Past post betting /slash angle shooting. Time to form a consensus

[matskralc]

I think what John is saying is that this is a very shady area that is better avoided all together. Going forward, as a policy, to cancel all wagers placed after the game has started would be the cleanest solution.

That's what I meant. I think I worded that such that it seemed like I was saying instead of cancelling all past posts that watchdogs should be getting into the grey area.

I meant to say that watchdogs should be going after books that don't cancel past-posts that the books win on, just as players winning on past-posts should be seeing their wagers cancelled and refunded as well (and, as we all know, those players do see that happen).

[SBR_John]

If it's an A+ Book, you already set precedent with the Bet Jamaica case. Since they fly their banner here, just rule for them first and hope the matter quietly goes away. Then if the news breaks at other forums and posters get up in and arms, come out and say you're taking a second look. And then when Scotty or whomever finally breaks via overwhelming public dissent--then take credit for negotiating the deal that should have happened in the first place.

Seems to me, you're trying to set up rules now so that you don't get caught with your pants down again. The original BJ ruling was a low point for SBR, IMO.

Good post. Not very accurate though.

The BJ case had an important element that we did not know about as how BJ has handled the limits in the racebook with other players. We are not psychics. Once that came out we questioned BJ and they made the move.

2nd part of your post is right. We want to get this past post betting to black and white. Because as it stands now it comes down to a judgement call on just who was taking the shot and if it really even matters based on the rules.

As for an all time low? You must be rather new. We are in these all the time.

[eric dy]

IMO, we must put the responsibility and accountability on the sportsbook. Regardless of the WAGERWEB dispute, if a sportsbook takes the action, they need to be responsible for paying the action. IF they keep a game on the board after the tip or the kickoff that is their choice and they need to take responsibility. This is their business and if they don't know about time changes or anything else that deals with the start of a game or 2nd half than they do not deserve to be in business. How is it that BODOG, 5Dimes and the other A rated sportsbook never have this problem? Because they know their business, they pay for quality automation and train their clerks properly. Why should we create a different standard because these lesser books can operate themselves properly. I have been playing with BODOG for several years and many times I will want to make a play 2 or 3 minutes prior to the start of the game and they will tell me the game is off the board. Am I happy? No. But, as a player, you become conditioned to knowing that you are not going to get in late plays with this sportsbook and you make your bets on time.

If these sportsbooks want to be in business they need to understand their business. There is no excuse for accepting a wager from a customer, who put his/her money at risk, and then not pay the customer.

I will agree if a book takes action on a game that has started and IMMEDIATELY realizes they made a mistake AND IMMEDIATELY contacts the customer to tell them they need to cancel the play because it was late - that is more than fair and acceptable.

These are all my thoughts, which I hope are helpful to you.

[HedgeHog]

Perhaps the top Books need to put in their T&C's that no bets will be accepted after the start of the contest. Like horse racing, a time stamp can be compared to the actual start time--and all bets afterward, win or lose, are void. Again as Eric said, immediate notification to the player of a canceled bet is paramount.

[idontlikerocks]

the books are not going to stop taking past post action.....the books are not going to stop taking past post action.......understand?.......the books are NOT going to stop taking past post action..... therefore; making a rule that past post action will not be allowed is senseless....it is a rule that will only be used against the players. The golden rule of gambling should be this: if the book accepts a bet and the player wins PAY THE PLAYER. stop what iffing this

[HedgeHog]

It probably is unrealistic to expect all books to adhere to a strict cutoff time policy, which makes a "one rule fits all" impossible. Basically we have two categories of Books: (1) places like WW that allow(ed) late action and (2) outfits that don't.

Places that routinely accept late action need to live with the results, period. You choose to play with fire, then don't bitch when you get burned.

Places that don't want late bets, should make it clear in their rules that this unacceptable and all past-post bets will be voided. On the rare occasion that a game is left up too long, quick email notification of a canceled wager is required. The key is that the Book needs to be consistent in this procedure.