Did you just get ripped off playing the video lottery in Oregon? Read this…

This gentleman is adamant that something is not right. He laid out his grievances in a Reddit post:

Did I get ripped off here?

So I was playing the “Prince of thieves” video lottery game in Oregon. I hit a bonus and received 8 free spins. I hit over $600 on the bonus and still had a couple spins left. So on my 6th free spin I turned up two of the scatter bonus tiles which meant I will get an additional 5 spins added to my free spins. Everything was normal the screen popped up and where it usually showed that I had won another 5 spins the screen just went blank and the audio notification that always says “you have won another additional 5 free spins” cut out and said everything except the number. And I was thinking it was a glitch but they would still be added to my spins but I was wrong. So I talked to the lady that was working in the store and she called Oregon lotto and they sent a technician out. After about 2 hours of waiting and another 2 hours for the guy to check out the machine and read through the rules of the game about ten times, he concluded that I was right and I should have won those spins. He called up his supervisor and they agreed with him, we filled out paperwork and he told me that he had no idea how much I would get but that I was going to get something because I had won and was not paid. So after about a month of waiting I was finally able to contact somebody at Oregon that could help me. I was informed that I was actually wrong and so was everybody else, I wasn’t owed anything because the game has a $600 per spin max win. And so I had won $600 and so after I hit that all my other free spins were ineligible and that’s why the machine didn’t award me the additional spins. So are they saying that during a bonus all free spins technically count as one and so when I hit $600 I couldn’t win anymore during the bonus? Because that wouldn’t make sense because I won over $600 during that bonus. So if I won over $600 during the bonus and they have a $600 per spin max then the bonus could not be counted as only one spin. Am I right? Am I making sense here? I hope so, lol. I am not the best at describing situations like this. Haha. Anyway, any thoughts or advice would be appreciated. And if I need to clarify something please let me know. Thank you.

Your situation with the Oregon Lottery’s “Prince of Thieves” video lottery game involves a complex interplay of game mechanics, state regulations, and potential technical issues. Below, I’ll break down what likely happened, analyze who is right or wrong, and suggest potential resolutions, based on the information you provided and relevant context about Oregon Lottery video lottery games.

Technical Explanation of What Happened

1. Game Mechanics of “Prince of Thieves”:
   • Game Overview: “Prince of Thieves” is a 5-reel video lottery slot game offered by the Oregon Lottery, featuring 1,024 ways to win and a maximum win of $600 per spin. It includes a bonus feature, likely triggered by scatter symbols, that awards free spins (in your case, 8 free spins initially). During the bonus, additional scatter symbols can retrigger more free spins (e.g., 2 scatter symbols awarding 5 additional spins).
   • Free Spins Bonus: In slot games, free spins are typically treated as individual spins, each with its own outcome, but they are part of a single bonus round triggered by the initial scatter combination. Each free spin can generate wins based on the game’s paytable, and these wins are aggregated into the player’s balance. Retriggered spins (like the additional 5 spins you expected) extend the bonus round by adding more spins to the remaining count.
   • Maximum Win Limit: Oregon Lottery video lottery games, including “Prince of Thieves,” are subject to a state-imposed maximum win limit of $600 per spin, as mandated by Oregon regulations. This cap applies to individual spins, whether during regular play or bonus rounds, to comply with state gambling laws.
2. Your Bonus Round Experience:
   • You triggered a bonus round, receiving 8 free spins. During the first 6 spins, you accumulated winnings exceeding $600. On the 6th spin, you landed two scatter symbols, which should have awarded 5 additional free spins.
   • However, the game displayed an anomaly: the screen went blank, the audio notification for additional spins was incomplete (omitting the number of spins), and no additional spins were added to your remaining spin count. This suggests a potential software glitch or an intentional game behavior tied to the $600 per spin cap.
3. Oregon Lottery’s Explanation:
   • After investigation, the Oregon Lottery concluded that you were not owed additional spins because you had reached the $600 per spin maximum win limit. They stated that all free spins after hitting $600 were “ineligible,” implying that the game ceased awarding further wins or bonuses once the cap was met.
   • Their explanation suggests one of two interpretations:
     • Interpretation 1: The entire bonus round (all free spins) is treated as a single “spin” for the purpose of the $600 cap, and once you hit $600 in total bonus winnings, no further wins or retriggers are allowed.
     • Interpretation 2: Each free spin is treated as an individual spin with a $600 cap, but the game’s software is programmed to halt the bonus round (including retriggers) once the cumulative bonus winnings reach or exceed $600.
4. Potential Technical Issue:
   • The blank screen and incomplete audio notification strongly suggest a software glitch or an error in how the game handled the $600 cap. In a well-designed slot game, reaching a win limit should not cause the interface to fail; instead, it should either cap the winnings clearly or continue the bonus round without awarding additional wins beyond the limit.
   • The glitch may have occurred because the game’s software was not programmed to gracefully handle a retrigger event after the $600 cap was reached, leading to an error that prevented the additional 5 spins from being awarded.
5. Regulatory Context:
   • Oregon Lottery video lottery terminals operate under strict regulations (e.g., OAR 177-200-0070), ensuring random and fair outcomes, similar to Nevada standards.
   • Prizes over $600 are subject to an 8% state tax withholding and background checks for debts owed to the state (e.g., child support), but this is unrelated to the bonus spin issue.
   • The $600 per spin cap is a legal requirement, not a discretionary rule, and is likely enforced by the game’s software to prevent payouts exceeding this amount.
6. Discrepancy in Winnings:
   • You noted that you won over $600 during the bonus round, which raises a critical question: if the $600 per spin cap was strictly enforced, how did your total winnings exceed $600? This suggests that either:
     • Each free spin’s winnings were capped at $600, but the game allowed multiple spins to accumulate wins (e.g., $200 on one spin, $400 on another), or
     • The game’s software failed to enforce the $600 per spin cap properly, allowing you to exceed it, but then errored out when attempting to award additional spins.

