Should pushes count towards rollover ammount? WWTS doesn't think so...

[pags11]

I was informed after I noticed that my Georgia +4 play was not recorded in my "account history" section with WWTS that my money on the wager would not go towards the ammount I need to rollover in order to withdraw my initial deposit bonus...

for an "A" book, I think this is a raw deal...the money was put into action, and the result was a push...anyone have any thoughts on this?...Bill, I know you guys have a great relationship with WWTS and wouldn't want to do anything to hurt it, but would you mind inquiring for me to get some further information on this matter...thanks...

[tacomax]

Some books count pushes for action on bonuses and some don't. Unless you were told something different to what WWTS are now saying then there's very little anyone can do. The onus should be on you to check the T&Cs of any bonuses you receive.

[AK]

Some books count pushes for action on bonuses and some don't. Unless you were told something different to what WWTS are now saying then there's very little anyone can do. The onus should be on you to check the T&Cs of any bonuses you receive.

I AGREE

Pags slipped.. I do it all the time.

[kdmfox]

Pretty petty of them if you ask me ... But that's what they are all about ... Anything and everything to prevent you from making a withdrawal ... A push is still a bet you made and lets face it, how many bets end up as pushes? ... Damn few ... The Fox

[bubba]

i believe cris doesnt give loyalty points for pushes too. dont like that very much either

[Winston Smith]

I'm kind of non-committal on it.

It'd be nice if they'd count it, but at the same time, pushes are treated as if they never happened, so it's not outrageous to not count them for rollover.

[JoshW]

Some say it is petty for WWTS not to count, I think is a little petty to worry about it. If the rollover was something like 10x, maybe it would come into play, but WWTS has a reasonable rollover and seems to me games were they actually get a decision and thus a theoretical edge are the only ones that should count.

Hypothetically you could never win or lose and still make rollover if you were betting on anything, but particuarly soccer.

[Max Levine]

You're right, Laker. But if you want to count wager requirements this way, you have to specify it in your rules.

WWTS Bonus policy rule in regard of rollover:
2.2 Our bonus policy requires that you wager five (5) times your deposited funds and bonus amount prior to any payout or transfer request.

As far as I'm concerned, a wager is that amount you place on an uncertain outcome. So, unless it is stated that a Push is not an uncertain outcome... I may be picky on semantics but rules policy have to be clear. The fact that the book calls it 'cancelled' after the fact is not accurate. I didn't cancel it, they didn't cancel it; it was a push.

I don't know if other sportsbooks count pushes or not. But I know casinos do. You put it at risk, it is a wager.

Max

[bigboydan]

any book will try anything to make sure you don't cash out. even as something as small and petty as this.

[Bill Dozer]

I think the rollover by definition should pertain to any funds that are risked. This would include pushes. If books want to list different requirements I think that is fine (although may not be player-friendly), but I wish they wouldn't call it a rollover.

Today, each book seems to be making up their own rules for their "rollover". The books would rather tweak the rules than show a scarier rollover requirement. Even top books are now counting the base amount (lesser amt of risk/win) and some might not be counting pushes. I know Sportbet for example, has some rules about MLs not counting toward the "rollover" credit and Pinnacle is now counting the base amount.

I would suggest players read the bonus rules carefully. Unfortunately we can no longer assume we know what a 4x roll-over means without checking the ToS.

In regards to WWTS, pushes should indeed count. I'm checking with them now about your account.

[Bill Dozer]

Pags,

Mgt. tells me that you were informed incorrectly and that pushes will count toward your roll.

[rm18]

Thats true that Cris doesn't give loyalty points on pushes

[OldeTymePlaya]

Pushes should definitely count towards rollover and laoyalty. If you're putting the money at risk it should count.

[pags11]

Bill, thanks for checking into this for me...I don't think it's unreasonable at all to ask that pushes be counted...as Bill stated, the money was risked, the outcome of the bet should not change that fact...I respect WWTS for their decision here, obviously the customer service rep I chatted with via email was misinformed...

[JoshW]

You're right, Laker. But if you want to count wager requirements this way, you have to specify it in your rules.

WWTS Bonus policy rule in regard of rollover:
2.2 Our bonus policy requires that you wager five (5) times your deposited funds and bonus amount prior to any payout or transfer request.

As far as I'm concerned, a wager is that amount you place on an uncertain outcome. So, unless it is stated that a Push is not an uncertain outcome... I may be picky on semantics but rules policy have to be clear. The fact that the book calls it 'cancelled' after the fact is not accurate. I didn't cancel it, they didn't cancel it; it was a push.

I don't know if other sportsbooks count pushes or not. But I know casinos do. You put it at risk, it is a wager.

