Olympic and Bad Lines = :)?

[guidoS]

my 2 cents worth!

i have to agree with chilly in that some of these supposed obvious line errors do not appear obvious to me either!

i think the original thread weeks ago talked about a difference of -18 vs +18...we can all agree that bettors should not take advantage of this gross an error!

but these hockey lines clearly fall into the gray area and if posted, should be honored!

here we go again trying to discern bettors intentions again! it cant be done from looking at the hanging or dimpled chads!

i dont want to see bettors to take advantage of an error by a sportsbook either...but the converse happens all too frequently also! i am in a new book who's online site is so confusing that i mistakenly double-placed a bet and emailed them saying the same and they didnt/wouldnt cancel the second bet!

insofar as mls's remarks, i have to think that REALITY was kidding when he said to confiscate player's money when they were suspected of taking advantage of the books! at least i hope he was!

[alec]

AV2,

I think Olympic has a great variety of bet offers and good odds. No questions about that.

That Olympic posts more lines than Tipsport does ... I would say so, though I don't agree that this is an obvious fact and in my opinion it depends on the definition of "posts more lines", which is not obvious for me as well.

My point is that the world is not restricted to the books that we or REALITY know about.

[Hartley]

I'm going to take a slightly different spin on this. First of all, I agree that one should never take advantage of blatantly bad lines. If you want the book to be fair with you, you have to return the favor. In fact I've received a lot of bonuses and more importantly, earned a lot of respect with some books by not betting on bad lines and instead pointing out the errors to them before they get burned.

But having said that, I think the question of what to do with the bettors depends a lot on whether the bet is made online or by phone and also whether the bet is on a game or a matchup. If you recall, there was someone who was very upset because their bet was cancelled after the fact by a book who stated the line was bad. But this person made the call by phone and was given the wrong line. He asked whether the book was sure that the line was correct and they stated "yes".

In this instance it is hard to fault the bettor. Online it's a little more obvious but even then, it's important to determine the intent of the bettor and the only way to figure that out is by examining patterns. If the person is constantly betting on bad lines with increased stake amounts from his norm, then it is obvious the person is a leech and should be treated as such. But if the person bets on one bad bet, it is possible that the person didn't know the line was bad - particularly if he bet his usual amount.

Also, on matchups you can't assume that the line was bad. For example, Olympic had a NASCAR matchup with Sterling Marlin favored over Tony Stewart. Obviously this was a pathetic line but not necessarily erroneous. Olympic puts up tons of NASCAR matchups and a lot of them are pathetic and obviously in disfavour to the book. But they stand by them. If a book wants to create their own lines with nothing to compare them to, they have to accept that the lines may not get balanced play - particularly in a sport like NASCAR. So it's wrong to assume the bettor knew this line was bad. In this instance, Olympic just cancelled the bets and offered an explanation to those who bet it, stating they put the wrong driver up.
Fine, it was handled correctly. But to even assume they should kick somebody out or steal their money because they dared to bet on Tony Stewart in that matchup is ludicrous.

My 2 cents anyways.

[Hamhog]

For last years NCAA Championship Basketball game, Olympic's opening total was about 13 points lower than the competition. The game went over and Olympic honored the line. If I recall correctly, Spiro posted a message explaining that he intended to open the total where he did.

A player who views a line like the NCAA championship total should not have to ask "Am I putting my account at risk by making a play?" or even "Will I get kicked out?".

[REALITY]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mls:

[B]As for Reality's "zero tolerance" suggestion that commends confiscating a customers balance ... no doubt your common mafia controlled street corner bookie would do just that ...

THE BOOK IN QUESTION IS NOT CONFISCATING YOUR FUNDS.

HE'S DONATING THEM ON YOUR BEHALF BECAUSE YOU FELT BAD THAT YOU WERE CAUGHT TRYING TO PAST POST AND YOU WANTED TO MAKE AMMENDS.

YOU DO RECEIVE YOUR RECEIPT FOR YOUR GENEROUS DONATION!

PLEASE CHECK WITH THE I.R.S. TO SEE IF IT'S TAX DEDUCTIBLE...

Yes, I know some of the offshore books are really just transplanted NY street corner bookies - with leg breakers close behind ...

THAT'S A WONERFUL STATEMENT TO BE MAKING IN A PUBLIC FORUM.

