I don't mean to come off as callous but I don't think a lot of the posters who immediately advocated paying players in these circumstances and continue to dispute Zab not getting the money understand that if SBR ruled in that matter, it would ADVERSELY affect the customers in general.

For this instance, imagine the casino players who realized it was a +EV game and have come out ahead in it and generally enjoy playing it. Now the payout structure has changed and there is no longer an incentive to play- eliminating the game for those who sought to take advantage of it the right way.

For those who say "they wouldn't refund the losses to a bot player", that is pretty poor logic. They have a rule. The guy PURPOSELY went against the stated rules. Not only did he go against the rules but he had a cute story and strategy all lined up if he was questioned. This guy was a professional who KNEW the risks involved in his scam. Because he saw an exploitable loophole and was sharp enough to develop a bot, then he should be rewarded despite not going about it in good faith?

The guy who flamed 5Dimes live chat and made threats claiming that the bad press and "without us" they are nothing does not understand that the 5Dimes business model is not really concerned with players who attempt to bonus abuse, cheat, take shots, angle shoot ect... I'm sure that 5Dimes offers the best lines for professionals and the large bettors who understand the sportsbook's viewpoint and do not contend them.

The smaller rec bettor who chargebacks, needs bonuses, and constantly trying to contend canceled bets on bad lines ect. is typically way more of a problem than they are worth in regards to the bottom line and function of the book. Does that give Tony the right to treat them like crap? Absolutely not but it is these conflicts that ultimately have negative effects on the other customers- professional or otherwise. SBR does a hell of a service with its watchdog work and it seems like the MODs are successful in creating a fairly objective venue to facilitate such discussions. I've noticed that Shari puts in overtime to constantly give the threads a perspective about what is in the benefit of the gambling industry as a whole rather than people's specific vendettas or interests.

Immediately taking Zab's side was understandable as it was kind of a human interest story but to continue to support paying him would have negative consequences for the customers, not the books.

Cory has done a good enough job showing is not an honorable customer but a customer should get paid if the money was obtained within the rules? Yes, Cory should have been paid despite how malignant he may be to the gambling community. Protecting good customers from scam books is just as important as protecting good books from scam customers.