[McFly86]

I made the following 5 live bets in the Aussie Rules football match between Melbourne and Sydney:

Sydney: 300 @ 3.25
Melbourne: 150 @ 4.5
Melbourne: 20 @ 4.5
Melbourne: 100 @ 3.75
Melbourne: 110 @ 3.4

The match ended in a tie, strangely enough, at 84 apiece.

Accordingly I expected to do very well because the dead-heat rule applies (as it does on Betfair etc.). The market that I bet on was a 2-way market (i.e. not tie option). A tie is very rare in high scoring sports such as AFL.

Bet365's general rules are quite clear:

Dead-Heats
Where two selections Dead-Heat half the stake money is lost and the full odds are paid to the other half. If more than two Dead-Heat the stake is proportioned accordingly.

Source: Bet365's General Rules: http://help.bet365.com/home/mainpage...b=0&sg=59&lng=

I found the rule from Googling for "bet365 dead heat rule".

According to the above, I should have profited approximately $487 (my maths might be off, but clearly my bets would show a profit according to dead heat rule). However, Bet365 simply refunded all my bets.

I then asked Bet365 in chat, and they state that the dead heat rule does not apply because of a sport-specific rule that states all bets are simply refunded in the case of AFL ties.

I never knew about the specific rule - I relied upon the General Rules, which are extremely clear, and are not phrased "subject to specific sport rules." The dead heat rule is industry standard and used on Betfair, etc.

[McFly86]

here is the long/annoying chat transcript



Andy D has joined this chat.

You are now chatting with Andy D.

Andy D Hello, welcome to bet365 Live Chat. How may I help you?

SCOTT Hi

SCOTT i had a few bets in the Sydney / Melbourne AFL game

SCOTT it was a tie in the end

SCOTT you didn't settle the bets correctly

SCOTT dead heat rule should apply

Andy D Can I take your username and four digit security number please?

SCOTT (DELETED)


SCOTT (DELETED)


SCOTT Dead-Heats
Where two selections Dead-Heat half the stake money is lost and the full odds are paid to the other half. If more than two Dead-Heat the stake is proportioned accordingly.

Andy D One moment please.

Andy D Do you have the bet reference?

SCOTT i made 5 bets

SCOTT they were all at massive odds

SCOTT one sec

SCOTT (DELETED)

Andy D Can you confirm one please.

Andy D Thank you.

SCOTT (DELETED)

SCOTT (DELETED)

Andy D Match Betting
If any match ends in a draw/tie then stakes will be refunded unless a price is offered for the draw/tie. Bets will be settled on official AFL result only.

SCOTT where is that from?

SCOTT your dead heat rules

SCOTT are here

Andy D That is from the AFL rules section.

SCOTT help.bet365.com/home/mainpage.asp?ibpid=5100&isb=0&sg=59&lng=

SCOTT that is what i found when you google "bet365 dead heat rule"

Andy D That is not the rules section.

Andy D To view our rules please click on Help from the left hand menu of our Website and then select Rules.

SCOTT General Rules

SCOTT yes

SCOTT it is

SCOTT clearly

Andy D Click on to Sports rules - Australian Rules.

SCOTT if its not the rules, why is it headed "general rules"

SCOTT ??

SCOTT why would i search for that, when the general rules are so clear?

SCOTT your general rules are crystal claer

SCOTT it was a 2-way market

Andy D Each sport or event would have its own rules.

SCOTT it was a tie

SCOTT that's deceptive

SCOTT betfair etc. all have dead heat rule

SCOTT your general rules say dead heat rule applies

Andy D I have advised you where the rules are for this particular sport.

Andy D Australian Rules
All match markets will be settled on regulation time unless otherwise stated. Regulation time must be completed for bets to stand unless otherwise stated.

Match Betting
If any match ends in a draw/tie then stakes will be refunded unless a price is offered for the draw/tie. Bets will be settled on official AFL result only.

SCOTT NO

SCOTT NO

SCOTT NO

SCOTT your general rules

SCOTT are contradictory

SCOTT i only looked at your general rules

SCOTT your general rules are very clear

Andy D No, this would be for general rules, however as advised each sport, market and event would have its own rules.

SCOTT what?

SCOTT if i looked in general rules

SCOTT and found a rule

SCOTT why would i not assume that is the rule?

