SBR Has Become The Site For Scammers, Shot Takers, and Two Bit Hustlers...

[BigBollocks]

Never thought I'd say this, but I'm disgusted at how some of the top guns here are burning their bridges to help the lowlives in our industry. Rather than pick their battles carefully and truly go at the no-pay, slowpay, and shot-taking books, SBR lately has decided to become the advocate for players taking shots themselves.

There is absolutely no way that guy at WW should be paid. He had such an unbelievable edge it was unreal, and the longevity of his actions proved just how mischievous his intent was. Rather than write it off as a failed shot taking attempt and move on, SBR has now been coerced into saying that because the system was flawed, the player's funds were at risk and he should be paid. I can understand if it was one or two attempts where the player's edge went up to say 75%, but when someone has that many documented past post 1st and 2nd half wagers they are guaranteed statistically to rake the book over the coals.

I thought that SBR should have stayed out of the BetJM incident, but did see how the player had somewhat of a case in that one. However, when you're defending players making 20-50 past post halftime wagers, defending players asking for their money back because they were really under 18, and defending players asking for their money back because they said the game had really started two minutes before they made their bet (and they waited until the game was over to say a word), we've got a real problem.

I couldn't be more appreciative for the inside info on books about to go belly up or pulling a sportsbook.com scam, but to become the advocate for cheating just because it was on the players' side is not a position SBR wants to take. We've seen more small-time, under 100 post count new subscribers in the last couple of months blindly screaming bloody murder over every case now than I can remember. It is obviously natural for us players to always root on each other, but SBR needs to start being reasonable and selective in the future battles they pick for both theirs and our sake. Cheers...

[Dark Horse]

Why would the player think his action was unwanted, let alone that he was taking a shot, if a live clerk, time after time, was willing to write the ticket? If anything, WW's own representative(s) made it perfectly clear that the action was totally acceptable to them.

The shadowy behavior is on behalf of WW, which, all of a sudden, doesn't want to take responsibility for its own clerk(s).

On a side note, the issue was never addressed if this concerned a single clerk or multiple clerks. In the latter case, company policy is established. As was mentioned in the other thread, if WW wants to -retroactively- backtrack on its own policy, let them return all losing wagers to all players who ever placed a bet after the game had started.

[SBR_John]

Thanks for the comments BB.

Nearly every dispute involves a shot taker on some level. We turn to the books own rules in these disputes. Afterall, its the books that write the rules.

[tblues2005]

SBRJohn,

I know there is a few clowns that will disagree with you guys but I do agree with the books rules and these books want to not lose their shirt on the horses, so they have to put limits on it for them to make a profit. I would do the same thing if I was them and make it clear with the person that is betting ahead of time. Mistakes are made sometimes and I do respect that the book does explain why they did something. I certainly respect that SBR is trying to watch out for everyone, when it comes to these rip off books like BetUs and sportsbook.com, I am for sure staying far away from them people as possible because they are doing bad business towards people.

[Bill Dozer]

One thing about forums and open discussions is we tend ask what likely happened instead of looking at what we do know happened and how. It's fine for casual discussion but if a player is able to get a bet in after kick-off or able to get a line that's +1.5 instead of -1.5... it's not our job to determine if he is sharp, to research if he knew when the game started or understood if the line was off, or if he went to church the Sunday before.

We need to look at the facts, rules, and what the book does to address its mistake. If the book wants to claim that 1.5/+1.5 is an obvious error after the game, fine. Make him buy the points. If the book thinks it confirmed a bet after the opening drive, fine. Send him an email in that same quarter and alert him that you messed up and he does not have action.

Not only did Wagerweb wait until the end of the game, they waited until the end of 70 games and his first payout.

[chano]

One thing about forums and open discussions is we tend ask what likely happened instead of looking at what we do know happened and how. It's fine for casual discussion but if a player is able to get a bet in after kick-off or able to get a line that's +1.5 instead of -1.5... it's not our job to determine if he is sharp, to research if he knew when the game started or understood if the line was off, or if he went to church the Sunday before.

We need to look at the facts, rules, and what the book does to address its mistake. If the book wants to claim that 1.5/+1.5 is an obvious error after the game, fine. Make him buy the points. If the book thinks it confirmed a bet after the opening drive, fine. Send him an email in that same quarter and alert him that you messed up and he does not have action.

