[Jakesteen]

I MADE THIS WAGER AND THERE WAS 3 OPTIONS AND NO SPECIFICATION THAT OT DID NOT COUNT OR THAT IT WAS FOR REGULATION TIME ONLY. OPTION 1 NEW YORK RANGERS SCORE THE NEXT GOAL , OPTION 2: OTTAWA SCORES THE NEXT GOAL, OPTION 3: NO GOAL. THIS IS WHAT I CHOSE THINKING THAT THE RANGERS WOULD SCORE THE NEXT GOAL AND WIN THE GAME AND IT WOULD NOT BE DECIDED BY PENALTY SHOTS IN A SHOOTOUT. (THEN THERE WOULD BE NO GOAL THAT HAD BEEN SCORED BY EITHER TEAM AND THE 3RD OPTION OF NO GOAL WOULD BE A WINNER. THERE WAS NOTHING THAT SAID ANYTHING ABOUT OT NOT COUNTING. THIS TYPE OF PROP WOULD CONCEIVABLY HAVE TO INCLUDE ANY GOAL SCORED BY EITHER TEAM TO DECIDE THE GAME AND THE GAME END BY THE SCORING OF A GOAL. THERE IS NO SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THIS PROP BEING FOR REGULATION ONLY. IT WAS 2-2 WHEN I BET IT WITH ABOUT 10 MINUTES TO GO IN THE 3RD PERIOD.

Tuesday 01/20/2015	Future/Prop	0	100
Ice Hockey - .NEW YORK RANGERS vs OTTAWA SENATORS - Team to score next Goal (Current score 2:2) NEW YORK RANGERS +227
More info Wager Status: Loss Risk / To Win Amount: 100.00 / 227.00 (USD) Accepted 01/20/2015 21:21 - EST Lost: 100.00 I NEED HELP TO GET MY 373 BACK. THEY TOOK IT. I HAVE HAD SEVERAL ISSUES WITH YOUWAGER BECAUSE I HAVE BEEN TAKING MONEY FROM MY WINNINGS. EVERYTIME I DO THAT I START EXPERIENCING FRICTION AND PROBLEMS. I HAD A CASE LAST WEEK RELEVANT TO A COUPLE PAYOUTS I REQUESTED, THEY ULTIMATELY TOOK ALL THE $1,470 OUT OF MY ACCOUNT AND NEITHER PAYOUT REQUEST WENT THROUGH, BOTH ENDED UP BEING CANCELLED AND I HAD TO TAKE ALTERNATE MEANS OF WITHDRAWING MY WINNINGS. I HAVE BEEN AN ACTIVE MEMBER FOR A LITTTLE OVER 1 YEAR AND HAVE A LAUNDRY LIST OF ISSUES I HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH. PLEASE POST ANY SUGGESTIONS THAT YOU ALL BELIEVE MAY BE OF SOME HELP. I AM FILING A COMPLAINT HERE TOMORROW IF THIS IS NOT FOUND A WINNER IN MY FAVOR. COM ON' MAN!!!! WE ALL KNOW THIS IS A STONE COLD WINNER.

[Jakesteen]

WHEN I TRIED TO WITHDRAW MY REMAINING BALANCE FOR THE MAX 750 ** , THIS IS THE EMAIL I GOT. Your payout has been rejected for the following reason:
there is a minimum balance required in this account of 126 plus the payout fees

Please reply to this message as soon as possible with your approval, new instructions or required information to complete the transaction.
The payout will be processed according to the date and time our Customer Service Department receives the approval of the charges or changes to the payout.
Without your approval the payout will NOT be processed.
Regards,

Customer Service Department


Payout Request Information:

[Jakesteen]

http://www.gamblingcontrol.org/questions8.php YOU ALL KNOW OF ANY OTHER PLACES; WHERE, I MIGHT GET SOME ASSISTANCE? THEY ARE TELLING ME THAT UNLESS STATED WAGERS DON'T INCLUDE OVERTIME. THIS IS VERY DECEPTIVE IN IT'S PRESENT FORM. A GOAL IS A GOAL AND IF THERE IS NO GOAL ,… THEN A SHOOTOUT OF PENALTY SHOTS IS UNDERTAKEN TO DECIDE THE OUTCOME. THAT, BY THE LETTER OF THE LAW IN THE RULE BOOK OF ICE HOCKEY; WOULD OFFICIALLY BE CONSIDERED, TO HAVE ENDED WITH NEITHER TEAM SCORING A GOAL. THE 1 POINT AWARDED FOR THAT RESULT IS AN UNOFFICIAL GOAL AWARDED AS 1 POINT FOR A SHOOT OUT WIN. IS THIS ALL CORRECT? I WILL REVIEW THE NHL RULE BOOK TONIGHT. I AM GOING THE DISTANCE ON THIS ONE, FOR THE PRINCIPAL AND BECAUSE THEY ARE REALLY NOT VERY BRIGHT AND THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE I HAVE DEALT WITH ARE RUDE AND HANG UP AAND YELL AND THE PREZ INSULTED ME FOR 20 MINUTES WHEN I TRACKED HIM DOWN AFTER A SOFTWARE UPDATE THEY PERFORMED RESULTED IN A WAGER FOR 400 BEING GRADED WRONG. I HAD MY BUSINESS PARTNER MAKE THE SAME WAGER IN HIS ACCOUNT 1 MINUTE LATER. HIS ACCT. WAS NEW AND MINE HAD TAKEN 2 PAYOUTS RECENTLY. HIS ACCT. POSTED A WINNER AND THEY SWITHCHED 1 TEAM IN MINE AND POSTED A LOSS. I HAD PROOF. GEORGE TOLD ME I MADE A MISTAKE . I HAVE NEVER CONFIRMED A WAGER ONLINE INCORRECTLY IN 20 YEARS. HONEST. I NEVER HAD ANY OF THESE PROBLEMS IN SUCCESSION OR GENERALLY AT ALL EXCEPT WITH FIRST FIDELITY AND YOUWAGER. I AM SO DONE WITH THESE FOOLS. I AM LEAVING THIS MESS IN THE HANDS OF THE FORUMS WHICH I HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF SINCE 95' . I WILL REPORT ALL MY RECORDED DISCREPENCIES AND ISSUES TO THE COMMISSIONS. I only have 2 words for george and first FIDELITY…SUCK IT!!!