SCOTT could you please transfer me to a supervisor

Andy D I have listed the rules for how AFL/ Australian rules football would be settled.

Andy D One moment please.

SCOTT that is completely contraditory to the dead heat rule

Andy D I can transfer you now.

You are being transferred...

Andy D has now left this chat.

Gareth M has joined this chat.

You are now chatting with Gareth M.

Gareth M Hello, my name is Gareth I am the Duty Supervisor on shift.One moment please while I review this chat.

SCOTT ok

SCOTT ok

Gareth M I can confirm that Andy is correct, all sports have individual rules.

Gareth M The bet has been settled as per ruling to that particular sport.

SCOTT No

SCOTT your general rules say dead heat apply

SCOTT i looekd at that

SCOTT why would i then search for a completely contradictory rule

SCOTT everyone else uses dead heat rules

Gareth M Can you show me where it says Dead Heat rules apply to this market?

SCOTT help.bet365.com/home/mainpage.asp?ibpid=5100&isb=0&sg=59&lng=

SCOTT
Where two selections Dead-Heat half the stake money is lost and the full odds are paid to the other half. If more than two Dead-Heat the stake is proportioned accordingly.

SCOTT it was a dead-heat

SCOTT in a 2way market

SCOTT that rule is so crystal clear

Gareth M Australian Rules has it's own separate rules.

SCOTT WHAT?

Gareth M This bet has been correctly settled and will not be changed.

SCOTT your rules say

SCOTT dead heat = half odds

SCOTT your rules are apparently contradictory

SCOTT you need to grade it according to dead heat

SCOTT if no

SCOTT if not

Gareth M If you click on Sports Rules.

SCOTT i will (1) withdraw all my balance and never play again on your site

Gareth M You then click on Australian Rules.

SCOTT (2) issue complaint to IBAS / Sportsbook review

Gareth M Under Match Betting.

SCOTT I NEVER LOOKED THERE

Gareth M If any match ends in a draw/tie then stakes will be refunded unless a price is offered for the draw/tie. Bets will be settled on official AFL result only.

SCOTT because your general rules were so crystal clear

Gareth M This is the rules.

SCOTT NO

SCOTT Where two selections Dead-Heat half the stake money is lost and the full odds are paid to the other half. If more than two Dead-Heat the stake is proportioned accordingly.

SCOTT how do you interpret that?

SCOTT that section doesn;t refer to "in most sports" or "differs for individual sports"

Gareth M I have quoted the rules and the bets have been settled correctly.

SCOTT your rule is phrased in a way that doesn't suggest i should look elsewhere

SCOTT do you understand my argument at all?

Gareth M No, you have bet on Australian Rules, All sports have there own rules.

SCOTT WHAT

SCOTT this is pointless

SCOTT could you please refer me to someone higher

Gareth M I am the highest person available at this moment.

SCOTT what is your complaints email?

Gareth M Our email address is support-eng@customerservices365.com.

SCOTT what is your interpretation of this rule: "Where two selections Dead-Heat half the stake money is lost and the full odds are paid to the other half. If more than two Dead-Heat the stake is proportioned accordingly."

Gareth M I appreciate what you are saying, however, you appear to be disregarding what I am telling you.

SCOTT no

Gareth M I have quoted you the rules for the Australian Rules.

SCOTT what is your interpretation of the rule?

Gareth M This bet has been settled correctly.

SCOTT if you read that rule, what part of the rule would suggest that i needed to dig further?

SCOTT the rule above is quite clear don't you think?

SCOTT there is no qualifier such as "please check each sport rules"?

Gareth M No, as I have advised Sports Rules has a list of sports for every different sport.

SCOTT that's not what i was asking

SCOTT i was asking

SCOTT your general rules do not suggset that the dead heat rule would only apply to specific sports

SCOTT would you agree or disagree with that?

Gareth M I do appreciate what you are saying.

Gareth M This is a general rule not a specific rule.

Gareth M All sports have specific rules.

Gareth M What would be the point of us having Sports Rules and General Rules.

SCOTT ok you have acknowledged that your general rules are quite clear on the issue

Gareth M This bet has been correctly settled and the settlement of this bet will unfortunately not be changed.

SCOTT now, was the match a "dead heat"?

SCOTT the teams tied at 84 apiece according to AFL.com.au

Gareth M The match finished a Tie yes.