Not only did Wagerweb wait until the end of the game, they waited until the end of 70 games and his first payout.

Big Bullocks is correct. This place has become a place for lowlife shot takers. Especially after your reply Bill. I understand your post but come on .. This guy is no good and should accept some responsibility ..

[Bill Dozer]

Big Bullocks is correct. This place has become a place for lowlife shot takers. Especially after your reply Bill. I understand your post but come on .. This guy is no good and should accept some responsibility ..

The player would take "some," and WW said they would propose something fair before balking.

We would set a dangerous precedent allowing the book to wipe balances out when a player tries to get bets in after the game begins. I'm sure you realize that if CRIS leaves a line up into the 1st quarter, many uneducated players will bet it thinking they will slip by with that unfair edge. Would you wipe them out? Punish them? Delete any previously graded bet after the scheduled time? Book 50 more bets?

Player intentions aside, what's your take on what the book did?

[SBR_John]

I wont deny that we represent some shot takers. Everyone has the right to have their case looked at. We have ruled in the books favor a lot more than most seem to think or give us credit for.

We rule in favor of the rules. Sometimes the book overlooks the rules and opens themself up to a shot taker. Its unfortunate at times but keep in mind its the books that write the rules and the players are to follow them. thats a very important point to keep in mind.

[BEANTOWNJIM]

YOUR FULL OF SH-T JOHN WHEN YOU SAY YOU RULE IN FAVOR OF RULES.WHAT HAPPENED WHEN LENNY FROM CASCADE SPORTSBOOK BROKE HIS OWN WRITTEN RULES JOHN AND YOU SIDED WITH HIM.DID YOU FORGET THE RULES IN MY CASE JOHN YOU GOT PAID OFF THIS IS THE REAL TRUTH.I GET ROBBED AND JOHN FROM THE SBR SAYS LENNY IS A GOOD GUY WHY DONT WE TELL IT LIKE IT IS JOHN YOUR ON THE TAKE.

CASCADE RULES (ALL WAGERS WILL BE ACCEPTED UP UNTIL THE POSTED STARTING TIME OF THE EVENT) REMEMBER THIS RULE JOHN I BET A GAME 15 MINUTES AFTER IT STARTED AND YOU ALLOWED LENNY TO ACCEPT THE BET AND GRADE IT IN HIS FAVOR AFTER THE GAME ENDED.WATCH DOG SITE MY ARSE

[noyb]

bb, i wonder why you seem to be so focused on the side of the player. the player took a shot, and should not be paid etc. let's look at it from the other side.

in a lot of the player complaints recently player behaviour might be suspicious, but in the end it's the book that's also taking a shot by not doing anything until they have to pay up.

you should be able to expect from a book they are able (both in terms of security as well as integrity) to spot a " shot taker " (whatever that may be) from the beginning. if they act then and boot the player, nobody will mind. if they don't, either because of very bad monitoring, or truely because they wanna see if the player might lose his deposit in the process, the book is definitely not a victim to me. there's no way a book should profit from this kind of behaviour.

while i agree there have been recent cases in which i did not feel the player deserved all of his winnings, the book definitely does not deserve them either.

[BEANTOWNJIM]

I Have Been In This Business A Long Time And Have Seen It All Over The Years.i Dont Know One Spoprtsbook That Wont Take A Shot At A Player If They Can.if Bet Jamaica Had A Rule 500 Is The Limit On Horses Then Why Cant They Change There Software.i Will Gaurentee You If A Player Bet Over 500 And Lost He Would Never Get His Losses Back.this Player Just Happened To Win So That Is Why Bet Jamaica Started Crying.think About It A Guy Has 500 Limit He Bets An Extra 500 Lets Say He Loses Both Bets For A 1000 Does Anybody In This Forum Think For A Minute A Sportsbook Will Return Your Extra 500 No Way Its A Set Up To Screw The Player.if You Win They Investigate But If You Lose They Say Nothing And You Lose All Your Wagers.total Bullshit By Bet Jamaica

[ChuteBoxe]

Jim, I agree with you 100%. No Fvckin way a player will be getting reimbursed for the extra money if he loses. I hope they do wind up changing their software after this fiasco. But, at least BetJam did the right thing though, and paid the guy his money.

