Heard a rumor Meadowlands sports book didn't pay a Broncos live Ticket

[Optional]

its not risk free. isn't ceasars in bankruptcy? casinos fail all the time. trump couldn't make it work. plenty of reasons for casinos to try to generate actual risk free income. i've seen complaints on here about books doing questionable/scam voids several times so who knows how often it really happens. giant banks like wells fargo/goldman sachs scam their customers and you think much smaller companies would never do it?

Thats why I said pretty much risk free.

And yes, companies do try to scam people, they just don't do it such a dumb way as this

If you want to argue that, take up the same challenge posed to KVB and explain the ongoing business value in purposely posting bad lines?

Feel free to show me how wrong I am. Take all the time you need.

[jjgold]

Yeah because JJ Goldibald is such a holy person. Guy has never taken advantage of anything in his whole life.

100%, I might be most religious guy here

[5mike5]

of course they arent gonna pay this, nor should they

its called common sense

[ikid2groove415]

but you said nobody knows they are a sports book . I would have to say you are not correct.

You said they took in 3 million ? With this free advertising- they will easily double that —Vegas is a terrible comparison- they don’t even take in 5% of the world sports gambling

[Optional]

I love Opti, one of my favorite posters.

Even when he gave me an infraction, I felt the utter need to PM him and treat him with respect, he was right and honorable in what he did.

BUT...

Opti has so much faith in the good.

I think it's great, but when it comes sportsbooks especially, or casino's in general, that faith can be misguided.

Sportsbooks will take advantage, very quickly, of the fact that "gambling" is a stigma and will use it to their advantage. I don't think it's like that in other parts of the world, where gambling is more widely recognized.

In the US, if you get hosed in a book, whether or not you took a shot, no one gives a fuk (except us gamblers).

The attitude is that, because you were gambling, tough shit because that's what happens when you gamble.

Gonna take a while for society to shift that perspective.

I think you're right about it being different in the USA due to prevailing views of gambling.

But also think newspapers and the public will care a lot more about bookmakers being fair than you imagine.

That story in the NJ newspaper is typical of what we see in AU and UK from the main stream media. Its an appealing story a big bad gambling company taking advantage of joe public.


(I don't have any recollection of an infraction or what for btw! And you are welcome to disrespect me as much as you would any other person here.)

[KVB]

...And if I do ask the question about what advantage they see for the book like with you... crickets usually. And never a clever theory to explain that...

I've explained exactly, many times, the advantage the book has here. You got no crickets from me. I answered you directly.

...They could generate out of whack odds for both sides and take their pick. It doesn't matter. The losers aren't coming back as it stands. Only the winning bets will get refunded.

In fact, I know it will get exploited, I've been in the "legit" business, and know how it works.

Oh, ye of so much faith.

[KVB]

I think you're right about it being different in the USA due to prevailing views of gambling.

But also think newspapers and the public will care a lot more about bookmakers being fair than you imagine.

That story in the NJ newspaper is typical of what we see in AU and UK from the main stream media. Its an appealing story a big bad gambling company taking advantage of joe public.


(I don't have any recollection of an infraction or what for btw! )

Yeah, the books can't be viewed as any more shady than it already is...lol.

That's why I think the legislators get involved, groups speak out, etc.

It had to do with payment methods issues and whether the processor or book was involved. You warned me and I crossed the line. You made good on your warning.

[Mrtop7]

You said they took in 3 million ? With this free advertising- they will easily double that —Vegas is a terrible comparison- they don’t even take in 5% of the world sports gambling

but not the point. you said " nobody knows about it "

[shocka1212]

Unless the article I read is wrong about the timing of the wager, this is completely and utterly false.

Broncos 1st down on the 18 in a spot they can pretty much run out the clock and kick a chip shot should be -600 MINIMUM. And that's on the low side.

