WagerWeb cheating sharp players

[Bill Dozer]

Is this the same bunch who partnered with Cascade briefly in January of 07? Actually took deposits for Cascade? Then bailed out leaving the clients to just look to Cascade for payment?

Just wondering, Bill? You were suppose to be looking into this?

Trying to keep the facts straight on these types of books--is difficult, indeed!!

No that book has an extra W, WWW as in WorldWideWagering/Wager.dm. That detail still needs to be addressed with the owner.

[Bill Dozer]

I spoke with Wagerweb. The player has been paid the amount in dispute (although the player hasn't confirmed this yet).

Wager Web said it was an accounting error, and apologized.

Excellent. Now we need to hear what the policy will be going forward and how they will avoid "accounting errors."

[Bill Dozer]

How do they know if you're a pro after placing just 2 bets?

If you bet a big dog with your freeplay they know right then they don't want your action. You don't have to be a "pro" to be asked to leave the most recreational books. Different books have different ideas of what is sharp and pro action.

[Doug]

Doug, Where do you read all of the information about WagerWeb that let's you form your opinion on WagerWeb and its SBR rating?

I know them pretty well, have dealt with them since they were Casablanca. I used to like them a lot, and played there extensively when they gave me a free half point. I used to deal with a Bullshitter there named Tony Marsoni, he was with Cascade last I knew.

I beat them bad with it. One day they just cancel the free half, very rude when I asked about it.

After Marsoni, I dealt with a whole string of VIP reps calling me to come back ( after killing them). I knew they were desperate at this point ( like a year ago). They even offered to give me back the free half point. I refused.

They still call once in awhile. Then the crap with taking NFL bets after the games start.

I think these guys ( Dave) are on drugs. Too many bad signs for me to ever play there again, and for a long time.

They used to take some crazy correlated parlays, and pay them.

Mismanaged book, that surely has lost most of its customers, and now needs to steal... or try to.

No reason to play there.

One year they offered a dimeline in bases, and killed it in about a week.

[Bill Dozer]

I know them pretty well, have dealt with them since they were Casablanca. I used to like them a lot, and played there extensively when they gave me a free half point. I used to deal with a Bullshitter there named Tony Marsoni, he was with Cascade last I knew.

I beat them bad with it. One day they just cancel the free half, very rude when I asked about it.

After Marsoni, I dealt with a whole string of VIP reps calling me to come back ( after killing them). I knew they were desperate at this point ( like a year ago). They even offered to give me back the free half point. I refused.

They still call once in awhile. Then the crap with taking NFL bets after the games start.

I think these guys ( Dave) are on drugs. Too many bad signs for me to ever play there again, and for a long time.

They used to take some crazy correlated parlays, and pay them.

Mismanaged book, that surely has lost most of its customers, and now needs to steal... or try to.

No reason to play there.

One year they offered a dimeline in bases, and killed it in about a week.

sounds like back then you had a C rating type of experience.

[Shark79]

How sad to see how WW has continuously had problems with its customers and yet doesnt do anything about the problem.

This book should be at this point a D book

[Doug]

Here's what I think they have up their sleeve for me if I went back, with the free half point ( even good on an NFL 7).

If I lose,fine.

If I win and try to cash out, they pull up some correlated parlays I made in 2002, and try to take them back !

They aren't getting the chance.

[treece]

How sad to see how WW has continuously had problems with its customers and yet doesnt do anything about the problem.

This book should be at this point a D book

They're a D book in my book.

[greek]

they should be shut down completetely --I HATE THIEVES!!!!!!!!

[Doug]

You have to ask yourself:

Self: Does Wagerweb offer me anything that I can't get at a better book like 5D,Greek,Jamaica,WSEX,Matchbook ?

If they have something that you like that nobody else offers, then play there. If not play at a better book. I haven't looked lately, but I'd bet 5D beats them on most every line, or equals their line.

One thing WW had that I liked was NBA salami, usually a good over bet with lines determined by addition.

[Doug]

sounds like back then you had a C rating type of experience.

More like a B+/ almost A- book morphing into a D- book, IMO, Bill !

They are now a D as in Doug,IMO !

It no longer matters, you are crazy to use less than an A, or a rare B book.

[Rand790]

Wagerweb deserves everything they get - can't wait for them to close their doors - they are awful......

[Thremp]

Excellent. Now we need to hear what the policy will be going forward and how they will avoid "accounting errors."

Yeah... An error... Right...

[Shark79]

Funny how wagerwebsucks only comes in when something about them is talked about (sounds more of a ghost account than anything else) ... stay with us more WWSUCKS! become a real member of SBR

[Doug]

there is no good reason to play there, so they hurt for business, and try to steal, that = D book.

[trixtrix]

best practice ever.. ww has finally solved the age-old riddle of the intermediary step ??? before "profit"..

1. open a book
2. offer bonus
3. ??? **
4. profit!!1

**confiscate players funds regardless of outcome citing professional play/bonus abuse

[robmpink]

there is no good reason to play there, so they hurt for business, and try to steal, that = D book.

