Avoid Wagerweb

[durito]

I spoke with someone from Wager Web. They haven't given me the final say on what they are doing regarding a settlement.

They did tell me that this same player had 3 accounts at BetOnSports, and beat them out of $157k via past-posting. Wager Web also disclosed that there was another dispute with OSGA and this same player regarding past posting, which the player lost as well.

As I said earlier, this is a software problem in ASI. Any book not running a tight ship is vulnerable to this.

How does WW know about his accounts at BetOnSports?

[JimmyG]

Wow! What does BetonSports have to do with anything.......last I checked they were out of business.

Bottom line is WagerWeb accepted my plays, took my action and my money was at risk - let's stay focused here!

Have we forgotten what the issue is here....................

Your a bad bad man...lol

[bigboydan]

If true, that changes things. A long history of consciously preying on this weakness tilts the balance more towards WW in my mind.

Indeed it does changes things DH. Since I wasn't fielding this case at all I didn't know this. Please accept my apologies WagerWeb in regards to my robbery comments above.

Now even though I still feel that WW does owe this gentlemen his funds. I would have to say that he does not deserve all of his winnings, because he was indeed clearly preying on them. However, hopefully WagerWeb and Justin can hammer out a fair compensation settlement that is fair to both parties involved.

[robmpink]

Well, if it's true you're a pro shot taker. With your edge your money, over the large number of bets that you placed this way, was never at risk. That is only true on an individual bet-by-bet basis. My earlier impression was that you came across this weakness at WW and then went with it. But that doesn't seem to be the case. It now seems that you're actively preying for books with this weakness. In my mind that changes everything, because it makes you a thief. WW is still responsible for its own weakness, so they have to give you something, but please don't play the 'my money was at risk' card.

I hope your background check is made public here. It would seem that, if you stole several hundred thousand from books in this way, you're not going to get a whole lot of sympathy.

Why do you change your opinion now? You were all gung ho for him to get paid when he just exploited WW. Now it is possible he did it to other books. You knew that he found a way to exploit WW and said he should be paid. In your train of thought why shouldn't he get paid now even if he did it to other books? Your rationale is lame.

You are saying it is ok to rob one book, but if you rob two or more, it isn't ok.

[Dark Horse]

That's right. If it was one book it wasn't robbing, because intent is not proven. He may have come across that situation and then milked it. But if multiple books are involved that changes everything. I can understand that you think I changed my mind, but I didn't. I factored in an ingredient that wasn't previously mentioned, and it so happens that this ingredient has the power to turn the entire dynamic.

Doesn't change the underlying fact that both parties were taking shots at each other. For that reason alone, WW can't walk away without paying something. It's a mess with two dishonest parties.

[robmpink]

That's right. If it was one book it wasn't robbing, because intent is not proven. He may have come across that situation and then milked it. But if multiple books are involved that changes everything. I can understand that you think I changed my mind, but I didn't. I factored in an ingredient that wasn't previously mentioned, and it so happens that this ingredient has the power to turn the entire dynamic.

Doesn't change the underlying fact that both parties were taking shots at each other. For that reason alone, WW can't walk away without paying something. It's a mess with two dishonest parties.

Thanks for the reply.

[Dark Horse]

My pleasure.

The amount that was mentioned (150K at one book) also means something. If it's 10K here and 10K here, that's one thing. But if it's several hundred thousand dollars spread out over different books, then I think he's done enough damage and it was only a matter of time before he was exposed.

And as mentioned, because of the large number of bets placed in this way, the money was never truly at risk. Individual bets, yes. The bankroll in the long run, no. So that would weigh in as well, in terms of holding a book responsible for accepted wagers. This was not really about individual wagers. This was about a 'program' of wagers by someone who, it now appears, was preying for this one weakness at a professional level.

[Raiseandfold]

After reading through a lot of this, it has become quite apparent the "bettor" knew what he was doing. I could see finding a loophole by "accident" at one site, but doing it at "multiple" sites is a whole different ballgame.

I guess it is like going to the store seeing an item marked for $19.99 and peeling it off and putting another sticker on for $6.99 and getting away with it, and then trying it at other stores and continue to do it until someone catches you, or you return it without receipt hoping to get $19.99 back instead of what you truly paid.

That's what happened here, get a 1/2 line at -110 and truly 5-6 minutes into the game, get the same line which would live be -200 or better.

Shame on both the bettor and the house. The bettor for pulling it off and getting greedy, and the house for not monitoring all of it's action and leaving the door open too long. I wonder how many other bets are out there for less amounts.

[acw]

They did tell me that this same player had 3 accounts at BetOnSports, and beat them out of $157k via past-posting.