[acw]

BigBollocks,

Thanks to BTJ I knew several years ago already that Cascade could not be trusted. Thanks to these shot takers we know what WagerWeb's future will look like too.

[BEANTOWNJIM]

Chute Did You Ever Hear What Happened To Me At Cascade Sportsbook 3 Years Ago.

The Celtics Were Playing A Night Game It Started At 7.05 I Went In To Bet The Game And It Was Still On The Board At 7.20 So I Thought It Was An 8.05 Start So I Bet The Over.i Went To Watch The Pre Game Show And Little Did I Know The Score Was 16 To 14 With 5.21 Left In The 1st Quarter.i Said What The F-ck Is This Bullshit How Can A Sportsbook Have A Game Available For Betting 15 Minutes After It Started.

Chute Lenny From Cascade Sportsbook Watched The Whole Game Then When The Game Went Under He Said I Had Action And I Lost $660 Dollars.chute How Can A Sportsbook Break There Own Written Rules And Grade A Bet In There Favor You Might Ask.

Cascade Rules (all Wagers Will Be Accepted Up Until The Posted Starting Time Of The Event) You See Chute The Sportsbooks Rules Mean Shit They Will Take A Shot At A Player Anyway They Can.john From The Sbr Thought It Was O.k. That Lenny And Cascade Sportsbook Stole My Money Imagine That

[BEANTOWNJIM]

Bottom Line Boys Sportsbooks Take More Shots Than Players And Lets Not Forget They Are Holding Our Money So Be Very Carefull They Will Screw You Anyway They Can If You Dont Speak Up.

[chano]

The player would take "some," and WW said they would propose something fair before balking.

We would set a dangerous precedent allowing the book to wipe balances out when a player tries to get bets in after the game begins. I'm sure you realize that if CRIS leaves a line up into the 1st quarter, many uneducated players will bet it thinking they will slip by with that unfair edge. Would you wipe them out? Punish them? Delete any previously graded bet after the scheduled time? Book 50 more bets?

Player intentions aside, what's your take on what the book did?

Well...Here is how I look at it. The player initiated a negative relationship. Therefore the player should lose. I agree that the book put itself in a no lose situtaion, probably knowing from the beginning that they would deny any payouts If and when that time came. Although , I dont blame them for that. Its the player that had negative intentions from the start and definetly deserves NOTHING. I would send the players deposit back and tell him/her, NICE TRY. Now go elsewhere...

[jjgold]

Jimmy every forum owner owes you an apology, you were right about Lenny way back, I remember we were both banned when we exposed him because guys were on the take.

Good Call Jimmy

[eric dy]

Bottom line is WAGERWEB is a unprofessional organization and nobody should ever send them a penny. There are way too many reputable sportsbook out there to deal with these clowns. In addition, if anyone has any money with this sportsbook they should take it out immediately. This sportsbook needs to be severly punished for there actions. Regardless, of how anyone sees it, the sportsbook took the action (via a live phone clerk, over 70 plays) and after the player wins over $37,000 they decide to say he is "taking a shot." Give me a break!!! WagerWeb needs to take the $37,000 they STOLE from this guy and invest in new management, software and training.

[robmpink]

I play at WagerWeb and get paid by them no problem. I don't feel worried that my funds will be held up since I don't take shots. I thought Justin's report said that the guy wasn't on their radar. Do we know for a fact that WagerWeb knew all along and just waited? Again I am satisifed with WW and will be the first to tell you that it doesn't suprise me that the wagering clerks could have let this slip this long. Yes it is something WW needs to fix it since God only knows how many other people may have exploited this flaw. I'm sure there are others who did it but maybe didn't accrue such winnings. The more and more I think about it, the guy did himself in with greed and stupidity. It was an omen for WW that it happened and was finally discovered. I would actually use the tapes as a training session with the reps and rip the shit out of the ones who were oblivious to it numerous times.

[ritehook]

Bottom Line Boys Sportsbooks Take More Shots Than Players And Lets Not Forget They Are Holding Our Money So Be Very Carefull They Will Screw You Anyway They Can If You Dont Speak Up.

noyb said basicaly the same thing as beantownjim here.

I recall some years ago that I had called in a horse bet - I think to the late, unlamented Millenium - thinking I had 15 minutes to post.

