Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sportsbooks canceling bets.......

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Why do we need to put the words on paper?

    The answer is simple. Because it will provide more protections for both sides.

    Of course you can still argue that even though we put 2,000 pages of rules and you can still refuse to pay your customers and run.

    But before we play a game and if we want to play a fair game, trust on words just isn't enough nowadays, words on paper is more fair.

    You can be in charge of book X today and you can guarantee that you will never cancell any bets after confirmation, but when tomorrow someone else replace you, he could have another thought on this issue and he could refuse to pay me on this kind of bet.

    So, if I'm the customer of book X, should I chase you and ask you to pay me the bet?

    Words, policies, "normal pratice" are all personal judgements, only rules in written could be fair to both sides.

    [This message has been edited by AYCE (edited 02-25-2000).]

    Comment


    • #47
      There should be a definite set of rules that are clearly stated by sportsbooks regarding these "bad line" scenarios. I can't believe that there are people here that are willing to 100% completely trust the integrity of a sportsbook. Most sportsbooks vaguely mention something in their rules, for their own protection, of course, something like "We the sportsbook reserve the right to cancel any bets, without any notice, and solely at our discretion." If there are people out there that will put their "blind faith" in their sportsbook handling all matters related to this fairly, then they are morons. The next time you see a bad line, why don't you play the disadvantageous side, and take the -16 when you should be getting +16. Play that for a couple of thousand, because you know in your heart of hearts that the sportsbook will do the right thing and cancel your wager. Are there any takers? I didn't think so.

      That is why sportsbooks that feel it is their right to cancel or amend bets should have clear and concise guidelines as to what their powers are. They should only be allowed to cancel a bet prior to the start of a game. And it should show on your pending wagers screen, or e-mail etc.., but you should be notified. What happens if I jump on a bad line, and it wins, so they decide to cancel my wager, but it was first credited to my account, but removed hours later. But what if my team had lost, and the bet stands as a loser, and they don't bother to refund my wager? When you give the sportsbooks the power to handle bad lines etc.. any way they darn please, then you are asking for trouble.

      I don't mean to say that sportsbooks are scum, and totally untrustworthy, but for the protection of both the book, and the bettor, there should definitely be a clear set of rules as to what the book can do in these cases. Don't give me that "We reserve the right to cancel any bet, without notice, for any reason we see sufficient, whether it be before or after the start time of the wager in question", bla bla bla bull.

      Clearly state when, how, why, and what bets you reserve the right to cancel, and the time frame allowed in regards to these matters.

      But, why should they, a lot of people here would bet their life that all sportsbooks would never abuse this privilege they have of cancelling bets whenever they feel like, and in any manner they want to.

      Sure, people take advantage of bad lines, but don't be so stupid to think that the sportsbooks can't and won't also use this to their advantage.

      Well, I have to go. I just saw a bad line. Duke +20 at home. I'll be really stupid and play the other side at -20 for a big one. I know for sure that my book will do the right thing and give me back my money because they are completely fair and trustworthy.

      Comment


      • #48
        Alexander,

        you are just using some very unreasonable example to make your arguments.

        When a bad line of Spurs +16 against the Clippers (should be -16 instead) is there,

        some greedy people will play Spurs +16 immediately.

        BUT ONLY A COMPLETE IDIOT WILL PLAY CLIPPERS -16.

        And you want to challenge a complete idiot?

        Come on!

        In fact, most reputable books out there will NOT only cancell the bets if the wrong side win BUT they will refund both sides no matter which side will win.

        Didn't last week someone posted in here that he wanted to take advantage a bad line at PL BUT STILL LOST and then PL STILL refund his bet back?

        Comment


        • #49
          AYCE

          Your absolutely right in above post. Just check another thread in this forum titled "SID DIAMOND SPORTS" and see how secure your money wagered off shore may be.

          The old saying "my word is my bond" is bull-bleep today. Dealing with someone you don't know thousands of miles away who has your money in their posession is very, very risky business at best. Granted--- there are books that have earned their respect, but for everyone of those that have there are many, many more that are total crapshoots.

          Sincere words of welcome and trust mean nothing until you postup your money with a book. Once your funds leave your hands be prepared for a wild ride if you don't know who you are dealing with. Just read Ray Meyer's "Action Sports" beautifully worded website. I can see how that site sucked in plenty of clients with the advertising campaign they had. Now---anyone funded there should have skid marks in their undies.

