Should this be graded as a loss or no action?

[DontTailMe]

At this point I’m just chalking it up as a bad rule and lesson learned.

2 losers and 2 no action is just plain unfair.

It's not a bad rule. It's a bad grade. They're misapplying that rule. It doesn't say that they can split a market so that half void and half lose. That's an insane outcome.

[Optional]

I posted the ticket number above

You don’t need to check. I’ve moved on. I don’t like to argue about every call that goes against me. I save my fights for the bigger $ amounts.

I did my job by altering other posters about placing these bets. Every time there’s a suspended game, books clean up. That’s the bottom line.

I agree that's how I would handle it too if I had appealed and already been rejected.

I could ask our rep to get it reviewed for you, but kind of expect they will say this is the intended grading formula with the rule about already determined markets having action.

Best outcome would be a begrudging freeplay I think. And I wouldn't want to fight for that if it was my account either.

[RudyRuetigger]

I agree that's how I would handle it too if I had appealed and already been rejected.

I could ask our rep to get it reviewed for you, but kind of expect they will say this is the intended grading formula with the rule about already determined markets having action.

Best outcome would be a begrudging freeplay I think. And I wouldn't want to fight for that if it was my account either.

so you think the book is right here?



sad to see

[Mugsy]

[QUOTE=big joe 1212;30471411]Yea, I can’t afford it


#1 rule of wagering

Don't bet what U can't afford to lose.

crimony

[fried cheese]

You're wrong.

Rule was posted on previous page.


Any market whose outcome has already been determined will have action, even if the game is suspended after that point.



If you are going to power post about an issue AT LEAST take 10 seconds to read the thread or make sure you are correct mate.

he said his alonso bet over 1.5 bases was already determined though and was still voided because the game didnt finish.

[big joe 1212]

I agree that's how I would handle it too if I had appealed and already been rejected.

I could ask our rep to get it reviewed for you, but kind of expect they will say this is the intended grading formula with the rule about already determined markets having action.

Best outcome would be a begrudging freeplay I think. And I wouldn't want to fight for that if it was my account either.

Opti, I appreciate the offer but it’s not worth it for the $ amount wagered. I also appreciated when you helped me out last year when I got screwed out of $300 because of a glitch. They would not listen to me but you got the job done! I’ll save my battles for those $ amounts.

[RudyRuetigger]

Opti, I appreciate the offer but it’s not worth it for the $ amount wagered. I also appreciated when you helped me out last year when I got screwed out of $300 because of a glitch. They would not listen to me but you got the job done! I’ll save my battles for those $ amounts.

remind me to never help this guy again

[big joe 1212]

remind me to never help this guy again

Rudy, it’s ok. I don’t want to get all stressed out over $20. I got other problems to worry about. I appreciate your opinion on this matter and glad you see it as unfair.

[RudyRuetigger]

$20 here and there is alot

[DontTailMe]

Yeah, I never let these go either. If it's wrong, it's wrong. They bookies have enough money of ours - they don't need illegitimate winnings.

[Optional]

he said his alonso bet over 1.5 bases was already determined though and was still voided because the game didnt finish.

I missed that.

If that is correct, Joe should be able to email in that example to show grading is not consistent and I would think something would be done for him.

He is good at handling people and it would be best for him to try that himself above a complaint if he wants to.

[Optional]

Yeah, I never let these go either. If it's wrong, it's wrong. They bookies have enough money of ours - they don't need illegitimate winnings.

Whilst I get the point of view. And MilwaukeMikes example explanation makes me go hmmm too. I'm not as sure as you this is clearly "wrong".

A similar argument has been made a few times when 2 leg teasers have one leg cancelled and still need to win the other leg for a push result.

[teacher10]

That sucks BJoe. You clearly won the Alfonso bet! I'm glad it wasn't that much money you lost.

Since the game was suspended why can't the books just wait until the game is resumed before deciding the outcome. Put a time limit of 72 hours? I remember earlier this year during a soccer match when Christian Eriksen collapsed on the field, the game was suspended but my ML bet wasn't cancelled.

[pavyracer]

If the game is suspended or cancelled all bets are void.

[Mugsy]

If the game is suspended or cancelled all bets are void.

yep

and QQing over a $20 bet

[Optional]

If the game is suspended or cancelled all bets are void.

Not correct. The Bookmaker rule has been posted on page 1 and page 2 of this thread.


Any market whose outcome has already been determined will have action, even if the game is suspended after that point.

[pavyracer]

Not correct. The Bookmaker rule has been posted on page 1 and page 2 of this thread.


Any market whose outcome has already been determined will have action, even if the game is suspended after that point.

Then why if a game total is 7.5 and you bet the over and they score 8 runs in the first inning and it gets rained out in 3rd inning the bet is cancelled?