[cobra_king]

It's a 3 way wager, it's for regulation time only. They don't have to specify it because it should be clearly understood. It's impossible for the "NO Goal" option to win if overtime is included. You may have a litany of issues with this place, but this is not one of them.

[DiggityDaggityDo]

SUCK IT!!!

[Jakesteen]

HOW IS THAT THE CASE? If it states regulation only. I get it. The case here is a goal is only considered a goal scored by either team that counts as a goal scored in either reg. or overtime. it is no goal scored if it goes to OT where the scores are considered penalty shots and not tallied as regular goals. the final point awarded is a score relative to the result of the shootout total. I have seen 3-way reg. props and 3way including OT and penalty shots. they had others listed that fit both categories. My wager simply stated and in the rules as well had a prop that was for the next goal in the Game to be scored by the Rangers. The no goal prop would be a winner if the result ended up being decided in a shootout. the last chance for a goal to be scored by either team would be in OT. plain as day unless it stated that this was a reg. only. OT is the logical assumption when there is no rule other that a general listing in the annuls of their rule book that is basically a disclaimer to account for any clerical mistakes that may be made when posting these. I don't buy it. 5Dimes is clear even though they could not supply any listings on 2 propositions I had that were questionable decisions when graded. After 2 hours of inquiries and they still failed to provide me with written guidelines stating the rules on the 2 wagers in question. HA! This one is what it is… very grey and very much a winning prop in it's general appearance and in relation to the Game to which it applies. A GOAL that is a recorded GOAL; and, is not a shootout goal , is a Goal. I could not find it stated in the specified rules pertaining to this wager type that this applied to Regulation only. The books also stand to gain from (OT being a valid addition to this type of prop because it adds 5 more minutes of time to their chances of winning 2 of 3 of the props offered.) I know they post it in ambiguity; like this, for a reason. ***KEY @ THE RIDDLE HERE!) THIS WAY OF DOING THINGS, which is different than the postings of other books gives them an out for all 3 props, if they choose. There are no specified guidelines even in the live wagering section specifically adressing this exact wager. It's a 3 way slider for the bookie and nobody wins. I know it and I asked a customer svc. rep who after almost 40 minutes and 3 tries came to understand what I was drawing out for her and how I am correct. She is a 10 year employee and I asked her to explore the records tonight and tell me what she sees and prove I am wrong. ONLY TIME will tell. The rangers scored , so that is a win, no it's not because they say OT doesn't count. The no goal is also a win in their favor too because they can say there was no goal in the 3rd. then they can also collect on the wagers that picked Ottawa. NOW DO YOU SEE WHAT"S REALLY HAPPENING. I HAVE CAUGHT THEM CHANGING THE RULES SEVERAL TIMES WHEN IN A DISADVANTAGEOUS SITUATION. I have been swimming in these waters for 20+ years . I know what time it is. I am right and I know what they are doing. I'll handle it. no worries, Man!

[cobra_king]

Not going to read all that with all that crayola being used. My point still stands. Good luck.

[Jakesteen]

Your point is understood but does not apply here. the book wins all three here because of the slick way they present it. I know it for certain, I'm as sure of this as I am that my next play with this book will be a litigation law suit for unethical and illegal business practices because I have other clear records of what they do to keep the green in house. I know the program and most of the intricacies of the business. this is way bigger that this one wager.

[Jakesteen]

Not going to read all that with all that crayola being used. My point still stands. Good luck.

could not find it stated in the specified rules pertaining to this wager type that this applied to Regulation only. The books also stand to gain from (OT being a valid addition to this type of prop because it adds 5 more minutes of time to their chances of winning 2 of 3 of the props offered.) I know they post it in ambiguity; like this, for a reason. ***KEY @ THE RIDDLE HERE!) THIS WAY OF DOING THINGS, which is different than the postings of other books gives them an out for all 3 props, if they choose. There are no specified guidelines even in the live wagering section specifically adressing this exact wager. It's a 3 way slider for the bookie and nobody wins. I know it and I asked a customer svc. rep who after almost 40 minutes and 3 tries came to understand what I was drawing out for her and how I am correct. She is a 10 year employee and I asked her to explore the records tonight and tell me what she sees and prove I am wrong. ONLY TIME will tell. The rangers scored , so that is a win, no it's not because they say OT doesn't count. The no goal is also a win in their favor too because they can say there was no goal in the 3rd, or it could be a loss for the client too if they say that OT counted. It says no where that it doesn't, except in their general disclaimer buries somewhere that addresses all discrepencies or potential typos. finally for the trifecta, they can also collect on the wagers that picked Ottawa. NOW DO YOU SEE WHAT"S REALLY HAPPENING. I HAVE CAUGHT THEM CHANGING THE RULES SEVERAL TIMES WHEN IN A DISADVANTAGEOUS SITUATION. BETTER?

[tomallen123]

How is anyone supposed to read all of that?