why is SBR turning there head on WagerWeb?

[NaturalLight]

I have read numurious reports on wagerweb stealing huge amounts of money from many players from some 5% rebate promo they offered in the past..

Why has wagerweb not been downgraded to an D- or F?

[Sean]

Not sure where you get the idea that SBR is "turning there [sic] head" on the WagerWeb disputes. We have, in fact, been working to get to the bottom of this issue ...

I am investigating this. This is quite possibly the most complicated dispute I have ever reviewed. This might take longer than normal to resolve if only due to the 5-year period where this thing built up.

Most of the time, there is much more to these matters than what "meets the eye" in forum-ville.

[Spanks]

Same Reason Sportsbook.com Is Blacklistedcfor Not Paying In A Timely Fashion...

[SBR_John]

I think we are in that period where its not appropriate for SBR to make shoot from the hip comments. The players who are involved in this have sounded off. Now the book gets its chance to explain what happened.

[jjgold]

Posters leave out IMPORTANT details with book disputes and usually the book ends up right.

[slash]

Posters leave out IMPORTANT details with book disputes and usually the book ends up right.

Most books don't give a shit about screwing over a player. They will make up lies if that supports their case.

[jjgold]

Slasher we only bet with top books so no problems like this arise.

[Senator7]

Posters leave out IMPORTANT details with book disputes and usually the book ends up right.

Gotta agree with JJ here. I've seen it too many times where some poster comes on here blasting a book for ripping him off and when we get the book's side of things, we learn some pretty interesting details that were conveniently forgot by the poster.

Now, I'm not saying that's the case this time. I'm just saying that history has proven that patience is necessary before passing judgement for one side or the other.

In a perfect world, everyone would only play at the books on SBR's Recommended List and there would rarely, if ever, be a problem. Unfortunately, we don't live in a perfect world and most sportsbettors are more concerned with the amount of their bonus than if the book is actually going to pay them.

[Justin7]

I'm still waiting for both sides to give me information. In particular, I only have contact information for 2 of the 10 players involved in the dispute. I am also waiting for the complete Wagering log for all the players from Wagerweb (which they have agreed to provide).

I also need a detailed communication log from both sides (both have partially complied with tihs). As I said, this is very complicated, and both sides need to provide me with a lot more information before I can say anything intelligible about it.

[slash]

Gotta agree with JJ here. I've seen it too many times where some poster comes on here blasting a book for ripping him off and when we get the book's side of things, we learn some pretty interesting details that were conveniently forgot by the poster.

"Forgot" by the poster or made up by the book...

[NaturalLight]

I'm still waiting for both sides to give me information. In particular, I only have contact information for 2 of the 10 players involved in the dispute. I am also waiting for the complete Wagering log for all the players from Wagerweb (which they have agreed to provide).

I also need a detailed communication log from both sides (both have partially complied with tihs). As I said, this is very complicated, and both sides need to provide me with a lot more information before I can say anything intelligible about it.

10 players? I show 17 as of this minute crying foul from all over the forums. The book offered 5% return what possibly is Wagerwebs excuse for stiffing them? Seems like a simple fraud case to me unfortuanitly the book is at fault this time. I mean a majority of these players have played there for over 5 years and just now wagerweb claims them of fraud?

Either way if it took wagerweb 5 years to "detect" some sort of scam I sure don't want my hard earned money there.

[Justin7]

Natural - there were 13 "associated" players. 3 of them stopped playing some time ago. 10 were active as of a year ago.

I'm not drawing any conclusions until I have all the facts. Both sides have presented arguments that, if backed by facts, entitle them to relief. When I have all the information, I'll present it at once. Until then, I'm refraining from speculation.