Stealing by sportsbook.com

SBR_John · 09-26-07, 04:28 PM

Which case are you referring to? There are always multiple cases involving this book. Can you provide a link?

bigboydan · 09-26-07, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by SBR_John

Which case are you referring to? There are always multiple cases involving this book. Can you provide a link?

It's just a total guess on my part John. However, I think this is probably the complaint Louis is referring too:

Sportsbook.com Group stands firm on decision to grade winning wagers as losers.

Sportsbook.com (SBR rating D+) bettors who had winning bets on the September 9th game between the Indians and the Angels will apparently be cheated out of their funds. After initially crediting players for the win the funds were deducted from accounts due to a misspelling in the abbreviated listing of one of the pitcher's first names. Players have made a legitimate case that the decision is illogical, inconsistent and subjective. Players have reported instances where losing wagers placed on games where the pitchers' names have also been misspelled were not canceled.

Player: FYI, below is a copy of a bet that I made at Sports.com on Sep 18th. You'll notice that it was graded a Loss, rather than a No Action, despite the fact that the pitcher's name was spelled wrong (it was spelled Harahan, and was supposed to be Hanrahan). Now obviously, it's not a major spelling error (only one letter off), and it did not confuse me, and I wouldn't expect the bet to be No Actioned .... however, it does illustrate that their bet cancellations are very subjective (the JefWeaver bet that they cancelled was only one letter different from JerWeaver, similar to this Harahan / Hanrahan bet which they allowed to stand as a Loss).

Bill Dozer · 09-26-07, 04:47 PM

Originally posted by louis

They simply stoled this guy's money.

I would be interested in hearing from WSEX, GREEK, and other books that have representatives here at SBR what they would have done in the same situation.

This will help draw business away from sportsbook.com to the better books, as sportsbook.com does not deserve to be a sportsbook on the internet.

I am sick and tired of hearing about the crap sportsbook.com tries to pull to rob players of their funds.

Players are calling it an outright scam. The book can hang an opinionated line and take lots of action but cover themselves by spelling a pitcher's name wrong.

The Greek is on record as saying they would use common sense. If there is incorrect spelling of a name of the only pitcher it could be referring to, it would not be canceled.

If someone contacted the book after the game and claimed the spelling error lead them to believe it was someone else then it could be handled on an individual basis.

bigboydan · 09-26-07, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by Bill Dozer

If someone contacted the book after the game and claimed the spelling error lead them to believe it was someone else then it could be handles on an individual basis.

The guy who made that complaint would be nothing more than a shot taker though in my opinion Bill.

The common sense factor should have came into play on this particular complaint.

Bill Dozer · 09-26-07, 04:52 PM

Player outlines issue with Sportsbook.com decision:

Bill, Here are the two bets that were cancelled at Sports.com. The account number is ***********, if by some chance it gets that far:

25) BET ID=218280677
Straight Wager 09/09/07 12:09 ET
bet 3,000.00 to win 2,000.00 (paid 3000.0) Result: No Action

Indians(Cleveland) Laffey No Action
Angels(Anaheim) JefWeaver 09/09/07(20:10 ET)
Indians(Cleveland) +1.5 (-150)

32) BET ID=218235457
Straight Wager 09/09/07 10:29 ET
bet 1,000.00 to win 1,450.00 (paid 1000.0) Result: No Action

Indians(Cleveland) Laffey No Action
Angels(Anaheim) JefWeaver 09/09/07(20:10 ET)
Indians(Cleveland) +145

As you can see, I’m out a total of $3,450 ($2,000 on the runline and $1,450 on the moneyline) …

------------------------------------------
A few points regarding this situation ….
1. In general, the rule that states that the listed pitcher has to pitch is there to avoid confusion, not to use as an excuse to void a legit bet at a legit line when there is a minor typo (as was the case here). In this case, a reasonable person (if they even noticed the spelling error) would not have been confused by this ticket … they would know that there is no ‘Jef’ Weaver on the Angels, and assume it’s a minor typo and that it’s supposed to be Jered Weaver (especially considering that the ‘r’ and the ‘f’ are adjacent to one another on a keyboard).

