Results News results for the search term: wagerweb
11.18.2011 (06:14 PM CST)
A BetGrizzly (unrated) player writes in with an account complaint. The player registered for BetGrizzly on November 13th, 2011. He accepted the free $50 no deposit bonus and completed the advertised 6X rollover. After finishing the rollover, the player requested a $250 withdrawal. The player tells SBR that BetGrizzly informed him that he needed to wait a period of 30 days in order to request payment. The player then says that his account was suddenly closed without notice from BetGrizzly. The player states that customer service will not reopen his account. SBR is following up on this BetGrizzly sportsbook complaint.
On July 29th, 2011, SBR reported that BetGrizzly Sportsbook was targeting players promising 100% bonuses. BetGrizzly was being promoted by former WagerWeb (SBR rating D-) employee "Chuck".
Players are advised to use extreme caution when playing with unrated online sportsbooks. High bonuses are typically dangled as carrots to reel in new blood but can spell disaster for the house without proper risk management. SBR publishes a comprehensive list of over 1,000 sportsbook ratings in the SBR Sportsbook ratings guide.
BetGrizzly players with payout complaints are asked to submit a sportsbook complaint form, or dial 1-830-255-4677 during normal business hours to speak with a Sportsbook Review dispute analyst.
09.21.2011 (03:55 PM CST)
The WagerWeb (SBR rating D-) player from SBR's report on August 12th is still owed $2,500. On July 6th, the player filed a sportsbook complaint against the Costa Rica based online sportsbook company WagerWeb, indicating that he had not been paid a $5,000 withdrawal. SBR followed up on the complaint, and eventually received the player's confirmation that half of the payout request was filled by the sportsbook. WagerWeb claimed that the funds were originally sent via a processing method that was ultimately frozen, and believed at the time that there was a chance the player might still receive the first payout.
WagerWeb also claimed that the player communicating with SBR was a third-party, or "beard", acting on behalf of the account-holder. A beard is an individual sports bettors might use to register an account in the name of, whilst still placing the bets themselves. It can be a tactic used to hide ones identity if the original player is a known professional, has a negative history at the sportsbook in question or wishes to avoid being associated with a gaming company. WagerWeb questioned the legitimacy of the email address associated with the player, but declined to delve into specific details.
SportsbookReview is following up with WagerWeb on the player's remaining, unpaid $2,500 balance.
| Read more
09.01.2011 (07:11 PM CST)
A BetGrizzly (unrated) player has filed a sportsbook complaint. The player tells SBR that he deposited to BetGrizzly after being lured in by their attractive bonuses, and because he had prior dealings with "Chuck" (formerly of WagerWeb). The player tells SBR that BetGrizzly gives out 25% in freeplays per day, and that by his estimation he has received nearly $2,000 in freeplays in his short time with the online sportsbook. After having success with his wagers, the player tells Sportsbook Review that his balance was increased to $4,000. He has been trying to withdraw funds for the last week via a cash transfer service, and has to date not received payment, despite BetGrizzly advertising same-day payouts through those methods.
Players are advised to use extreme discretion in choosing which online sportsbook to send their funds to. Unrated sportsbooks just starting out have a high failure rate in this industry. Many of these sportsbooks will promise 100% bonuses or other daily incentives to entice players to play with them over more established sportsbooks. | BetGrizzly sportsbook news
| Read more
08.12.2011 (05:13 PM CST)
A WagerWeb (SBR rating D-) player reports receiving $2,500 of a $5,000 withdrawal request on Thursday, July 7th. The player tells Sportsbook Review that he has currently unable to arrange for payment for the rest of his balance. WagerWeb has allegedly offered to send another portion of the funds owed to the player.
WagerWeb is currently on SBR's sportsbook blacklist with a rating of D-. | WagerWeb player speaks out
| Read more
07.29.2011 (07:08 PM CST)
BetGrizzly (unrated) is soliciting player deposits advertising 100% signup bonuses. BetGrizzly is being pushed by former WagerHub (SBR rating D-) and WagerWeb (SBR rating D-) employee "Chuck". Chuck's position is listed as customer service advisor in the BetGrizzly homepage. An SBRforum user reports that a telephone sales pitch was made to him by Chuck, and that originally the plan was to bring on players to off-line domain "BetChuck.com". BetChuck has been suspended by its host for nonpayment.
