blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 09:49:43 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272477 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Poker Forums
| |-+  The Rail
| | |-+  Barred from Grosvenor Casinos
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Barred from Grosvenor Casinos  (Read 52649 times)
shmeigle
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54



View Profile
« Reply #105 on: August 31, 2018, 12:48:34 PM »

I think the point you are missing is that even if you self exclude as a form of self control, it is an alarm bell for the casino, multiple self exclusions and you are telling them the only way you can control yourself is to self exclude.
that makes a lot of sense.
my response is yes I have used it as A form of self control and the multiple uses just show that it is my preferred method and not the only as you have put it

As I have mentioned in a previous post for me personally I find it easier knowing that I cant go. its like a switch in my head...........

If that is true you shouldn't be in a casino.

I would suggest that if you get an answer to your question from Grosvenor it will be that they are doing their job correctly and the others are not.
.........but, other casino's do take RG seriously. I had to have management chats with both Broadway and Genting before I was reinstated. As part of these chats I was made aware that self exclusion is not a tool to be used flippantly as I was doing. Its like I kept using a bandage when a plaster would do. I have learnt my lesson. I now self control just fine with out self excluding, further evidence of my switch. Now I know self exclusion is not an option its not something I ever feel like implementing again.

That is certainly how it looks from here.

thank you for all your points of view
Logged

Its Hold'em NOT Fold'em
Simplez
Sheriff Fatman
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6133



View Profile
« Reply #106 on: August 31, 2018, 02:38:06 PM »

I think the point you are missing is that even if you self exclude as a form of self control, it is an alarm bell for the casino, multiple self exclusions and you are telling them the only way you can control yourself is to self exclude.
that makes a lot of sense.
my response is yes I have used it as A form of self control and the multiple uses just show that it is my preferred method and not the only as you have put it

As I have mentioned in a previous post for me personally I find it easier knowing that I cant go. its like a switch in my head...........

If that is true you shouldn't be in a casino.

I would suggest that if you get an answer to your question from Grosvenor it will be that they are doing their job correctly and the others are not.
.........but, other casino's do take RG seriously. I had to have management chats with both Broadway and Genting before I was reinstated. As part of these chats I was made aware that self exclusion is not a tool to be used flippantly as I was doing. Its like I kept using a bandage when a plaster would do. I have learnt my lesson. I now self control just fine with out self excluding, further evidence of my switch. Now I know self exclusion is not an option its not something I ever feel like implementing again.

That is certainly how it looks from here.

thank you for all your points of view

With all due respect, it's not a form of self-control.  It's using the 'nuclear option' available to prevent you from having to exercise self-control, which looks very much to outsiders like ourselves as though there's some sort of issue in you being able to apply self-control without it.  Essentially, you're using an option that's intended to be a permanent measure as some sort of on/off switch for which it was never intended.  As others have expressed, based on reading this thread, the bigger surprise to me is that the other chains have allowed you to return, rather than Grosvenor not allowing you to do so, as yet.

Regardless of the outcome with Grosvenor I would strongly suggest not repeating this methodology with the other chains again unless you intend for them to be permanent exclusions, as I suspect you're ultimately going to have similar issues across the board.
Logged

"...And If You Flash Him A Smile He'll Take Your Teeth As Deposit..."
"Sheriff Fatman" - Carter the Unstoppable Sex Machine

2006 Blonde Caption Comp Ultimate Champion (to be replaced by actual poker achievements when I have any)

GUKPT Online Main Event Winner 2008 (yay, a poker achievement!)
shmeigle
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54



View Profile
« Reply #107 on: August 31, 2018, 04:15:43 PM »

Essentially, you're using an option that's intended to be a permanent measure as some sort of on/off switch for which it was never intended. 

id argue against this. The only stipulation imho when you take out self exclusion is that its non negotiable for the period chosen and the minimum time period is 6months.



As others have expressed, based on reading this thread, the bigger surprise to me is that the other chains have allowed you to return, rather than Grosvenor not allowing you to do so, as yet.