I thought it was their own 18

[KVB]

That story in the NJ newspaper is typical of what we see in AU and UK from the main stream media. Its an appealing story a big bad gambling company taking advantage of joe public...

It starts in Jersey, then grows.

I think, across so much of the nation, at least publicly, it's more like "that's what you get for gambling on sports" still. Change is coming and well on it's way.

...you are welcome to disrespect me as much as you would any other person here.)

Will do.

[KVB]

of course they arent gonna pay this, nor should they

its called common sense

I don't think he should get paid.

But make the book pay a fine in the same amount, let's see how many more mistakes that get made actually get sold to the public.

[ikid2groove415]

but not the point. you said " nobody knows about it "

So if 100,000 knew about FD Sportsbook? And now because of this scandal 600,000 knows about FD Sportsbook ? How the hell am I wrong?

[fried cheese]

Thats why I said pretty much risk free.

And yes, companies do try to scam people, they just don't do it such a dumb way as this

If you want to argue that, take up the same challenge posed to KVB and explain the ongoing business value in purposely posting bad lines?

Feel free to show me how wrong I am. Take all the time you need.

so banks just giving you fees that you dont owe and hoping you dont notice is smart? i had to go to BkofAma like 3 months in a row when they kept giving me the same fee in error over and over. explain how the madoff ponzi had ongoing business value. explain how goldman sachs selling securities that were designed to fail to their customers had ongoing business value. it isnt some wise long term thinking person running these companies. its a guy who feels pressure to keep increasing profits every quarter so he gets a bonus and will not be fired. the long ongoing business value is that you get around 50% of the total bets placed on bad lines of profit instead of around 5% with no absolutely no risk. then ppl will even defend you for doing it because they are the poor gambling book being taken advantage of.

[ikid2groove415]

FD created this fake glitch / wake up boys

[Joey Vigs]

Dont you have a parade to be at?

Sunday. Do you want to come with

[KVB]

...take up the same challenge posed to KVB and explain the ongoing business value in purposely posting bad lines?

Feel free to show me how wrong I am. Take all the time you need.

Hey now, there was never crickets from me on that.

I know the advantage and posted it, I could think of more, it's just the obvious one we're dealing, and the kicker becomes that fact that we are dealing with a counter.

...They could generate out of whack odds for both sides and take their pick. It doesn't matter. The losers aren't coming back as it stands. Only the winning bets will get refunded.

What I don't see as an advantage, is throwing some drunk guy who made an unrealistic dumb bet out of your book.

I would think they would want that guy's business...

It's a whole different ball game when you are dealing with online customers, the advantages aren't there, but you do have a guy's bet history to decided whether to keep or toss him.

The book can just see he's drunk...lol...or just some cocky ass who thinks he's going to come up quick on the book, because of the book. That's an ideal customer.

[Mrtop7]

So if 100,000 knew about FD Sportsbook? And now because of this scandal 600,000 knows about FD Sportsbook ? How the hell am I wrong?

you were only wrong on the last part of the sentence about " nobody knows they are a sportsbook" The rest of it could of been a stunt , you be correct. No way of knowing. Big business does play games . Always did

[shocka1212]

tremendous thread

[fried cheese]

intentionally putting up bad lines for brick and mortar casinos is basically stealing nicky's strategy in casino.

"Nicky's methods of betting weren't scientific, but they worked. When he won, he collected. When he lost, he told the bookies to go fuk themselves."

[Optional]

so banks just giving you fees that you dont owe and hoping you dont notice is smart? i had to go to BkofAma like 3 months in a row when they kept giving me the same fee in error over and over. explain how the madoff ponzi had ongoing business value. explain how goldman sachs selling securities that were designed to fail to their customers had ongoing business value. it isnt some wise long term thinking person running these companies. its a guy who feels pressure to keep increasing profits every quarter so he gets a bonus and will not be fired. the long ongoing business value is that you get around 50% of the total bets placed on bad lines of profit instead of around 5% with no absolutely no risk. then ppl will even defend you for doing it because they are the poor gambling book being taken advantage of.

