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

cobra_king · 12-20-07, 05:01 PM

If a book takes the bet they pay the bet, even if it is past posted, because if they don't want past posted action then take the bloody game off the board.

SBR_John · 12-20-07, 05:06 PM

What about mistakes like a TV time moves up 10 minutes? Books are not able to operate 100% of the time getting every game off the board correctly.

I hear what you are saying though. It wouldnt be an issue if there were never mistakes.

My question is what happens when a mistake is made? Honor the bet or void it?

HedgeHog · 12-20-07, 05:11 PM

Depends on the sport. A full game FB bet that is bet a few minutes past is no big deal. Horse racing past posting is a different animal--forgive the pun. For live sports bets, not ones over the internet, it is the Books responsibilty to know the start times of games. If they book it, they're stuck with it. Books like WW need to realize this and take accountability.

Dark Horse · 12-20-07, 05:13 PM

The book can't have it both ways. If there is a disconnect between theory and reality - i.e. no past posting in the rules, but a past posting policy in reality- , then the book, and only the book is responsible for it. 'Action' speaks louder than words. A bet between book and player is a business contract. As cobra king says, if a book doesn't want players past posting take the game off the board when it starts.

SBR_John · 12-20-07, 05:16 PM

This is going to be a tough consensus to form.

katstale · 12-20-07, 05:17 PM

A few minutes, one way or the other is not gonna give either side an edge. The simple answer is this: if you book it, it's valid.

I would also say that any book that wants to be A rated should say they have a 5 minute grace period to allow for mistakes in starting times. If the bet gets down AND ACCEPTED in that five minute window it should stand no matter what. If it gets bet after that 5 minute window--it should be "no actioned" and the player emailed this fact immediately with a full explanation of why the bet was taken in the first place after the start.

Dark Horse · 12-20-07, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by SBR_John

What about mistakes like a TV time moves up 10 minutes? Books are not able to operate 100% of the time getting every game off the board correctly.

I hear what you are saying though. It wouldnt be an issue if there were never mistakes.

My question is what happens when a mistake is made? Honor the bet or void it?

If a book has a policy of accepting late bets then the risk of mistakes should have been factored into that overall decision.

If, on the other hand, a book is known to never accept late bets, then the bet is no good if the game started too early.

The book's own policy should be the overriding factor. Not rules that bail it out, unless it follows those rules itself (and I don't mean retroactively).

SBR Lou · 12-20-07, 05:22 PM

This is really ridiculous and entirely selective on the books part.

We can send people into space. We can design tiny chips to control warheads. We can do all of this crap with computers. I know books can either design better software, or train their phone clerks more efficiently. Right?

The HG · 12-20-07, 05:26 PM

Without question, the answer is, if a book takes the bet, it has to honor it. Any decent book should have this policy, without question. Now of course, in egregious cases, no the book doesn't have to honor the bet. And yes, "egregious" is still a subjective term. But leaving a game up for too long is not even close to being egregious.

What if, for instance, a book had a software glitch, and a line was left up past the end of the game, and a million people bet their entire bankrolls on the game, and the book had no way of knowing which were legit bets placed before the game? Of course, the book shouldn't honor those bets. What would I do? I would cancel all bets for that game, perhaps except maybe for those under a certain amount, and I would be very very embarrassed and apologetic, and maybe offer some kind of one-time bonus as an apology.

But for the average line being left up too long due to book laziness or error, no question a book should honor it.

The WW case is not a good example of that, because clearly the player was in the wrong and the book was in the right. The player was being dishonest, while the book just wasn't responsible enough to not leave itself open to that kind of dishonesty. In that case, I don't feel one bit bad for the player, and I feel the book is being given a bad rap in that case.

But in general, a book should honor every bet it takes except in egregious cases.

SBR_John · 12-20-07, 05:27 PM

crazyl it really is harder than you think. On a saturday you got 70 college bb games going off and nba and tons of other stuff. Some gets moved a little for TV with no notice. I can tell you from our own lines project it gets crazy with all the last minute changes on the weekends.

HedgeHog · 12-20-07, 05:33 PM

Originally posted by SBR_John

This is going to be a tough consensus to form.

You're looking for an easy answer to a very tough question. Again it comes down to a case by case review. If it's an isolated case, a one-time thing, then look at what the conditions were at the time of the bet--and assume the player knew. If a place like WW keeps taking bets after kickoff, some 60 or 70 times, then rule against them for being stupid. Afterall, this is their business, and if they allow their reps to accept bets 5-10 minutes late repeatedly--it's on them. Afterall, the player (shot taker or not) has funds at risk too.

SBR Lou · 12-20-07, 05:34 PM

Well under those circumstances I would hope a book is consistent more than anything else. I was speaking more along the lines of the WW case, where there is not a situation with time changes and just inefficiency on the books part. I am sure that kind of stuff happens more than it should.