2. At first glance (and second and third glances), I never even noticed that there was an ‘f’ in the name. If you look quickly, from a normal 18-24” distance from the computer monitor, it looks like it’s simply ‘JeWeaver’ or even ‘JerWeaver’ (for Jered)… the ‘f’ (especially the top part of the ‘f’) is obscured by the capital ‘W’, so it’s hard to pick out the spelling error unless you’re specifically looking for it.

3. If a book does make this type of error, you expect them to notice it and correct it within a reasonable amount of time. Most bettors don’t take 30 seconds to examine every detail on a betting ticket, and have come to rely on the books to have it written correctly, especially on mainstream bets like baseball. Sportsbook.com and their sister books generally hang tomorrow’s baseball lines (moneylines and totals) around suppertime the day before. If you look at the time stamps on my tickets, they show 10:29 AM (mid-morning) and 12:09 PM (lunchtime). This means that Sportsbook.com had this game listed and available for about 18 hours prior to me placing these bets. The fact that they had the line up for a full 18 hours without noticing the error, proves just how obscure and hard-to-see that this typo actually was.

4. This game was played on Monday night. Around 1 AM on Monday night / Tuesday morning, I did a reconciliation with all my book balances. At that point, these bets were still graded as winners. So even after the game was completed, Sportsbook.com had still not noticed the minor typo, and had these bets graded as winners. I suspect what happened is that somebody who bet the other side happened to notice the typo, and was looking for a freeroll on this game … if their side would have been a winner, they would have not said anything, but since their side was a loser, they contacted Sportsbook.com to complain about the typo and ask that Sportsbook.com no-action their losing bet.

5. As per Point 4 above, the bet was not voided before the game, and obviously no e-mail was sent to notify people. The bet was no-actioned well after the game was completed.

6. I follow lines quite closely, as you might imagine, and the lines for this game (moneyline, total, and runline) were spot on at Sportsbook.com … so the excuse that Sportsbook.com used that “they had the wrong line because they capped the game with Jeff Weaver pitching” is complete bulls**t. The line was not wrong.

7. Sportsbook.com rarely puts the first name of the pitcher on the betting ticket … that’s another reason why people probably never bothered to check closely. I can go back in my betting history at Sports.com and find dozens of betting tickets with pitchers named Perez, Hernandez, Gonzalez, etc. … names of pitchers who have the same last name as other pitchers in MLB … and Sports.com does not bother to list their first names. Here’s an example from the 9th … Felix Hernandez pitching … several other pitchers named Hernandez in MLB, but Sports.com doesn’t bother putting in the first name:
34) BET ID=218225713
Straight Wager 09/09/07 09:48 ET
bet 500.00 to win 434.78 Result: Wager Lost

Mariners(Seattle) Hernandez 14
Tigers(Detroit) Bonderman 7 09/09/07(13:05 ET)
Under 9.5 (-115)

FYI, below is a copy of a bet that I made at Sports.com on Sep 18th. You'll notice that it was graded a Loss, rather than a No Action, despite the fact that the pitcher's name was spelled wrong (it was spelled Harahan, and was supposed to be Hanrahan). Now obviously, it's not a major spelling error (only one letter off), and it did not confuse me, and I wouldn't expect the bet to be No Actioned .... however, it does illustrate that their bet cancellations are very subjective (the JefWeaver bet that they cancelled was only one letter different from JerWeaver, similar to this Harahan / Hanrahan bet which they allowed to stand as a Loss).

38) BET ID=219594920
Straight Wager 09/18/07 18:11 ET
bet 1,500.00 to win 1,200.00 Result: Wager Lost

Mets(NY) Maine 8
Nationals(Washington) Harahan 9 09/18/07(19:05 ET)
Under 9 (-125)

Bill Dozer · 09-26-07, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by bigboydan

The guy who made that complaint would be nothing more than a shot taker though in my opinion Bill.

The common sense factor should have came into play on this particular complaint.

He would have to make a case that he thought a different Weaver was pitching. Most players know there is only one Weaver on the team and who was pitching that night.