SCOTT Where two selections Dead-Heat half the stake money is lost and the full odds are paid to the other half. If more than two Dead-Heat the stake is proportioned accordingly."

SCOTT So (1) the rule is clear and is not "subject to specific sport rules"

SCOTT (2) it was a dead heat

SCOTT therefore dead heat rule should apply

Gareth M The Dead Heat Rule in General Rules is an example of how bets are settled if Dead Heat are quoted in the Sports Rules.

SCOTT you acklowedged that the AFL result was a "dead heat"

Gareth M It was a Tie.

SCOTT how is that not a "dead heat"?

Gareth M If I could give you an example in Cricket.

SCOTT no

SCOTT how is a tie different to a dead heat?

Gareth M It does state in some markets that Dead Heat Rules Apply.

SCOTT that's irrelevant

Gareth M This is what the general rules is there for.

Gareth M To explain this.

SCOTT no

Gareth M It's not irrelevant.

SCOTT are you now denying that the result was a dead heat?

Gareth M I am sorry Scott, this bet has been settled correctly and will not be changed.

Gareth M how do you wish to proceed?

SCOTT was the result a dead heat?

SCOTT there are 2 courses of action

SCOTT course 1 - you settle the bets in accordance with the General Rules

Gareth M I have explained what that Dead Heat explanation is in the general rules.

SCOTT course 2 - i withdraw my balance in its entirety

Gareth M No, we settle bets as per the Sport Specific Rules.

SCOTT make a complaint to IBAS ( i think that's the correct authority) and Sportsbookreview

Gareth M This is your decision if you wish to do this.

SCOTT i think course 1 would be best for everyone

Gareth M The bet has been settled correctly.

SCOTT so you DON"t settle your bets in accordance with the general rules?

SCOTT if so, what is the point of having your Rules?

SCOTT if they are completely contradictory and you pick and choose?

SCOTT you really need to re-consider

SCOTT and refer this to someone

Gareth M You have bet on the Australian Rules, therefore, we settle our bets in line with the Australian Rule Rules.

SCOTT i am completely right and i will be pursuing this until i am paid

SCOTT so your general rules don't apply to AFL bets?

Gareth M If you wish to escalate this further you will need to send an email to the address provided.

Gareth M I have explained why the explanation is in the general rules.

Gareth M This settlement will not be changed.

SCOTT no you haven't explained it

SCOTT please explain why the result was not a "dead heat"?

Gareth M It is there to relate to when a sports rule quotes 'Dead Heat Rules Apply'

Gareth M I am not going to continue to go around in circles.

SCOTT was the result a "dead heat" or not?

SCOTT if the result was not a dead heat, who won?

Gareth M It was a tie.

SCOTT THAT IS A DEAD HEAT

SCOTT in the absence of a "tie" option

Gareth M These bets have been correctly settled and unfortunately will not be changed.

SCOTT how is a tie not a dead heat?

Gareth M I have advised that if you wish to escalate this further you will need to send an email in to the address provided.

SCOTT what?

SCOTT you never answered my question

Gareth M I am unable to assist you any further.

SCOTT that is usnatisfactory

SCOTT why?

SCOTT im not being repetitive?

SCOTT i have asked a fairly straightforward question

SCOTT which you have refused to answer

Gareth M A tie is effectively a dead heat, I have explained why the bet has been settled as it has.

SCOTT so a tie is a dead heat?

Gareth M I am not going to continue to discuss this Scott.

SCOTT but you haven;t discussed it

SCOTT "continue" implies that you have already discussed it

Gareth M Unless you have any further queries, I will have no option other than to terminate this chat.

SCOTT you said above that "a tie is effectively a dead heat"

SCOTT what does "effectively" mean?

SCOTT it's such a clear cut case

SCOTT tie = dead heat = dead heat rule applies?

[McFly86]

Gareth M That is not correct.

SCOTT but you said tie = dead heat

Gareth M Dead Rules are only applied if it is stated in the Sports Specific Rules.

Gareth M If you wish to escalated this further please email this in.

SCOTT but

SCOTT your general rules say that

SCOTT dead heat applies in the case of a dead heat

Gareth M This can then be referred to the relevant person.

SCOTT you need to answer

SCOTT is a tie a dead heat or not?