THE OFF-SHORE INDUSTRY ISN'T MALIGNED ENOUGH WITHOUT THIS TYPE OF CRAP.

THESE KINDS OF STATEMENTS REALLY HELP THE CAUSE OF LEGITIMIZING THE INDUSTRY AND THE NON-BETTING PUBLIC'S PERCEPTION OF THE INDUSTRY...


Would class operations like WWTS, CRIS, Canbet, WSEX, etc, etc consider for a second stealing, becoming a criminal to handle a criminal, ...

Olympic is definitely a class operation. Suggesting it should stoop to stealing is insulting ...

MLS,

TRUE.

BUT NOT AS INSULTING AS WHEN I WAS TOUTING OLYMPIC AS THE #1 OFF-SHORE BOOK AND YOU WERE SEEKING TO HAVE SPIRO THROW ME UNDER THE BUS BY INSINUATING HE WAS IN FINANCIAL TROUBLE BECAUSE I BROUGHT SOMEONE FROM AUSTRALIA WHO WANTED TO MAKE SPIRO AN OFFER FOR OLYMPIC SPORTS...


mls
Member posted 05-01-2000 11:59 PM

Every single book that went broke and stiffed its customers tried to sell out first. Of course, this is not true of every sale (although you know that Sting reported that had ABC/CRIS not bought Majestic we would have seen bouncing checks everywhere).

People simply do not "usually" sell successful relatively new companies unless they are having serious financial problems. You should know this from Majestic.

Bet-the-Net had 3-4 sales fall through before it stiffed me for 13 dimes and everyone else.

There are financially solid reasons for selling a book. But when a book that has just admitted losing $4 in baseball, admitted getting hit hard with high limit half time and opening numbers (13 points of for the NCAA championship game as I recall), gets crushed on the Super Bowl, is trying to find a buyer ... well you get the idea.

These are all red flags. I did not pay attention to these very signs in the Bet-the-Net case and paid dearly.

Reality revealed confidential inside information that made all the pieces fall into place for me. I have seen the exact same signs before Bet-the-Net went under.

Once again I appreciate the confidential information Reality revealed. Maybe he saved me from another bet-the-Net fiasco ..

Olympic: Since you probably know me you know I frequently bet 10-12 college football games at the same time. I do not know how many times I was putting in my plays in the afternoon and I was surprised that a game had already started (always because of time changes from my printed early week schedule). I have never past-posted a game yet - but I can see how it could happen innocently.

Deal with the situation the same way the top books do: cancel the bet and monitor the account - maybe send a polite warning e-mail asking for an explanation. If it happens again, without legitimate excuse, close the account - but certainly don't, as Reality suggests, steal the customers money.

SPIRO,

MLS IS RIGHT.

DON'T TAKE THEIR MONEY.

LET THEM COLLECT IT IN PERSON FROM THOSE FRIENDS OF YOURS WHO USED TO THROW STONES AT YOU WHEN YOU WERE WALKING HOME AT NIGHT...

SPIRO,

ALL THE BEST...

YOU DESERVE IT!

REALITY

[AussieVamp2]

Originally posted by alec:
AV2,

I think Olympic has a great variety of bet offers and good odds. No questions about that.

That Olympic posts more lines than Tipsport does ... I would say so, though I don't agree that this is an obvious fact and in my opinion it depends on the definition of "posts more lines", which is not obvious for me as well.

My point is that the world is not restricted to the books that we or REALITY know about.

Never said it was obvious, and looking again Tipsport has NHL first period lines by the look of it. Yes, I definitely agree that reality and Americans in general are sports and sports betting myopic/insular or whatever

[kosar]

Wow,

This guy bets a hockey team total of 5 and a prop knowing that one of the participants was suspended and somehow this turns into some sort of debate about 'what constitutes a bad line'.

Come on now, a team total of five will always be a bad line and the other situation obviously is 'off'(per the rules of almost every book) and will be canceled automatically.

While it's polite to notify a book that they have an off line, there is no reason to get offended and pissed off that the book fails to correct their line based on email or even telephonic communication.

You see it time after time. People post about how they notified the book about an error and they didn't even get a thank you, or a bonus, or the book didn't change their line...ummm, so what.

Just ignore it next time and carry on, if you crave recognition so badly and didn't receive it when you did your 'good deed'. And if you are so upset that you just have to play into it, don't be surprised when you are identified as a cheat.

Seems like common sense...but as they say, it ain't that common.

