Avoid Wagerweb

**SBR Lou** · 12-07-07, 01:11 AM

Originally posted by bigboydan

SBR has asked Wagerweb to address each individual bet and to pay the player for all wagers where he was allowed to put his funds at risk.

If they do not, downgrade time?

**cobra_king** · 12-07-07, 01:25 AM

And hopefully not just a token downgrade either. This type of theft is getting out of hand and such sites should be downgraded to the lowest levels possible.

**Dark Horse** · 12-07-07, 02:22 AM

Originally posted by bigboydan

[B]WagerWeb WagerWeb states the player stalled wagering phone clerks, giving him the ability to make bets after kick-off.

What a load of crap.

If the game is off the board, the game is off the board.
Train your clerks better, if true (which I doubt).

**idontlikerocks** · 12-07-07, 02:28 AM

if they accept it they gotta honor it. go get 'em!

**HedgeHog** · 12-07-07, 08:34 AM

Wow, now B Books are stealing, too. Sad, but a sign of the times.

**curious** · 12-07-07, 08:51 AM

I don't see what possible difference it could make if a game was six minutes into the game, unless the score was 24-0, but even then that wouldn't guarantee that you would win. I think Troy was down 21-0 after five minutes in every game they played this year and they ended up something like 9-3.

How can you "stall a clerk"? They have rules they have to follow, either they follow them or they don't. How is that a player's problem?

Wager web is just upset that they lost and they don't want to pay.

I think that SBR should start letting these books know that this type of blatant theft is going to get them a very serious delisting or put on the black site list. None of this "Oh, you used to be rated a B, now you will be rated a B-" crap.

Curious

**Justin7** · 12-07-07, 09:14 AM

I'm still exploring the facts on this one, but...

They provided a list of about 70 wagers that were accepted after the posted start time. In all of of them, the player telephoned right before the start of the game. There's a lot to look at, but I've found at least a couple wagers that fit what Wager Web described. I also found a wager listed as a "past post" that was bet before kickoff (1pm start time, 1:07 wager time, 1:08 kick off).

One clarification... The amount confiscated was the net result of the wagers (winners and losers) listed as past-posts.

I still have a lot to look at.

**Bill Dozer** · 12-07-07, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by Justin7

One clarification... The amount confiscated was the net result of the wagers (winners and losers) listed as past-posts.

That's a good point. If they go back a month and ask the player to settle on his account and give up a bet made 5 minutes in, they can just as easily look at a loser placed in the same way.

**picantel** · 12-07-07, 09:39 AM

Alot of people wait until the last minute to bet. Hell I wait until 30 seconds before a race goes off before I make my horse racing bets. It is the smart thing to do. Then the books will use it as an excuse cris not to pay cris.

**Bill Dozer** · 12-07-07, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by picantel

Alot of people wait until the last minute to bet. Hell I wait until 30 seconds before a race goes off before I make my horse racing bets. It is the smart thing to do. Then the books will use it as an excuse cris not to pay cris.

Horses are not a good comparison and most books have a buffer time where 30s will get you canceled.

It sounds like the player found a way to delay the confirmation process and the book just learned another lesson the hard way. Justin is still working hard on this and looking at bets so let's see what else he can conclude. There will be more to discuss.

**shantystar** · 12-07-07, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by bigboydan

WagerWeb (SBR rating B-) confiscates $37,451; cites wagering fraud

A player won $37,451 making over 60 football wagers through the month of October. At the end of October, the player requested his funds and was given $5,000, which equaled the total amount he deposited. He was told his winnings would not be paid due to wagering fraud. WagerWeb states the player stalled wagering phone clerks, giving him the ability to make bets after kick-off. The book has thus far provided evidence that the player bet six minutes after the start of one game. SBR has reviewed multiple examples of his NFL wagers which were found to have been placed prior to kick off. This dispute highlights WagerWeb's on-going problems with risk management and their inability to deal with issues in real time. If the book identifies a bet placed after the start of a game it is expected to cancel the wager immediately, informing the player of its error of failing to close the betting market on time- as opposed to allowing the player's funds to be risked and later canceling the bet upon auditing his wagering history. Regardless of past-posting claims, Wagerweb has unjustly punished the player labeling his account as fraudulent instead of addressing individual wagers. SBR has asked Wagerweb to address each individual bet and to pay the player for all wagers where he was allowed to put his funds at risk.

really a fraud bookmaker indeed ,

**HedgeHog** · 12-07-07, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by picantel

Alot of people wait until the last minute to bet. Hell I wait until 30 seconds before a race goes off before I make my horse racing bets. It is the smart thing to do. Then the books will use it as an excuse cris not to pay cris.