So maybe it is this player's fault that BOS is broke now?

[JimmyG]

Indeed it does changes things DH. Since I wasn't fielding this case at all I didn't know this. Please accept my apologies WagerWeb in regards to my robbery comments above.

Now even though I still feel that WW does owe this gentlemen his funds. I would have to say that he does not deserve all of his winnings, because he was indeed clearly preying on them. However, hopefully WagerWeb and Justin can hammer out a fair compensation settlement that is fair to both parties involved.

bigboydan

If you werent fielding the case why were you so intent upon stressing your opinion?

Heres what you wrote:
"These morons at WagerWeb would and did after like the first 20 wagers (give or take), and continued to take them knowing good and well they were going to ROB this guy. (Sorry, I'm not gullible enough to believe WagerWeb's lie on this subject)

WTF?

You didnt field the investigation or look at any of the facts Justin provided yet you made these type of comments.

Dude...your a moderator?

"Please accept my apologies Wagerweb" ...lol


I dont get this...the guy past posted EVERY bet he made and you crucify WW but then you hear he did the same at another book and it makes a difference?

Am I the only one confused?

You support the downgrade 100% of WW now your apologizing?

[Dark Horse]

Am I the only one confused?

No. It is a confusing web.

Wagerweb is still wrong to accept wagers and then retroactively decide not to honor them. If the rumors are true that the player did this before at other books, for large amounts, then WW lucked out because that would destroy the player's credibility. But, judging from this thread, WW only discovered that after the fact. So we are still left with a book that is not willing to pay on wagers that it accepted. The past posting was part of its policy. That was not the problem (and if it was, then everybody having lost such a wager should be refunded by WW).

Basically we have two parties willing to steal from each other. The 'problem' for the player is that he may be on record for about 200K, while WW is only on record for 37K. You do the weighing.

[Dark Horse]

The money doesn't really belong to the book or the player. Perhaps it is best donated to charity.

[TLD]

I agree with robmpink that this new allegation provides zero reason to change positions on the dispute.

If what the player did at Wagerweb constitutes stealing (as robmpink contends), he was already in the wrong regardless of the new allegation.

If what the player did at Wagerweb does not constitute stealing (as I contend), then the new allegation cannot somehow transform it into stealing.

All this about whether he came across it by accident at only one book, and what his likelihood of winning or losing was long term, etc., etc. is utterly irrelevant.

Wagerweb owes him his entire balance.

[acw]

The money doesn't really belong to the book or the player. Perhaps it is best donated to charity.

That is what our so called stand up guy Lenny from Cascade did with Beantownjim's money. We all know how that ended.

That was not the problem (and if it was, then everybody having lost such a wager should be refunded by WW).

Correct and the winners should still be paid!

[BigBollocks]

Pardon my French gentlemen, but this guy is a fukking scumbag. Allowing him to constantly bump this thread with the same bullshit while every other forum has laughed at him and shown him the door hurts SBR's credibility, which in turn pisses me off....

John you're the best player activists and all-around forum on the net---bar none. Please ban this lowlife and lets move on to legit players with legit problems...

[Dark Horse]

One party being wrong doesn't make the other party right.

None of this hurts SBR's credibility. It merely shows they go to far greater lengths to get to the bottom than the forums you refer to.

[Dark Horse]

I agree with robmpink that this new allegation provides zero reason to change positions on the dispute.

The new allegation shows the player's history. That history is relevant to this case. Pretty basic.

[increasedodds]

I do not care where or when the player placed these bets. I do not care how many books he has beaten in this manner.

If a book books a bet they need to pay that bet.

It is one thing if there is an online error (+100 instead of +10), but in this case, every bet was taken over the phone.

You hire your clerks. You set your rules. You decide when to not take bets.

Pay the man and move on.

You've been in business for 10+ years. Get some decent software and clerks with brains.

[Dumb_lucK]

The money doesn't really belong to the book or the player. Perhaps it is best donated to charity.

Perhaps we can donate it to JJ and his lawsuit?

[pavyracer]

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.

This does not answer the 1000 year old question. Why did the book take the bets?

If I had x-ray vision and could see what are the winning scratch tickets before buying them would the lottery pay for my winning tickets? Should I tell the lottery that I can see the winning tickets? Should the clerk sell me the tickets if he knew I had x-ray vision?

My point is that once the book took a chance taking the bet then it should live with the concequences of their actions and don't penalize the player. After the player is paid then fix their software or close the phone lines after a game starts. It is not the player's responsbility to tell the book on how to run their business!

[robmpink]

This does not answer the 1000 year old question. Why did the book take the bets?