What I didn't know till a few hours later was that an electrical storm had knocked out electricity, and my clock was almost 25 minutes slow. (It happened in the middle of the night)

When I had made the bet, the race was already over, and my horse had lost. The book knew it, of course, but happily took the bet. Free money!

I didn't even consider asking for my money back, and in fact did not then know about this site (this incident occurred last century).

Did the book steal my money? They must have figured, hey, his error, our profit. What's different when a player does it to a book? Don't they have to keep their clocks accurate, and be sure they're not being past-posted?

[ritehook]

Out of curiosity --- is there any known incident, anytime, anywhere, where a book caught itself making an error in its own favor (ie, when the player lost) and then refunding the money they illegitimately won to the losing player?

[JoshW]

SBR handles tens of thousand player complaints each year. What you see going to the forum is often the most extreme cases. Most cases are more reasonable and don't end up on the forums, so don't think what you see on the forum represents the bulk of the work SBR does for players and books in resolving issues.

[durito]

sbr seems to be drawing heavy criticism on both ends on this case, which leads me to believe they are probably doing a good job.

[Lucas]

Out of curiosity --- is there any known incident, anytime, anywhere, where a book caught itself making an error in its own favor (ie, when the player lost) and then refunding the money they illegitimately won to the losing player?

i know about wsex
they posted lines at half for teams like washington and washington state and opponents had also almost similar names, both went to half time, but the ****ed up the lines; i was confused too and made a very bad bet on match that i did not want to bet /something like U 17.5 where 24.5 was right line/, the bet lost but they sent me email after the match "sorry your bet was cancelled"

[Bill Dozer]

Well...Here is how I look at it. The player initiated a negative relationship. Therefore the player should lose. I agree that the book put itself in a no lose situtaion, probably knowing from the beginning that they would deny any payouts If and when that time came. Although , I dont blame them for that. Its the player that had negative intentions from the start and definetly deserves NOTHING. I would send the players deposit back and tell him/her, NICE TRY. Now go elsewhere...

Thanks for the honest answer. It's understandable for posters to root against a player who tries to parlay two games that started. It would be short-sighted for us to overlook the separate issue of voiding a month of 70 oops-bets because of the cumulative result.

[greek]

because sbr helpeed me today !!!!!!!!!! , i would have to say ,give sbr a little credit, i never thought id get paid ,,,, ziggy at bet met didnt have to pay , it was sbrs name that made bet met man up ,they could have kept my money SBR IS GROWING IN GRACE WITH ME [ except warning me when i badger those ,who badger me ] but they will learn & get better & they will grow ! iam sure --- i looked at 10 sites yesterday cause iam lookin at the best forum , and guess what iam still here and so are you , lets face it guys ,this aint the best site but the others are worse , i tell you what lets start thinking creatively and make some solutions not PROBLEMS ON HOW SBR CAN IMPROVE ,I THINK EVEVERYONE WANTS THIS PLACE TO BE BETTER greek

[Cosmicwheelz]

John...im confused
You say you rule in favor of the rules.
This player opened an account at Wagerweb and agreed to the same rules I did on their join form

http://www.wagerweb.com/sportsbook/general-rules.cfm

See Rule #10
Please explain yourself
Im not sure why SBR does so much wotrk making sure books have updated rules if they don't make players abide by them.
How can a player accept a rule when they signup and then use SBR in way so they don't have to abide by the rule...


I have been with Wagerweb for over 7 years, an eternity for this industry and they are great.

How many other sportsbook CEO's put their name out like Dave Johnson does? I have been playing the Illinois pick 3 and 4 (and cleaning up BTW) for over 5 years and I have no idea who owns them!

When I read on another site that Wagerweb was being attacked, I came right over to defend them.

Gee John could this have anything to do with any kind of blackmail? Let's see you talk bad about any of the books that ADVERTISE on this site, THEN I'll be convined that you have the players best interest. Until then SCREW OFF!

[louis]

It is not the "shot" takers job to manage the book

Wager Web stoled a player's money, and I appreciate SBR not supporting this thievery.

This player did in fact take "shots" at the sportsbook. So what? There was nothing wrong with these "shots". They're known as advantage play, and if the sportsbook doesn't like it then they should do a better job managing themselves.

Olympic left lines up, after the game started, and after the second half started all day today. Do they do this on purpose, or was it an accident? That's not the players job to figure out. It's the player's job to make money betting sports.