A subliminal post, I love it

**acw** · 12-07-07, 11:28 AM

Originally posted by Justin7

I still have a lot to look at.

Is it just me that? Or are there others?

Justin7,

One clarification... The amount confiscated was the net result of the wagers (winners and losers) listed as past-posts.

For your information:
Do you think there would have been any problem if this figure would have turned out to be in favour of the book?

**goldengoat** · 12-07-07, 11:37 AM

this is fvcking bullsh*t and needs to be handled as such

they should be dropped at least a full letter grade to C- and if it ever happens again they should be tagged with an F indefinitely

this is straight up theft and if they had a problem with the bet being late they should have canceled it immediately like any professional site would

**bigloser** · 12-07-07, 11:45 AM

This makes the other problem less clear cut.

They could be short of cash and trawling their books for excuses not to pay

**Shark79** · 12-07-07, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by HedgeHog

Wow, now B Books are stealing, too. Sad, but a sign of the times.

HH I wouldnt say bookS ... it is one specific book that has been all of a sudden screwing customers .

**SBR_John** · 12-07-07, 12:53 PM

A lot of gamblers are angle shooters. This player's angle was to bet as late as they would let him. You book the bet you pay the bet. Management at Wagerweb needs to step up here and settle this fairly.

**HedgeHog** · 12-07-07, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by Shark79

HH I wouldnt say bookS ... it is one specific book that has been all of a sudden screwing customers .

You're right, a bit of an overreaction. Used to seeing D Books do this, and now a B- Book attempts it. Caught me by surprise.

**bigboydan** · 12-07-07, 01:17 PM

Originally posted by Justin7

I'm still exploring the facts on this one, but...

They provided a list of about 70 wagers that were accepted after the posted start time. In all of of them, the player telephoned right before the start of the game. There's a lot to look at, but I've found at least a couple wagers that fit what Wager Web described. I also found a wager listed as a "past post" that was bet before kickoff (1pm start time, 1:07 wager time, 1:08 kick off).

One clarification... The amount confiscated was the net result of the wagers (winners and losers) listed as past-posts.

I still have a lot to look at.

Did they tell you how this player stalled the clerks Justin? If so I'd be curious like probably everyone else is to hear this answer. Hell, It could have been a handicap of some type the player had.

**Stumpage** · 12-07-07, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by bigboydan

Did they tell you how this player stalled the clerks Justin?

That's exactly what I was wondering. Hell, there's only so many times you can say: "So, how's the weather down there?" Maybe he's a real casanova and kept commenting on how beautiful, or masculine, the clerk's voice sounded.....

**bigloser** · 12-07-07, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by bigboydan

Did they tell you how this player stalled the clerks Justin? If so I'd be curious like probably everyone else is to hear this answer. Hell, It could have been a handicap of some type the player had.

It really doesnt matter. If the clerks were trained properly they wouldnt accept late action. Books fault not the players. They have to pay.

**Bill Dozer** · 12-07-07, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by Stumpage

That's exactly what I was wondering. Hell, there's only so many times you can say: "So, how's the weather down there?" Maybe he's a real casanova and kept commenting on how beautiful, or masculine, the clerk's voice sounded.....

It's a trick a lot of sharps use to gain a line advantage. They will ask the clerk for run downs of the lines in different sports. Players can watch a Live odds screen, wait for a move, and hit it. A good bookmaker sees the tactic right away. It isn't expected to ever work on markets that should already be closed.

Wagerweb has no excuse for waiting until he takes a payout to address this. It should be real easy to notice his bets taken minutes after everyone else with a high volume sport.

**20Four7** · 12-07-07, 02:24 PM

Your post is right on Mr. Dozer. If wagering is closed it's closed, don't accept something after tip off or kick off and then go.... whaaaaat's happening...

**Dark Horse** · 12-07-07, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by curious

I don't see what possible difference it could make if a game was six minutes into the game...

You have got to be kidding. All spreads applying to the game would be affected in that time.

**bigboydan** · 12-07-07, 05:21 PM

Originally posted by Dark Horse

You have got to be kidding. All spreads applying to the game would be affected in that time.

You beat me to it DH.

We could go all day long on the advantages aspect of it, however I'll give him one example. Past posting on certain prop bets alone could be a enormous advantage.

**dwaechte** · 12-07-07, 05:22 PM

I seem to always side more in favour of the book than everyone else here, so keep that in mind, but;

People claiming this to be straight up theft: it's not. Straight up theft confiscating funds without giving any reason.

Look, I understand that books should have things in place to prevent these things, and stop them earlier. WagerWeb shouldn't have allowed these bets in the first place, and secondly, they should have been monitoring the wagers and notified the player much earlier than they did. Free shots aren't good.

