Cirrus informed they they had assigned me low priority status and were likely stagger my $10,000 payment – making approximate payments of $1000 approximately every month on the grounds that:
- I am not a recreational player like most other players
- I have advanced skills at Blackjack that exceed those of just luck
I do not actually fall into either of these categories as I have stated. I am a student with a part-time job and occasionally gamble when I can afford it. Also, I am not an advanced Blackjack player, I play using a simple strategy that I believe optimises my odds – though they still of course remain in the casino’s favour.
However, if they were correct on the above assumptions, would it be legitimate to assign me low priority and pay me my money over 10 months?
Are there such people as the non-recreational players that I have been lumped in with? My understanding is that Casino’s always have the edge and thus no one can have a guaranteed professional income from an online casino. The only execption I am aware of is the use of bonuses to tip the balance – but that is not applicable in my case.
I have been caused much distress by what I percieved as completely unfair behaviour regarding the payment of my legitimate winnings – I just wondered if they were in fact right to be vigilant? Maybe there are dishonest players that somehow manipulate the casino? If so then I would understand that it may be appropriate to punish these players who are not content with a level playing field.
However, I am not one of those (if indeed they exist) players. I am an honest player who risked my own money and have had some good luck – Please let’s resolve this issue.
If anything I would have thought I should be assigned high priority due to the propensity I will return after my win and the fact that I have wagered at least $23,000 at Cirrus.