5dimes screw up at my expense attention sport bettors BEWARE!!

**HedgeHog** · 12-08-12, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by raiders72001

Scooter also thought that a player should be able to screw a book on a bad line. The player made a baseball bet at +140 when the line should have been -140. Scooter agreed with the player.

That type of bet should be canceled, preferably before the game starts. However, what 5D does is wait until the game is over and cancels only if the bet wins. Tony is known to freeroll people that bet bad lines.

**Scooter** · 12-08-12, 03:38 PM

Durito has previously pointed out an axiom of sportsbetting disputes:

If the only person agreeing with you is raiders, you are on the wrong side.

**MonkeyF0cker** · 12-08-12, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by raydog

as far as what i remember from Dan, after betting quite a few pleasers, he didnt play anymore of them after hitting one... why would he stop betting the best odds(x1000) at the entire book?

because he knew it was wrong 100% and now had a br to bet with...he thought it would get overlooked if he just hit one. (thats the way tony sees it anyways)

and mf, obviously you cant tell, but im not 100% siding with the book here either...if i were siding with the book completely, i would say that i agree that he should paying the 11k back to them... i think its very wrong for him to have taken payouts, but thats what it cost 5d for their incompetence...i simply dont agree they should pay him out more after the mistake is found...

freerolling him?

exactly who is out of pocket 11k? did dan give them a penny out of his pocket since hitting the pleaser? unreal

his acct. never actually goes in the minus either...(if you want to get completely technical with the rule people keep bringing up)

Uhh. Yes. Freeroll. You said that players should not get money back for "taking shots." If winning bets don't get paid and losing bets don't get refunded, who is the only one that wins? Do you seriously need this explained to you AGAIN? What prevents ANY BOOK from intentionally posting bad lines and odds so that they get to keep every penny bet with that ridiculous premise?

**raydog** · 12-08-12, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by MonkeyF0cker

Uhh. Yes. Freeroll. You said that players should not get money back for "taking shots." If winning bets don't get paid and losing bets don't get refunded, who is the only one that wins? Do you seriously need this explained to you AGAIN? What prevents ANY BOOK from intentionally posting bad lines and odds so that they get to keep every penny bet with that ridiculous premise?

how do you refund someone your own money? you are wrong about it again...but we dont have to go through it, you wont be convinced you are wrong and again in this case, i know im not... repeat offenders hitting bad lines deserve to lose... you are under the impression that books steal from guys hitting bad lines...they void most wagers anyways, but then punish repeat offenders...and you would too

if you really think books put out bad lines on purpose, you have been given entirely too much credit... books dont intentionally post bad lines like this (100x off) ... what keeps them from doing it? losing customers left and right when it happens...i know you think the worst of bookmakers, but if you think books post bad lines on purpose, you are fukking retarded.

**MonkeyF0cker** · 12-08-12, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by raydog

how do you refund someone your own money? you are wrong about it again...but we dont have to go through it, you wont be convinced you are wrong and again in this case, i know im not... repeat offenders hitting bad lines deserve to lose... you are under the impression that books steal from guys hitting bad lines...they void most wagers anyways, but then punish repeat offenders...and you would too

if you really think books put out bad lines on purpose, you have been given entirely too much credit... books dont intentionally post bad lines like this (100x off) ... what keeps them from doing it? losing customers left and right when it happens...i know you think the worst of bookmakers, but if you think books post bad lines on purpose, you are fukking retarded.

LOL. Okay. Jesus. I'll say this REALLY SLOW for you. You said that anyone betting bad lines and bad paytables is a shot taker. That much is obvious since even a guy calling to verify it is a shot taker in your book. Secondly, you stated that anyone "taking shots" should not be refunded for bets wagered on a bad line or paytable. You've also stated that those wagers should not win. If a player cannot win nor get their bets refunded, who gets THEIR money? The book. That is called a money pit.

Do I think books put out bad lines and paytables intentionally? Not as a matter of practice. But what you're supporting means that someone probably will down the line. It is a freeroll, Ray. Quit being an idiot.