Why is this surprising given I have explained that it was something I used flippantly? I didn't think it was a big deal. These other casino's know me personally, they accepted what I said and were prepared to give me the benefit of doubt in terms of judging me historically.
Iv been Gambling in casino's since I was 16. I had a marker at a casino when I was 16. A marker for those who don't know is a credit facility whereby the casino would lend me money to gamble with if I had run out of cash etc on the night. I used to self exclude even then when I wanted a break.
I don't know when exactly RG became so prominent here in the UK but it is probably in the last about 5yrs or so... times change. I didn't change fast enough.
30yrs ago many people would drink and drive. It wasn't legal but it was just what everyone did. In the present its seriously frowned upon. So before when I used to self exclude ( cause im being judged for my history of self excluding) it wasn't a big deal. Now it is and then you look at my history and it looks worse that it is in reality cause most of those self exclusions where during a a time frame when self excluding wasn't a big deal.

Regardless of the outcome with Grosvenor I would strongly suggest not repeating this methodology with the other chains again unless you intend for them to be permanent exclusions, as I suspect you're ultimately going to have similar issues across the board.
AMEN

Logged

Its Hold'em NOT Fold'em
Simplez
tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #108 on: August 31, 2018, 04:44:53 PM »


"Why is this surprising given I have explained that it was something I used flippantly?"

Because if you WERE a problem gambler (& I am not saying you were) that's exactly what you would say to a Casino.

Also, you were in Casinos at 16 years of age? I never even knew that was legal, I thought the minimum age was 18.

And you were using credit to gamble at 16......?

I mean, really, I've got no axe to grind with you mate, but there are a whole lot of red flags here which would suggest to a Gaming Group that they may fall foul of the RG regs if they re-admit you.

So yes, as this story unfolds, I'm even more surprised the other Casinos re-admitted you so readily.

If I were in your shoes right now, I'd lie low & be content that some casinos have let you back in. 
Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
shmeigle
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54



View Profile
« Reply #109 on: August 31, 2018, 05:05:56 PM »

I feel like people are seeing what they want to and I feel like I am defending myself which was not the kind of support I was looking for

I grew up in a different country and im obviously a product of my environment.
Self excluding was not something I considered serious or severe. It was just an option I used to take a break when I felt I needed it. THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO READ INTO IT.
I have been open and honest about the good and the bad.
I am not a problem gambler. I am a gambler.

In one of my emails to Grosvenor I tried to explain that they are accomplishing nothing by not allowing me back, nothing except limiting my options of where and which POKER tournaments I can play.
If I was a problem gambler I could get my fix of anything POKER/SLOTS/ROULLETTE/BLACKJACK at any of the other casinos I am allowed in. I could do my bollocks 24hrs a day 7 days a week if I wanted to.

SO TO SUM UP.... I made a mistake self excluding so many times. I did it without realising the full implications beyond the minimum 6month period that it would be valid for or how it would look to anyone else looking at it through the eyes of RG. Is this the kind of mistake that I deserve to be denied membership for an indefinite period ??



Logged

Its Hold'em NOT Fold'em
Simplez
tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #110 on: August 31, 2018, 05:22:09 PM »

I feel like people are seeing what they want to and I feel like I am defending myself which was not the kind of support I was looking for

I grew up in a different country and im obviously a product of my environment.
Self excluding was not something I considered serious or severe. It was just an option I used to take a break when I felt I needed it. THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO READ INTO IT.
I have been open and honest about the good and the bad.
I am not a problem gambler. I am a gambler.

In one of my emails to Grosvenor I tried to explain that they are accomplishing nothing by not allowing me back, nothing except limiting my options of where and which POKER tournaments I can play.
If I was a problem gambler I could get my fix of anything POKER/SLOTS/ROULLETTE/BLACKJACK at any of the other casinos I am allowed in. I could do my bollocks 24hrs a day 7 days a week if I wanted to.

SO TO SUM UP.... I made a mistake self excluding so many times. I did it without realising the full implications beyond the minimum 6month period that it would be valid for or how it would look to anyone else looking at it through the eyes of RG. Is this the kind of mistake that I deserve to be denied membership for an indefinite period ??





You are getting hold of the wrong end of the stick here, mate.

What I & others are doing is telling you the probable reason that Grosvenor won't re-admit you. We are not on their side, nor are we criticising you, we are just explaining why Grosvenor have made the decision they have.

"...In one of my emails to Grosvenor I tried to explain that they are accomplishing nothing by not allowing me back, nothing except limiting my options of where and which POKER tournaments I can play. ...."

