 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
Glad you got refunded but the book was right. Lines on Novak were better than they should have been due to the risk of him not playing. You get a better line because he might not play. Do you think the book should adjust your payout down if it turns out he does play? I’m guessing the answer is no.
That's an absurd argument. Many Books were dealing Djokavic at +115 to win the tournament, they were not pricing in the probability he wouldn't play at all.Originally Posted by PharaohUB
They should follow house rules, which is almost certainly "all bets are action".
The reason they can refunding bets, is because they want the nice gesture to convince people to continue betting into their 30% hold. Are they also paying out everyone who bet Djokovic not to win? Of course not, because they won't even offer fair bets like that.
I would much rather bet at the places that have 10% hold on futures and stick to the rules.
VERY tiny
Surprised they caved. Glad you got your $5 bsck
Why would a book adjust the price on Joker? He either plays or he doesn't. That's why the rules cover their ass regardless. Some book isn't going to offer him at +900 and bury themselves on the best player incase he somehow is allowed to play.
I’ve seen books that refund all bets if the favorite doesn’t play. This is to protect the books not you. Why you would want to change a rule that benefits players is beyond me. I got in +800 on zverev and +250 on medvedev when news started coming out Novak was being quarantined in a hotel. You made a poor decision betting on a guy at risk of not being allowed to play in Aussie open. That’s on you. They can’t just change rules because one person doesn’t like the outcome.
The Australian government approved his ****, what happened was not foreseeable.
No they didn't. v1sas to come here, or to the USA, cannot be pre-approved by anyone. Says on the forms subject to Homeland Security checks on arrival.
He got the same V1sa that you would apply for if coming here. You fill out an online form and make a declaration that you will meet the conditions when checked on arrival.
The real stuff up was that the local state govt told Tennis Australia that their local rules would allow him to cross their state border with proof of a previous infection. Which was true for inter-state visitors (all they control) but was opposite of what the Federal Govt had already told Tennis Australia.
The tourney director convinced himself that it would be ok based on that and told Djoko he was clear to come.
In no way shape or form did the federal govt, responsible for border rules, ever approve a v1sa or say anything but that there was no exemption possible for previous infected people at the time.
Let's see if you accept that now that you know, or repeat your claim again...
Nope. In the case of murder, the correct outcome would be to follow their rules and grade Djokovic a loss. Now, in a case like that, sportsbooks might very well refund the losing side of that future, but that would purely be a goodwill gesture done for customer relations / PR purposes.
Don't know where things stand now as per this subject, but you're owed a refund. Djokovic isn't participating in the tournament so how can a future on him still stand as a bet?
We have confirmed they refunded his $4.50 parlay bet.
Do not laugh that is a value meal DELICIOUS
Good point. True.
I know i always have a good point not just on my head . I got a value meal at Sonic today i got a large iced coffee too and i added chocolate when i got home and made it into a Mocha.
So, as a rule, you think this should always be the case, or just when you are holding a ticket on the guy? Or, just if it is the top guy? What about if it was Medvedev--same? Or the 5th ranked player, he matters a lot, no? So now you think all these people holding tickets (whether it be on. a 'favorite' or a long shot should have their tickets cancelled?
Jesus Christ, you couldn't be more wrong. Maybe next time read the thread. Rules are rules.
This entire thread is stupid.
Imagine what they do when they see his -150 bets…
best free photo hosting
All in futures mean you are placing a wager and regardless of what happens your bet stands. If a book refunds you it's only out of good will they are doing this. If you can't comprehend this you should probably gamble more.
Wrong, these bets did not account for a third party intervening to stop Djokovic from playing. Learn to read.All in futures mean you are placing a wager and regardless of what happens your bet stands. If a book refunds you it's only out of good will they are doing this. If you can't comprehend this you should probably gamble more.
You don't understand what I said. Obviously the national government did not approve Djokavic's **** - governments don't do that in advance of people entering the country usually anyways.
What I'm saying is that the local government and the tennis association clearly approved of Djokavic's **** application and informed him that he would be able to play.
The local Australian government and the Tennis association - which obviously doesn't control the country's border, made clear that Djokavic's **** would be accepted.
The national government intervened for political reasons, there isn't a single remotely scientific based reason for not allowing a healthy young man with natural immunity in your country, the mistake Djokavic made on his **** was minor and not in bad faith.
Please show this stipulation in the rules or the terms of the bet.
Again, there are exceptions to every rule. If someone killed a player before a tournament, if the tournament was cancelled - which happened multiple times in 2020.
Not when you have a contract between two parties. The exceptions have to be spelled out. I am amazed that someone who has seemingly been betting as long as you have believes that there are unwritten rules which must be abided by. That goes against everything which we preach here. The rules are the rules.
I'm actually beginning to think that you recognize how you were wrong and are now just committed to trolling everyone in this thread.
Last edited by DontTailMe; 01-22-22 at 05:59 AM.
Why not put your opinion to the Gaming Control Board Thomorino?
Nothing will change if people just bluster about stuff like this on forums and don't bother telling the people who can change it what you think.
https://gamingcontrolboard.pa.gov/?p=106
Nothing more heart warming than optional shilling for his coworkers and banning innocents
Morino bullied in every one of his threads
Arguing with morino is like arguing what came first..the chicken or the egg? The guy is lucky they refunded his $10 bet. Off course he doesn't post a screenshot of the refund because it is so small.
He’s not going to do all that. He created this thread to argue with people. Books don’t give a rats shit about his opinion otherwise. Just another guy placing -160 bets with an “edge”
But that was only $20 I throw that out the window
It doesn’t matter how or why he didn’t play the tournament. Someone could’ve shot him walking into the stadium and the result is still the same, it’s an action play and unfortunately is graded as a loss. If you start debating different situations where a player was unable to start the tournament you open yourself up to all kinds of issues if you are a book.
2 unintelligent posters
These gaming boards are all political hacks, they don't know anything about gambling.
Every rule has an exception. If Djokavic died Ina nuclear attack bets should be refunded.
Not refunding my bet would have violated the spirit of the rule.
Am I the only one who thinks that this original poster didnt actually make the bet in question???
I am mean in NO WAY should all bets on Joker be refunded! That would effect the odds on all of the other players. Now maybe Morino bet $5 and since he bitched about it for a few days they got tired of him and gave him back his $5. But REST ASSURED that they did not offer anyone a refund with a bet over $100 on Joker or anyone else
Reply With Quote
