Pennsylvania Sportsbook Likely Makes an Error on Super Bowl Prop Bet with a 992 Limit

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • thomorino
    Restricted User
    • 06-01-17
    • 45842

    #1
    Pennsylvania Sportsbook Likely Makes an Error on Super Bowl Prop Bet with a 992 Limit
    I bet professionally so I look at all these different prop market, but I'm surprised no one else evidently has spotted this, but Windcreek sportsbook, which is nationwide sportsbook in a number of states, including Pennsylvania, has a prop bet up that is an error. The bet has a $992 dollar limit.

    The bet is cross sport bet between Anthony Davis's total point total for the Lakers for a game he played yesterday against Golden State, compared to the Rams team total in the super bowl. The line is Rams team total +1.5 -115.

    The bet clearly states the Davis point total comes from the game played yesterday and the Lakers don't play today.

    Anthony Davis only score 16 points against the Warriors on 2/12, so this bet cashes if the Rams score 15 points or more, and the payout is 85 cents on the dollar, the limit as I stated is $992 for the bet.

    This book likely didn't realize or they likely intended to take the bet off the board after the Lakers game started, since the Lakers game is yesterday as I stated.

    Obviously Stafford could break his leg or the Rams offense could be complete garbage and score under 15 points, but that is highly unlikely.
  • thomorino
    Restricted User
    • 06-01-17
    • 45842

    #2
    This prop bet won easily.
    Comment
    • BuckyOne
      SBR MVP
      • 01-02-15
      • 2728

      #3
      What are the chances you will get limited to a 100 bucks or else kicked out?
      Comment
      • thomorino
        Restricted User
        • 06-01-17
        • 45842

        #4
        Originally posted by BuckyOne
        What are the chances you will get limited to a 100 bucks or else kicked out?
        Zero - the books chose to leave this prop bet up and it wasn't a clear error at all.

        There are nearly 10 books to bet at in Pennsylvania too, but this wasn't an obvious error - the legal standard under common law in most states.
        Comment
        • Booya711
          BARRELED IN @ SBR!
          • 12-20-11
          • 27329

          #5
          You don’t even know what the red zone is dumb shit
          Comment
          • thomorino
            Restricted User
            • 06-01-17
            • 45842

            #6
            Originally posted by Booya711
            You don’t even know what the red zone is dumb shit
            You are too dumb know what the term red zone even means.
            Comment
            • Optional
              Administrator
              • 06-10-10
              • 61589

              #7
              Originally posted by thomorino

              Zero - the books chose to leave this prop bet up and it wasn't a clear error at all.

              There are nearly 10 books to bet at in Pennsylvania too, but this wasn't an obvious error - the legal standard under common law in most states.
              Wow, there is a legal standard for what an obvious bookmaking error is in Pa. Mind blown. Got a statute #?

              And it's got something to do whether it is obvious to you personally too eh!

              Amazing how the law there seems to reflect what casual bettors think it means intuitively. Instead of the established and legally tested definition everywhere else in the world.


              Palpable, or obvious errors as you call them, are solely about if the offering is either out of line with what an expert linesman would be expected to do, or there was a genuine error on their part like a typo or unintentional offering.

              It was nothing to do with whether it seems "obvious" to you or not. Zilch, nada, not a thing.


              And this bet is a clear angle shot. If they spot your past post, they could quite legally void it in any jurisdiction. You have no argument. The whole point of your thread is that one leg had already posted and therefore should not be offered.



              Now go away and do not continue posting misinformation in this sub forum. Not the right forum for your nonsense and arguing.
              .
              Comment
              • thomorino
                Restricted User
                • 06-01-17
                • 45842

                #8
                Originally posted by Optional
                Wow, there is a legal standard for what an obvious bookmaking error is in Pa. Mind blown. Got a statute #?

                And it's got something to do whether it is obvious to you personally too eh!