Hey now, there was never crickets from me on that.

I know the advantage and posted it, I could think of more, it's just the obvious one we're dealing, and the kicker becomes that fact that we are dealing with a counter.



What I don't see as an advantage, is throwing some drunk guy who made an unrealistic dumb bet out of your book.

I would think they would want that guy's business...

It's a whole different ball game when you are dealing with online customers, the advantages aren't there, but you do have a guy's bet history to decided whether to keep or toss him.

The book can just see he's drunk...lol...or just some cocky ass who thinks he's going to come up quick on the book, because of the book. That's an ideal customer.

yeah I know there was no crickets... but still surprised you don't see the inherent issue.

Where exactly do they MAKE MORE money with this strategy?

They don't make money from voids.

In the B&M context, do you think he number of walk up counter losing tickets that should be void is going to amount to enough to make it worthwhile to burn your customers each time you do this for a short term 'gain'.

It's an overly simplistic theory to imagine books want to post bad lines on purpose as a profit generator. You just need to think it through to the end to clearly see it's not a winning strategy for a book.

[Mac4Lyfe]

Not all people playing wrong lines are shot takers. You would be shocked how many of the betting public have no clue the difference between a +1200 and a +120 line. I've seen several people mix it up in these forums.

[KVB]

yeah I know there was no crickets... but still surprised you don't see the inherent issue.

Where exactly do they MAKE MORE money with this strategy?

They don't make money from voids.

In the B&M context, do you think he number of walk up counter losing tickets that should be void is going to amount to enough to make it worthwhile to burn your customers each time you do this for a short term 'gain'.

It's an overly simplistic theory to imagine books want to post bad lines on purpose as a profit generator. You just need to think it through to the end to clearly see it's not a winning strategy for a book.

There's no such thing as a short term gain from the sportsbook's point of view.

The book could exploit this loophole in, apparently, ways you can't imagine.

Over and over again, let me say that only the winners get refunded, the losers walk out the door.

There is no such thing as a void, like you are thinking, it is not online. This thread is too long, it's circular. We're going to get back to some fund to set aside.

Let's make it simple.

The only thing you need to worry about is the clerk and supervisor that allowed this "obvious error" line to be sold.

They are the point of contact. They themselves can run a scam, with the help of the book at large.

If Jersey doesn't safeguard, live bets late at night might just best be avoided there, you may not be able to win. It could create a whole cultural knowledge, years down the road, of how at the end of games the lines are ridiculous, and never honored.

There will still be suckers that try. The books don't care.

Or, it will become necessary to hang on to losing tickets and check to see if they were "void" which is a laughable term when it comes to an error.

I expect more from the combination of computers and people, and I suspect the New Jersey lawmakers will too.

[KVB]

...It's an overly simplistic theory to imagine books want to post bad lines on purpose as a profit generator. You just need to think it through to the end to clearly see it's not a winning strategy for a book.

They are a book, there is literally no such thing as a losing strategy (I say that loosely). They will not lose customers due to bad publicity.

They are a sports book and the vast majority of the business doesn't care.

On NFL Sunday, it will all be forgotten. They could murder a random customer each day, make it policy, and people will still try to get down...lol.

[fried cheese]

yeah I know there was no crickets... but still surprised you don't see the inherent issue.

Where exactly do they MAKE MORE money with this strategy?

They don't make money from voids.

In the B&M context, do you think he number of walk up counter losing tickets that should be void is going to amount to enough to make it worthwhile to burn your customers each time you do this for a short term 'gain'.