Greek also puts up second half lines before the first half is over. Again, is it the player's job to figure out if this is a mistake on the part of the Greek? I submit it is the book's job to manage whether or not this bet should be made available when it is. Greek has actually given up some money to the "shot" takers with this, in order to be first and get more business.

Wager Web probably got some additional business from allowing these bets after the game started from non shot takers. SBR should ask them why they never proposed subtracting this benefit from what they stoled.

Of course Wager Web's actions are the responsibility of Wager Web. To blame the player is absolutely ridiculous. To steal the players money is an outrage, and SBR is right on to not support this type of action from a sportsbook.

[Dark Horse]

I have been with Wagerweb for over 7 years, an eternity for this industry and they are great.

How many other sportsbook CEO's put their name out like Dave Johnson does? I have been playing the Illinois pick 3 and 4 (and cleaning up BTW) for over 5 years and I have no idea who owns them!

When I read on another site that Wagerweb was being attacked, I came right over to defend them.

First of all, you admit to lacking any objectivity regarding WW.

Second, are you suggesting that WW couldn't possibly be cheating this player, because they didn't cheat you?

[SBR_John]

Great thread! Thanks for all the comments.

[robmpink]

Wager Web stoled a player's money, and I appreciate SBR not supporting this thievery.

This player did in fact take "shots" at the sportsbook. So what? There was nothing wrong with these "shots". They're known as advantage play, and if the sportsbook doesn't like it then they should do a better job managing themselves.

Olympic left lines up, after the game started, and after the second half started all day today. Do they do this on purpose, or was it an accident? That's not the players job to figure out. It's the player's job to make money betting sports.

Greek also puts up second half lines before the first half is over. Again, is it the player's job to figure out if this is a mistake on the part of the Greek? I submit it is the book's job to manage whether or not this bet should be made available when it is. Greek has actually given up some money to the "shot" takers with this, in order to be first and get more business.

Wager Web probably got some additional business from allowing these bets after the game started from non shot takers. SBR should ask them why they never proposed subtracting this benefit from what they stoled.

Of course Wager Web's actions are the responsibility of Wager Web. To blame the player is absolutely ridiculous. To steal the players money is an outrage, and SBR is right on to not support this type of action from a sportsbook.

Your analogy to the Greek leaving their lines up after it kicked off is worthless. Did they leave the lines up for a minute? This guy was stalling for 7 or 8 minutes.

P.S. "stoled" isn't a word.

[louis]

My point with the Greek, is that books often allow "past posting" to their advantage. In fact, Wagerweb almost certainly benefited from past posters who were not "shot" takers. Of course, Wagerweb doesn't now refund the net losses of those who were beneficial "past posters". They choose to void the action of only the net winners. So of course SBR is going to interpret Wager Web's actions as stealing. The "past posting" is just the latest excuse Wager Web is using to steal player funds. You will soon see what other excuses they can come up with.

[eric dy]

WAGERWEB SUCKS!!!! The fact that their management allows for all of this negative publicity is truly amazing. In addition, they just got downgraded from a B- to a C rating. I am confident that any player who looks to SBR (which I know there are many everyday) will NEVER open account with WagerWeb due to this situation. In addition, I know that several employees of SBR would also now NEVER recommend WagerWeb to any potential player (if someone calls them for an opinion).

They must have the worst management in the business. I wonder who owns WagerWeb - they must be proud!

[robmpink]

WAGERWEB SUCKS!!!! The fact that their management allows for all of this negative publicity is truly amazing. In addition, they just got downgraded from a B- to a C rating. I am confident that any player who looks to SBR (which I know there are many everyday) will NEVER open account with WagerWeb due to this situation. In addition, I know that several employees of SBR would also now NEVER recommend WagerWeb to any potential player (if someone calls them for an opinion).

They must have the worst management in the business. I wonder who owns WagerWeb - they must be proud!

You really have no clue then about how things go. Many people play at C books. B- to C rating isn't a free fall. Also I find it funny that SBR sways away from the Mods (Justin) report. If I remember, Justin says that WW's actions weren't out of bounds. I guess SBR didn't agree with Justin's write up. Everyone knows that if WW advertised here it would be a different story.

[dwaechte]

Now, I haven't checked post by post, but Eric Dy has to be setting some kind of record for most consecutive posts about the same subject in which he says the same thing. And right out of the gate no less!