I disagree.

#1 I get great bonuses
#2 Get 3 "free' (goes into freeplay account) withdrawls a month
#3 I get $1 loyalty points for every $125 I bet in sports and the casino
#4 I have always been paid by them

I guess I'm not considered professional.

[noyb]

The truth is, as we have said before, if is not an exact science which is why we are as transparent as a resource as you will find. If you would like to know more about a D rated book, please ask.

i'm glad it seems the wagerweb complaint was indeed taken seriously and sbr was able to solve this case so fast. congratulations for that.

the point i was making about the rating list in general is not really topic-related at all so perhaps i shouldn't have made and shouldn't make it here.
i totally understand it's not exact science. the sbr rating list is considered widely, not just among US bettors, as a sort of bible on where to play. altough sbr didn't ask for this, it does create a responsibility to make sure you stay up-to-date with every book you are rating. right now there are soo many books in your rating list, I don't see how SBR manages to do that with the number of people (I'm guessing) they employ. I definitely feel some of them (specifically the well-known us books) you are watching very very closely, while other lesser known books (I'm not talking about new books like LazerWager here) get no complaints, but no rating change either.

ok, an example. a euro-book: bet-at-home, rated a D over here for a long long time as far as I can tell. I can vaguely recall they had complaints about credit card problems and lack of communication about this a few years back (which probably explains the D). Recently though I've heard very little complaints from anyone, they always pay, have been around for quite a while, are listed on the stock exchange, they are quite fair, also with regards to limiting. good overall feedback on euro-forums. i'm not saying they are an a, but a D, some other books had to do some serious stealing to get that low.
i compare them to wagerweb, who in the last couple of months had several complaints for let's say unethical behaviour filed against them. in this case, sbr intervened and solved it, but still they are a C. I don't quite get in what respect the difference in ratings can be explained.

another example: an aussie book, centrebet, rated a b+. very good rating but not exactly top quality according to sbr. you won't find anyone complaining about these guys though. regulated in australia, so safe as a brick. also listed on the stock exchange, always pay, fair in limits. really, a top book, can't think of a negative.
still, they are "only" a b+, while say the cris-group is an a+, despite several complaints about annoying CS and severe cold calling, and, let's be honest, gambling regulation in Costa Rica is nowhere near the level of regulation in Australia.
I've played at both and there's no question about which of the two really striked me as a high class top book, and I can tell you it's not Cris. I could just not be representing the general opinion, but if I look at other feedback on the forums I really think i'm not.
I could name more examples but I'll leave it at this. The most important reason for the difference in ratings I think (unless I am unaware of some other aspects) is simple: books like Bet-at-Home and Centrebet don't accept Americans, therefore are not watched as closely by SBR and not as highly rated. Don;t get me wrong: I get that, SBR caters mainly to the American bettor, so they focus on that. I'm just thinking: just don't rate these other books then, since a lot of people around the world are actually looking at them very seriously.

sorry for going off-topic like this, but I wanted to explain my earlier post. and again, i'm glad apparently sbr helped sort this wagerweb-thing out.

[Santo]

I would echo much of noyb's post above, especially as regards regulation.

[treece]

great post noyb. i feel the same way with Carib being only a B book. They deserve to be at least an A-.

[Thremp]

I guess I'm not considered professional.

Are you winning? And at what clip?

[treece]

Are you winning? And at what clip?

he says he gets great bonuses. to me that means he's losing.

[Thremp]

he says he gets great bonuses. to me that means he's losing.

Yeah. The question was rhetorical. Every winner is "professional" in most books eyes.

[robmpink]

Are you winning? And at what clip?

I have no reason to lie. Like most gamblers I am down.

Basically everyday I'll play horses, casino and bet a bunch of games. I'm not depositing and using my entire free play or balance on a +$750 dog.

I'd be doing the same at an A book but i wouldn't be getting as good a bonus, loyalty points, and the 3 withdrawls. If you are a recreational player you have no need to worry. You would have to check with WW to seek out the definition of a professional player.

[BadAzz]

Noyb,

SBR ratings are rather useless when talking about books which are not concentrating on US sports. They do serve their purpose for US market though. Centrebet being anything short of A and Bet-At-Home being a D is ridiculous. It is of course understandable, that SBR is more accurate on the market where their visitors mostly originate from.

[Thremp]

robm,

Its obvious your losing and not a "professional". The biggest problem that books have is that every winner is a "professional". If you can donk your way into 20k+ of winnings at BetOnline, for example. You'll probably be accused of insider information/syndicate play etc, but in a very polite and friendly manner.