The HG · 12-20-07, 05:35 PM

Is it hard to make sure all the games are taken down on time? Maybe so, I have no idea. I bet Ganchrow could design a fairly simple program that would contain multiple checks for it. Even I can imagine a few things you could do, just right off the bat.

But if it is hard, well welcome to the world of having a business. A book should honor any bet it takes except in egregious cases.

cobra_king · 12-20-07, 05:37 PM

If we are talking about major professional sports like football where start times are the start times and books are staying open to acquire any late action they can get, they should pay every single bet they take. If we are talking about a college game that gets moved up 10-15 mins for TV, that's an entirely different animal. In that case, the bet should be honored unless the book notices the mistake right away and CANCELS the bet right away with email notification. None of this waiting till the result is in, or even waiting until the game is half over. If they want to cancel this type of past post it MUST be done within a reasonable amount of time from when the game started.

HedgeHog · 12-20-07, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by SBR_John

crazyl it really is harder than you think. On a saturday you got 70 college bb games going off and nba and tons of other stuff. Some gets moved a little for TV with no notice. I can tell you from our own lines project it gets crazy with all the last minute changes on the weekends.

Time changes are posted very early in the week. Again, this is the Book's responsibilty to keep track of--and can't today's software tell when a game goes off? I think you have a pre-conceived notion to rule for the Book in this case and want our agreement.

jjgold · 12-20-07, 05:44 PM

Lots of books lets you bet after the game has started because they are also taking shots at the player. If the game loses they say nothing but if the bet wins they void the bet.

HedgeHog · 12-20-07, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by The HG

Without question, the answer is, if a book takes the bet, it has to honor it. Any decent book should have this policy, without question. Now of course, in egregious cases, no the book doesn't have to honor the bet. And yes, "egregious" is still a subjective term. But leaving a game up for too long is not even close to being egregious.

What if, for instance, a book had a software glitch, and a line was left up past the end of the game, and a million people bet their entire bankrolls on the game, and the book had no way of knowing which were legit bets placed before the game? Of course, the book shouldn't honor those bets. What would I do? I would cancel all bets for that game, perhaps except maybe for those under a certain amount, and I would be very very embarrassed and apologetic, and maybe offer some kind of one-time bonus as an apology.

But for the average line being left up too long due to book laziness or error, no question a book should honor it.

The WW case is not a good example of that, because clearly the player was in the wrong and the book was in the right. The player was being dishonest, while the book just wasn't responsible enough to not leave itself open to that kind of dishonesty. In that case, I don't feel one bit bad for the player, and I feel the book is being given a bad rap in that case.

But in general, a book should honor every bet it takes except in egregious cases.

Bull. WW accepted 60-70 live bets, not internet error. They should live with the results, not change them weeks/months after the fact.

BEANTOWNJIM · 12-20-07, 05:54 PM

John Why Do You Like To Piss Me Off We Already Know How You Would Rule As Always In Favor Of The Sportsbook You Already Showed Your Hand.

Boys Cascade Sportsbook Stole 660 Dollars From Me They Accepted A Bet At 7.20 For A 7.05 Start And Jonh Thought That Was O.k. 15 Minutes After A Game Started And Mr. Watchdog John At The Sbr Forum Said That I Was A Shot Taker Can You Imagine This Bullshit Its Perfectly O.k. For A Sportsbook To Leave A Game Up Late And When You Lose You Had A Bet But If You Win The Sportsbook Says We Cant Let You Bet A Game 15 Mintes After It Started.thats Why We Have Rules John So Why Does The Sportsbook Break There Own Written Rules Explain That To Me Dip Shit

Cascade Sportsbooks Own Written Rule (all Wagers Will Be Accepted Up Until The Posted Starting Time Of The Event) John Not 15 Minutes After A Game Starts Asshole

aszzzbrokerman · 12-20-07, 05:54 PM

IMO the books aren't being run efficiently enough to handle these type of problems in real time. Instead some have decided to let them go without review until a mistake can really hurt them. They must not be budgeting for adequate quality control. They must have decided that these type of problems have a low priority.

In a case where many past posted bets are placed I would raise an eyebrow as well. Would I pay the bet if it were my business? Not until I got the problem fixed.

The main problem is people using less than A rated books. Isn't it just like taking out a loan from a shady mortgage company? Most of us feel entitled to a certian amount of honor in a business where there is no honor. Find an A book stick to it. Let these other chicken shacks go belly up and we'll all be better off for it. If we could all somehow "protest" bad books then we would all be better off. Instead most of us just need the action and dont care where we get it.

