I think he should have declared his interest when advocating Betvoyager. You may not.
Scep, yes I have affiliate links to BV, so what? Does this invalidate its merits or mean that I only advocate it because I'm an affiliate? obviously not.
I don't see that you have any legitimate complaints. The T & C clearly state that you are required to produce ID when withdrawing (to thwart money-laundering), that's a common requirement at online casinos. Similarly, when you login a large notice is displayed telling about the terms regarding the 10% deduction, you'd have to be blind to miss it.
Actually,Bayes, the reason I chose Betvoyager was your view that it was a "Fair" site.So much so that I did not even read the Terms and Conditions.
That's unfortunate, and somewhat unwise if you don't mind me saying so. But you can hardly blame me (or BV) if you're having trouble withdrawing funds when you're not willing to meet the requirements as stated in the T & C. Personally I've never had a problem withdrawing funds, and to my knowledge no-one else has either.
BV isn't perfect, and maybe you would prefer to play at a live OC because you like looking at the dealers or watching the wheel spin around, or maybe you would prefer prettier graphics or nicer background music.
But if you want the best roulette odds on the net, together with the peace of mind that the game isn't rigged against you (and what's the use of the best odds if you don't trust them?) then BV is the obvious choice.
Your example ignores the fact that we in this forum - including yourself - EXPECT to win more than we lose .If we do that , and bet on a 37 number table ,we do not suffer a 10% deduction , we get paid the full odds . In this case the 2.7% is irrelevant .
Come off it scep, if you think the house edge is irrelevant then you're the one indulging in Alice in wonderland fantasies. The house edge is never irrelevant; even the AP with a demonstrable edge has to overcome
the house edge, so it doesn't really matter whether you expect
to win or not. As Mr P has pointed out, many wheels may be biased, but not all are sufficiently biased to overcome the HA, so it depends on what precisely your edge is whether the 10% deduction works out to be an overall disadvantage.
The problem is, many don't understand how the HA works. Many people looking at the 10% deduction argue that this is greater than the standard 2.7% HA and so you must be worse off than playing a supposedly "fair" wheel. Or they don't understand how the deduction is applied, and conclude that you're better off playing the regular game. Steve H made this mistake -[admin. note: please no links to that site, thanks]
They also don't understand how the randomness control works and think it's just a gimmick (Steve's criticism of it in that article may apply to the "Fairness control" feature, but not to "Randomness Control" which can't be cheated in the way he describes).
It's for these reasons that I added a lengthy article on my site about BV - I even included an algorithm for the SHA so you can check the outcomes yourself and don't have to rely on BV's. If I'm going to all that trouble, why not include some affiliate links so that I potentially pay for the site running costs? In any case, I've been promoting BV for years without being an official affiliate, so Reyth is correct; I'm not in it for the money (and FWIW, my affiliate earnings amount to zero so far).