They probably had more action on Weaver and took the out. The line was bet down 15 cents.

HedgeHog · 09-26-07, 05:38 PM

This is so wrong--and I've been with Sportsbook.com forever.
Hopefully the pressure from all this negative exposure will get them to do the right thing.

ronniejamedio · 09-26-07, 05:50 PM

that sucks man. big bets too. they never side with the consumer. thats why I stopped playing there. A few months back they had a problem with the poker software where it would freeze and time you out if you tried to raise or go all in. so your hand would be folded. It happened a few times and cost me a couple hundred dollars easily. when I made the complaint all they did was refund my blind (2 bucks) 3 times. they said they are not responsible for any malfunctions. So phuck them. everyone should leave that junk site.

ugpcalled · 09-26-07, 07:31 PM

very common

EJandV · 09-26-07, 07:44 PM

Sportsbook.com are straight up pirates in more ways than I could try and tell you .
If you get caught up playing blackjack with them you will regret it big time .
They have also made some of my wagers disappear that were winners believe it or not ...
The great strategy they use to get people in the blackjack and their casino games in general is they let you do good in the beginning to plant that seed , to program you so you will keep coming back CHASING THAT GOOD DAY YOU HAD BACK IN THE DAY LMAO .
In the blackjack you will lose 8 hands in a row , that happens because they want you to raise your bet .
What happens next ?
You lose that hand too , 9 in a row , raise it again , no way I can lose 10 hands in a row , thus for a total screw job from a rigged casino , wiped out !!!!!!!
This would be no different than any strategy you would employ if you were trying to take someones / everyones money , being a shark or pirate or a great player .
You would not have a computer generated program but is the same in context .

crazylegs118 · 09-26-07, 11:46 PM

The blackjack is totally rigged

I completely agree. I've lost a lot of money on that stupid blackjack. The amount of hands they will make you lose in a row is insane. The only way I've ever won a lot on there is if I lose a bunch first.

I used Sportsbook for probably about 4 years. I used to actually think they were great. I would request a bank wire withdrawal and it would be in my bank in 2 days. I stopped using them about 6 months ago when withdrawals started taking over a month and they would just lie and give you a date knowing it was never going to be sent.

HedgeHog · 09-27-07, 08:17 AM

SBR is 100% right on their stance against Sportsbook.com, but the title they chose for the 9/25 wire is somewhat inaccurate. At the risk of getting hate posts, may I suggest two bettor ones:

"Sportsbook.com Group stands firm on decision to deny winning wagers"

Or

"Sportsbook.com Group stands firm on decision to grade winning wagers no action"

I think it's an important distinction, and continue to hope that Sportsbook.com finally gets it right.

PS Ignore the green smiley face in the upper left. I tried to quote the 9/25 wire and got that instead.

Bill Dozer · 09-27-07, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by HedgeHog

SBR is 100% right on their stance against Sportsbook.com, but the title they chose for the 9/25 wire is somewhat inaccurate. At the risk of getting hate posts, may I suggest two bettor ones:

"Sportsbook.com Group stands firm on decision to deny winning wagers"

Or

"Sportsbook.com Group stands firm on decision to grade winning wagers no action"

I think it's an important distinction, and continue to hope that Sportsbook.com finally gets it right.

PS Ignore the green smiley face in the upper left. I tried to quote the 9/25 wire and got that instead.

Good catch. The title described an even worse situation but has been fixed. Thank you.

bigloser · 09-27-07, 01:24 PM

Dont known what I think about this.

It looks as if Sportsbook must have received complaints from those that bet the losing side and had to void.

As was said in another thread rules are there to avoid people having to use a common sense appoach

So I dont know.
Will now check to see if I was on that game

spliff · 09-27-07, 01:50 PM

It's amazing that books routinely make these spelling mistakes. It's simply amazing. How hard is it to copy and paste if you unsure? Take the initiative to do a decent fukking job.

durito · 09-27-07, 04:05 PM

Aren't the Angels, called the Los Angeles Angels now?

What will they do next, void a bet because their system still says Anaheim?