Before I came here I was betting at sportsbook.com. I got out ASAP and joined SIA....oops...now I have joined WSEX.

HedgeHog · 12-20-07, 06:07 PM

Originally posted by aszzzbrokerman

IMO the books aren't being run efficiently enough to handle these type of problems in real time. Instead some have decided to let them go without review until a mistake can really hurt them. They must not be budgeting for adequate quality control. They must have decided that these type of problems have a low priority.

In a case where many past posted bets are placed I would raise an eyebrow as well. Would I pay the bet if it were my business? Not until I got the problem fixed.

The main problem is people using less than A rated books. Isn't it just like taking out a loan from a shady mortgage company? Most of us feel entitled to a certian amount of honor in a business where there is no honor. Find an A book stick to it. Let these other chicken shacks go belly up and we'll all be better off for it. If we could all somehow "protest" bad books then we would all be better off. Instead most of us just need the action and dont care where we get it.

Before I came here I was betting at sportsbook.com. I got out ASAP and joined SIA....oops...now I have joined WSEX.

Fix the problem first, so you don't get past-posted time and time and time again. Also, most B Books, like WW was, are just fine. There shouldn't be a different expectation than say A Books (a D or F Book would be a different story of course--expect to be screwed!).

SBR_John · 12-20-07, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by HedgeHog

Time changes are posted very early in the week. Again, this is the Book's responsibilty to keep track of--and can't today's software tell when a game goes off? I think you have a pre-conceived notion to rule for the Book in this case and want our agreement.

Actually no.

This consensus will have nothing to do with the current disputes and we have had plenty of both recently.

What we have here is a hole in the fair play fabric. I want to be able to go to the A+ books and explain this and rewrite rules if necessary and go with a future rule that makes these disputes black and white.

So whatever we decide the process that we go through to lobby the A+ books for a fair play rule change will not begin for a few weeks. No effect on current disputes.

Destroyer · 12-20-07, 06:26 PM

Past posting of bets should be voided and graded as no action. This issue would not be so controversial if the offshore sportsbook industry would follow Las Vegas rules.

If a bet is past posted, the wager is voided and graded as no action. That's how it works in Las Vegas and unless there's evidence to suggest otherwise, this rule would eliminate the controversy surrounding past posting of bets if the offshore sportsbook industry would be more diligent in adhering to this rule.

SBR_John · 12-20-07, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by Destroyer

Past posting of bets should be voided and graded as no action. This issue would not be so controversial if the offshore sportsbook industry would follow Las Vegas rules.

If a bet is past posted, the wager is voided and graded as no action. That's how it works in Las Vegas and unless there's evidence to suggest otherwise, this rule would eliminate the controversy surrounding past posting of bets if the offshore sportsbook industry would be more diligent in adhering to this rule.

Good post. I think it has to be that way otherwise either the book or the player can take a shot.

Say the book sometimes allows a bet to stay open on a NFL game. Player grabs the team that just threw a 20 yard pass to their opponets 40. Does the bet stand? Now the book is in a position to take a shot at the player. Keep in mind it was the player who grabed the 1st advantage play. Now the book really has an option to cancel or let stand. They could wait a few plays, a quater, or like wagerweb when the player cashes out, or tries to.

There are too many holes to allow past post betting. If the clock starts all bets placed after the first second runs off the clock should be voided imho.

Dark Horse · 12-20-07, 06:50 PM

That works.

Plenty of live betting opportunities anyway.

bigboydan · 12-20-07, 06:50 PM

Originally posted by HedgeHog

Bull. WW accepted 60-70 live bets, not internet error. They should live with the results, not change them weeks/months after the fact.

I agree 100% HH.

I can understand giving the book a little bit of "wiggle room" (maybe 4-5, then boot'um), but make no mistake about it. This WagerWeb dispute is clearly a book taking a shot at the player at it's finest! You can't wait 60 to 70 wagers later before trying to enforce that rule, especially when it was crystal clear preventable.

Bottom line is on this WagerWeb situation is this... It sounds like something Sportsbook.com (SBR rated D-) would pull on it's players. I think that pretty much says it all really... Don't you?

If books want to prevent these type of issues in the future. Then take the game off the board early, even despite the loss of potential revenue. Or hire clerks that are on the ball that would prevent these types of things from ever happening.

One more thing while were on this subject. These books should "man up" and put what scoreboard they use to grade all these wagers. Then that would cut down on a few these so called "gray areas".

The HG · 12-20-07, 06:51 PM

Originally posted by SBR_John

Good post. I think it has to be that way otherwise either the book or the player can take a shot.

Say the book sometimes allows a bet to stay open on a NFL game. Player grabs the team that just threw a 20 yard pass to their opponets 40. Does the bet stand? Now the book is in a position to take a shot at the player. Keep in mind it was the player who grabed the 1st advantage play. Now the book really has an option to cancel or let stand. They could wait a few plays, a quater, or like wagerweb when the player cashes out, or tries to.