If I had x-ray vision and could see what are the winning scratch tickets before buying them would the lottery pay for my winning tickets? Should I tell the lottery that I can see the winning tickets? Should the clerk sell me the tickets if he knew I had x-ray vision?

My point is that once the book took a chance taking the bet then it should live with the concequences of their actions and don't penalize the player. After the player is paid then fix their software or close the phone lines after a game starts. It is not the player's responsbility to tell the book on how to run their business!

Let me pose this question to you. If a book had golf daily match ups offered. For some reason they had the tee times off by an hour. Really Tiger Woods and Mickelson are teeing off at 2:00 PM, but the book has it at 3:00 PM. They are in the same group. Woods is a Mickelson is a huge dog +275. I monitor the first 3 holes and Woods is +3 while Mickelson is -3. I max out on Mickelson bets and also do many multi sports parlays with Mickelson. The book doesn't catch it and I win a lot. I notice the same bad tee time for the next two tournaments. It is obvious someone can't tell the difference between EST and CST. I hit them again and again.
The book finally catches the problem right at the end.

What would you do?


#1 complain to SBR because the book found out about the times right at the end and refused to pay me? I really think I should be paid.

#2 Know the gig is up and either play dumb or own up. You would accept the books decision on whether they would pay you anything.

#3 never log into the book again and chalk it up as a lose.

[matskralc]

I work for my state's welfare department. We get a lot of people lying to us, manipulating our system, pulling fast ones on overworked/lazy caseworkers. Sometimes it is weeks, months, or even years before a worker discovers that somebody has been receiving money to which they were not entitled because somebody on the state's side messed up somewhere or did not catch a lie.

In every single one of those cases, we file an overpayment and the state seeks to recollect the money that was paid, money which the recipient was not entitled to. This guy doesn't strike me as being much different. An overpayment is an overpayment...it doesn't matter whose "fault" it is, it happened, and he was not the least bit entitled to this money. He quite clearly broke past-posting rules, just as plenty of people quite clearly break the state's rules in trying to collect welfare. Whether the book (or the state) allows them to get away with it is irrelevant: they still aren't entitled to that money. And neither is this guy. Return his original deposit and don't let the door hit him on the way out.

[pavyracer]

Let me pose this question to you. If a book had golf daily match ups offered. For some reason they had the tee times off by an hour. Really Tiger Woods and Mickelson are teeing off at 2:00 PM, but the book has it at 3:00 PM. They are in the same group. Woods is a Mickelson is a huge dog +275. I monitor the first 3 holes and Woods is +3 while Mickelson is -3. I max out on Mickelson bets and also do many multi sports parlays with Mickelson. The book doesn't catch it and I win a lot. I notice the same bad tee time for the next two tournaments. It is obvious someone can't tell the difference between EST and CST. I hit them again and again.
The book finally catches the problem right at the end.

What would you do?


#1 complain to SBR because the book found out about the times right at the end and refused to pay me? I really think I should be paid.

#2 Know the gig is up and either play dumb or own up. You would accept the books decision on whether they would pay you anything.

#3 never log into the book again and chalk it up as a lose.

I would have closed my account with that book and move my money to a book that know what they are doing. I will repeat myself. It is not the player's responsibility to tell the book how to run their business. Invest in better software, better phone clerks, better managers, to catch the glitches before they occur not after the player has risked his money. If the book wants to run a cheap ass business they should bear all the consequences of their poor management, NOT THE PLAYER

[Doug]

It would have been a better decision to pay the guy his money instead of having a downgrade and threads like this that discourage potential future customers from playing there.

Terrible business decision by WW.

[SBR Lou]

I understand you're supposed to look at a case on its own merits, but it seems hard to ignore this players background, having already practiced the same stuff at another operation for the tune of $150k?

He clearly didn't just stumble upon this and exploit it, he went in specifically with the intent of finding ways to do this. It just feels like a crappy deal for all parties involved, it's almost like helping this guy get paid is like rewarding a criminal with freedom. Think he'll go out and do it again? Hell yeah, and will likely be back here for more "defense", draw the line somewhere, I'd like to see the book settle for something but I think the guy should be warned by SBR he'll be by himself in future cases like this if he gets caught.

[Dark Horse]

I agree crazyl. That is why, other than being paid something, he should be blacklisted. No more offshore action for this joker.

[JimmyG]

It would have been a better decision to pay the guy his money instead of having a downgrade and threads like this that discourage potential future customers from playing there.

Terrible business decision by WW.

Doug

The type of potential future customers discouraged to play at WW are the ones just like this guy.

Im sure WW aint losing sleep over it.

Real players know the book and know its a safe place to play.