The worth of a poker player to a Gaming Group is of extremely limited value in itself. They want you for House Games, not poker. Set against the potential fine they face from the GC for re-admitting a player who - on the face of it - is demonstrating a whole bunch of red flags, you are a potential liability to Grosvenor.


"I am defending myself which was not the kind of support I was looking for"


Nobody here is attacking you, you asked some questions & got the correct answers. We (certainly me) are not attacking you mate & don't have a problem with you.

You keep saying stuff that is very damaging though.

You had credit from Casinos at 16 years of age?

I mean, that's GG you right there in today's super sensitive RG environment.

What you seem to have missed is the whole change in approach to RG from the Gaming Industry - not because they wanted to, but because the GC forced them to, with a whole series of massive fines. In 2018 alone, the major Gaming businesses have faced fines of £8 million, £6 million, several at £2 million, £1 million & £600,000 for what were deemed lax controls of problem gambling.

Why should they risk those sort of fines for a poker player? THAT is why they are denying you re-admission.

Nobody here is attacking you, just trying to help you understand.
Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
shmeigle
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54



View Profile
« Reply #111 on: August 31, 2018, 05:40:05 PM »

I feel like people are seeing what they want to and I feel like I am defending myself which was not the kind of support I was looking for

I grew up in a different country and im obviously a product of my environment.
Self excluding was not something I considered serious or severe. It was just an option I used to take a break when I felt I needed it. THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO READ INTO IT.
I have been open and honest about the good and the bad.
I am not a problem gambler. I am a gambler.

In one of my emails to Grosvenor I tried to explain that they are accomplishing nothing by not allowing me back, nothing except limiting my options of where and which POKER tournaments I can play.
If I was a problem gambler I could get my fix of anything POKER/SLOTS/ROULLETTE/BLACKJACK at any of the other casinos I am allowed in. I could do my bollocks 24hrs a day 7 days a week if I wanted to.

SO TO SUM UP.... I made a mistake self excluding so many times. I did it without realising the full implications beyond the minimum 6month period that it would be valid for or how it would look to anyone else looking at it through the eyes of RG. Is this the kind of mistake that I deserve to be denied membership for an indefinite period ??





You are getting hold of the wrong end of the stick here, mate. ok sorry

What I & others are doing is telling you the probable reason that Grosvenor won't re-admit you. We are not on their side, nor are we criticising you, we are just explaining why Grosvenor have made the decision they have.

"...In one of my emails to Grosvenor I tried to explain that they are accomplishing nothing by not allowing me back, nothing except limiting my options of where and which POKER tournaments I can play. ...."

The worth of a poker player to a Gaming Group is of extremely limited value in itself. They want you for House Games, not poker. Set against the potential fine they face from the GC for re-admitting a player who - on the face of it - is demonstrating a whole bunch of red flags, you are a potential liability to Grosvenor.
So if I am a millionaire table game player then its possible they'd want my business ? this is the implication I get from this paragraph.


"I am defending myself which was not the kind of support I was looking for"


Nobody here is attacking you, you asked some questions & got the correct answers. We (certainly me) are not attacking you mate & don't have a problem with you.

You keep saying stuff that is very damaging though.

You had credit from Casinos at 16 years of age?

I mean, that's GG you right there in today's super sensitive RG environment.
that was 20yrs ago. there werent even card machines then. it was all cash or cheques. having that facility open to me as a customer is more a badge of honour than a blemish. cause in that day and age it was more who you know than what you know. so it was a sign that the casino management vouched for my honesty and integrity by offering and allowing me such a thing.

What you seem to have missed is the whole change in approach to RG from the Gaming Industry - not because they wanted to, but because the GC forced them to, with a whole series of massive fines. In 2018 alone, the major Gaming businesses have faced fines of £8 million, £6 million, several at £2 million, £1 million & £600,000 for what were deemed lax controls of problem gambling.
no one can accuse Grosvenor of being lax in this regard. personally I think they are over the top. but that's natural for someone in my present position.

Why should they risk those sort of fines for a poker player? THAT is why they are denying you re-admission.

Nobody here is attacking you, just trying to help you understand.
thank you. me too... im just trying to get my side of the story across. what if there is someone reading this who has the position to help me but is put off cause they don't understand where im coming from ??