          Dot

          Comment


          • #50
            Ayce,

            You obviously didn't get my point, which was that nobody should ever be foolish enough to completely trust a sportsbook's honesty and integrity in regards to how they choose to cancel bets.

            I could go on and on with scenarios showing how sportsbooks can use their ability to cancel bets how and whenever they feel like it, to their advantage.

            As for your scenario with the Clippers. That person would be an idiot for two reasons. You only mentioned one. Of course, the person is an idiot because he took the wrong side of an obvious bad line. But that person would also be an idiot if he believed with 100% certainty that his bet would be refunded, regardless of whether or not he knew it was a bad line. It is up to the sole discretion of the sportsbook whether or not they want to refund his bet or not. Remember, there are no clear cut rules. The sportsbook can do whatever it pleases, and that is definitely not in the anybody's best interests.

            Comment


            • #51
              In my opinion a bet is a bet, period. I bet 5 dimes earlier this year at Aces Gold(not on Fri., either)on the wrong side. I notified them of my error but they would not let me cancel the bet. Why can the bookmaker do it? A ticket is a ticket is always what I've been told. And what constitutes a bad line? I bet Fullerton St. +21 Thurs. nite 10 minutes after the steam had moved the game to 18 across the Don Best screen and this was at Premiere League who you can rarely ever beat on a move. Should I have called them and said,"Excuse me you'd better adjust your line because everyone else has 18 and you have 21." And believe it or not there people who wager on these games who would have no idea whether Fullerton should be getting 18 or laying 18. Until an exact # of points is defined to determine a bad line, and when bookmakers start letting you cancel bets then I think the bookmakers are in the wrong when canceling bets. They get 11-10 and they feast off of our mistakes, why can't we profit from some of their's.

              Comment


              • #52
                My point AYCE is that no matter what a book writes in it's rules, it doesn't mean that they will abide by it. The simple fact that we don't have anything in our rules about cancelling wagers should tell you that we DON'T reserve the right to cancel your wager after we accept it.
                Any Sportsbook is only as good as its reputation. There has to be trust that the book will do the right thing. We just feel that canceling wagers already accepted is not the right thing. I've been doing this off-shore since 1995 and before that in the states, and we have never canceled a bet taken and confirmed. You may find that hard to believe, but it's true. We have developed our software to prevent such things and if it does happen, we bite the bullet and learn from the mistake. If a guy makes 50 plays with me and on 1 of them he gets to take advantage of a bad line, he is not a piece of sh**, he's a player and good luck to him.

                Comment


                • #53
                  It seems to me that the reason this question of bad lines/trust is going round and round is really because all of us have our own way of conducting business. There are still alot people out there who really believe in the "my word thing" and really don't break their word. There are others who want everything on paper etc. etc. I don't necessarily think either approach is totally appropriate or foolproof. The bottom line is really this. We as customers are bearing all the risk. We are sending our money to people miles away who we either don't know, or know only by reputation. If you really think about it, its rather risky. All the people who come here and claim that XYZ sportsbook is as solid as Citibank or as good as gold etc. etc. are living proof that ignorance is indeed bliss. Sportsbooks should indeed bend over backwards to make sure that we who are taking all the risk feel as comfortable as possible. My opinion is that most don't. Sometimes it's just incompetence. For those of you that have multiple phone outs, try this out if your bored. Call the books that you've never received a payout from and ask them to confirm your full name and address. If you have 5 or more outs I bet you one or more of them will have it wrong. This may seem like nitpicking until your check gets lost. One final point that seems to get lost a bit is that sportsbooks are in business to win your money. They fully expect to win your money. Anything short of that, on a long term basis, is an aberration to them. Regardless of whether you or I, individually, are winning players, most gamblers lose. It is not that great of a leap in thought for them to consider us, as a group, losers, or at best suckers.
                  So when sportsbooks or their agents, come here and seem a bit indelicate in their assertions or responses, its important to realize that their respect for us gamblers/customers is tenuous at best. So a sportsbook who admonishes individuals who want everything written out or spelled out, is in some ways showing that lack of respect. Food for thought.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    chester!

                    your point was well taken, but until the offshore guys started taking post-up money the bookmaking business in the states was a credit business. where the bookies took all the risk that the customer would pay. trust is a two way street. but it was also a business where everyone knew each other or someone vouched for each others credibility.
                    thats not the case today with books having customers from around the world with very little personal contact.