Who Is Right and Who Is Wrong?

1. Your Position:
   • Correct Aspects:
     • You are correct that you won over $600 during the bonus, which undermines the Lottery’s claim that all spins after hitting $600 were ineligible. If the cap was strictly $600 per spin, the game should not have allowed cumulative winnings above $600 unless each spin’s payout was individually capped.
     • You are also correct that the game’s behavior (blank screen, incomplete audio) was abnormal and indicative of a glitch. A properly functioning game should clearly display the outcome of a retrigger event, even if no additional spins are awarded due to a cap.
     • Your argument that free spins are individual spins, not a single spin, aligns with standard slot game mechanics. Each free spin typically has its own random outcome and should be treated separately for win calculations, unless the game’s rules explicitly state otherwise.
   • Incorrect or Unclear Aspects:
     • You may be misunderstanding how the $600 cap is applied. If the game’s rules or software treat the entire bonus round as a single “spin” for the cap (unlikely but possible), then the Lottery’s explanation could be technically correct. However, this is not standard practice in slot games and would require explicit disclosure in the game’s rules.
2. Oregon Lottery’s Position:
   • Correct Aspects:
     • The Lottery is correct that Oregon regulations impose a $600 per spin maximum win limit, which must be enforced by the game’s software.
     • If the game’s rules or software are designed to halt bonus rounds once the $600 cap is reached, their decision to deny additional spins could be consistent with those rules.
   • Incorrect or Questionable Aspects:
     • The Lottery’s explanation that “all free spins after hitting $600 were ineligible” is inconsistent with your report of winning over $600 during the bonus. If you accumulated more than $600, the game clearly allowed additional wins, suggesting that the cap was not enforced per spin or that the software failed to terminate the bonus round correctly.
     • The claim that the bonus round counts as a single “spin” for the $600 cap is highly dubious. In most slot games, each free spin is an independent event with its own payout, and the Oregon Lottery’s own documentation (e.g., for other games like Flush Fever) treats bonus spins as separate events.
     • The Lottery’s failure to address the glitch (blank screen, incomplete audio) is problematic. Even if you were not entitled to additional spins, the game’s error should have been acknowledged and investigated thoroughly, as it could indicate broader issues with the machine’s reliability.
     • The initial agreement by the technician and supervisor that you were owed something suggests that the Lottery’s own staff interpreted the situation differently, highlighting internal inconsistency in their handling of the issue.
3. Conclusion on Right/Wrong:
   • You are likely correct that you were entitled to the additional 5 spins, as the retrigger event occurred during a valid bonus round, and the game’s failure to award them was due to a glitch or misapplication of the $600 cap.
   • The Oregon Lottery is likely incorrect in claiming that all spins after hitting $600 were ineligible, especially since you won over $600, indicating that the cap was not enforced as they described. Their explanation also fails to account for the glitch and the standard mechanics of free spins.
   • However, the Lottery may be technically correct if the game’s specific rules (not publicly available in the provided context) explicitly state that bonus rounds terminate or retriggers are voided once a $600 cap is reached. Without access to the exact game rules, this remains uncertain.