**raydog** · 12-08-12, 05:43 PM

when you hit a 7000/1 line that should be 700/1 then you are a shot taker...plain and simple

**MonkeyF0cker** · 12-08-12, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by raydog

when you hit a 7000/1 line that should be 700/1 then you are a shot taker...plain and simple

So the book can put out that line and keep every cent bet on it. Right? LOL.

Well, you've even stated that a book's own rules are there for them to break. I suppose it's pretty pointless to continue this conversation with you. You're just not rational about these things.

**raydog** · 12-08-12, 05:53 PM

Originally posted by MonkeyF0cker

So the book can put out that line and keep every cent bet on it. Right? LOL.

Well, you've even stated that a book's own rules are there for them to break. I suppose it's pretty pointless to continue this conversation with you. You're just not rational about these things.

there is no telling how much that pleaser has cost them... at least 11k from this guy... its not that im irrational, i just dont disagree with what 5dimes is doing about it...i imagine tonys head almost exploded when he found out they already shipped out 11k all because of a guy taking adv. of a line error...well, that and his dumb fukking clerks giving out bad info...

**Keith Richard** · 12-08-12, 06:01 PM

Originally posted by KGambler

I don't know, it seems pretty clear cut.

5 Dimes is my current favorite place to play. Granted, there aren't too many choices anymore for U.S. bettors anymore. That being said, there is no doubt in my mind if Dan had run up a negative balance from his Pleaser win 5Dimes would have expected full payment of the negative balance.

**raydog** · 12-08-12, 06:05 PM

Originally posted by Keith Richard

5 Dimes is my current favorite place to play. Granted, there aren't too many choices anymore for U.S. bettors anymore. That being said, there is no doubt in my mind if Dan had run up a negative balance from his Pleaser win 5Dimes would have expected full payment of the negative balance.

and there isnt a snowball chance in hell of them getting any payment...why? because the player wouldnt feel like should have to pay because of the mistake...exactly the same thing that is happening with the book now

**MonkeyF0cker** · 12-08-12, 06:08 PM

Originally posted by raydog

and there isnt a snowball chance in hell of them getting any payment...why? because the player wouldnt feel like should have to pay because of the mistake...exactly the same thing that is happening with the book now

Now, you're speculating. You're going to sit here and say that ABSOLUTELY NOBODY would pay the book in that situation? Seriously?

Even Brock Landers supposedly tried to pay a debt to a bookmaker (which happened to be a scam or whatever but he supposedly sent the money).

**raydog** · 12-08-12, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by MonkeyF0cker

Now, you're speculating. You're going to sit here and say that ABSOLUTELY NOBODY would pay the book in that situation? Seriously?

Even Brock Landers supposedly tried to pay a debt to a bookmaker (which happened to be a scam or whatever but he supposedly sent the money).

i said a few times in the thread, that i believe only a very serious gambler or someone that does it for a living would pay back a book a good sum...especially a much needed out... i know i would pay it and i know you would pay it...but we would report the error in the first place, so we wouldnt be put in that position...you are an honest guy who needs outs in order to help make a better living... a rec player and supposedly a beginner, no way they pay it back... landers paid a % of the old debt because he thought he had his current balance up in limbo and would get chucked from a book.

**Keith Richard** · 12-08-12, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by raydog

and there isnt a snowball chance in hell of them getting any payment...why? because the player wouldnt feel like should have to pay because of the mistake...exactly the same thing that is happening with the book now

Yes my point is though if they considered those bets as losses they implied by their rule that all bets made after the Pleaser payout are considered valid.Of course I am making the assumption that they would demand their money back from a negative balance.

**Scooter** · 12-08-12, 06:49 PM

raydog operates by "Book the bet; Pay the bet."

He has to - it's the rules of the Nevada Gaming Commission.

But clearly he would love to scam and cheat customers.

Unfortunately, there is no enforcement offshore, and rules are made to be invoked only when they are to the book's benefit.

