How about it Lou, post this evidence he was part of a syndicate. You're supposed to be the impartial decider of FACTS--and all you can do is toss out innuendo. Take yourself off this case, buddy--you're embarrassing yourself.
-
Comment -
Not only embarrassing himself but he is trying to make me out to be some sort of criminal. That does not sit very well with me. If u want to feel that way fine but don't put it out here to try and turn people against me without anything to back it up! U haven't even given me the opportunity to explain all this to u on the phone where I can clearly tell u my side!
Just because I did not question what two people who were supposed to be managers told me was a correct pay out does not make me a criminal. Again I am very new to sports betting and there is no reason for me to question what two managers tell me. I felt they knew what they were talking about and I didn't! Listen to the call it should change your opinion!./Comment -
I think that SBR might be a co-owner of 5dimes. I mean, I have zero proof but I think I heard it somewhere and you should all blindly believe itComment -
Completely agree with you. I recently deposited at ladbrokes specifically because of repeated email promos from them. Of course after depositing and making what I believed were qualifying wagers I was notified that I hadn't met the qualifications which weren't forth coming in the body of the promo email. After speaking with live chat I was told I qualified for a different promo so I figured OK at least not all was lost but after trying to claim the bonus I was clearly told I was eligible for, I was informened yet again I didn't qualify so I got nothing at all. At that point I figured I'd file a complaint here not knowing at the time they were a sponsor book. Needless to say I ended up with the short end of the stick but that was expected especially since it was the Douche bag Lou looking into it and yet again Lou you lived up to your well earned sell out reputation. Let me ask you Lou...do the sponsor books provide the lube for the continued butt penetrating u give to the forum members here?Comment -
Goddamn this is a good post. 5 dimes should take whatever the amount they overpaid on the individual bet out of his account and pay him the rest. He did his due diligence and made sure the amounts were correct and the bookmaker verified the amounts.
I really don't see how any other outcome is just.
In Vegas players have been overpaid in the past from various sportsbooks. Many times books look at the camera and then make the player pay back the amount if they have any sort of access to the player, usually an agreement with the hotel (won't let person check into their room without paying back the money, sometimes the player can go for long periods of time without paying back the sportsbook, they leave Vegas and then on their return trip check into to their same hotel). If a player goes out and makes a ton of money in the Casino or at some other sportsbook with those Sportsbook winnings the Casino/other sportsbook is not taking back those winnings.
Hell, the person could make the bets at the same sportsbook (Coasts, William Hill, Cantor, Harrahs, MGM) just at another location and the books would have to pay. There would be none of this bullshit, oh... were not paying you because we overpaid you and you used that money to bet this or that.Comment -
Please, SBR....
Tell me what is wrong with the way Vegas handles this and why 5Dimes could not handle it the same way?Comment -
We once had SBR as a watchdog of online sportsbooks but money has changed that and the only thing for certain is anyone's chances of a fair and unbiased ruling don't exist against the growing number of sponsor books.Comment -
in the last two cases I am reading here with some interest (heritage casino case and this one) I can only see that SBR is making people to prove his innocence instead making books proving their guilt. New version of Robin Hood is in town, stealing from the players and giving it to the poor bookies (or at least justifying the theft)Comment -
Cutter, let's be a bit fair... you're making it sound like Lou's responsible for global warming here. I call him Evil Lou when I'm pissed at him but he nor anyone else is a magician who can make books do anything when we stuff up/misread or don't read/take a shot no matter how much they debate things. But at least these guys are trying to advocate for us.Last edited by shari91; 12-04-12, 07:43 AM.Comment -
I can't speak to Cutter's case, but I fail to see any type of advocacy provided in Dan Bouton's complaint here. His best chance at fairness was when another Mod (J7) expressed a favorable opinion (follow 5D's own rule on the matter), but then he was never to be heard from again. It was instead handed over to Lou who has provided more "guesswork" than detective work. This case needs to be reopened with a pair of fresh and impartial eyes. Justin would be the logical choice.Comment -
I hear you Hedge. And I'm saying that sincerely. I tried to call Dan at his request a couple of hrs ago but this time difference is f'ng us up. But the problem is with your (and my old) theory is that everyone talks. It's not the case of a complaint gets assigned to Lou or J7 or whomever else and only that person deals with it. Just like any other normal job, dilemmas are discussed. And just because x or y is posting, that doesn't mean the other one isn't involved. Having staff respond in a thread like this doesn't always illicit the best response. When we go silent it's not because we've been told to... anyone who knows me will understand how silly that notion is. And J7 is a babbler too. But it's usually because our presence will derail a discussion or detract ppl from the actual case. That doesn't help anyone and that aspect won't change.Comment -
Give me a break Sheri. The biggest issue is you mods don't fairly advocate for us mostly honest players when a sponsor book is involved. Its a shame how often you mods claim to be unbiased and fair but in reality most of you misrepresent yourselves and come across as liars and I'm not blind to it and hopefully others realize it to.Comment -
All good questions, which could easily be answered if the bet history was released. Note that OP has given his permission on the matter. Taking the OP at his word, he estimates he made roughly 30 such pleaser bets (3-4% of 800-900 overall bets), and only 1 mispriced winner was produced (an improper gain of less than 4k). The rest of the action he claims to be 100% legit resulting in approximately 40k profit, an assertion that 5D and SBR have failed to disprove.Comment -
I can't and won't argue with you cutter as it seems kind of silly to get into it since it's a matter of belief. If you know of a better place that will bust their ass trying to sort out your case - even if you didn't bother to read bonus t&c's - then let us know. For all I know there is this magical forum out there that even when a player doesn't read bonus terms or takes a shot or multi accounts, etc, they can still convince the book to pay. For the rest of the world it's called personal responsiblity + SBR. Wish you all the best
Comment -
Other than perhaps Heritage, for awhile SBR was a bright spot in an other wise corrupt industry. Heritage left for the dark side with the greek/betjam takeover. SBR has followed suit ever since the Cory case. It amazes me how case after case SBR mods are able to twist everything in favor of their sponsor books, and against non-sponsor books. At first it didn't bother me here and there, because it's keeping a good site I like to use in business. Now greed and plain arrogance has just taken over. JJ left, and I'm guessing Justin won't be too far behind? Why don't you guys create another "SBR Alert" thread over some non-sponsor book getting ONE file complaint against them, while you sweep all the Betonline/5dimes complaints under the rug.