                    THE DEVIL

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Alexander,

                      If you will remember what kind of topics we are talking about, then you should NOT use the words of "honesty and integrity".

                      If a person bet on the bad lines "on purpose" and no matter what sides will he on (again and obviously, if he choose the Cliipers, he's just a complete idiot), he should NEVER expect the books will treate him with "Honesty and Intergrity".

                      He should never expect to be treated fair.

                      Being a thief, you should never expect the store owner will treate you "polite and fair" when he caught you stealing.

                      If you can show me any other scenarios that "the books will use their ability to cancell the bets how and whenever they like it and to their advantage", please tell us.

                      If you can give us some legit examples that the above mentioned had been happened (other than bad lines and obvious errors) at some well known names, I believe most posters here will stand on your side and bash them to death.

                      Otherwise, please don't use the words "honesty and intergrity".

                      As I said already, when a books has rules stated they will cancell bets because of bad lines and obvious errors, and you still want to play those bad lines. Don't cry and don't argue if you will get caught, you have no grounds.

                      Don't like it, then don't play with them.

                      Go out there find a book like Intheknow mentioned that they will honor you anything after confirmation.

                      Brett,

                      there are some books came here before and mentioned that they will allow the players to cancell a bet "normally" - but this is a "normal pratice", in their written rules, most of them WILL NOT allow it.

                      Even they will allow it, it must be a reasonable one.

                      You give an example of you want to cancell a 5 dimes bet, which your bet would very possible caused the line to move a point of so, in this case, I believe the general opinion here will agree that the book has the rights to refuse to cancell your bet even they have normal pratice on this kind of thing.

                      Intheknow,

                      other than this PR thing. You are using a very bad and dangerous pratice here, Mr. BM.

                      Unless they have been changed, written rules will be implied the same for every customers no matter which clerks or managers they will be talking to.

                      Your "trust on words" is on you or someone that give out the "words of trust", once you are not here or the company has been sold, those "trust" will be very doubtful.

                      And in some case, when there will be a huge conflicts between you, your customer and the benefit of the company, when there will be a case of "words of trust vs written rules", can you sell the picture and the dangers?

                      Although no one out there can/willing to define what exactly and how much is a bad line, but I would say a sportsbook has a rule in their book IS A SMART AND RIGHT THING for saying that

                      "they will cancell any bets in attempt to take advantage of a bad line or an obvious error."

                      I would think they are more worth trust than someone just said,

                      "we don't have it on our rules, it means we won't do it, trust us."

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Ayce,

                        Your complete trust in the honesty and integrity of sportsbooks is mind boggling.

                        First of all, what do you mean about not using the words, "honesty" and "integrity"?

                        When a person like yourself believes that sportsbooks should be allowed to cancel wagers whenever and however they feel like, then you are putting complete TRUST in that book in that they will be fair and just in this matter. Since the book has no rules to follow, then we must obviously TRUST them in that they will do the right thing.

                        Here are some scenarios for you.

                        Books don't always take games off the board before they start. Sometimes you may know the outcome of the first couple of minutes as you're watching your game on the dish or tv, so you use this to your advantage. Of course you would never do this though because this is only what crooks do. So they take a game off the board at let's say 8:10 est., and you know the game started at 8:07 est. because you were watching it. You win your wager, but the book decides to cancel your bet because you made a sizeable wager, and they have reasonable grounds to refuse it. Whether or not you knew the game started at 8:07 est. is not really what is important here though. What is important is the fact that the sportsbook can cancel your bet because they can find proof somewhere on the internet or whatever that the game started at 8:07 est. and your bet was clocked on-line at 8:08 est. Well of course, you would agree with the book cancelling your wager because technically the game had already started, so they are well within their rights. So there goes your $2,000 profit, but that's okay because you have agreed to live by their rules. Perhaps if you had bet your money on the losing side, the book would not have decided to cancel your bet. But you would never think this possible, because the sportsbooks have never and will never cancel bets to their advantage.

