WSEX declines withdrawal

[Wongboy]

I had been considering WSEX, but will not play at a new site that charges a fee if I decide that I don't like their games.

Bet Royal does the same thing. I found out about that one the hard way. I deposited $500, and wagered the full $500 on football games that weekend, basically breaking even, then wagered the remaining $490 on games the following weekend. When I went to cash out my remaining $450 balance, they told me that I would have to pay the Neteller fees, even though they could see that I was willing to bet $500 a weekend on sports, and they had given me no deposit bonus. I moved my football sportsbetting back to Sportsbook and never bothered trying out the BetRoyal poker room like I had previously planned.

WSEX looked promising, but its not worth the risk to try it out when there are other rooms that you can try out for free.

[debater]

I think this policy is entirely fair, especially given the no rake plan they have. It also applies to sports wagers, as I ran into it late last NFL year.

Debater

[mmbt0ne]

[ QUOTE ]
I had the same situation...after i was turned down, i called them up, they said i had only played 1/2 as much poker as i needed to, so i would be charged. About a month had passed by since my attempted withdrawl by this point, my money gets forgotten about regularly, and i I decided to withdraw, pay their stupid fine and they wont get my football betting business come fall, no biggie.

So the second time i tried to take the money out, it went through, no charge, no problem.

I don't know what the lesson is from this.

[/ QUOTE ]

IIRC, you get one free transaction per month.

[primetime32]

[ QUOTE ]
I had been considering WSEX, but will not play at a new site that charges a fee if I decide that I don't like their games.

Bet Royal does the same thing. I found out about that one the hard way. I deposited $500, and wagered the full $500 on football games that weekend, basically breaking even, then wagered the remaining $490 on games the following weekend. When I went to cash out my remaining $450 balance, they told me that I would have to pay the Neteller fees, even though they could see that I was willing to bet $500 a weekend on sports, and they had given me no deposit bonus. I moved my football sportsbetting back to Sportsbook and never bothered trying out the BetRoyal poker room like I had previously planned.

WSEX looked promising, but its not worth the risk to try it out when there are other rooms that you can try out for free.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are willing to pass up the potential of rake free poker because you MAY have to pay 14 dollars in neteller fees if you don't like the games. I vote this the post of the day.

[MicroBob]

I think it's incorrect for this to be a consideration for the intelligent player as well. Outright stupid actually.

You can check out the games all you like without depositing. And you can deposit just enough to buy-in if you decide you want to play.

This is partly contingent on the assumption that the wagering-requirement is as simple to attain as I think it is.

But the fact is, there will be some players who are turned-off by this enough that it might end up keeping them from playing there at all.
that alone means it is in WSEX's best interest to NOT have this rule.

[primetime32]

to the extent that it will turn off players who are probably the type of players i would want to have at my table, i agree.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
I think this is a pretty bad policy.


What are their terms for 'rolling it over' one time in the poker-room anyway? I don't think that earning $500 worth of rake-back is their standard, is it?

[/ QUOTE ]

I assumed it was similar to Pacific Poker's policy for bonus clearing, a $500 wagering requirement.

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
I think it's incorrect for this to be a consideration for the intelligent player as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would not be a consideration for me. If I can beat the games there for a healthier profit than I can elsewhere, I will play there. It certainly is not my intent to discourage players from playing there. I am a big fan of the rake-free model and I'd like to see it do well. Now that this has come up, I wonder if I should have brought it up. However, like MicroBob, I think it is in bad policy. To the poster who said it was fair: Yes, it's fair as it is clearly spelled out in the T&C; however, fairness does not always equate to good policy.

[Peter666]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it's incorrect for this to be a consideration for the intelligent player as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would not be a consideration for me. If I can beat the games there for a healthier profit than I can elsewhere, I will play there. It certainly is not my intent to discourage players from playing there. I am a big fan of the rake-free model and I'd like to see it do well. Now that this has come up, I wonder if I should have brought it up. However, like MicroBob, I think it is in bad policy. To the poster who said it was fair: Yes, it's fair as it is clearly spelled out in the T&C; however, fairness does not always equate to good policy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like Pavlovs dogs, it looks like we've been conditioned to not see the woods for the trees.

It is like those miserly people who will drive their gas guzzling SUV to the other side of town to use their coupon for 20 cents off a can of tuna, rather than getting it at the corner store.

[rez]

[ QUOTE ]
I checked out the 10/20 game but did not play in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Were you really going to play 10/20 with only a 1 buyin deposit? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

If you play 10/20, beating the 2/4 or 3/6 at WPEX should be no problem, even if there are better games at other sites.

Here's what you should do:

1. Stop complaining
2. Complete wagering requirement at 2/4 or 3/6
3. Collect rakeback and cashout
4. Never go back