[TommieGunshot]

Not correct. The Bookmaker rule has been posted on page 1 and page 2 of this thread.


Any market whose outcome has already been determined will have action, even if the game is suspended after that point.

Explain this:

My Pete Alonso over 1.5 bases was graded as no action even though he already had hit a double.

[milwaukee mike]

Whilst I get the point of view. And MilwaukeMikes example explanation makes me go hmmm too. I'm not as sure as you this is clearly "wrong".

A similar argument has been made a few times when 2 leg teasers have one leg cancelled and still need to win the other leg for a push result.

this isn't a teaser or parlay, it's a yes or no bet

they graded it as though the NO won... anyone betting the NO got a gift, and the people with YES got cheated

[semibluff]

this isn't a teaser or parlay, it's a yes or no bet

they graded it as though the NO won... anyone betting the NO got a gift, and the people with YES got cheated

Absolutely! This isn't a 2 bet parley made up of a -220 bet and a -125 bet, (or whatever odds). If it was the book would have to settle 2 of the 4 parley outcomes as losers and with the other 2 parley outcomes as winners, (having 1 leg as a winner and 1 leg void). Either that applies or all 4 scenarios are void. It's the same as a draw no bet UFC/boxing match with A wins points, A wins KO, B wins points, B wins KO. You can't settle KOs as losers and Points void if it's a draw.

[magpie878]

If the game is suspended or cancelled all bets are void.

As I said earlier, my bets stayed open. One won, one lost.

[Optional]

Then why if a game total is 7.5 and you bet the over and they score 8 runs in the first inning and it gets rained out in 3rd inning the bet is cancelled?

Would you mind showing them your bet and that rule and let us know what they say?

[DontTailMe]

this isn't a teaser or parlay, it's a yes or no bet

Agree 100%. I'm very surprised people here can't see the difference between multiple wagers combined in a parlay/teaser and multiple conditions offered as a single wager.

they graded it as though the NO won... anyone betting the NO got a gift, and the people with YES got cheated

It's worse than that though. I'd be willing to bet they aren't handing out any wins (because no one won). Only voids and losses.

[Optional]

I'm very surprised people here can't see the difference between multiple wagers combined in a parlay/teaser and multiple conditions offered as a single wager.

I'm surprised people act like it MUST work the way they feel like it should.

Now that you know some rules can result in a wager with only voids and losers when a cancel affects it, you can stop assuming the opposite I guess?

The rules are what you agree to. The rules are what count. There were major changes in the way books grade baseball before last season. Ever since when this comes up people say the same thing... they feel like the rules should not count as there is no winner payout in this situation.


Does me repeating you are definitely wrong and the rules definitely intend to grade this way carry any convincing weight with you?

You making statements that are counter to the book rules, Rudy angrily power posting the rules are not what they are, Pavyracer just making a dumb statement demanding the rules are opposite to what they are has not swayed my opinion at all either.

But go ahead and repeat your same assumption too.

Or you could point to a written rule at Bookmaker.eu that AT ALL supports your assumption (like I have to support my opinion) and argue on logic, not what you assume the rules should say.

[big joe 1212]

I sent them an email this morning with a full explanation. I’ll report back once I get an answer.

[Optional]

this isn't a teaser or parlay, it's a yes or no bet

You're entire argument was that no wager can exist where only voids and loser is a possible result.

So I point out a wager where that does happen, and you're reply is "well, all wagers apart form that wager"???

There was a chance for everyone to win or lose when the wager was struck, so your argument is based on a fallacy anyway. No one created a bet where people can't win but can lose. The game situation changed and this is the way the rules say to grade this bet and two leg teasers when a game is abandoned/postponed.


But outside all your assuming, just show me a Bookmaker.eu rule that supports your claim and I will go do my job the way you want. Until then I not arguing with bookmaker that people feel their rules should be framed differently.

Why don't you and Rudy go ahead and see how far you get talking about your feelings on bet grading...

Use the rules. Only the rules matter.

[Optional]

I sent them an email this morning with a full explanation. I’ll report back once I get an answer.

Good stuff.

Did you include the other bet people mentioned they think is graded the opposite way?

If that is correct, it should make the conversation a lot easier. "Which way is correct?"

[big joe 1212]

Good stuff.

Did you include the other bet people mentioned they think is graded the opposite way?

If that is correct, it should make the conversation a lot easier. "Which way is correct?"

Yes, I laid out all the scenarios and gave them their rule I think they are grading by, adding, if you are grading by this rule, then my Pete Alonso bet should be graded as winner.

[Sea Turtle]

In the history of gambling the player props is simple. Guy has to start the game and game has to complete. Alonso bet was never going to be graded a winner.

