a lot of money when claiming the bonus, but that's part of the game

now what is not a good thing and the casinos put impossible requirements to claim the bonus, wouldn't it be better then not to put bonuses? putting bonuses but with requirements impossible to be met so it's better than not putting bonuses, it's not right to be reducing the customer's intelligence, I even see the following argument: "we put these requirements to fight bonus abusers". sure, but no one is going to claim the bonus anymore because it has requirements that are impossible to fulfill, what's the point of putting bonuses then? it would be better to say: "we don't have bonuses because of bonus abusers" and that's it, everyone will understand that!