                        What happens if a sportsbook puts up a bad line and it gets pounded on? Since sportsbooks can cancel bets whenever they feel like it, they can wait until that particular game is over before making any decision. Well, would you believe it, the other side won!!! Gee, that's a profit of let's say $250,000 for the sportsbook. Well, they decided not to refund the game after all. People call in and complain, but the book's policy has just changed in that they will now honour any bad lines in the future. Besides, why should these CROOKS call in and complain, they got what they deserved right?

                        Do I really need to go on with more examples? If you want to let sportsbooks cancel wagers whenever and however they feel like, then you are putting your complete trust in them, and hoping they won't abuse this privilege. I just don't know what you don't understand.

                        I am not saying that sportsbooks are abusing or taking advantage of their supposed right to cancel wagers. But let's face it, the possibilities are there, and maybe they do abuse this privilege, but very discreetly. Don't be so naive as to think all sportsbooks will be honourable.

                        Sportsbooks should be more specific in regards to when, how, why, etc... they will cancel a bet. This is in everyone's best interests, especially the bettor. If you are happy with the "we reserve the right to cancel any wager, at any time, without any prior notice, and solely at our discretion" bull, then you deserve to be conned.


                        What is a bad line anyways? For you, a bad line is whatever your sportsbook says is a bad line. You'll just take their word for it.
                        Myself, and many others would prefer more specific answers. It's just plain common sense. We just want to protect ourselves, just as the sportsbook has the right to protect themselves. But sportsbooks shouldn't be allowed to cancel bets and determine what bad lines are etc.. solely at their discretion. Cancellation policies should be governed by a strict set of rules, but for some reason that is beyond me, you don't seem to agree.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Alexander,

                          My complete trust on the "honesty & integrity" of the books?

                          How funny was that!

                          Try to take a look at my posts again, when did I say that the sportsbook should be allowed to cancell bets whenever and whatever they fell like?

                          When did I will have my "complete trust" on a sportsbook when I am the first to tell Intheknow that "trust on words" doesn't mean a damn thing to me, rules written is what we need.

                          When did I say that a bad line is whatever my book says is a bad line?

                          Come on, don't be so ridiculos!

                          When you sign up with a reputable sportsbook, said WSEX for example, they will give you the rules before you sign up and it has been stated,

                          "When a line is put up in obvious error due to a typographical mistake by the book, any customer wagers entered to take advantage of the error will be cancelled.
                          ie) when the wrong team is put up as the favorite or when a Point Spread, Total, or Money Line is off by a significant amount."

                          Same and similar rules can be found at most reputable books out there.

                          IF YOU WANT TO PLAY, YOU SHOULD BE CONSIDER AS ACCEPTING WITH SUCH RULE.

                          Take a look back on Krackman's examples,

                          a) Cle +140 (actually should be Cle -140).
                          b) SA +4 (actually should be SA -4)
                          c) St Bon pick'em (Actually should be -6.5 or higher)

                          Only an idiot will believe that those bets has been entered with "honesty and integrity" but NOT TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF AN ERROR.

                          In this case or in such similar case, you have no grounds and no reasonings to argue that the sportsbooks SHOULD NOT CANCELL YOUR BETS.

                          Now back to your "great example",

                          SHOW ME ONE EXAMPLE THAT YOUR CASE HAD BEEN HAPPENED AT ANY REPUTABLE BOOKS IN THIS SITE THAT THEY WILL USE SUCH TACTICS TO CHEAT YOUR MONEY.

                          Tell me when did you place a bet that was 3 or 5 minutes after the game started and you won and then the book had cancelled your bets and tell you that its because of an error, when? where? and how much?

                          Don't use such an irrational and extrem example to compare with what Krackman had done in this case.

                          I had already mentioned, no books out there will have a clearly definition of what exactly a bad line/an error is and how much it should be. There will be always be some complains and conflits on bets got cancelled because of a sizable bets on a small margin of point spread/moneyline move.

                          BUT THAT WAS NOT THE CASE HERE AND FOR YOUR EXAMPLE.

                          If you are worrying that the book should "use this rule at anytime they want to cancell your bets to their best interests", the first thing you should worry about is "will they pay you".

                          YOU COULD BE ACTUALLY PLAYING AT SOME PLACES THAT YOUR COUNTRY BELIEVED THEY ARE ILLEGAL.

                          Don't try to find some reasons to defend a thief when he will get caught BY COMPLAINING ABOUT THE RULES.