                Amazing how the law there seems to reflect what casual bettors think it means intuitively. Instead of the established and legally tested definition everywhere else in the world.


                Palpable, or obvious errors as you call them, are solely about if the offering is either out of line with what an expert linesman would be expected to do, or there was a genuine error on their part like a typo or unintentional offering.

                It was nothing to do with whether it seems "obvious" to you or not. Zilch, nada, not a thing.


                And this bet is a clear angle shot. If they spot your past post, they could quite legally void it in any jurisdiction. You have no argument. The whole point of your thread is that one leg had already posted and therefore should not be offered.



                Now go away and do not continue posting misinformation in this sub forum. Not the right forum for your nonsense and arguing.
                You didn't even read my post.

                Let me explain what I'm saying because you didn't take the time actually read and understand it.

                What I said because I don't know that exact statute and gaming commission laws that deal with issues like this is that the usual standard is clear and obvious error.

                So Anthony Davis Scored 16 points so the Rams needed to score 15 points for this prop to win - the bet certainly carried some risk that it would lose, there obviously was no guarantee the Rams would score 15 points, they only had 7 points at the beginning of the 4th quarter in the San Francisco game which was last week.

                That's point 1 - I did not see this prop has a clear and obvious error - it was for instance a bet that required the Rams to score 1 point to win. It is certainly possible the Rams would score less than 15 points in a game.

                So to say that this was a clear angle shot is not accurate - a clear angle shot would be when a line is so obviously wrong that the bet is almost guaranteed to win.

                I also don't feel bad for this book, their online casino I have played it is likely rigged, I haven't lost any significant money playing in that casino, but anyone who plays in these online casinos sees they are likely rigged - and I do not feel bad for these books - which in any case in this situation was not a guaranteed or blatantly bad line.
                Comment
                • thomorino
                  Restricted User
                  • 06-01-17
                  • 45842

                  #9
                  Originally posted by Optional
                  Wow, there is a legal standard for what an obvious bookmaking error is in Pa. Mind blown. Got a statute #?

                  And it's got something to do whether it is obvious to you personally too eh!

                  Amazing how the law there seems to reflect what casual bettors think it means intuitively. Instead of the established and legally tested definition everywhere else in the world.


                  Palpable, or obvious errors as you call them, are solely about if the offering is either out of line with what an expert linesman would be expected to do, or there was a genuine error on their part like a typo or unintentional offering.

                  It was nothing to do with whether it seems "obvious" to you or not. Zilch, nada, not a thing.


                  And this bet is a clear angle shot. If they spot your past post, they could quite legally void it in any jurisdiction. You have no argument. The whole point of your thread is that one leg had already posted and therefore should not be offered.



                  Now go away and do not continue posting misinformation in this sub forum. Not the right forum for your nonsense and arguing.
                  And almost every legal standard is the reasonable person standard - there is no reason a reasonable person would view this prop bet as a blatant and flagrant error.

                  Again, the Rams had 7 points in the 4th quarter last week.
                  Comment
                  • thomorino
                    Restricted User
                    • 06-01-17
                    • 45842

                    #10
                    My bigger point is that these books are billion dollar companies, they are responsible for putting the right lines up. Its one thing to have a software glitch for a couple second in live betting where the line is off by a hundred point.

                    They literally left this prop bet up at the -115 price I listed for 24 hours after the Laker game ended.

                    This pro bet - as I've said - was not an obvious error, the Rams had to score 15 points, not 2 points for the bet to win. And again, the Rams barely scored 15 points last week. The bet certainly still involved risk.
                    Comment
                    • thomorino
                      Restricted User
                      • 06-01-17
                      • 45842

                      #11
                      There is a big difference between leaving a questionable line up for 24 hours and having a software glitch in something like live betting where a line is off by a hundred points - this was not a flagrant or in my opinion clear and obvious error to the reasonable person.
                      Comment
                      • thomorino
                        Restricted User
                        • 06-01-17
                        • 45842

                        #12
                        I don't believe this line was what a reasonable person would find was a clear and obvious error and I don't feel sorry for billion dollar companies who rig their online casinos are charge absurd vig for most bets - I think optional is the only person who does.