Max

Is a good point Max, they should change the wording if they decided to go that way. I was reading the Terms & Conditions when people were complaining about bets being cancelled, and I think WWTS/siniter is a little on the sparce side. They certainly should consider providing more details, as was pretty vauge.

I think the rollover by definition should pertain to any funds that are risked. This would include pushes. If books want to list different requirements I think that is fine (although may not be player-friendly), but I wish they wouldn't call it a rollover.

Today, each book seems to be making up their own rules for their "rollover". The books would rather tweak the rules than show a scarier rollover requirement. Even top books are now counting the base amount (lesser amt of risk/win) and some might not be counting pushes. I know Sportbet for example, has some rules about MLs not counting toward the "rollover" credit and Pinnacle is now counting the base amount.

I would suggest players read the bonus rules carefully. Unfortunately we can no longer assume we know what a 4x roll-over means without checking the ToS.

Interesting post Bill. Sort of a state of the industry on bonuses, good read.

[why]

They should! Its action you risked.

[bigboydan]

Pushes should definitely count towards rollover and laoyalty. If you're putting the money at risk it should count.

if anything they should higher the rollover requirements and, not try to use some lame excuses like "pushes don't count"

[kdmfox]

if anything they should higher the rollover requirements and, not try to use some lame excuses like "pushes don't count"

Jeeeeeeeeezus BBD ... Rollovers are already too high ... I have a great idea ... Why don't they just apply your losing bets to the rollover ... That way they will never have to make a payout ... For a 10% bonus, they have players jumping through hoops with rollover rules.

[slacker00]

They should! Its action you risked.

They shouldn't. They aren't taking any vig on the push.

I know it sucks, but this seems analogus to "raked hand requirements" for clearing poker bonuses. Some hands aren't raked, if the hand is folded before the flop, for example. I see a non-vig push as the same thing. They aren't taking any vig, so it doesn't count as money wagered. Now, if they charged a vig on pushes, I think it should count towards the rollover.

If there are some places that count a push towards the rollover, I'd consider that a bonus. If you are depending heavily on bonuses for whatever reason, don't bet pushable lines.

[why]

They shouldn't. They aren't taking any vig on the push.

I know it sucks, but this seems analogus to "raked hand requirements" for clearing poker bonuses. Some hands aren't raked, if the hand is folded before the flop, for example. I see a non-vig push as the same thing. They aren't taking any vig, so it doesn't count as money wagered. Now, if they charged a vig on pushes, I think it should count towards the rollover.

If there are some places that count a push towards the rollover, I'd consider that a bonus. If you are depending heavily on bonuses for whatever reason, don't bet pushable lines.

So if you win that should not count as action because they are not collecting juice. Come on, action is action!

[tacomax]

And a bonus is a bonus. If you don't like the terms, don't take the bonus.

[onlooker]

Pushes should go toward rollover? Yes, its money being risked, it should be counted toward the rollover.

[pags11]

slacker, you seem to be in the minority here...

tacomax, I'm all about following the rules to obtain bonuses, I just think this one's an easy call...

thanks for all your input on this guys...

[Bill Dozer]

Interesting post Bill. Sort of a state of the industry on bonuses, good read.

Things have definitely evolved. As a player, I think simpler is better. If I risked 2 dimes a night for 5 nights, I would expect to be able to calculate that my rolled amount is 10k. Instead, I now need to break out the notebook and check the win amount for each of those bets and look to see if any certain wagers do not count toward my bonus investment.

The scalpers ruin it for the gamblers by grabbing bonuses and playing any big chalk that comes at a value price. That's the reason why the books are using the lesser amounts. Those playing -110 straight bets are only slighty affected.

True gamblers are looking for a deal and want to get the most for the money. If that gambler is not just joining up for the bonus, the best deal is usually reduced juice. Unfortunately these same gamblers think that the instant gratification that comes with a bonus is the way to go. So, the books are left to market those flashy bonuses while figuring out ways to fend off those who know how to suck the value off of every single offer.

[Bill Dozer]

BTW, WWTS did not make an exception for Pags. They do count pushes for everyone. It appears that the clerk who initially serviced him made an error.

[AK]

the books are left to market those flashy bonuses while figuring out ways to fend off those who know how to suck the value off of every single offer.

They don't have to offer a bonus

[bigboydan]

The scalpers ruin it for the gamblers by grabbing bonuses and playing any big chalk that comes at a value price.

nobodys forcing these books to give out these bonuses at all. maybe the books should find a new way to attract the true gamblers or, square gamblers or, whatever type of gamblers/customers they are looking for IMHOO

[Bill Dozer]

They don't have to offer a bonus

Right, and you didn't have to offer those ladies money to get them to play at BetAK.