                          You know the rules before you play the game, whether its fair or not, no one has put a gun at your head that you need to say its fair and you need to play it. like I said, if you don't agree with such rules, go out there and find a book like Intheknow mentioned that they will have "trust on words" that won't cancell your bets.

                          And then let me repeat this one more time and hopefully its the last time,

                          don't cry like a stupid a-hole when you will get caught. Suck it up and move on. When you cry it loud with nothing rational behind you, you are just a pathetic loser.

                          At the meantime, Alexander, I suggest you quit gambling until there are books out there that will have clear rules define that what is a bad line and how much should it be (again, I didn't mean we don't need it but just doesn't see anyone will have this up in the near future).

                          Or better yet, I suggest you to find a book out there with rules saying that,

                          "Welcome, rob me anytime time you want."

                          Or a book like Intheknow said,

                          "Trust us, we will never cancell your bets."

                          [This message has been edited by AYCE (edited 02-26-2000).]

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Alexander, thanks for making the point so elequently and completely.

                            AYCE, you still don't understand the point. The problem is the gray area, not from Team-6 to Team+6, but in much smaller differences. In this gray area it cannot be determined for sure whether (a) the line is a mistake, or (b) the player intentionally took advantage of it. Here the BM has total disgression over the outcome, and can do what he darn well wants.

                            Sure, most are honest. But there is no reason to leave this amguity up in the air. Make a rule, make it fair.

                            There are, without a doubt, offshore BMs who would take advantage of this if they could.

                            intheknow, I appreciate at least one input from the other side of the counter that understands the issue. I'd like to consider giving you some business.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Bigmoney,

                              what is your grey area that you are talking about?

                              I said it earlier on my posts, my grey area is the line with less than 3/4 pts off or something under 50 cents difference(for under +/-200 moneylines).

                              I believe this will be pretty rational.

                              But again, how often that you will see people coming here to complain their bets was cancelled because in this grey area.

                              You are right, the books CAN use the rules to get their best benefit in some very extrem cases. But how often does it happen?

                              Last week we have a guy betting a bad line at PL coming in and wanted his bet got refund and he DID get his money back.

                              This time we have Krackman.

                              Can you say they are in the grey area?

                              If a book want to cancell a bet in this grey area, he better has very good reasons to do that.

                              Nowadays with the internet, a wrong move could be a disaster to the books. Anytime if a player coming in with solid reasons, most people will stand behind him and bash the books.

                              Until there are clear cut rules to be set (which should be but no books willing to), until some books will do this often in some extrem cases to the players to get their benefits,

                              YOU CAN'T USE THE GREY AREA AS AN EXCUSE TO ARGUE WHAT KRACKMAN HAD DONE.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Ayce,

                                I guess you really just don't get it.

                                You said so yourself that most books are extremely vague when it comes to clearly outlining the rules of their cancellation policies. They are vague for one reason only, and that is for THEIR PROTECTION, and not for the customer's protection. How do their ambiguous rules protect us, the customer? BigMoney is absolutely right for saying that there is a huge gray area when it comes to clearly defining what a bad line, or obvious error is. And like you said, their are no books willing to clearly define this "gray area". And no book WILL EVER define this gray area because they will always want to maintain the absolute and final right to cancel bets at their leisure. So what you are telling us, the betting public, is that we should let our sportsbook be the only judge and jury when it comes to determining if a situation does arise wherin a bet needs to be cancelled.

                                You really don't understand the power that you are entitling them when you let them cancel bets based on their ambiguous rules and policies. The scenarios I outlined COULD HAPPEN, and just because it may not have happened yet, does not mean that it WILL NEVER HAPPEN. Your sportsbook can be as honest or as crooked as they want to be.

                                So why give the sportsbooks a power to POSSIBLY cheat by using their cancellation policies for their own benefit? The temptation is there I am sure, and for the protection of the bettor, is it so wrong if they want to remove this temptation?

                                I, for one do not want my sportsbook as the only judge and jury, setting their own ambiguous rules, and exacting their method of punishment that is accountable to nobody else but themselves.

                                Ayce, why don't you ask your sportsbooks why they don't want to come up with a more clearly defined policy when it comes to cancelling bets etc... Myself, and many other bettors already know it is because they want to retain that right, or should I say "POWER" to cancel bets whenever and however they feel like. But perhaps one of those books will be honest enough to tell you this, and maybe this will finally sink into your brain once you actually hear it from the horse's mouth.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X