                        This prop bet was up for over 24 hours - it was not a software glitch. If a billion dollar company can't put up the right lines then hire some better people. It wasn't a blatant or flagrant error, and given this like most books clearly comes close to rigging their online casino I don't feel bad for them.
                        Comment
                        • Barrakuda
                          SBR Wise Guy
                          • 02-28-18
                          • 786

                          #13
                          You found a bad line at a US book? Tell us your techniques.
                          Comment
                          • thomorino
                            Restricted User
                            • 06-01-17
                            • 45842

                            #14
                            Originally posted by Barrakuda
                            You found a bad line at a US book? Tell us your techniques.
                            I just saw the prop bet and though it had more value than usual. Nothing special.
                            Comment
                            • thomorino
                              Restricted User
                              • 06-01-17
                              • 45842

                              #15
                              Optional really feels bad for these billion dollar books who have all the resources in the world and basically rig their online casino but don't put up perfect lines.

                              Maybe they can hire him as a PR Consultant.
                              Comment
                              • thomorino
                                Restricted User
                                • 06-01-17
                                • 45842

                                #16
                                And again, I didn't view the line as a blatant and flagrant error, I viewed it as a questionable prop.
                                Comment
                                • Optional
                                  Administrator
                                  • 06-10-10
                                  • 61589

                                  #17
                                  Originally posted by thomorino
                                  I don't believe this line was what a reasonable person would find was a clear and obvious error and I don't feel sorry for billion dollar companies who rig their online casinos are charge absurd vig for most bets - I think optional is the only person who does.

                                  This prop bet was up for over 24 hours - it was not a software glitch. If a billion dollar company can't put up the right lines then hire some better people. It wasn't a blatant or flagrant error, and given this like most books clearly comes close to rigging their online casino I don't feel bad for them.
                                  Rams TT Over 15.5 -115 is not obvious to you?

                                  OK.

                                  But, again, what is obvious to you is not taken into consideration when it comes to an official mediation or court decision.



                                  Good find and nice of you to share though. Hope you won with it.
                                  .
                                  Comment
                                  • thomorino
                                    Restricted User
                                    • 06-01-17
                                    • 45842

                                    #18
                                    Originally posted by Optional
                                    Rams TT Over 15.5 -115 is not obvious to you?

                                    OK.

                                    But, again, what is obvious to you is not taken into consideration when it comes to an official mediation or court decision.



                                    Good find and nice of you to share though. Hope you won with it.
                                    Its actually over 14.5 -115 but again I lost not a huge amount of money, but $500 in their basically rigged online casino, the line was up for over 24 hours, and again, to me, this was a flagrant or obvious error.

                                    They had 24 hours to correct the line, they didn't.

                                    If I complain about their almost basically rigged casino they tell me to go fuk myself, I don't think I should feel bad for them.
                                    Comment
                                    • thomorino
                                      Restricted User
                                      • 06-01-17
                                      • 45842

                                      #19
                                      Originally posted by Optional
                                      Rams TT Over 15.5 -115 is not obvious to you?

                                      OK.

                                      But, again, what is obvious to you is not taken into consideration when it comes to an official mediation or court decision.



                                      Good find and nice of you to share though. Hope you won with it.
                                      I said the standard is likely the reasonable person standard, its obviously an objective not subjective standard.
                                      Comment
                                      • thomorino
                                        Restricted User
                                        • 06-01-17
                                        • 45842

                                        #20
                                        Originally posted by Optional
                                        Rams TT Over 15.5 -115 is not obvious to you?

                                        OK.

                                        But, again, what is obvious to you is not taken into consideration when it comes to an official mediation or court decision.



