Originally posted on 09/18/2012:

Optional.. most of that comes from the fact that you don't understand the way things worked in the past - before the UIGEA legislation was finalized. SBR could afford to be diligent and fair. It's not a knock on you. You just weren't around.

Quote Originally Posted by Justin7 View Post
In a newswire from earlier, we stated that SIA had canceled a player's winnings for the last 6 months. SIA provided convincing proof that the player was aware of the closure at that time. Through a technical error, the player's account was re-enabled for wagering, and the player resumed playing (after initiating withdrawals).

I recommended to SIA that they pay the player anyway - it wasn't the player's fault that his account was re-enabled. Still though, the player's knowledge that his account was closed muddies the water. While I would have handled the dispute differently from SIA, I cannot say their decision in this matter was unjustifiable.
Quote Originally Posted by SBR_John View Post
If he would have lost would they have refunded those losses? No. They should pay.
Quote Originally Posted by Bill Dozer View Post
The player's funds were at risk so he he won the money. If SIA really wants to be sure the player understands they don't want his action they can cash him out.
http://www.sportsbookreview.com/forum/players-ta...te-update.html

It's a different story today.