One would think he would be writing Letters to the Editor, giving interviews to newspapers and magazines, and campaigning in any way possible to change the Nevada Gaming Regulation that says "Book the bet; Pay the bet".
But no. He obeys the rules where he works.
He can't screw customers where he works by law. But he loves to see customers cheated, and takes the side of the cheaters on the internet.

I'm curious how the director of his sportsbook would feel about his employee's attitude that rules are made to be broken, and that customers can have winning bets revoked weeks and months later.

**Dan bouton** · 12-08-12, 07:09 PM

Sbr, ray and. Others

What if this mis grade happens. I then run up my balance to 9k. I now withdraw 5k and loose the other 4k. I now deposit 3k and go on my run and make 35k! Now what do u do! Do u say that the 3k was part of the 5k I took out and not pay anything? These situations can be complicated and that is why u put rules out there to be followed. I should have to pay the 3900 and keep the rest in either situation! But as to my hypothetical scenario, how do u rule?

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by raydog

when you hit a 7000/1 line that should be 700/1 then you are a shot taker...plain and simple

It should have paid 70-1, not 7000-1.

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 07:35 PM

Who wins a bet and after winning calls up and says that I think it was a bad line? You call before or not at all if it's on the up and up. Putting up 57 cents is saying that I don't care about the 57 cents but will take a shot on the 7000-1.

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 07:39 PM

Dan asked if the odds were right because he knew the correct odds. I have never called up a book after a bet to see if the odds were correct. I've called or chatted many times before placing the bet.

**rumnblack** · 12-08-12, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by raiders72001

I have never called up a book after a bet to see if the odds were correct. I've called or chatted many times before placing the bet.

Who do you call, your Mom?

Air bets don't count.

**Dan bouton** · 12-08-12, 07:55 PM

I did not wait until the bet won. What r u talking about? I called days befor winning the bet. Yes I placed it, I then continued researching the profession as an attempt to learn more and be a more educated bettor. During this research I came up on examples and definitions of a bad line. I then continued my betting and came back to those pay tables and wagers. I thought I should call and ask for a professional opinion on this. That's basically what I did. I'm not gonna keep explaining that! Comment in my last post raiders, I would like u to comment on that!

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 07:55 PM

Originally posted by rumnblack

Who do you call, your Mom?

Air bets don't count.

You're way out of your league Jr. When you grow up you may post at the big boy forums.

**MonkeyF0cker** · 12-08-12, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by Dan bouton

I did not wait until the bet won. What r u talking about? I called days befor winning the bet. Yes I placed it, I then continued researching the profession as an attempt to learn more and be a more educated bettor. During this research I came up on examples and definitions of a bad line. I then continued my betting and came back to those pay tables and wagers. I thought I should call and ask for a professional opinion on this. That's basically what I did. I'm not gonna keep explaining that! Comment in my last post raiders, I would like u to comment on that!

Don't worry, Dan. Raiders doesn't ever let facts get in his way.

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by Dan bouton

Sbr, ray and. Others

What if this mis grade happens. I then run up my balance to 9k. I now withdraw 5k and loose the other 4k. I now deposit 3k and go on my run and make 35k! Now what do u do! Do u say that the 3k was part of the 5k I took out and not pay anything? These situations can be complicated and that is why u put rules out there to be followed. I should have to pay the 3900 and keep the rest in either situation! But as to my hypothetical scenario, how do u rule?

You win the $35k under the scenario above.

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by Dan bouton

I did not wait until the bet won. What r u talking about? I called days befor winning the bet. Yes I placed it, I then continued researching the profession as an attempt to learn more and be a more educated bettor. During this research I came up on examples and definitions of a bad line. I then continued my betting and came back to those pay tables and wagers. I thought I should call and ask for a professional opinion on this. That's basically what I did. I'm not gonna keep explaining that! Comment in my last post raiders, I would like u to comment on that!

The story has changed somewhat from the beginning. How many phone calls did you place before any of the games started? How many phone calls did you make after winning the bet?

**NobodyUKnow** · 12-08-12, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by Scooter

raydog operates by "Book the bet; Pay the bet."