                                        Good find and nice of you to share though. Hope you won with it.
                                        In addition to the fact that I don't think at -115 this was a flagrant or obvious error I am a firm believe in treating others the way they treat you.

                                        Which is why I am never disrespectful to anyone or any company that treats me respectfully.

                                        I dropped nearly $500 in this company's online casino about a month ago, online blackjack, the game was clearly close to rigged, I basically lost 14 straight hands.

                                        If I or anyone else complains about the flagrantly manipulated online casino software we are told to go fuk ourselves and we have no recourse, so even though I don't believe I did anything wrong anyways, I feel fine about what I did.

                                        My bet won too.
                                        Comment
                                        • Optional
                                          Administrator
                                          • 06-10-10
                                          • 61589

                                          #21
                                          There is always an argument against books who simply fall asleep at the wheel and leave odds up.

                                          But if you got into a legal argument over this one, you would lose. It would be treated as a past post for sure.


                                          Plus honestly, without even looking at the book terms, they will have their asses covered from every angle you can think of.
                                          .
                                          Comment
                                          • thomorino
                                            Restricted User
                                            • 06-01-17
                                            • 45842

                                            #22
                                            Originally posted by Optional
                                            There is always an argument against books who simply fall asleep at the wheel and leave odds up.

                                            But if you got into a legal argument over this one, you would lose. It would be treated as a past post for sure.


                                            Plus honestly, without even looking at the book terms, they will have their asses covered from every angle you can think of.
                                            I disagree.

                                            There is a rule in Vegas for example that they are required to honor any bets they take even at bad lines. That is the Vegas gaming commission's rule.

                                            I think this bet is clearly different than a live line being off by a hundred points, here, again, this was not a flagrant and obvious error like a line being off by 50 or 100 points.

                                            It also, again, wasn't a glitch, they had this line up for over 24 hours after the Lakers game ended and this is a huge company with enormous resources.

                                            If a player gets drunk and starts betting 500 dollars a hand in blackjack (I've never done this and never would) and hitting on 20, the player doesn't get to say no reasonable player would be hitting on 20 so I want my money back.

                                            This wasn't a software glitch off by a hundred points, it was a line up for over 24 hours that without question still involved risk.
                                            Comment
                                            • thomorino
                                              Restricted User
                                              • 06-01-17
                                              • 45842

                                              #23
                                              Originally posted by Optional
                                              There is always an argument against books who simply fall asleep at the wheel and leave odds up.

                                              But if you got into a legal argument over this one, you would lose. It would be treated as a past post for sure.


                                              Plus honestly, without even looking at the book terms, they will have their asses covered from every angle you can think of.
                                              And again, that's incorrect in places like Vegas, where they are clearly required to honor every bet they take, no matter what the line was when the bet was taken.

                                              Just depends on the jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions obviously might be different.
                                              Comment
                                              • juicername
                                                SBR Hall of Famer
                                                • 10-14-15
                                                • 6906

                                                #24
                                                Originally posted by thomorino
                                                I bet professionally so I look at all these different prop market, but I'm surprised no one else evidently has spotted this, but Windcreek sportsbook, which is nationwide sportsbook in a number of states, including Pennsylvania, has a prop bet up that is an error. The bet has a $992 dollar limit.

                                                The bet is cross sport bet between Anthony Davis's total point total for the Lakers for a game he played yesterday against Golden State, compared to the Rams team total in the super bowl. The line is Rams team total +1.5 -115.

                                                The bet clearly states the Davis point total comes from the game played yesterday and the Lakers don't play today.

                                                Anthony Davis only score 16 points against the Warriors on 2/12, so this bet cashes if the Rams score 15 points or more, and the payout is 85 cents on the dollar, the limit as I stated is $992 for the bet.

                                                This book likely didn't realize or they likely intended to take the bet off the board after the Lakers game started, since the Lakers game is yesterday as I stated.