Some of you guys act like you have never made a wager before.

First inning bets were credited in that game and to score in first inning was graded a win even though game didnt complete...

[Sea Turtle]

Optional isnt it nuts that these guys are the same guys who look for every loophole on how to bonus whore, casino glitches, odds mistakes, etc to hammer the books but book finds one little clause and they are up in arms.

[DontTailMe]

I'm surprised people act like it MUST work the way they feel like it should.

Now that you know some rules can result in a wager with only voids and losers when a cancel affects it, you can stop assuming the opposite I guess?

The rules are what you agree to. The rules are what count. There were major changes in the way books grade baseball before last season. Ever since when this comes up people say the same thing... they feel like the rules should not count as there is no winner payout in this situation.


Does me repeating you are definitely wrong and the rules definitely intend to grade this way carry any convincing weight with you?

You making statements that are counter to the book rules, Rudy angrily power posting the rules are not what they are, Pavyracer just making a dumb statement demanding the rules are opposite to what they are has not swayed my opinion at all either.

But go ahead and repeat your same assumption too.

Or you could point to a written rule at Bookmaker.eu that AT ALL supports your assumption (like I have to support my opinion) and argue on logic, not what you assume the rules should say.

I already addressed this aspect with my first post in this thread. I do not agree that that rule applies in this scenario. It says "Any market whose outcome has already been determined". The outcome of this market has not been determined. Evidence of this is the fact that they had to void some wagers since the outcome cannot be determined.

That rule applies nicely in other scenarios where the market is clearly determined, and I provided an example in that very same post.

I wonder if Bookmaker would be applying this rule if the outcome called for VOID/WIN instead of VOID/LOSS. I'm not saying they're purposely doing anything underhanded here. It's just that their bias might lead them to mistakenly apply a questionable rule when it's beneficial to them.Note: I can't think of a theoretical wager where an outcome of VOID/WIN would even be possible under these conditions, and I think that's part of why this rubs people the wrong way. This (mis)application of the cited rule results in a "Heads I win; tails you lose (or void)" situation.

I definitely respect your experience and logic in these matters. I just see this Bookmaker grade as very obviously wrong, even given the rule that you cited (not cited by Bookmaker, so we are even making educated assumptions in that regard as well). This isn't an attack on you. We just disagree. It happens, I guess.

[milwaukee mike]

You're entire argument was that no wager can exist where only voids and loser is a possible result.

So I point out a wager where that does happen, and you're reply is "well, all wagers apart form that wager"???

There was a chance for everyone to win or lose when the wager was struck, so your argument is based on a fallacy anyway. No one created a bet where people can't win but can lose. The game situation changed and this is the way the rules say to grade this bet and two leg teasers when a game is abandoned/postponed.


But outside all your assuming, just show me a Bookmaker.eu rule that supports your claim and I will go do my job the way you want. Until then I not arguing with bookmaker that people feel their rules should be framed differently.

Why don't you and Rudy go ahead and see how far you get talking about your feelings on bet grading...

Use the rules. Only the rules matter.

you pointed out a TEASER RULE

show me a single straight bet anywhere in the world, where it's a yes/no bet, and the yes can be graded a loser while the no is graded no action

i still think they graded the NO as a winner... i don't think the rules should be framed differently, because i have had this exact same situation happen and it was graded a push, even though i won the first part, which was the correct grading

[milwaukee mike]

• Washington Nationals vs New York Mets: New York Mets scores 1st and Wins GM?
• LOSEMLB - [150955] Yes +129 ( Action / Action )
• Score: Yes() - No(1)
• Game Start:08/10/2021 07:10 PM
• Ticket # 515156718

let's switch this bet to Washington Nationals score first and win game? Yes/No

They didn't score first and win the game because the game wasn't finished... but they scored first

If you had the YES on that, and they scored first and were leading when the game was suspended, you would be even more pissed if they graded the NO a winner

either way, no action is the only way to grade it

[Optional]

you pointed out a TEASER RULE

show me a single straight bet anywhere in the world, where it's a yes/no bet, and the yes can be graded a loser while the no is graded no action

i still think they graded the NO as a winner... i don't think the rules should be framed differently, because i have had this exact same situation happen and it was graded a push, even though i won the first part, which was the correct grading

I get how you feel Mike.

And as I said your example did make me go hmmm.

But it doesn't matter what other books do.

We need to use the Bookmaker.eu rules and having been through the discussion before, I am pretty sure they mean to grade this way.



But maybe I am wrong that this is really how they intend to grade and it is an error.

Joe should get some sort of confirmation about why this bet and his Alonso bet appear to have been graded differently.

Hopefully that helps confirm it properly.

[jjgold]

Joe how about I give you the $5 you lost ??