Gareth M If you have no further queries, this chat will be terminated.

SCOTT but i do

SCOTT is your position that the result was a dead heat or not???

Gareth M Yes, the match did finish as a tie.

SCOTT yes it was obviously a tie

SCOTT but isn't that a dead heat?

Gareth M yes, however, as per the sports rules this is not settled on the dead heat ruling.

SCOTT ok

SCOTT just to confirm

SCOTT you acnkowledge it was a "dead heat"?

SCOTT 84 - 84

SCOTT there was no tie option

Gareth M As the Rules state for the Australian Rules - Match Betting If any match ends in a draw/tie then stakes will be refunded unless a price is offered for the draw/tie. Bets will be settled on official AFL result only. therefore the bet has been correctly settled.

SCOTT that's a copy/paste but i was looked forward to you directly answering my question

Gareth M has now left this chat.

This chat has been closed by bet365.

[chachi]

Settled correctly IMO ... sport-specific rules always override the general rules

[McFly86]

Settled correctly IMO ... sport-specific rules always override the general rules

No. The General Rule is on-point and specific and does not suggest that there is any exception. It is deceptive to then rely upon a contradictory rule that you would simply not expect to find (and I would be willing to swear under oath that I was unaware of).


Dead-Heats
Where two selections Dead-Heat half the stake money is lost and the full odds are paid to the other half. If more than two Dead-Heat the stake is proportioned accordingly.


Read that. Did two selections "Dead-Heat"? Clearly they did, and the Rule should apply.

[jw]

... agreed ... rules are very clear ... sport specific rules are the ones that always count.

[McFly86]

... agreed ... rules are very clear ... sport specific rules are the ones that always count.

How can you possibly say the "rules are very clear"? They are completely contradictory.

And on what basis can you argue that certain rules are more applicable than others? It just allows the book to "pick and choose".

[jw]

How can you possibly say the "rules are very clear"? They are completely contradictory.

And on what basis can you argue that certain rules are more applicable than others? It just allows the book to "pick and choose".

The rules are extremely clear .. click the sport that your betting and read the rules ... couldn't be any clearer .. it is your responsibility to understand them before placing the bet.

[AribaAriba]

just dont live bet...... its a risky business to get into. Live bet IMO are for degenerates who are bound to lose money....

[McFly86]

The rules are extremely clear .. click the sport that your betting and read the rules ... couldn't be any clearer .. it is your responsibility to understand them before placing the bet.

Please explain your interpretation of the General Rules regarding dead heats?

[jw]

Please explain your interpretation of the General Rules regarding dead heats?

Dead heats are something that horses do .. draws/ties are something that sports teams do.

Either way - you lost. and you don't stand a chance if you take it to arbitration .. the book is correct here. My interpretation is not important .. the books is .. and in my opinion - they are correct.

[Mistongo]

Settled correctly IMO ... sport-specific rules always override the general rules

This is true in every book I ever played. GL with your bet OP but I don't think you are right in this case.

[McFly86]

Dead heats are something that horses do .. draws/ties are something that sports teams do.

Either way - you lost. and you don't stand a chance if you take it to arbitration .. the book is correct here. My interpretation is not important .. the books is .. and in my opinion - they are correct.

1. Betfair applies the dead heat rule to AFL markets -- they specifically call it "the dead heat rule".

2. What is the difference between a tie and a dead heat?

[Art Vandeleigh]

Every time I deposit into a new book, I always allot a certain amount, that I know I'm going to lose, under a category called "learning curve". Until you are completely comfortable with an on-line sportsbook's software and rules, crap like this is going to happen. You really have no choice but to eat it, file it under education expenses (you have now been educated that at bet365, you need to read the sports specific rules), and move on. Do you really think IBAS is going to help you out here?

[McFly86]

Every time I deposit into a new book, I always allot a certain amount, that I know I'm going to lose, under a category called "learning curve". Until you are completely comfortable with an on-line sportsbook's software and rules, crap like this is going to happen. You really have no choice but to eat it, file it under education expenses (you have now been educated that at bet365, you need to read the sports specific rules), and move on. Do you really think IBAS is going to help you out here?

Could people please keep irrelevant/nonsensical posts like this out of my thread.

[chachi]

Mcfly - you're wrong, you won't win, you didn't understand the rules you were wagering under, learn from it and move on ...

