@holydarkness, I see all other cases were solved except the OP's one. Any development you have in mind? I have not followed the progress for last a week because I was having a break.
I received a PM to check
a new case too. I am considering to remove the tag I left but before I do I would like to take some more time to ensure everything is in the right order.
BC.Game Support, thank you for messaging me about removing the tag I left.
Hi, I guess with OP's case being ruled by BC as invalid and they agree BC has the full right to void OP's winning, all of the cases in my previous summary is resolved. I'm attaching the updated summary at the bottom of this post, and I think it'll the end of this "phase", if there's another batch of situation, I'll make a new summary [given updating them means I'll also update other summaries I made on other threads, and that's... driving me toward insanity, LOL]
My insight for this case, I think there are some discrepancies with OP's narrative. Some are hinted on my posts on this thread, but to mention some more: OP said he's a high roller, but his betting history from page 10 to 3 [the order was from the oldest to newest] shows a rather small value. He's also put some interest in advancing his level by wagering some NFT he had lying around, though it is not a sure thing, I rarely encountered a high roller who mind much about their rank in a sense that they deliberately trying to raise it by wagering on low. Not necessarily conclusive, anyone can do whatever they want and they have their own preferred activity, but I just find them... odd.
Interestingly, his bets only increases with the lastest the mAzuki [page 1], as shown somewhere on this thread. His bets on page 2 were mostly 4 digits, and jumped to 6 digits with mAzuki, I think it's quite plausible to amuse an argument that he noticed the difference in value, thus depositing more Azuki to reap benefits from price difference, in charge-back bonus.
While for vainica's case, I am currently overseeing that one as well, but I think it'll be wise to wait until the dust settle before we can make any conclusion. The most recent situation suddenly brought too many parties, one claiming this, only to be rebutted by other saying that, then another come with different accusation, and then silence. I think it'll be best to wait until anyone make a move before we can learn about what truly happen with vainica's case.
[...] so I am deleting it.
Ahh... with several consideration, I am removing the neutral feedback as well.
The BC.Game statistics page is very badly done. It summarizes the bets together in a very weird format and doesn't include all of the bets (instead of grouping all the bets in the same crypto into one number, it shows chunks of bet totals in various sizes, so you will see both and tiny and huge sizes in the same crypto). You will see smaller bets on other high rollers' profiles as well if you check them. Just go to the daily leaderboard page and click on anyone and you will see the same thing:
.
I have shown some of the bigger bets I have done in stable coins here before (50k+ and 100k+ bets). Here they are again:
There is no reason to doubt my legitimacy as a high roller. I have bet tens of millions of dollars on many other sites, not just BC.Game, and as a high roller myself who have also talked to numerous other high rollers some of which have wagered close to a billion, we do care about VIP levels and rewards. Of course this depends on your definition of a "high roller", but I highly doubt most of the "high rollers" you have talked to wager nearly as much. As for your hypothesis, all I can say is you can't base it on the bet summary page of varying bet sizes on BC.Game because it's done very poorly.
That being said, I am not surprised at the rulings by the arbitrators. Any online crypto casino puts in their ToS they can revoke any bonus amounts for any reason. This is essentially what they did. If you deposit 100k into a casino, wager say 20 million, get 100k in bonuses, and end up with the same 100k balance, the casino can technically deduct your whole balance for any reason and not violate their own ToS because it's technically a bonus. It's all up to the casino in the end even though you might have never wagered the way you did had it not been for the bonuses. I just want everyone to be aware of that.