But:
Personally, I look at wagers like this: If it seems wrong, it's probably wrong. If you have a feeling the book is going to bitch about your practices, they probably will.

To me, this seems like a player who knew he was manipulating their system. It seems like a player who was deliberately breaking rules(even if they rules weren't directly stated) to gain an edge. I have a tough time siding with players who do this.

Everyone wants that extra edge. It's almost necessary in order to be successful. But the reason I gamble is because I feel I can gain an edge while still playing fairly, and by working hard at it. Overstepping the bounds of fairplay, especially when you're dealing with a book like Wagerweb who don't have the same resources as the top books, is just asking for trouble, and I feel this guy deserves what was coming to him. He gets his deposit back, he learns a lesson, and moves on.

**JBC77** · 12-07-07, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by cobra_king

And hopefully not just a token downgrade either. This type of theft is getting out of hand and such sites should be downgraded to the lowest levels possible.

Couldn't have said it better myself. This is bullsh1t. The words were too kind in the review of the investigation.

**eric dy** · 12-07-07, 10:37 PM

Wow!

I have been playing with Sportsbooks for decades and this is one of the worst stories I have ever heard. In the world of sports betting, the bottom line is if you accept the wager and the wager wins, the book pays. The only exception is if there an obvious error in the line (example: Detroit Pistons are really -15 points and the book makes an obvious mistake and offers Detroit +15). This happens very rarely!!

If the information in the above threads is accurate, the book accepted the plays and the player had his money at risk; therefore, the book MUST pay. This is the kind of stuff that really hurts the entire industry.

What do you think would happen if this scenerio happened at a top notch (A) sportsbook? Nothing! Why? Because they would never be stupid enough to allow a player to bet after a game has started. If the player was making plays after the game started and the sportsbook was taking them - then more power to the player! The book has the obligation to protect themselves. If they take the play down then the player can't bet. I think it said there were 70 plays that were made after games had started - hard to believe that is possible. How could this book be in business? I am sure they review which accounts won and lost for the day - and I can't imagine this guy one 37 dimes in a few hours. So, why didnt the book contact the player immediately and point out the problem? Oh.....I know, maybe they were waiting for him to lose, but it sounds like the opposite happened - so the player won! Now, the book has a "no-lose" situation. Customer loses and the book wins; customer wins and book claims "foul." UNBELIEVABLE!!!!

Come on! No sportsbook can be that poorly managed...........

Here is a suggestion for WAGERWEB - do the right thing:

1. Pay the customer every penny of what he won!
2. Give the customer an extra $20,000 for showing them how terribly managed they are (small price to pay).
3. Immediately terminate the entire management team that allowed this to happen. Start at the top and work down!
4. Invest dollars in properly training your employees who are taking the wagers, while also making sure all games are taken off the board when the game starts.

This is awful! I have never played with WagerWeb, but I will never play with them after I heard this - thank you SBR for this information. Or, on second thought, maybe we all should bet with WagerWeb and see how many games we can bet on after the game starts................sounds like a good way to make some money.......

**louis** · 12-08-07, 01:50 AM

Olympic sometimes welcomes these types of bets

Books like Olympic, put up lines on the second half before the first half has ended. They often leave the lines up until the ball has been snapped a couple times in the second half.

Olympic has also allowed bets on the game after kick off. Several other books, such as Millenium and Bet On Sports use to do this. They do it on purpose to get more business.

Bottom line: it is the books responsibility to know whether or not they should be booking a bet. In other words, it is the books responsibility to not offer bets after the game starts, or before the first snap, whatever their policy.

You can in fact get a HUGE advantage if you can bet 6 minutes into a game, especially on first half and quarter bets! If a book wants to offer a bet with a huge advantage, that is the book's fault, not the player who takes advantage of it, period.

**SBR_John** · 12-08-07, 02:16 AM

The books have systems to know when to stop taking bets. Wagerweb is a B- book that has been around for 10 years.

Plus, here is the litmus test; would the book refunded all the money if the player had lost?

NO

And part II
Did the book cancel the bet in the 1st qtr for past post betting?

NO

I'm sure they are upset an angle shooter got the best of them. But they need to understand their role as the bookmaker. They offered the bet and the player accepted. The bet was confirmed by a live person at Wagerweb. The bets had action and there were no off lines. Its not the 1st time an angle shooter has come out ahead and it wont be the last. Its Wagerweb who makes the rules and accepts the bets. If they dont want to accept them thats fine. But if they do they are required to pay the winners.