[pavyracer]

Yes the book saved a few dimes for not paying the man but they lost a few million from the bad publicity for losing new customers. Maybe it was a wise management decision. But what do I know. I'm not auditing their books when they go out of business.

[JimmyG]

Yes the book saved a few dimes for not paying the man but they lost a few million from the bad publicity for losing new customers. Maybe it was a wise management decision. But what do I know. I'm not auditing their books when they go out of business.

a few million?...come on Pavy stop

read the whole thread..opinion is split

what do u think? all gamblers share your opinion

i havent closed my account and im sure many others havent either.

Give me a break?.. You think people are gonna shut their accts cause a shot taker says 'Wagerweb sux'

Dont be so naive

[TLD]

The new allegation shows the player's history. That history is relevant to this case. Pretty basic.

Nope. Pretty question begging.

It's precisely the relevance of this part of the player's history that I dispute. Simply asserting that it's relevant doesn't make it so.

[TLD]

[QUOTE=robmpink;472475]Let me pose this question to you. If a book had golf daily match ups offered. For some reason they had the tee times off by an hour. Really Tiger Woods and Mickelson are teeing off at 2:00 PM, but the book has it at 3:00 PM. They are in the same group. Woods is a Mickelson is a huge dog +275. I monitor the first 3 holes and Woods is +3 while Mickelson is -3. I max out on Mickelson bets and also do many multi sports parlays with Mickelson. The book doesn't catch it and I win a lot. I notice the same bad tee time for the next two tournaments. It is obvious someone can't tell the difference between EST and CST. I hit them again and again.

1. If a book consistently follows a policy of taking its golf lines down right at tee off, but occasionally it leaves them up an extra hour, it is pretty obvious their leaving them up was completely unintentional and probably due to something like misreading EST for CST. It should be treated the same as an obvious error in a "bad line" case, such as when the market has a team at -7 and briefly a book posts a typo line of +7. Bets attempting to exploit the obvious error--whether they win or lose--are void.

2. If a book consistently follows a policy of accepting golf bets a few minutes after tee off as long as the phone call started before tee off--whether as a courtesy to customers or to get some action it otherwise wouldn't get or whatever--the bets stand. If the book decides later that they lost more than they gained by allowing a bit of a grace period like that, they cannot retroactively alter the policy and void the bets.

The question is whether #1 or #2 is analogous to the Wagerweb case. I'd say it's a lot closer to #2.

[robmpink]

WagerWebSucks seems to have gone AWOL since it was disclosed of the alleged prior monkey business at other books.

[increasedodds]

Wagerweb's decision here makes me question their solvency. It makes me not want to play there.

Wagerweb chose to take these bets. It is not as if the NFL picked a new start time.

Wagerweb has been in business for 10+ years and decided to take these bets. Whether or not they took a shot on purpose I have no idea, but I know for sure 5 years ago in the days of neteller, this guy would have been paid and booted.

Books used to pay and boot wise guys.

Now books, likely hurting for cash, just boot wise guys.

Wagerweb should be ashamed of itself.

Pay the guy and move back into a respectable level.

Hire new clerks, find new software. Do what you gotta do, but pay the bet YOU CHOSE to accept.

[increasedodds]

And by the way, the players history means nothing.

I've excelled at:

Correlated parlays, certain teaser subsets, etc. Many books have booted me.

Now if I go play correlated parlays or certain teasers somewhere else should I not get paid?

Sean

[JimmyG]

Wagerweb's decision here makes me question their solvency. It makes me not want to play there.

Wagerweb chose to take these bets. It is not as if the NFL picked a new start time.

Wagerweb has been in business for 10+ years and decided to take these bets. Whether or not they took a shot on purpose I have no idea, but I know for sure 5 years ago in the days of neteller, this guy would have been paid and booted.

Books used to pay and boot wise guys.

Now books, likely hurting for cash, just boot wise guys.

Wagerweb should be ashamed of itself.

Pay the guy and move back into a respectable level.

Hire new clerks, find new software. Do what you gotta do, but pay the bet YOU CHOSE to accept.

Increaseodds

Why did Wagerweb decide to take these bets? Why would any book?

You seem so sure they did it on purpose so tell us why...what would they gain? Please dont answer with "well they thought he would lose" I think we have been through that and the guy was never losing nor did he have a chance of losing. Justins posts have been pretty accurate about his longterm odds of winning/losing.

Plus, WW had a rule about past posting on their site so they could have stopped him at anytime and voided the wagers then.

Also, please dont call this guy a wiseguy. Its an embarassment for all professional gamblers who visit this forum. Lets stick with scumbag, shot taker or crook. All three are more accurate than Wiseguy.