                                                Obviously Stafford could break his leg or the Rams offense could be complete garbage and score under 15 points, but that is highly unlikely.
                                                Wouldn't a professional by definition have to make money in their profession? You are a documented loser over 3+ years.
                                                Comment
                                                • Optional
                                                  Administrator
                                                  • 06-10-10
                                                  • 61589

                                                  #25
                                                  Originally posted by thomorino

                                                  And again, that's incorrect in places like Vegas, where they are clearly required to honor every bet they take, no matter what the line was when the bet was taken.

                                                  Just depends on the jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions obviously might be different.
                                                  You will just keep arguing forever if I keep answering eh?

                                                  Not Pa and obviously a quite different animal to most places. And a great model I wish we all had.

                                                  But even the Vegas gaming commission allows voids of past posts.
                                                  .
                                                  Comment
                                                  • thomorino
                                                    Restricted User
                                                    • 06-01-17
                                                    • 45842

                                                    #26
                                                    Originally posted by juicername
                                                    Wouldn't a professional by definition have to make money in their profession? You are a documented loser over 3+ years.
                                                    Wrong, I'm a profitable gambler
                                                    Comment
                                                    • thomorino
                                                      Restricted User
                                                      • 06-01-17
                                                      • 45842

                                                      #27
                                                      Originally posted by Optional
                                                      You will just keep arguing forever if I keep answering eh?

                                                      Not Pa and obviously a quite different animal to most places. And a great model I wish we all had.

                                                      But even the Vegas gaming commission allows voids of past posts.
                                                      You chose to come in here and argue. Vegas of course like everyone else allows voiding online bets where there are software glitches with their online apps but the Vegas gaming commission requires books to honor bets accepts in person even if there is a line error.
                                                      Comment
                                                      • Buckandadime
                                                        SBR Hall of Famer
                                                        • 04-21-15
                                                        • 8847

                                                        #28
                                                        Originally posted by thomorino
                                                        I bet professionally
                                                        I stopped reading...
                                                        Comment
                                                        • thomorino
                                                          Restricted User
                                                          • 06-01-17
                                                          • 45842

                                                          #29
                                                          Originally posted by Buckandadime
                                                          I stopped reading...
                                                          You can't read, that requires an IQ over 1
                                                          Comment
                                                          • stake1
                                                            SBR Posting Legend
                                                            • 12-19-18
                                                            • 18116

                                                            #30
                                                            Originally posted by Optional
                                                            You will just keep arguing forever if I keep answering eh?
                                                            Comment
                                                            • Kermit
                                                              BARRELED IN @ SBR!
                                                              • 09-27-10
                                                              • 32555

                                                              #31
                                                              Originally posted by thomorino
                                                              I bet professionally
                                                              Comment
                                                              • jjgold
                                                                SBR Aristocracy
                                                                • 07-20-05
                                                                • 388179

                                                                #32
                                                                Morino a funny guy

                                                                Disbarred from PA
                                                                Comment
                                                                • stake1
                                                                  SBR Posting Legend
                                                                  • 12-19-18
                                                                  • 18116

                                                                  #33
                                                                  Originally posted by jjgold
                                                                  Morino a funny guy

                                                                  Disbarred from PA
                                                                  I have heard stories about lawyers losing their licenses. And most of the time? over trying to trade representation for sex.
                                                                  I can only guess the number of guys thom esq tried that with before they disbarred him
                                                                  Comment
                                                                  • jjgold
                                                                    SBR Aristocracy
                                                                    • 07-20-05
                                                                    • 388179

                                                                    #34
                                                                    I think he lost it gambling
                                                                    Comment
                                                                    • chargers4222
                                                                      SBR MVP
                                                                      • 01-16-10
                                                                      • 4702

                                                                      #35
                                                                      Originally posted by thomorino
                                                                      I bet professionally
                                                                      I love you babe. Happy V-Day.
                                                                      Comment
                                                                      SBR Contests
                                                                      Collapse
                                                                      Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
                                                                      Collapse
                                                                      Working...