[jw]

Could people please keep irrelevant/nonsensical posts like this out of my thread.

What you are actually looking for is someone to come and agree with you then .. not an opinion from anyone that does not ....
That is 5 or 6 people now who are siding with the sportsbook ... maybe there is a good reason for this.

As I said earlier -- good luck if you dispute .. I don't think you stand a chance of getting any money from them - as I believe they are correct here.... but my opinion counts for nothing ... you have made that quite clear.

[McFly86]

What you are actually looking for is someone to come and agree with you then .. not an opinion from anyone that does not ....
That is 5 or 6 people now who are siding with the sportsbook ... maybe there is a good reason for this.

As I said earlier -- good luck if you dispute .. I don't think you stand a chance of getting any money from them - as I believe they are correct here.... but my opinion counts for nothing ... you have made that quite clear.

Your initial argument was "a tie is not a dead heat", and now you are arguing that "the masses are right."

Clearly you have nothing to contribute towards the discussion, and I would kindly ask that you not post anything further in this thread.

[jw]

Your initial argument was "a tie is not a dead heat", and now you are arguing that "the masses are right."

Clearly you have nothing to contribute towards the discussion, and I would kindly ask that you not post anything further in this thread.

As i suspected .. waiting for one person who agrees with you ... I have already given my reasons - you have chosen to ignore my answer ... my intial argument was that dead heats happen in horse races .. not in sports events .. you did not like that argument - so I backed it up with a "everyone but you sees that you are wrong here" and you then decide to stick your fingers in your ears and scream lalalalalalala ... ad wait for someone else to comment in the hope that you will eventually find someone that agrees with you ... at which point you will jump up and down and convince yourself that the one person who agrees with you is correct -- and the 10 or 12 people that disagree with you are wrong .. why post if you didn't want opinions ?



As I said - you're wrong ... but good luck.

[Art Vandeleigh]

I have to say though, he really did get screwed here.

Imagine someone else made the same wager but on the other side at the exact same time, in the 1.3 - 1.4 range. That person should have lost a bundle with a tie, but would have gotten away with it because of the draw=refund rule. Definitely doesn't seem right.

[McFly86]

I realise that my posts above are a bit vitrolic, and I apologise if they are offensive, but I was just very frustrated to trade the game basically perfectly and not make a profit. It is a little frustrating to then argue with Bet365, and post my story here and get more of the same.

I have attached proof from a Betfair AFL game going on right now to show that "dead heat" indeed applies to AFL matches and is industry standard.

[barcelonafc]

bet365 are a good book for small time players, anything more than this and ur limited asap.

[Hareeba!]

What a waste of time!

Every sportsbook has General Rules Sports Specific Rules

Obviously the sports specific rules apply where the eventuality is covered (as it is in this case). The General Rules apply only when the SS rules don't cover the eventuality.

The fact that Betfair or any other book treats a tie under dead-heat rules is irrelevant.

Always make yourself aware of the rules at the book you are playing at. And don't go complaining if you don't and then get a 'surprise' like this.

Google is not the way to find out what a book's rules are.

[McFly86]

What a waste of time!

Every sportsbook has General Rules Sports Specific Rules

What is the between General Rules and Sports Rules? All rules are of equal importance. It is absurd for books to have contradictory rules in cases such as this, whereby they can "pick and choose" to screw the player.

Obviously the sports specific rules apply where the eventuality is covered (as it is in this case). The General Rules apply only when the SS rules don't cover the eventuality.

The "General Rule" is phrased in a positive, all-inclusive manner. If they intended for it to not apply to all bets, why not clarify "this rule does not apply to certain sports" or "subject to individual sports rules"?

The fact that Betfair or any other book treats a tie under dead-heat rules is irrelevant.

I disagree; standard industry practice is relevant in interpreting rules. Especially in cases where there is ambiguity due to conflicting rules.

Always make yourself aware of the rules at the book you are playing at. And don't go complaining if you don't and then get a 'surprise' like this.

Google is not the way to find out what a book's rules are.

What dross.

[chachi]

You obviously are going to ignore anyone posting anything except "you are right they screwed you!" so what is the point? Referring to the last post's remark as dross is laughable, as it is directly on point.