Players are advised to use extreme caution when choosing to play with newly established sportsbooks. High bonuses from unknown sportsbooks can often lead to player headache come withdrawal time. SBR will update this report as more information is learned about BetGrizzly.com.
05.07.2011 (03:37 PM CST)WagerWeb downgraded from D to D-
05.07.2011 (02:24 PM CST)
A WagerWeb (SBR rating D-) player reports having his account disabled with a $2,252 balance. The player was accused of operating multiple accounts on March 3rd, 2011. The player admits to having a friend access his computer to log into WagerWeb months ago, but claims that this was an isolated incident. SBR is following up on this sportsbook complaint.
| Read more
04.08.2010 (05:26 PM CST)
SBRforum posters discuss Wagerweb (SBR rating D-) sportsbook.
02.19.2010 (12:59 PM CST)
On January 6th SBR reported that WagerWeb (SBR rating D) confiscated $9578.60 from a player that wagered exclusively on correlated parlays. WagerWeb has since locked the player out of his betting account, freezing his remaining $1700 balance. SBR is following up with WagerWeb to ascertain the reason for the action and whether or not the player is scheduled to be paid his funds.
01.06.2010 (08:20 AM CST)WagerWeb downgraded from C- to D
01.06.2010 (07:47 AM CST)
On December 21, 2009, SBR provided an update on this dispute. WagerWeb claimed that the player won a net of $9578.60 on correlated parlays, and that it had warned the player not to make this type of wager in the past. WagerWeb seized this money from the player's balance. SBR asked the sportsbook to, at minimum, provide proof that the player was warned, but was unable to.
The player provided a wager log that shows he started betting on August 23rd, 2009. From August 23 to October 24th, 2009, the player put in numerous bets consisting of mostly correlated parlays. The player lost and made redeposits on September 26th, October 4th and October 17th, 2009. With each redeposit, WagerWeb reviewed his play and gave him deposit bonuses. At one point, the player was down $11,000 betting correlated parlays (which WagerWeb was allowing during the losing streak). The player did not move past even until October 24th, at which point he was showing a net win of $3752. Correlated parlays accounted for a net win of $4302.
If WagerWeb had only confiscated $4302 (the player's net win from correlated parlays), it still would have been an unjust confiscation. Although WagerWeb's rule states that it does not accept correlated parlays, it had no problem honoring them when this player (and other players) were losing for months. WagerWeb's software permits line managers to designate what games are eligible for same-game parlays - if WagerWeb did not want to accept correlated parlays, it could have set its software to disallow any bet type it did not want. WagerWeb's selective enforcement of this rule allows it to free-roll players as evident by at one-time beating this player out of $11,000. Any practice that allows a book to accept wagers the Sportsbook can win, but the player cannot is unfair and unethical.
In addition to confiscating $4302 from the player's net win in correlated parlays, it stole another $5276.60. When it was pointed out to WagerWeb that the player won only $4302 from correlated parlays, it made no attempt to justify the additional theft.
12.21.2009 (12:42 PM CST)
On 12/14, SBR reported on WagerWeb (SBR rating C-) confiscating $9578.60 from a player that had wagered multiple correlated parlays. The player is a long-time bettor with WagerWeb and placed numerous correlated parlays dating from August 29th to October 24th. On October 29th the player
inquired about initiating a withdrawal via bank wire. At this point WagerWeb began a five week auditing process which culminated in deducting $9578.60 in winnings citing correlated parlay play.
WagerWeb has a rule which outlaws correlated bets. The rule states WagerWeb does not accept any bet that is considered a correlated multiple, or parlay. WagerWeb uses ASI software, which has the ability to limit the correlation percentage of same-game pointspread to total parlays. WagerWeb chose not to exercise this software function and instead accepted the players parlay wagers.