But, you are right. They could offer lower vig and send would-be players looking elsewhere for the big bonus. The cappers still outweigh the AKs by enough to make it worth it... for now.

[AK]

Right, and you didn't have to offer those ladies money to get them to play at BetAK.

How did you get that info?

Bill is on top of things

[pags11]

outstanding stuff here Bill...and being that I am one of those handicappers looking for as much reduced juice as possible...I use these bonuses to help cut down on vig on my handicapped games...I can see why books are so leary of scalpers and bonus hunters...me, I just want to be fair to my books and have them be fair to me...that's all you can ask...

[kdmfox]

Isn't the bonus the vehicle they use to institute rollover? ... No bonus, no rollover? ... Think about it, for a bonus they get you hanging around without a withdrawal for 5x or greater ... And the bonus is chump change ... Everyone likes something for "free".

[JoshW]

Isn't the bonus the vehicle they use to institute rollover? ... No bonus, no rollover? ... Think about it, for a bonus they get you hanging around without a withdrawal for 5x or greater ... And the bonus is chump change ... Everyone likes something for "free".

kdmfox, is a tough game. Not everyone needs to go for bonuses, but the guys who stay around long term have to take advantage of almost every legit edge they can get. Low juice, no juice, bonuses, contests. Doesn't mean you have to do them all, I certainly am not a big contest player, but over the long term the more ways you have to make a little money to keep in action the better. In most cases we know the sportsbooks will always be around, but you or I as players have to find all the ways we can to stay in action.

[kdmfox]

kdmfox, is a tough game. Not everyone needs to go for bonuses, but the guys who stay around long term have to take advantage of almost every legit edge they can get. Low juice, no juice, bonuses, contests. Doesn't mean you have to do them all, I certainly am not a big contest player, but over the long term the more ways you have to make a little money to keep in action the better. In most cases we know the sportsbooks will always be around, but you or I as players have to find all the ways we can to stay in action.

Good points lakerfan ... Frankly though, most of us are so reckless, impulsive, and undisciplined that low juice, no juice, bonuses and contests don't amount to squat in the long run ... Except me of course ... Hehehehehehehehehe ... The Fox

[slacker00]

slacker, you seem to be in the minority here...

tacomax, I'm all about following the rules to obtain bonuses, I just think this one's an easy call...

thanks for all your input on this guys...

Pags, I was just trying to give a different viewpoint. I honestly would side with the bettors rather than the house every time. But, the house needs to take a profit, and I understand that as well. The key is to find something that is fair to both sides. There is always room to argue.

An intersting thing is happening in online poker right now. The online cardrooms keep increasing the rake and decreasing the bonuses. I know a lot of you guys don't know anything about online poker, but these sportsbook bonuses that are currently offered might get a lot worse in months and years to come, as they have less reason to offer bonuses. It's a changing market. A lot of "regular" online poker players are plenty pissed about the fact that the poker bonuses are getting smaller and the rake is getting higher and higher. It's all business. That's a good thing to remember.

[marc]

Its one thing if a bet is no actioned like a baseball game that is rained out. But a push should count. If books wnat to make sure that they collect thier juice, then simply only offer lines that have a hook.

As for the bonus rules, I am definitely seeing more books looking at the lesser of the risk amount or win amount. Persoanlly I think its a bit foolish. Genrally speaking the favs tend to get bumped up, and players trying to complete thier rollover tend to want to bet big favs. But that means Books are making good theoretical edge on those plays. Instead they are forcing players to bet the dogs, whihc are often pumped up to the point where they have positive theorectical edge for the player. So now in the long run, the books are going to lose evn more money.

WHat i really don't like about all these bonus rules, is that often the software isn't desinged to allow the player to easily calculate how much roll is done. If your a book that tends to give out a bonus, then design your software such that players can quickly see if the roll is done. That's what I love about bodog. Its so easy to see how much action you've done. SOme books like bowmans its a total pain to go through your wagers and figure it out.

WHat would also be nice is if some of these books can be a bit more reasonable. For instance, if I have 15k in my account, and I owe about 5k in action to complete the roll, so let me make a 5k withdrawal. I respect the fatc that you have players who upon completeing the roll immeditaely cahsout, and that drives books crazy. But sometime you have books that have limits on how much you can withdraw per week, or they don't allow withdrawals over the weekend, so i knwo fro myself, there have been occasion where on thursday I'm scrambling to finish a roll, so I can cashout some of my winnings on friday, and not have to wait until monday.

But as a player the one thing to always remember is that there really aren't that many quality books giving out bonuses. So if bonuses matter to you, and you feel a book is making you jump through hoops, just be sure to hold your tonuge. The last thing you want is to burn your birdges.