SO TO SUM UP.... I made a mistake self excluding so many times. I did it without realising the full implications beyond the minimum 6month period that it would be valid for or how it would look to anyone else looking at it through the eyes of RG. Is this the kind of mistake that I deserve to be denied membership for an indefinite period ??



Logged

Its Hold'em NOT Fold'em
Simplez
kukushkin88
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3892



View Profile
« Reply #112 on: August 31, 2018, 09:57:54 PM »

I feel like people are seeing what they want to and I feel like I am defending myself which was not the kind of support I was looking for

I grew up in a different country and im obviously a product of my environment.
Self excluding was not something I considered serious or severe. It was just an option I used to take a break when I felt I needed it. THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO READ INTO IT.
I have been open and honest about the good and the bad.
I am not a problem gambler. I am a gambler.

In one of my emails to Grosvenor I tried to explain that they are accomplishing nothing by not allowing me back, nothing except limiting my options of where and which POKER tournaments I can play.
If I was a problem gambler I could get my fix of anything POKER/SLOTS/ROULLETTE/BLACKJACK at any of the other casinos I am allowed in. I could do my bollocks 24hrs a day 7 days a week if I wanted to.

SO TO SUM UP.... I made a mistake self excluding so many times. I did it without realising the full implications beyond the minimum 6month period that it would be valid for or how it would look to anyone else looking at it through the eyes of RG. Is this the kind of mistake that I deserve to be denied membership for an indefinite period ??





You are getting hold of the wrong end of the stick here, mate. ok sorry

What I & others are doing is telling you the probable reason that Grosvenor won't re-admit you. We are not on their side, nor are we criticising you, we are just explaining why Grosvenor have made the decision they have.

"...In one of my emails to Grosvenor I tried to explain that they are accomplishing nothing by not allowing me back, nothing except limiting my options of where and which POKER tournaments I can play. ...."

The worth of a poker player to a Gaming Group is of extremely limited value in itself. They want you for House Games, not poker. Set against the potential fine they face from the GC for re-admitting a player who - on the face of it - is demonstrating a whole bunch of red flags, you are a potential liability to Grosvenor.
So if I am a millionaire table game player then its possible they'd want my business ? this is the implication I get from this paragraph.


"I am defending myself which was not the kind of support I was looking for"


Nobody here is attacking you, you asked some questions & got the correct answers. We (certainly me) are not attacking you mate & don't have a problem with you.

You keep saying stuff that is very damaging though.

You had credit from Casinos at 16 years of age?

I mean, that's GG you right there in today's super sensitive RG environment.
that was 20yrs ago. there werent even card machines then. it was all cash or cheques. having that facility open to me as a customer is more a badge of honour than a blemish. cause in that day and age it was more who you know than what you know. so it was a sign that the casino management vouched for my honesty and integrity by offering and allowing me such a thing.

What you seem to have missed is the whole change in approach to RG from the Gaming Industry - not because they wanted to, but because the GC forced them to, with a whole series of massive fines. In 2018 alone, the major Gaming businesses have faced fines of £8 million, £6 million, several at £2 million, £1 million & £600,000 for what were deemed lax controls of problem gambling.
no one can accuse Grosvenor of being lax in this regard. personally I think they are over the top. but that's natural for someone in my present position.

Why should they risk those sort of fines for a poker player? THAT is why they are denying you re-admission.

Nobody here is attacking you, just trying to help you understand.
thank you. me too... im just trying to get my side of the story across. what if there is someone reading this who has the position to help me but is put off cause they don't understand where im coming from ??

SO TO SUM UP.... I made a mistake self excluding so many times. I did it without realising the full implications beyond the minimum 6month period that it would be valid for or how it would look to anyone else looking at it through the eyes of RG. Is this the kind of mistake that I deserve to be denied membership for an indefinite period ??