[Bill Dozer]

i'm glad it seems the wagerweb complaint was indeed taken seriously and sbr was able to solve this case so fast. congratulations for that.

the point i was making about the rating list in general is not really topic-related at all so perhaps i shouldn't have made and shouldn't make it here.
i totally understand it's not exact science. the sbr rating list is considered widely, not just among US bettors, as a sort of bible on where to play. altough sbr didn't ask for this, it does create a responsibility to make sure you stay up-to-date with every book you are rating. right now there are soo many books in your rating list, I don't see how SBR manages to do that with the number of people (I'm guessing) they employ. I definitely feel some of them (specifically the well-known us books) you are watching very very closely, while other lesser known books (I'm not talking about new books like LazerWager here) get no complaints, but no rating change either.

ok, an example. a euro-book: bet-at-home, rated a D over here for a long long time as far as I can tell. I can vaguely recall they had complaints about credit card problems and lack of communication about this a few years back (which probably explains the D). Recently though I've heard very little complaints from anyone, they always pay, have been around for quite a while, are listed on the stock exchange, they are quite fair, also with regards to limiting. good overall feedback on euro-forums. i'm not saying they are an a, but a D, some other books had to do some serious stealing to get that low.
i compare them to wagerweb, who in the last couple of months had several complaints for let's say unethical behaviour filed against them. in this case, sbr intervened and solved it, but still they are a C. I don't quite get in what respect the difference in ratings can be explained.

another example: an aussie book, centrebet, rated a b+. very good rating but not exactly top quality according to sbr. you won't find anyone complaining about these guys though. regulated in australia, so safe as a brick. also listed on the stock exchange, always pay, fair in limits. really, a top book, can't think of a negative.
still, they are "only" a b+, while say the cris-group is an a+, despite several complaints about annoying CS and severe cold calling, and, let's be honest, gambling regulation in Costa Rica is nowhere near the level of regulation in Australia.
I've played at both and there's no question about which of the two really striked me as a high class top book, and I can tell you it's not Cris. I could just not be representing the general opinion, but if I look at other feedback on the forums I really think i'm not.
I could name more examples but I'll leave it at this. The most important reason for the difference in ratings I think (unless I am unaware of some other aspects) is simple: books like Bet-at-Home and Centrebet don't accept Americans, therefore are not watched as closely by SBR and not as highly rated. Don;t get me wrong: I get that, SBR caters mainly to the American bettor, so they focus on that. I'm just thinking: just don't rate these other books then, since a lot of people around the world are actually looking at them very seriously.

sorry for going off-topic like this, but I wanted to explain my earlier post. and again, i'm glad apparently sbr helped sort this wagerweb-thing out.

Good points on Bet-at-home. We had some minor complaints but an upgrade is likely overdue.

In general, I also agree ratings at SBR really make no sense at all right now. You have several lesser known books at D without any complaints (let alone, a theft) against them whatsoever for a long long period of time, yet books like Wagerweb are somehow a C.

We still need to discuss policy with WW ownership. It's great that we could help this player but if they are going to dip in player accounts to recover free-plays we would agree the rating is too high.

[BigBollocks]

This is the report that sends them entirely over the edge. Wagerweb is too unstable and chintzy for anyone to play with considering all the other options out there. The writing may well be on the wall as they continue to find newer ways to connive players (granted I thought they were in the right with WWSucks and the multi-account guy). Their customer service compared to the service at Olympic is night and day.

Looking forward to more updates on this and their bonus fraud practices...

[Rand790]

It really makes me happy to see WagerWeb getting all of this negative publicity - these guys are looking to screw anyone they can - can you believe they had an "accounting error?" Come on........Can you believe one of their employees actually sent me an email asking me to re-up with them - after they stole over $40,000 from me. You can say they just sent out a mass email, but come on - you think they would have an up-to-date database to pull from.

Also, please keep in mind that ROBMPINK is a management level employee at WAGERWEB (found out through some research), so anything he says is always going to be in favor of WagerWeb - which shows more ignorance on Wagerweb's behalf.

[Rand790]

Another comment - for anybody out there who is complaining about SBR - get off the site - who else in this industry can you turn to help you? OSGA? What a joke they are! Nobody else will even try to help you if you have a problem with a sportsbook - so stop your complaining!


This guy Bill Dozer is excellent and you should be thankful that his organization even exists.

[Shark79]

Do u need a tissue?

[Rand790]

No, just trying to be a contributing member to SBR - like you suggested earlier.

[robmpink]

It really makes me happy to see WagerWeb getting all of this negative publicity - these guys are looking to screw anyone they can - can you believe they had an "accounting error?" Come on........Can you believe one of their employees actually sent me an email asking me to re-up with them - after they stole over $40,000 from me. You can say they just sent out a mass email, but come on - you think they would have an up-to-date database to pull from.

Also, please keep in mind that ROBMPINK is a management level employee at WAGERWEB (found out through some research), so anything he says is always going to be in favor of WagerWeb - which shows more ignorance on Wagerweb's behalf.

Research? You are a bafoon. Once again, get off my dick.

[robmpink]

No, just trying to be a contributing member to SBR - like you suggested earlier.

You aren't a member. You are a scammer. Are you an educated man? Many are curious as to how you pulled off the scams the way you did. How did you first come across this? How many times did you pull it off. Be a member and tell us all.

[Dark Horse]

A book that lowers limits to $1 doesn't have to right to use 'accounting error' as excuse (for stealing money).

WW is not even a D book.