The player disputes his net amount won by placing these
correlated wagers. WagerWeb has not yet justified how it obtained the $9578.60 figure. SBR will update this report as discussion continues. | View initial WagerWeb complaint
12.14.2009 (02:21 PM CST)WagerWeb downgraded from C to C-
12.14.2009 (12:48 PM CST)
On December 7th, WagerWeb (SBR rating C) confiscated $9578.60 from a player, citing their rule against correlated paralys. WagerWeb does not restrict correlated parlays from being accepted via the software, and has admitted to SBR that the rule is selectively enforced. WagerWeb claims the player was warned not to continue placing correlated parlays and that the player ignored the warning. The player denies ever receiving a warning. WagerWeb's selective enforcement allows it to keep winnings from losing players, and confiscate funds from winners. This is a clear case of theft by WagerWeb similar to the unresolved complaints of Sportsbook.com (SBR rating D-).
WagerWeb also has a history of confiscating winnings citing rules after
a players funds have won for a period of time and funds have been at
risk. SBR will update this report pending further discussion with WagerWeb management.
03.06.2009 (08:56 PM CST)BetEpic enters the SBR Rating Guide at C-. BetEpic is operated and hosted by
WagerWeb (SBR rating C). Epic is currently one of three sportsbooks operated by Costa Rica-based Wagerweb. The sportsbooks use ASI software. |
Wagerweb
01.26.2009 (06:54 PM CST)WagerWeb (SBR rating C) continues to rough up veteran bettors
Last year SBR received multiple complaints from "sharp players" that the sportsbook was confiscating funds in the amount of free-play bonus losses, when deciding it no longer wants to take the players' wagers. In March of 2008 WagerWeb agreed not to confiscate cash in the amount of losing freeplays and refunded users for the debits. This month WagerWeb has declined service to a player, after giving him a reload freeplay bonus. The free-play was lost but WagerWeb reverted to old policy, telling the player he would have to pay it back from his cash balance. Since sharing his complaint on the SBR posting forum, WagerWeb has lessened the punishment to a debit of only part of the free-play amount. SBR will again insist that WagerWeb agrees not to arbitrarily charge players for taking part in promotions and request that this player be paid in full.
03.18.2008 (09:34 PM CST)WagerWeb (SBR rating C) refunds player's $600; agrees not to confiscate cash in amount of freeplay losses. The issue involved a player the book realized it did not want to service after two "sharp" wagers. As a result the player did not roll over the deposit as is required when free-play bonuses are accepted. Any players whose balance was debited for the amount of a losing free-play is encouraged to share his/her experience with
SBR. |
Original complaint report
03.09.2008 (11:07 AM CST)WagerWeb (SBR rating C) cheating sharp players
SBR has received multiple complaints from WagerWeb players that the book is debiting user accounts for losing free-play bonuses after the book decides it no longer wants to service the client.
Player: I deposited with wagerweb and received $600 in freeplay. I played these funds and lost. I additionally placed two wagers with wagerweb before they cut my limits. After my initial wager my limits were lowered to $250, after the 2nd wager they were lowered to $1. I placed a withdraw with them and they seized $600 from my actual money citing that I had not completed the wagering requirement despite never giving me a chance and the fact I had not won anything. THEY ARE STEALERS!
This policy allows the book to take a shot at the player. A player who is forced to leave stands to be forced to pay the book in cash for as much as twice the free-play value. More unfair is that if the player won he would only receive a small fraction of the free-play winnings. If the player who is being shut down has won his free-play the book uses the larger amount of the risk-to-win to calculate the roll-over.
One player sums up the scam: "It's like a bank sending you a free toaster to open up a account and then chargin your bank account for two toasters if it decides they don't want your business!! The bank makes out!"
01.02.2008 (11:41 PM CST)WagerWeb (SBR rating C) no longer offering resolution to $37,451 player dispute
During the month of December the sportsbook ignored two self-scheduled dates to resolve the player
dispute. Wagerweb initially told SBR it would be offering a settlement but has failed to follow through on two occasions. The player's winnings derived from as many as 70 phoned-in NFL bets that were placed after the events had begun. |
Forum Topic
12.27.2007 (11:20 PM CST)BetWorldSoccer enters SBR rating guide at C. The sportsbook is a sister site of
Wagerweb (SBR rating C) and is listed under parent company,
Casablanca Gaming. BWS offers the same wagering options as WagerWeb while highlighting its soccer betting menu. Wagerweb believes it is close to resolving the player
dispute that was originally reported on 12/6/07.