Don’t you need to explain why you self excluded? It would never occur to almost anyone to do that, unless they had a gambling problem. I’d just do something else.
Logged
lucky_scrote
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3531



View Profile
« Reply #113 on: September 01, 2018, 06:09:15 AM »

Your mistakes far surpass self excluding many times, in fact, that is the only good decision you have made when it comes to casinos. Stay away from them, they have already caused you and others around you far too much grief and heartache.
Logged

<3 ENSUING
stato_1 said, "banoffee pie i reckon"
stato_1 said, "this is delicious"
shmeigle
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 54



View Profile
« Reply #114 on: September 01, 2018, 11:34:31 AM »

Your mistakes far surpass self excluding many times, in fact, that is the only good decision you have made when it comes to casinos. Stay away from them, they have already caused you and others around you far too much grief and heartache.

dickhead post ^^^

like you know me well enough to make such a sweeping comment. don't get personal with me or you will get it straight back.
Logged

Its Hold'em NOT Fold'em
Simplez
engy
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 623


View Profile
« Reply #115 on: September 01, 2018, 12:10:12 PM »

 
Logged
lucky_scrote
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3531



View Profile
« Reply #116 on: September 01, 2018, 04:58:48 PM »

Your mistakes far surpass self excluding many times, in fact, that is the only good decision you have made when it comes to casinos. Stay away from them, they have already caused you and others around you far too much grief and heartache.

dickhead post ^^^

like you know me well enough to make such a sweeping comment. don't get personal with me or you will get it straight back.

Ok I apologise. I refuse to defend myself if I think I know better, nor that I believe I know you well enough to make such a decision.

Good luck.
Logged

<3 ENSUING
stato_1 said, "banoffee pie i reckon"
stato_1 said, "this is delicious"
SuuPRlim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10536



View Profile
« Reply #117 on: September 02, 2018, 11:03:53 AM »

One thing you probably aren't seeing in all this is the casino's perspective, Responsible gambling is a huge nuisance to the majortiy of us, having to answer questions to Bet365 like "DO you ever gamble to get away from problems at work?" when all you wanna do is stick an acca on the footy. Trust me, having worked with various regulatory bodies this is not something the casinos or betting sites want to do, they want you in there un-halted gambling away.

The problem is, this RG stuff is not a joke, and it's there for 1 reason and 1 reason only (and not because any casino gives a fuck about protecting you) and that reason is if they don't co-operate fully at all times and be evidently taking all possible measures to restrict problem gamblers from gambling with them...then the consequences for them are brutally severe. Fines into the tens of millions and they could even lose their license.

So put yourself in the position of a Grosvenor decision maker, looks at your history, multiple self exlclusions + evidently some compulsive personality traits (no disrespect, this is how customers are looked at from a RG perspective) the downside to allowing you back in is actually huge - if you were to develop a problem gambling habbit and lose money you weren't able to (and again, I'm just looking blankly at it, with no knowledge or your current mental state or financial means) this could be a huge huge problem for grosvenor, this is the sort of story the Daily Mail would go wild on and it could end up costing 8 figures + some horrific PR. To them, as business people the downsides of your membership would far, far outweigh the upsides and therefore were I in Grosvenor's shoes I also would never take the risks of allowing you back as a member.

I understand you wanted a more supportive "Grosvenor are bastards why can't they just speak to you and see you're not a problem gambler" kind of response, but unfortunately I believe how i have described it will be EXACTLY how they are viewing your case and for this reason my best advice would be forgot Grosveor for now, maybe you could periodically have another attempt to be re-instated at various points throughout the next 10 yrs and see what happens but honestly, I wouldn't hold your breath.

Also - you shouldn't respond to Scrote like that, you might think his post patronising or whatever but you posted publically asking for help and opinions and even if you disagree with his post reacting like that is quite out of line I believe, in fact it is the single biggest piece of evidence I have seen in this thread to suggest your gambling problems might run a little deeper than you realise, as one thing all people with deeply placed gambling issues categorically respond badly too is suggestions they are not in control of their gambling. Again I have no idea about you I'm making a blanket statement. I would happily accept though that you are just frustrated with Grosvenor hence your aggression in this instance.
Logged

tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #118 on: September 02, 2018, 11:09:08 AM »



That's a terrific post by the Little Man.

More & more it remains a mystery why & how Compliance at the other 4 Casinos/Groups allowed him back in - though we are all basing our views only on the basis of the info on this thread.

Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
SuuPRlim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10536



View Profile
« Reply #119 on: September 02, 2018, 06:00:08 PM »

TBF to him/the casinos, 1 self exclusion, followed by an interview with a manager after the exclusion period seems fine. They can show they honoured the minimum 6 month period, took some steps to see he was not problem gambling etc then i think would be fine to let back in, Grosvenor themselves allowed the self exclusion to be removed twice.

3 Times though i dont think they could reasonably allow anyone back in.
Logged

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.359 seconds with 20 queries.