name this book!

[cashusking]

Hey is this right? Read this garbage below.
One of the books listed below has the following written in their terms and conditions??...


"Professional sports gamblers (Wise Guys) are not allowed membership at *.COM. If a suspected professional sports gambler
does open an account at *.COM, *.COM reserves the right to 1) cancel this account at any time without notice, and 2) refund any initial deposits made by the professional sports gambler into the *.COM account as *.COM's only liability towards any and all
winnings the professional sports gambler may have achieved."


What about this BGeorgia? Is anyone who wins a suspected wise guy? How much and over how long of a period?

If you take this crap as it is written this book can stiff whenever they want to based on suspecting you to be a professional sports gambler!!!

[Scott Landau]

I'll take a stab-NASA? I wonder if they'd take my action. I consider myself a pro, but I only agree with the steam maybe 55-60% of the time. And I wouldn't hesitate to buy back the other side on a middle or a scalp! So can I play there? Not that I'd want to!

[Boomer]

You said it is on a book below, well, which one is it.

[Jeff]

Neither Brian nor I make the rules at any of the books listed below.

We aren't here to protect the books either. They are all big boys.

Name the book and bitch all you want.

Let's not play name the book. I don't like that game.

[cashusking]

Bitch, huh? Like this isn't a valid complaint?

Sportsbetting.com.

1) Hey Jeff you're right, you don't make their rules. But don't try to imply that you don't have opinions about what they do - you do have a list called the clink, remember?

2) How many times have I seen on this board about why didn't someone with a gripe attempt to solve the problem before going public with it? Which is it - name names or don't names now?

[Boomer]

Actually I just went in and checked out their policies and they say that if you are part of a syndicate, you can only win only $50,000 in a 30 day period.

If you are a wise guy or professional gambler though, you can't win anything.

It's a good thing guys in syndicates are not wise guys or they'd be in trouble.

[sportshobby]

The problem with such a statement in a book's policies, is that there is still too much ambiguity. And ambiguity can lead to misunderstandings, being taken advantage of, lawsuits, etc.

Suppose the player is not a professional gambler, but places bets for one. Or suppose that the player is very good/sharp but has another profession. Or suppose it is a player that somehow gets the steam plays and plays them for himself. I could go on and on.

Cashusking is right. This kind of disclaimer is license to not pay anyone they want.

[Jeff]

It's a very valid complaint. That's why this is called "RANTS" and raves.

You're also correct to say I have opinions. Of course I do, and I'm not afraid to air them, regardless of whether or not a book advertises here. I don't air my opinions more often for the simple fact that if I say something that favors a book, it can immediately be discounted with "you're just saying that because blah blah blah".

The part about people trying to solve disputes behind the scenes really implies to minor discrepencies and misunderstanings. Mistakes, etc.etc. The whole point behind that is so someone doesn't come in and say XYZ sucks, they ripped me off. Once that's said the damage is done, and more often than not, it's a problem that can be solved easily.

I hope there aren't players out there not willing to criticize things they don't like about different books.

I for one, have always encouraged constructive criticism. I have always believe d there was a right way and a wrong way to criticize. Obviously, I feel that coming on the board and saying xyz sucks does no one any good.

Likewise, I also believe that a point is reached in most of these threads where it simply becomes redudndant. Yes, we have closed threads like that before, when we felt the point was driven home.

But if there's a policy on a books site you don't like, or anything else for that matter, please, go right ahead and let it out. Things don't change unless people speak up.

If anyone feels that we have implied that we don't want people to criticize books, I apologize. That certainly isn't our intention.......but don't forget to pat them on the back when they do good things

[krackman]

Jeff- This is the main reason I post on bw and appreciate the freedom to post good and bad on books whether or not they are an advertiser of bw.

[cashusking]

Nice work Boomer. Am glad to see someone else picked that up.

I meant nothing personal Jeff. Bettorsworld is a GREAT site and you do a fantastic job.

Now let's do business.

Sportsbetting.com is trying to cover their rear but there are better ways to do it than that. I was considering opening there but after looking over that stuff, I simply can't. It is not just a matter of worrying about when you might get burned. What ever happened to pay off with a smile? This place has BAD ATTITUDE written all over it.

Well, after slamming them for those outrageous policies I want to take Jeff's advice and pat a couple joints on the back. How about OLYMPIC Sports Market/ACES GOLD? FAST payouts, big limits, early lines. And no whining. Why would anyone ever put money in a place such as sportsbetting.com when OLYMPIC and ACES GOLD are out there?

[JohnnyDeMarco]

This thing about sportsbetting.com is outrageous. Why would anyone have an account there?

[Cons]

So what's the difference between a pro and simply a winner? If someone wins most of the time then does that make him a pro?

It's ridiculous to have a rule like this to be honest. I used to back books and right to protect themselves. But this is too much. Once a bet is accepted it should be set in stone, unless some horrendous error has been made (like a clerk reading the lines upside-down).

The best way to resolve this is to let the book know about how disappointed us sportsbettors are when we see stuff like that. And until they change, just don't post up. If people stopped posting up, they would change this policy overnight...

[Boomer]

This was a book I was definitely going into and now would never consider sending any money to. They obviously don't want anyone playing who has a chance of winning.

If they are serious about advertising to attract new business, they'd better re-examine their terms. Anyone would be a fool to send them a dime the way it is written now.

[Jeff]

No question there are much better ways to discourage sharp play, and discourage sharp play is the key here.

I don't necessarily have a problem with a book posting a statement in their rules saying sharp action not welcomed, accounts will be closed immediately.

Actually, doing so, is being more upfront than most of the other books.

There are so many books that toss players, yet don't indicate anything of the sort in their rules. Which is the better way to go?

If Sportsbetting.com removed the part about not having to pay winnings, they would be one step ahead of most shops, again, by being upfront.

I imagine one reason for NOT having a disclaimer, is that sharp guys lose as well. Rather than discourage them right off the bat, why not let them post up and see if they go on a cold streak.

I know of more books that have tossed players, than books that haven't.......and I know of alot of books. That's something to keep in mind.

[Segundo]

cashhusking, you just saved me from having some problems. I was definitely going to send these people money, I had heard a lot of good things about them. I probably would have read their policies anyway but you saved me some time, thanks. This is an absolute joke. We all just have to keep burying these hijos de putas up to football season because that is when they don't want the bad press.