He's actually stating the exact opposite in this thread repeatedly if you had any reading comprehension whatsoever, dumb ass.

**Dan bouton** · 12-08-12, 09:03 PM

My one and only phone call related to these wagers was placed befor the bet had won. I spoke to two reps in that call. They verified the payable was correct. I continued betting and won one of the wagers that was already pending at the time of the call. I made no more calls after winning as I thought they already made it clear to me that the wagers I placed then were legit. If i called again I agree that would be questionable and show I knew something was wrong but I did not. I trusted the info in my first and only call was correct. That's what I've said all along! I made my call befor winning the bet and spoke to two seperate people on that single call who both reviewed and verified the payable and bets.

**Monte** · 12-08-12, 09:38 PM

Every book that does not cancel bad lines asap, but adjust prices or waits till the game is over, takes a reversed shot at the player. What is so damn difficult about that, it's not a players fault if there are bad lines.
Not everyone will be 100% sure either they are bad, cos not everyone compares lines with other books or has a clue how big of a favorite a team should be. There are squares out there you know, i mean really clueless ones, and only shit books who want those squares don't cancel bad lines...capiche?

**Scooter** · 12-08-12, 09:45 PM

Originally posted by NobodyUKnow

He's actually stating the exact opposite in this thread repeatedly if you had any reading comprehension whatsoever, dumb ass.

Go back and have someone read my post to you.

It's clearly stated, yet you failed to understand.
Then you accuse me of lacking reading comprehension.

**HedgeHog** · 12-08-12, 11:09 PM

Originally posted by raiders72001

You win the $35k under the scenario above.

So it's just Dan's bad luck that he hit the pleaser earlier instead of later. You would rule otherwise if he hit it later--that's inconsistent and moronic. This is why the one bad bet should stand on it's own. Correct it and let the legit bets stand--regardless of when they occurred. Is this that difficult for you to comprehend?

**rumnblack** · 12-08-12, 11:20 PM

Originally posted by HedgeHog

So it's just Dan's bad luck that he hit the pleaser earlier instead of later. You would rule otherwise if he hit it later--that's inconsistent and moronic. This is why the one bad bet should stand on it's own. Correct it and let the legit bets stand--regardless of when they occurred. Is this that difficult for you to comprehend?

Stop being so logical. You're a buzzkill to Raiders one line replies in an attempt to tune everyone out of the thread on the promise of a $5 six-team-parlay.

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 11:21 PM

Originally posted by HedgeHog

So it's just Dan's bad luck that he hit the pleaser earlier instead of later. You would rule otherwise if he hit it later--that's inconsistent and moronic. This is why the one bad bet should stand on it's own. Correct it and let the legit bets stand--regardless of when they occurred. Is this that difficult for you to comprehend?

If he deposits more money, then he can play with that. Post up is not that difficult of a concept.

**raydog** · 12-08-12, 11:31 PM

Yeah raiders, I meant 70/1 ... Dan, in that circumstance I think Tony would want 5k of that 35k balance...knowing him...he hates to feel like someone stole from him...he would want that 5k wd back.

Mf, not make the fight tonight? English probably the 2ND language on the strip tonight

**HedgeHog** · 12-08-12, 11:31 PM

Originally posted by raiders72001

If he deposits more money, then he can play with that. Post up is not that difficult of a concept.

He didn't need to post up more--or at least he didn't think he needed to. 5-Dimes own CS reps (2 of them) told him his pleaser bet was good--nearly 2 months prior to Tony's theft of his account.

**MonkeyF0cker** · 12-08-12, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by raydog

Yeah raiders, I meant 70/1 ... Dan, in that circumstance I think Tony would want 5k of that 35k balance...knowing him...he hates to feel like someone stole from him...he would want that 5k wd back.

Mf, not make the fight tonight? English probably the 2ND language on the strip tonight

LOL. Yeah. Pretty much.

I gave my tickets to a friend. I've got a headache tonight and don't feel like dealing with the crowd.

**raiders72001** · 12-08-12, 11:40 PM

edit