find a better way to beat the book .... But if they book it and you lose, if they take the money then they should pay the money if you win and then close the accounts...but this business its clear cut at all.... I'd find a better way to beat the book.
-
Comment -
This is Africa?Originally posted by ThrempComment -
when I look at these disputes, I always use this standard: "If gambling were legal in the U.S., how would a court rule on this dispute?" In most cases, it is simple contract law.Originally posted by purecarnagge
In this matter, you have a contract between the sportsbook and the bettor. If a party misrepresents a fact (his identity), and the other party would not have entered the agreement if it knew the truth, a court would find fraud. In instances of fraud, the court tries to put the defrauded person in the same situation they would be in if they never entered the agreement - which is comparable to voiding all wagers and refunding the money.
Let's face it - there are sharp players who can beat books long-term. Some books don't want to deal with that. There are fair and unfair ways to deal with sharp players. Lowering their limits or kicking them out is fair, as long as they pay the player. But if a player comes in later misrepresenting his identity, it's fraud.
In the case I'm looking at, the player didn't contest that he controlled the other accounts. This is smart though - he has credibility with me, and I'm looking for other fair angles to reach a settlement. Nothing is more annoying (or will sap my desire to help someone) than a player lying to me. If you did something shady, tell me. I'll still help you in the most ethical way I can.Comment -
If you already considered it fraud, why did you ask for input?Comment -
There's zero material difference between opening an account in your sister's name and betting on it versus standing over your sister's shoulder and saying click here, click here, click here, submit, password, profit, which is clearly legal by the book's rules.
Would a book accept one of my plays if they knew it came from a supersharp? Assuming you've been cut/banned on a book, if I tail one of your AFL plays for a max bet on that book, they clearly would not accept the wager if they knew it was "yours", but I'm hardly committing fraud, and neither are you, even if I bought your picks, causing you to profit (indirectly) from my bets. Is a player under any obligation to disclose the source of his plays? Obviously not. So if the player had simply said "I told my sister what to bet and she clicked", and the book couldn't prove otherwise, how could you justify not paying in full (given no rules about household/IP)?Comment -
1. I want other opinions. There might be something persuasive that someone smarter than me suggests;Originally posted by Dark Horse
2. I want players alert to the possibility of having winnings taken in this situations; and
3. In less book-friendly scenarios, I want books to know that bad things will happen if they screw up.Comment -
Originally posted by Justin7
Justin7
Comment -
Exactly. Some sort of random "intent" clause strikes me as random and pointless. When 5dimes repeatedly takes shots at players via incompetent grading, or BetJ taking a shot at dupe horse player etc etc etc... Where is the recourse? Should there be a player fraud unit that handle vigilante justice?Originally posted by Dark HorseComment -
excellent post here.....Originally posted by ThrempComment -
I'm just not sure that I agree with you that using multiple identities, for no other reason than being able to continue to play, is fraud.Originally posted by Justin7
The player has an edge. The book doesn't like it, so kicks him out (same as extreme lowering of limits). The player does not gain an edge by returning under another name. He already has that edge.
I don't see the difference with a card counter in Vegas wearing a wig and moustache to avoid being detected.
Comment -
DH,
I agree that its wrong. But the wrongness comes from getting caught and breaking the rules. Not from some intangible "spirit of the rules" clause that exists in every books rules and regulations.
The onus is on the sportsbook. Can they prove these family members don't exist and were not placing the wagers? If they cannot, they're in the wrong. There are steps to prevent this from happening. Incompetence is not an excuse for this behavior being validated.Comment -
My point is that Justin is a card counter, who comes to Vegas with different looks. That's part of the game. There's a grey area where it's not about right or wrong, but about playing the game.
As a gambler I find it very hard, in such a case, to root for the casino. Look around the casino or book. Do you see all those players losing? And here is a guy with an edge and the casino kicks him out... No way that book gets my sympathy. Is the book within its right to kick him out? Sure. Is the player within his right to try to return with a different look? What do you think Justin?Comment -
DH,
Yes, it'd be very inconsistent to support one viewpoint and not the other.Comment -
Does the site specifically have a rule that if this was to happen all winnings would be confiscated?
If not, then pay him, then ban him and make the rule clearly known on your website of what happens if these actions happen.
Don't make up a winnings confiscation rule AFTER it already happens.
Pay him and learn from your mistakes.Comment -
So by Justins post he's agreeing that its ok for the books to have more rights than the players.
The books will not admit there was a mistake made and refund money if they would have won the bet.
Until I see books having a two way street, if they book it they should pay it.Comment -
There seem to be two different philosophies with regards to offshore:
There are people who think that the offshore industry, where books love to say they follow Vegas rules, should live up to Vegas standards. And there are others who treat the offshore world and Vegas as two entirely different entities.Comment
