Fishhead said:
Not sure, but understand the policy if enforced.
Many books do it this way.
If not, one could just lose/scalp out their deposit portion and then re-up again, thus essentially lowering ones rollover requirement.
example- Deposit 1,000 instead of 2,000..........lose the 1,000 and re-up another 1,000 and essentially save onesself $4,000 in rollover of the 5x if deposting 2,000 from the beginning.
I've heard you say some dumb things, but this one may take the cake.
How the hell can you say that you "understand the policy if enforced" ?
If you deposit $1,000, get $100 bonus, and lose the whole $1,100 in one bet, WSEX should be overjoyed. They've gotten their pound of flesh from you, every ounce ... they've won all the money that you deposited with them.
Understanding this, how can you possibly say that they have a right to "carry over" any unfulfilled rollover requirements to the next deposit ? After all, they've already won every penny from you that was related to the initial $1,000 deposit.
And when you say that "many books do it this way", you're just plain wrong. There are anecdotal stories about WWTS operating this way, but other than that, it's usually just some 3rd/4th-tier books that do it.
I usually have the attitude that a book can make their own rules, within reason, as long as they're posted on the website .... but this rule really pisses me off, as I don't think any book is justified in doing this.