Bet365's rules are VERY clear what treatment should be applied in the (rare) event of a tie score after regulation time in that sport. If you think just because something is how Betfair does it is standard market practice you're fooling yourself, Betfair voids in many cases where books would not, and vice versa.

Such a rare event did occur, and they applied the settlement treatment as their rules state, end of story, nothing to see here folks, move it along, move it along.

By the way, if you think there is such a set of standard market settlement rules you've obviously never looked at betting on tennis and the impact of matches being awarded by penalty points or injury retirement.

Lastly, arb'ing them against themselves like that is a surefire way to having a useless account, well done

[Jontheman]

What is the between General Rules and Sports Rules? All rules are of equal importance. It is absurd for books to have contradictory rules in cases such as this, whereby they can "pick and choose" to screw the player.



The "General Rule" is phrased in a positive, all-inclusive manner. If they intended for it to not apply to all bets, why not clarify "this rule does not apply to certain sports" or "subject to individual sports rules"?



I disagree; standard industry practice is relevant in interpreting rules. Especially in cases where there is ambiguity due to conflicting rules.



What dross.

1) The book can't pick and choose rules to screw a player. Sports-specific rules ALWAYS take precedence over general rules - (if not there would be no point in having them - THINK ABOUT IT). THIS is industry standard practice (since you love the phrase so much). Even if the book had a massive liability on the favourite so that it would be more advantageous to them to apply dead-heat rules they cannot - they must void/push. They cannot and are not picking and choosing their rules; in fact the reverse. They have applied the correct one and you have trawled the site to find a different rule not relevant to this sport that you would rather was arbitrarily applied here.

BTW Betfair do all sorts of weird things with ties that are NOT industry standard in several sports.

You have also insulted everyone who has told you exactly this which would make you a pig-headed moron. The fact that you labelled as "dross" the revolutionary suggestion that you should actually read the rules of what you are betting on is proof of this.

[mikeyg]

I agree with McFly..... Just to keep this going of course

[whatagoal1]

Mcfly is on the losing end of the dispute, but he is correct that the rules are contradictory, maybe speak to someone higher in the company and plead a case for x00 dollar discretionay payment.

If you really want to take it further the way to go is GC, not Ibas, and if you are really serious you can file a court claim for less than 50 dollars, don't know how a court case would work with you being in the states though.

I think if you were in the UK and you went for the court route you would win, as they would have to counter the argument of the conflicting rules, and if they do not in their rules have anything suggesting which of the conflicts takes preference they SIMPLY wouldn't bother with court, and just pay

[chachi]

But, since he arb'ed them against themselves, they're possibly less inclined to listen than they might normally be ...

[dikefale]

Tie is void bet,what is so strange for you in this decision.

[Hareeba!]

Mcfly is on the losing end of the dispute, but he is correct that the rules are contradictory, maybe speak to someone higher in the company and plead a case for x00 dollar discretionay payment.

If you really want to take it further the way to go is GC, not Ibas, and if you are really serious you can file a court claim for less than 50 dollars, don't know how a court case would work with you being in the states though.

I think if you were in the UK and you went for the court route you would win, as they would have to counter the argument of the conflicting rules, and if they do not in their rules have anything suggesting which of the conflicts takes preference they SIMPLY wouldn't bother with court, and just pay

There is no conflict or contradiction in the rules.
It is standard practice for books to have general and sports specific rules.
Have a look at any decent bookie or exchange site you like and you will see this is fact.
He wouldn't have any chance taking it to arbitration or a court.

I would however comment that the rule does appear to be very strange for AFL at least and I can't figure out why they would have it. But it is there and Bet $3.65 have made the correct decision.

Further, there is nothing wrong with the in-play trading which the OP did and that would be no reason for them to void or not pay had there been a result in the game.

[whatagoal1]

He would have a chance in court, because 1) he would argue as to whether sports specific rule overrules general rules
and 2) Uk bookmakers very rarely turn up to the court for small amounts, so as not to set a precedent, as many punters when in dispute will not see a complaint through which suits the bookies fine

[Hareeba!]

He would have a chance in court, because 1) he would argue as to whether sports specific rule overrules general rules
and 2) Uk bookmakers very rarely turn up to the court for small amounts, so as not to set a precedent, as many punters when in dispute will not see a complaint through which suits the bookies fine

I'd offer 100/1 a court falling that argument