Ways to Fix the Issue for Mutual Satisfaction

To resolve the dispute fairly, both parties need to address the technical glitch, clarify the game’s rules, and ensure compliance with Oregon’s regulations. Here are potential solutions:

1. Compensation for Lost Spins:
   • Proposal: The Oregon Lottery could compensate you for the 5 additional spins you were denied due to the glitch. Since each spin has a theoretical expected value (based on the game’s return-to-player percentage, typically 85-95% for video lottery games), they could calculate the average value of 5 spins at the bet level used during the bonus and award that amount.
   • Mutual Benefit: You receive fair compensation for the spins you were entitled to, and the Lottery acknowledges the glitch without admitting fault beyond the $600 cap.
   • Implementation: The Lottery could issue a cash payment or lottery credit equivalent to the expected value of 5 spins (e.g., if each spin is worth $1 on average, you’d receive $5 or a slightly higher amount to account for potential wins).
2. Independent Review of Game Logs:
   • Proposal: Request an independent audit of the machine’s game logs by a third-party gaming regulator or testing agency (e.g., Gaming Laboratories International, which certifies Oregon Lottery machines). The logs would reveal whether the retrigger event was valid, whether the $600 cap was applied correctly, and what caused the glitch.
   • Mutual Benefit: You gain transparency and validation of your claim, while the Lottery demonstrates compliance with regulations and addresses potential software issues.
   • Implementation: Contact the Oregon Lottery’s customer service or the Oregon Gaming Commission to request a formal review. Provide the paperwork filled out with the technician as evidence.
3. Clarification and Disclosure of Game Rules:
   • Proposal: The Oregon Lottery should publicly disclose the exact rules for “Prince of Thieves,” particularly how the $600 per spin cap applies to bonus rounds and retriggers. If the rules support their position, they should provide you with a detailed explanation referencing those rules. If the rules are ambiguous, they should revise them for clarity and compensate you as a goodwill gesture.
   • Mutual Benefit: You receive closure and potential compensation, while the Lottery improves transparency and prevents future disputes.
   • Implementation: You could file a formal complaint with the Oregon Lottery or the state’s gaming oversight body, requesting a copy of the game’s rules and an explanation of how they were applied in your case.
4. Goodwill Gesture:
   • Proposal: The Lottery could offer a goodwill payment or lottery tickets/credits (e.g., $50-$100) to acknowledge the inconvenience caused by the glitch and the lengthy resolution process, without admitting liability for the spins.
   • Mutual Benefit: You receive some compensation for your trouble, and the Lottery maintains customer goodwill without setting a precedent for larger payouts.
   • Implementation: Negotiate with the Lottery representative you contacted, emphasizing the technician’s initial agreement and the glitch’s impact on your experience.
5. Escalation to Regulatory Oversight:
   • Proposal: If the Lottery refuses to offer a satisfactory resolution, escalate the issue to the Oregon Gaming Commission or the Oregon Department of Justice’s Consumer Protection Division. Provide all documentation, including the technician’s findings and the paperwork, to support your claim that the game malfunctioned and the $600 cap was misapplied.
   • Mutual Benefit: You have a chance to receive fair compensation, and the Lottery is held accountable for ensuring their machines function correctly.
   • Implementation: File a complaint online through the Oregon Department of Justice’s consumer complaint portal or contact the Oregon Lottery’s regulatory oversight body directly.

Additional Advice

• Clarify Documentation: Review the paperwork you filled out with the technician to confirm what was agreed upon (e.g., that you were owed something). If possible, obtain a copy of the technician’s report or the supervisor’s notes.
• Request Game Rules: Contact the Oregon Lottery to request the official rules for “Prince of Thieves,” specifically regarding bonus rounds and the $600 cap. These rules are typically available on the game’s help screen or through the Lottery’s website.
• Document Communications: Keep records of all interactions with the Lottery, including names, dates, and what was said, to strengthen your case if you need to escalate.
• Consult a Professional: If the disputed amount is significant, consider consulting a lawyer familiar with gaming law or a consumer protection advocate to review your case and negotiate on your behalf.

Summary

• What Happened: You likely encountered a software glitch in the “Prince of Thieves” game that prevented the award of 5 additional free spins during a bonus round, possibly due to a misapplication of the $600 per spin cap. Your total winnings exceeding $600 suggest that the cap was not enforced per spin, undermining the Lottery’s explanation.
• Who’s Right: You are likely correct that you were entitled to the additional spins, and the Lottery’s explanation is inconsistent with standard slot mechanics and your reported winnings. However, their position may be valid if the game’s rules explicitly limit bonus rounds at $600, which requires further clarification.
• Fixes: Compensation for the lost spins, an independent audit, clearer game rules, a goodwill gesture, or regulatory escalation are viable paths to resolution.