[Dark Horse]

Looks like I also got screwed by this pitcher change that wasn't.

Internet / -1Ticket #: 872857
Jul 29 07:10 PM

MLB
STRAIGHT BET
[8501] SFO +1½EV
( VOGELSONG -R / D WILLIS -L )

100.00 / 100.00

0.00
NO BET
N/A PITCHER
07/29/2011 10:29 AM

Which books is that HH?

[skrtelfan]

This is likely going to be an issue tonight as well, the Colorado listed pitcher went from Jimenez to Rogers back to Jimenez.

[dlweaver]

yes i had the rockies and sportsbook.com cancelled my bets on them because of this change

[skrtelfan]

File an SBR complaint. In the thread tomcowley mentioned earlier in this thread, SBR was able to get people paid on a similar issue with sportsbook.com years ago. Ridiculous that these idiots still haven't figured it out after all this time, it really isn't that difficult.

[Santo]

It comes up a few times a season, often around the trade deadline. I get that books want to free funds up -- good for them and players, so are reluctant to leave all PC's until the match goes, but this way they're getting free-rolled so can only be in their interests to set up software to account for this.

[HedgeHog]

Which books is that HH?

SBR Sportsbook--It was a 100 point bet. I still think SBR should pay on it. Am I wrong here and if so, why?

[HoulihansTX]

SBR Sportsbook--It was a 100 point bet. I still think SBR should pay on it. Am I wrong here and if so, why?

I had the same bet with listed pitchers. Lou made a thread giving some lame excuse for why they will not payout.

It is points, which they have full control over. If a book that deals in "make-believe currency" can not figure out a payment plan for this situation, then I would have less faith ikn an offshore book.

BTW, I live in Vegas and made the same bet for $50 with Willis listed. I was paid accordingly.

[HedgeHog]

I would file an SBR complaint. Your bet said Willis must start. Willis started. That another pitcher was scheduled to start in the interim is not relevant to your bet, and sportsbook.com obfuscated the issue by cancelling your bet before the game started. Unless sportsbook.com has a specific rule that states otherwise, you should have action, regardless of what the person said in live chat.

There isn't even really a need for a specific "rule" here if books were competent enough to simply not void listed pitcher bets before the game starts.

I agree, a complaint should be filed. Funny thing is that the SBR Sportsbook is guilty of the same thing and they're unwilling to correct their mistakes. It would appear hypocritical if SBR went after SB.com for this too. FWIW, I filed a complaint to re-coup my 100 point winner just for giggles--it was ignored.

[no1here]

I agree should be live bet as made as I checked the box which says so.

[Dark Horse]

Betonline let the original wager stand. That seems to be the industry standard. But it's not right that books take different approaches. Imagine if somebody scalped this game for the max at two different books. So in fairness to all players, including scalpers, as long as not every book is on the same page, all wagers should be canceled. That may not be the right way to do it, but the alternative is more unfair.

[Santo]

I don't think scalpers is the right reason to fix it; scalping is always caveat empor. Books have had different tennis rules going back to the very start.

I don't have a problem with books having different rules, so long as they are specified.

[HedgeHog]

Betonline let the original wager stand. That seems to be the industry standard. But it's not right that books take different approaches. Imagine if somebody scalped this game for the max at two different books. So in fairness to all players, including scalpers, as long as not every book is on the same page, all wagers should be canceled. That may not be the right way to do it, but the alternative is more unfair.

I think the better argument is to let all bets stand until game time, verify starting pitchers at that time and grade accordingly. Books can get on the same page that way too. Killing legit bets on erroneous pitching changes defies common sense.

[BigDaddy]

the bet should never be refunded until after the game starts.

unless the game is PPD

[Dark Horse]

I don't think scalpers is the right reason to fix it; scalping is always caveat empor. Books have had different tennis rules going back to the very start.

I don't have a problem with books having different rules, so long as they are specified.

No disagreement here. The problem arises when the rules are not specified.

The scalping example was just to show that players can get hurt when books can do as they please. This was a free rolling situation, but, strangely, nobody from SBR cared enough to pitch in (publicly).