12.15.2007 (11:51 AM CST)WagerWeb & BetDon downgraded from B- to C
12.15.2007 (11:51 AM CST)BetDon WagerWeb & BetDon downgraded from B- to C
12.06.2007 (10:08 PM CST)WagerWeb (SBR rating B-) confiscates $37,451; cites wagering fraud
A player won $37,451 making over 60 football wagers through the month of October. At the end of October, the player requested his funds and was given $5,000, which equaled the total amount he deposited. He was told his winnings would not be paid due to wagering fraud. WagerWeb states the player stalled wagering phone clerks, giving him the ability to make bets after kick-off. The book has thus far provided evidence that the player bet six minutes after the start of one game. SBR has reviewed multiple examples of his NFL wagers which were found to have been placed prior to kick off. This dispute highlights WagerWeb's on-going problems with risk management and their inability to deal with issues in real time. If the book identifies a bet placed after the start of a game it is expected to cancel the wager immediately, informing the player of its error of failing to close the betting market on time- as opposed to allowing the player's funds to be risked and later canceling the bet upon auditing his wagering history. Regardless of past-posting claims, Wagerweb has unjustly punished the player labeling his account as fraudulent instead of addressing individual wagers. SBR has asked Wagerweb to address each individual bet and to pay the player for all wagers where he was allowed to put his funds at risk.
05.19.2007 (09:40 AM CST)Player vs. WagerWeb (SBR rating B-): Multiple Account Dispute
SBR Mediator, Justin concludes review of multiple account dispute. SBR reviewed the player's wagering activity, the sportsbook's terms and conditions and the action taken against the player.
The player and Wagerweb agree to most of the facts. The player deposited $5000, and collected a $1000 cash bonus, in addition to a $1500 free play bonus (which lost). The player placed a series of bets over a week, meeting his rollover and running his balance up to $11,793. The player asked for a withdrawal, and the book refused, claiming the player abused bonuses, and would have lost his entire deposit but for the bonus.
Full Report:
Player vs. WagerWeb
| Read more
03.08.2007 (07:06 PM CST)Carib (SBR rating B) and WagerWeb (SBR rating B-) again accepting new US-based players.
01.28.2007 (10:29 PM CST)Wagerweb (SBR rating B-) no longer accepting new registrations from U.S.-based players. Wagerweb will continue to service current U.S. clients.
01.08.2007 (08:37 PM CST)BetDon upgrade to B reversed; lowered to B-, WagerWeb downgraded from B to B-
01.08.2007 (08:37 PM CST)WagerWeb BetDon upgrade to B reversed; lowered to B-, WagerWeb downgraded from B to B-
01.08.2007 (07:43 PM CST)WagerWeb (SBR rating B-) confiscates $2038 from account holder.
The sportsbook deducted winnings from a $750 free-play bonus as well as winnings subsequently accumulated using those funds. A cash bonus of $500 and winnings accumulated using those funds were also confiscated. WagerWeb gave the player a 50% sign-up ’bonus package’ ($500 cash and $750 free-play) with the stipulation of a 10x roll-over (wagering the bonus and deposit ten times). The book’s Fraud Manager informed the player that his wagers equated to what the book classifies as "Bonus Pyramiding". This rule allows the bookmaker to review the account history of a winning customer to see if the betting style shows the user risked his/her balance + bonus repeatedly until the roll-over was met. The player’s account history shows that he did not wager his entire balance until the roll-over was met. SBR will address this issue with management tomorrow.
Update: Wagerweb states that despite the explanation given to the player, other factors in the decision involved fraudulently operating multiple accounts. SBR has asked Wagerweb to remove the pyramid rule which is nothing more than a subjective description of player activity.