There are too many holes to allow past post betting. If the clock starts all bets placed after the first second runs off the clock should be voided imho.

What if players or books started to mess around with time stamps?

The HG · 12-20-07, 06:53 PM

Originally posted by bigboydan

I agree 100% HH.

I can understand giving the book a little bit of "wiggle room" (maybe 4-5, then boot'um), but make no mistake about it. This WagerWeb dispute is clearly a book taking a shot at the player at it's finest! You can't wait 60 to 70 wagers later before trying to enforce that rule, especially when it was crystal clear preventable.

Bottom line is on this WagerWeb situation is this... It sounds like something Sportsbook.com (SBR rated D-) would pull on it's players. I think that pretty much says it all really... Don't you?

If books want to prevent these type of issues in the future. Then take the game off the board early, even despite the loss of potential revenue. Or hire clerks that are on the ball that would prevent these types of things from ever happening.

One more thing while were on this subject. These books should "man up" and put what scoreboard they use to grade all these wagers. Then that would cut down on a few these so called "gray areas".

Perhaps I was wrong about the WW thing, I didn't follow it too closely. I was just under the impression that the player was tricking the CS reps into entering the bets when the game should have been off the board, and he wasn't caught until late because he wasn't "profiled", not because the book was setting him up for a shot. Still, even if they did, the player started it, he started the underhanded sh*t. Live by the sword, die by the sword.

20Four7 · 12-20-07, 06:57 PM

Book the bet pay the bet, it's that simple. I play a lot of 2nd half plays, if the game is up it's fair game. The greek is great for putting 2nd halfs up before the half is even there and they take it down the second the half starts. If pinny, royal, justbet, beted or whoever leaves the game up it's a fair shot. If it's on the phone when they go to bet say it's started and the game is OTB. The books have to start to take responsibility for their action. It's not like having an over under of 999 listed for the half or something which everyone should know is a bad line.

SBR_John · 12-20-07, 07:07 PM

Originally posted by The HG

What if players or books started to mess around with time stamps?

We make a free screen shot tool players should use. Or they can do a screen shot tool of their own. We would catch a book cheating in due course.

matskralc · 12-20-07, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by Dark Horse

A bet between book and player is a business contract.

If you want to use the contract analogy, keep in mind that, generally, contracts entered into illegally (i.e. against the rules) by one or the other party (or both) are unenforceable.

It seems to be impossible to expect every game to be taken off the board immediately at the actual start time. It would follow, then, that the only way to effectively enforce start times and past posting is retroactively.

Every single past-posted bet ought to be cancelled as soon as somebody figures out or is alerted to the fact that it is a past post. The fact that books have a poor history of cancelling past posts that they beat the player on does not make it OK for the player to get paid when he beats the book on a past post. They are two separate violations, and they are both exactly that: violations.

Instead of trying to work the book over on a successful past post, watchdogs like SBR should be going after books who are routinely beating players on past posts instead of cancelling those wagers.

Dark Horse · 12-20-07, 07:41 PM

Originally posted by matskralc

Instead of trying to work the book over on a successful past post, watchdogs like SBR should be going after books who are routinely beating players on past posts instead of cancelling those wagers.

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.

In the WW case the player was taking a shot at the book, but all the while the book was taking a shot at the player. So you have two dishonest sides going at each other, and then a honest evaluation is requested from SBR.

HedgeHog · 12-20-07, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by SBR_John

Actually no.This consensus will have nothing to do with the current disputes and we have had plenty of both recently.What we have here is a hole in the fair play fabric. I want to be able to go to the A+ books and explain this and rewrite rules if necessary and go with a future rule that makes these disputes black and white.So whatever we decide the process that we go through to lobby the A+ books for a fair play rule change will not begin for a few weeks. No effect on current disputes.

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.

cloudagh · 12-20-07, 07:51 PM

What is the "official record" of the published post time, actual start time, and who is to say the game clock is in sync with the sportsbook's clock? If you are talking about seconds counting here, then there is no way every book is in sync.

Because of this, I think the only workable solution is to go by the sportsbook's published post time on the wager lines, and the timestamp of when the ticket was accepted.

If the wagering system would simply refuse bets past their own published post time, this would all be moot. If they cannot follow the times in their own freaking database when book the bet, they should pay it.

SBR_John · 12-20-07, 09:21 PM

Originally posted by Dark Horse

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.

In the WW case the player was taking a shot at the book, but all the while the book was taking a shot at the player. So you have two dishonest sides going at each other, and then a honest evaluation is requested from SBR.

Very well said. Thanks Dark Horse.