**operaman** · 12-08-07, 04:59 AM

There is a difference between a one time event and a repeated shot. Maybe it took wager web a while to see the
trend. If the player knew they were breaking the terms, how can they be at 0% fault? Betting is a two sided contract and both sides have the duty to abide by the terms of the contract.

I am interested in how the played delayed the bets as that should clairify the just resolution to this dispute.

**SBR_John** · 12-08-07, 05:22 AM

There is a rule that all books have: All confirmed bets are final.

Opera, if Wagerweb did not want the bet they should not have booked it. Once its confirmed its final. There are exceptions and past posting is one of them. However, as I posted, WW has been in business fo 10+ years. They know what time Sunday NFL games kickoff. Their risk control is good, they see every bet that comes in. They accepted them and probably welcomed them thinking they had a square and he probably was. But even square angle shooters get lucky.

**operaman** · 12-08-07, 05:31 AM

If things are as you put forth then i would agree with you, but is it clear that is the case? If the player was using a glitch in the system things get grey.

edit: I missed where they were phoned in. So it is hard to think of a good reason why the book has to revoke the bets.

Lets give the book the chance to explain before rendering judgement though.

**Justin7** · 12-08-07, 04:25 PM

I've finished my factual investigation.

The player would call Wager Web 1 minute before kickoff. Wager Web's software would determine what games were open at the start of the telephone call, not when the bet was confirmed. The player would stay on the phone 8-12 minutes, and bet on a halftime line if the team he wanted scored, or was in scoring position. About 75% of his action (that Wager web showed me) was a past post. In EVERY INSTANCE, the player had a monster advantage when he took the bet. The player was "caught" when he tried to bet on two games in the same call where teams had already scored, and the clerk called out the play to ask if those games were good (that is not the normal procedure).

Wager Web monitors its "wise guys" closely, but does not routinely monitor other players - even those betting 5k per game. This player was not profiled as a sharp, so his wagers were not even showing up on the betting monitor.

Here some of the bets I reviewed:

10/6/7: Central FLA h1 -2
(CFU scored a TD on kickoff)
10/13/07 Miami FL +0.5
(GT punted on first possession)
10/13/07 Penn St h2 -3
(PSU scored a TD 3 minutes into h2)
10/13/07 Notre Dame h2 +7
(ND forced BC to punt on first possession)
10/14/07 NYJ h1 +2.5
(NYJ had ball on PHI 30 after KO and 1 play)
10/14/07 TENN h2 EV
(Tenn scored FG on first drive)
10/14/07 Balt h2 +4
(Balt kicked FG on first drive)
10/14/07 Dal h2 +2
(Dal scored TD 3:36 into h2)
10/18/07 Utah/TCU OV24 h2
(TCU drove to UT 33 after kickoff and 1 play)
10/20/07 Iowa h1 +4
(Iowa drove to 42 quickly)
10/20/07 Tenn/Ala OVER
(FG kicked in under 2 mins)
10/20/07 UVA+4
(UVA scored in 3:30)
10/21/07 Tenn h1 +1/2
(TENN kicked a FG in 3:30)
10/21/07 Cinci h1 -3x
(Cincin drove to NYJ 36 in 4 plays)
10/21/07 KC h1 +0.5
(KC drove to Oak 45 quickly, kicked FG)
10/21/07 S Miss h2
(S Miss scored a TD)

I looked at over half the claimed past-posts. In EVERY INSTANCE (save the first 2, where we disagree on the actual kickoff time), the player was betting 4-10 minutes after post, and was at a big advantage when the bet was placed. There was not a single past-post that "looked stupid". I'd note that I could not confirm the kickoff times for h2 wagers, but the player has not strenuously argued that any of these wagers were not past-posts.

Wager Web should have had better risk management to avoid this problem. They have made changes to avoid this kind of problem in the future. This dispute was preventable, and they share blame.

Whereas Wager Web was sloppy, the player was deliberately taking a shot. He was intentionally and systematically taking advantage of a weakness in the bookmaker's software. Between the two, I think the player is clearly more at fault.

What should be done here? This is a tough one, but I cannot say Wager Web was unfair. They canceled all past-post plays (both winners and losers). While we all agree they should have canceled the wagers before the games ended, I think their handling was reasonable given when they discovered the problem.

There is still a small factual issue remaining: did Wager Web pay the player his other winnings - the player asserts he is owed money even if all the past-posted wagers were canceled. That is a minor issue though, and I'll report about it if it isn't resolved.

Bill Dozer and I talked for several hours on this dispute. You might notice that we don't agree completely on everything. As you have seen in the past, SBR encourages me to post my findings and opinions, even if we aren't in agreement. This is what makes SBR a great player resource - the free flow of information and ideas.