08.21.2006 (06:12 PM CST)
WagerWeb has agreed to prorate all bonuses in cases where the house termintates the original incentive agreement and relationship with player due to sharp play. Management tells SBR they will also allow such players to exceed its normal daily Neteller limits so the bettor has the ability to wager elsewhere. WagerWeb offers bank wire and checks for larger sums.
08.20.2006 (11:02 PM CST)SBR receives multiple complaints from WagerWeb (SBR rating B) clients who were asked to leave the book due to professional play. Players complained of revoked bonuses and payout delays after the ability to wager was removed. SBR to inquire with WagerWeb about bonus policy changes and recent customer treatment.
05.25.2006 (11:55 AM CST)WagerWeb (SBR rating B) apologizes to player; agrees to honor original bonus terms. Ownership states that the new bonus terms should not have affected those who deposited prior to the change.
05.24.2006 (09:29 PM CST)Spreads(SBR rating C), managed by WagerWeb(SBR rating B), changes bonus terms after player wins. The bettor states that he agreed to accept a 20% bonus with a 50X rollover (wagering fifty times the bonus and deposit) because the terms of the offer allowed him to withdraw his winnings at anytime, thereby limiting his exposure and assuring his account balance would not exceed the deposit and bonus. After requesting a payout and receiving the following message via email, "Unfortunately we are not able to process it at the present time due to our new policy for payouts. In order to take out your funds you must reach the 50X rollover of your bonus given on May 16th ,2006. The total amount you must wager is $150,000 and as per today your wagered amount is $3,320. If you wish to proceed with your payout you will loose the bonus." the player contacted customer service using livechat.
Player: i requested a payout and I got a response that the new policy is you have to complete the rollover prior to withdrawing winnings
Diego: Hello
Diego: Yes
Player: I am confused. The terms of the bonus was 50x rollover but i could wihtdraw winnings at any time. how can you change the rules midstream
Diego: Mangements decision
Player: it doesn’t make sense. we already agreed to the terms. how can the terms be changed
Player: are you sure ther
05.09.2006 (07:56 PM CST)The sportsbook previously imposed a $20 Neteller fee for each withdrawal limited to $1,000 per day. SBR has received positive player feedback since the sportsbook began processing all Neteller transactions at no charge. Players can receive $5,000 per week via Neteller, although the $1,000 daily limit is still in place. Ownership told SBR of plans to increase the the daily limit prior to the start of the football season. WagerWeb has reduced the cost of bank wires from $70 to $50 and launched a new website since SBR’s previous upgrade to B- in January. Players are encouraged to send feedback to Assistance@SportsbookReview.com
05.09.2006 (02:33 PM CST)WagerWeb <A class=ab href="http://sbr.sportsbookreview.com/Search/default.aspx?Search=WagerWeb&Area=Site&Submit=Home">WagerWeb</A> upgraded from B- to B
03.01.2006 (06:25 PM CST)View photos of WagerWeb(SBR rating B-) here. WagerWeb moved into this new facility in April of 2005. The building houses a staff of 180 employees.
01.30.2006 (03:00 AM CST)WagerWeb upgraded from C+ to B-
01.30.2006 (01:21 AM CST)receives second upgrade in two months, resulting in jump from C to B-. In a recent conversation with SBR, WagerWeb ownership talked of implementing friendlier policies and agreed to eliminate a procedure where accounts are temporarily locked until the user confirms that he/she understands betting restrictions placed on proposition wagers. Recent player feedback has otherwise been positive.
12.26.2005 (05:25 PM CST)WagerWeb upgraded from C to C+
11.27.2005 (05:56 AM CST)
Sir
This email is to inform you of our new prop policy. All players who wager on props must also wager on other regular lines or the account will be closed. As of today you must wager at least 5 times your prop volume each day on other regular listed games as well.
Your account has been locked until you confirm your understanding of this with a return email.....>
Source: TheRx Posting Forum thread: Wagerweb prop rule
11.04.2004 (06:27 PM CST)CBS Corp successfully moved to stop Casablanca from using the name. Rio (SBR rating B+) had a similar fate with Las Vegas based Rio Hotel and Casino and infamous scam book Yahoops fended off Yahoo before finally being overcome by the legal system. Casablanca's permanent website address is now www.wagerweb.com.