[Hartley]

Kosar I think you're missing the point. The responses weren't to the person who bet on the line of 5 goals but rather to Spiro who asked what he should do with cheaters.

Reality's opinion is that Olympic should have a zero tolerance policy and close the account and donate the money to charity.

My opinion is that they can do whatever they want but before they take action they better be damned sure that the person(s) is indeed cheating. Just like books make mistakes with these lines players can make mistakes too. I know for a fact I once bet on a hockey game after the game was played but I had no idea it was already played. The game was scheduled for 7 p.m. and it was moved to 1 p.m. because of weather concerns for that evening (this was a couple of years back). A number of books had the game still available at 5 p.m. when I bet it. Then a little later when I started flipping through a sports ticker I saw the final score posted.

I called the book I placed the bet with, told them that it appeared the game was already played and to please cancel my bet - assuring them that I had no idea the game was already played. The book in turn thanked me for calling and assured me that it was an honest mistake that happens when games are rescheduled.

The only way to determine if someone is really cheating is to monitor them. When someone bets on a bad line, the book can flag the player and see if he bets on other errors. If a book notices that almost every time there is an error, this person has a big bet down then it is obvious the guy is a cheater and should be kicked out.

I guess to answer Spiro's question it's best to look at Las Vegas. If someone is suspected of cheating in a casino they are monitored by casino cameras. After some time the casino will know for sure if the person is really cheating or was just lucky. If they determine there is no basis for their suspicion they'll say nothing and let things carry on. If they are sure the person is cheating, then the person is taken by security, removed from the premises, told they are no longer welcome at the casino and are banned for life. And other casinos in Vegas are warned about the person.

Is this the thing to do? Maybe. It probably wouldn't hurt for the casinos to band together and say "Joe **** is a cheater. We had x number of bad lines and he tried to bet them all. If he tries to sign up with you I'd advise you not to allow him to."

Other than that I'm not sure if there is anything they can do or should do.

[kosar]

Originally posted by Hartley:
Kosar I think you're missing the point. The responses weren't to the person who bet on the line of 5 goals but rather to Spiro who asked what he should do with cheaters.

Hartley,

While i'm aware of the fact that most of these responses weren't directed at the author of this thread, the topic that I spoke of was the central point of the posts by: Groz, Sportshobby, Chilly, Guido S and Hamhog.

The only post that dealt exclusively with the 'point' that you feel that I missed was by MLS. And as usual, his brilliance speaks volumes. Or something.

So, i'm not really sure that I 'missed the point'.

The 'point', in my opinion, is that somebody started a thread stating how there were a couple of off-lines and he was going to bet them because they didn't respond to his efforts to correct them...

Check it out Hartley, it's in the first post of this thread. And the first post of a thread is usually the 'point', wouldn't you say?







[This message has been edited by kosar (edited 12-14-2000).]

[Underdog7]

Nope, Kosar. I think or we all think you are still missing the point.

[kosar]

Udog,

Frankly, I was waiting for you to chime in to speak for everybody on this matter. You didn't disappoint. As one of the leader's of the 'clueless brigade', I figured that you just might have an opinion on this. Unfortunately, your post was as well thought out and developed as usual.

And please don't again ever use one of those blue sad faces in a post directed at me. It scares me a bit.

Thanks dude!

[Underdog7]

[WsP]

I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to Spiro and the rest of the Olympic crew. I have no idea what brought me to try to take advantage of your outfit. It simply isn't in my nature to try to 'steal' my way through life. I have never before done such a thing and never will in the future. I wasn't thinking clearly. I sincerely apologize and wish to congratulate you on the excellent operation you run - without a doubt the best online book (haven't ever used their phone service).

[bucky]

What could a book do to spell out its bad line policy. I think spme sort of thank you to a player who informs them of a bad line might be a good idea. I have a book I play at that I spotted 5 or 6 bad Hockey lines - I did not play them and I called them and told them. 2 or 3 othe times they still thought they were right and didn't thank me ( they changed it later in the day). Well, I don't bother calling them anymore but I don't bet the plays either as I am sure they would cancel them later and I don't want that kind of hassle.
So wouldn't some type of loyalty program for 10 bucks a tip be well worth it?

[sportshobby]

bucky, that's probably a good idea. But what's even more important is for the sportsbook to post in their rules what constitutes a bad line, and what they will do with bets made against those lines.