It's an overly simplistic theory to imagine books want to post bad lines on purpose as a profit generator. You just need to think it through to the end to clearly see it's not a winning strategy for a book.

an example would be if they had some +180 team a at +600 instead. if +200 is about accurate then team a loses 2/3 of the time. most ppl are gonna take the +600 so 2/3 of the time almost all the bets will be losing tickets and most of those ppl probably will not realize that they can get a refund. so the winners tickets are voided and and the casino gets to keep most of the losers money. 1/3 of the time yea they dont make any money but instead of making around 5% of the total bets 3x on average if this hypothetical bet played out 3x, they instead make around maybe 80%(just a total guess on what percentage of ppl wont ask for a refund) 2x. even if its only 30% of ppl dont ask for a refund that is still 30% twice instead of 5% tripled.

[KVB]

an example would be if they had some +180 team a at +600 instead. if +200 is about accurate then team a loses 2/3 of the time. most ppl are gonna take the +600 so 2/3 of the time almost all the bets will be losing tickets and most of those ppl probably will not realize that they can get a refund. so the winners tickets are voided and and the casino gets to keep most of the losers money. 1/3 of the time yea they dont make any money but instead of making around 5% of the total bets 3x on average if this hypothetical bet played out 3x, they instead make around maybe 80%(just a total guess on what percentage of ppl wont ask for a refund) 2x. even if its only 30% of ppl dont ask for a refund that is still 30% twice instead of 5% tripled.

And like I said, on NFL Sunday, it will all be forgotten, if not forgiven.

The online mentality doesn't work when there is a counter.

[Mrtop7]

the bettor hired jackie chiles

[KVB]

[ans61201]

Hey now, there was never crickets from me on that.

I know the advantage and posted it, I could think of more, it's just the obvious one we're dealing, and the kicker becomes that fact that we are dealing with a counter.



What I don't see as an advantage, is throwing some drunk guy who made an unrealistic dumb bet out of your book.

I would think they would want that guy's business...

It's a whole different ball game when you are dealing with online customers, the advantages aren't there, but you do have a guy's bet history to decided whether to keep or toss him.

The book can just see he's drunk...lol...or just some cocky ass who thinks he's going to come up quick on the book, because of the book. That's an ideal customer.

"If the guy won would be refunded" is thrown around a lot on this thread.

No, his bet lost.

He was never given a refund for his winning bet, just paid at the correct odds. And then for the trouble for the OBVIOUS mistake, he was offered more than what the odds were and tickets to football games. They went above and beyond, but the arguement that losers should or wouldn't get refunded is silly. Book isn't free rolling the winners get paid, just at the correct odds.

[ans61201]

KVB maybe read up on the actual, updated story, no refund was ever offered. I'm semi surprised and then not surprised that you've taken up some a big backing for the player in this case.

If they were intentionally trying to dick a bunch of people the error would be up for longer than 18 seconds

[7deuceoff$uit]

This guy just needs to fill out an sbr complaint form, and let them take care of it.

[Mrtop7]

he got paid 82k

ap news wire

just in

[fried cheese]

KVB maybe read up on the actual, updated story, no refund was ever offered. I'm semi surprised and then not surprised that you've taken up some a big backing for the player in this case.

If they were intentionally trying to dick a bunch of people the error would be up for longer than 18 seconds

it doesnt matter if it was intentional or not because you cant always know if it was intentional or not. either way the person betting the bad line loses out because the line that they are going to give him is going to be a -ev bet that he would probably not have made if he knew what the odds were that he would actually get. the ppl making the mistake should be the ones who take the worst of it not the best of it. at least they should be forced to pay 3x or more the odds of the average of the top 5 biggest books.

[ans61201]

Yep paid in full. Man this guy is lucky they're new. Sounds like they're just paying to get rid of the bad PR.

[fried cheese]

he got paid 82k

ap news wire

just in

lol at the ppl who were saying how stupid he was for not taking the giants tickets.

[Mrtop7]

Yep paid in full. Man this guy is lucky they're new. Sounds like they're just paying to get rid of the bad PR.

might of not been their call.... could of been division of gaming who knows for sure