End of the day we can bitch all we want, but SBR and US-facing books have us all by the balls and they know it. And they are treating us this way. There are a few sponsor books here I trust would give a fair ruling, but I would never expect SBR to HELP a ruling against any sponsor book. Non-sponsor books are starting to not give a shit what SBR says, because the general public is learning its bullshit. I used to come to this site long before I realized anything about the complaints they handled, or the points they offered to pros and crap like that. I was pleasantly surprised by these perks but they aren't why I come here. I'll continue to use this forum like many others, and SBR knows this. We just need to stop expecting SBR to be a good guy, as they are just as corrupt as anyone else in this industry.Comment -
My personal issue is minor and I stated that much when I filed the complaint and yes I should have known to dig into the t&c more carefully but if a rep on live chat says I qualify for a certain promo and I run with it only be told a day later I also don't qualify for that based on being a non UK resident, I believe I have a reason to be a little put off. If I should have to take "personal responsibility" as you stated then so should the books when their employees make claims that turn out to be untrue. Not receiving the bonus the rep said I qualified for is minor and I could careless but why does Tony and more specifically the two employees Dan contacted not have to take responsibility for their mistake.Comment -
I'd wager Centrebet would see this as their own error, deduct the extra 3k, and pay the man his balance in this situation. Mainly due to the double confirmation from CS, but also because of the amount of time that has passed and the number of bets made.
Pro-rating 800 bets over 6 weeks because the player was overpaid by 3 times his deposit amount in week one is not a fair solution. The bet may have been grossly overpaid, but reality is he ended up with 3k from a $900 deposit, not really an unusual amount that might see someone betting differently than normal because of it is it?
30 shots at hitting the bad line would be quite a different story than the OP has portrayed so far.
When he made these bets makes the difference I think. Multiple shots before hitting the payout suggests he did know for certain it was a bad line. Multiple bets after CS confirmed the payout was correct might suggest he really believed CS, as a shot taker would know to get his winnings out fast and not give them a second chance to spot the error by taking the same bad line.Last edited by Optional; 12-04-12, 09:41 AM..Comment -
How can this guy not at least get part of the 32k? Even if he was paid out at correct odds are we just suppose to assume that he would have played differently? Why was no mediation or any kind of settlement offered? Is this now just standard practice for a book to steal a players money and have a corrupt players advocate site stand behind the book. SBR is so lucky they have no competition and can get away with these crimes.Comment -
I tried making the same point a few posts up but Sheri decided to be cynical and insisted I live in a magical world. I guess once I questioned SBR's motives and actions to loudly and to frequently the mods best recourse is to attempt to ridicule me. Irony is the more they claim to be fair and partial the worse they look. Is it so hard for John, Lou and all the other lackeys to man up and admit that the money coming in each month from sponsor books supersedes the need to be fair. I can deal with how they rule, thats no secret anymore, but the continued deceit and attempted cover ups is appalling to say the least.Comment -
Shari,
We can't even get the most basic of questions answered on the complaint itself.
Did SBR listen to the recordings to verify he asked for (2) supervisors and they confirmed the payout?
Why was the payout table wrong and for how long?
Did Dan wager on any pleasers after he won the big one?
etc.
You know what's really ironic is that after Justin ruled in favor of Heritage (and I believe in that other case rightfully so) SBR was bending over backwards for a 2nd opinion or arbitration...
Dan feels he was wronged in this case and we can't even get the most basic of explanations about the complaint...Why are no 2nd looks being offered this time when everything Dan has said so far APPEARS to be correct and he's not even objecting to the information being released?
Doesn't it seem quite odd to you that the basic merits of the complaint won't even be discussed? How can you review the complaint if we can't even get the FACTS OF THE CASE??????? How ironic is it that Justin posts something SOMEWHAT favorable to Dan but then isn't heard from again in 270+ posts??
I agree with SBR 80% of the time...but this whole thing just smells rotten from the start.Last edited by cloverfield; 12-04-12, 11:47 AM.Comment -
maybe i missed it, but why isnt this on the news wire? ive seen much smaller things on there with smaller non promoted sportsbooks on thereComment -
Shari, I believe J7 sent a PM to Dan that he cannot comment on the case anymoreComment -
@Mikey
Why would SBR wish to draw attention to a player getting railroaded? It took an outcry from OP and forum members for Lou or Bill to even post that this was resolved. Seems somewhat obvious to me that SBR didn't really want this decision splashed around everywhere.Comment -
Isn't it strange shari that even after 2 weeks you (I mean SBR), as an arbitrator and a person involved in this case still do not have his betting history however Lou made even made assumptions that this guy was a part of a syndicate (based on what if you do not even know THIS player's betting history?!?).
Because I expect you to say that Lou probably has it then why the f... do you call OP about the history if you have it in b&w with your trusted colleague?Comment -
I wish posters would quit saying if they booked it, they got to pay. 7000-1 on a 6 team pleaser? LOL. No they don't. And your tune would change if that bet breaks the book you have your bankroll at.
If your bank makes an error and puts money in your account, and you start using that money. You will be arrested and sent to prison.Comment
