The "punter" (player) who filed a complaint that his prop bet was invalidated has no reason to complain and SBR's stance that this player's bet should be honored is RIDICULOUS. The player betting on the prop after the news broke about the trade is no different than a player betting on a winning horse race after the race is over when a book mistakenly leaves the race up past post time. This is NOT a "falling asleep at the wheel" situation. This kind of thing would happen all the time on betting exchanges and I always felt that any bets placed after the news breaks should be cancelled. A message to BetVictor sportsbook: Don't cave on your proper decision to invalidate the players wager as he is guilty of "past posting", plain and simple. Full Disclosure: I have never done business with BetVictor.
-
-
I agree with Andywend here. If the trade was announced before the wager was placed, the player's wager was effectively a past-post. If you can grade the bet in dispute at the time the bet was made, it should be no action, regardless of whether it was left up.Comment -
Wait what? Isn't this just essentially betting steam, which is legal but frowned upon?Comment -
The bettor says he made his bet when he heard it was happening but before it was officially announced and confirmed. You need to factor in the fact that news outlets get things wrong too and his funds would still be at risk; either way, the lines managers should be penalized for falling asleep on their prop market here, not the bettor who got down on a price that was good throughout. Hopefully BetVictor will address.Comment -
According to the SBR news video at 0:32 to 0:36, the Bet Victor's position was that the bet was placed after the news had broken out.
Nothing in the video suggests that the player disputes this assertion. If this was not challenged, it should be treated as a fact accepted by both parties.
If the trade was accepted by both teams prior to the news release, the deal was done. The wager was a 100% proposition.
There's a big difference between falling asleep at the wheel when an NFL game moves from +3 to +4, and when a prop bet moves from +400 to -10000.Comment -
Right and news sites routinely get things wrong ... heck CNN butchers critical facts on a major national tragedy, we're talking about a sports trade. It's not official until it's confirmed by a team or player rep that the ink has dried. Meaning if the discussions broke down in the 11th hour (not unheard of or unlikely), his funds would have still been at risk. Not all that different than many of the cases you reported on in these same videos. =)
He was quicker to what was a good price than the oddsmakers were in managing their market. A unique market such as this requires active management, that didn't happen here and a player shouldn't have to do a prop managers job for him. Hopefully BetVictor rules in a player favorable way.Comment -
There is no "off time" for this so I'm sure it gets quite fun trying to solve it. But if a contract was signed prior to the bet being made, I fail to see how it is any different than a past-post. And the player can be wrong too, so how is a player saying I have been traded "official", what if he failed a physical, etc. It's official once he is officially under contract with the new team.Comment -
If a sportsbook that offers betting on horseracing fails to pull the market once the horses break from the gate and I bet $5,000 to win on the winning horse after he crosses the finish line, should my bet stand? Remember its possible an Inquiry can be launched and for my horse to be disqualified if I wager on the horse after he wins the race but before the result is declared official. How is this scenario really any different from what that bettor who has the dispute with BetVictor did? When offering betting on props like this, the industry standard is once any significant news breaks regarding the prop, any bets made afterwards are voided. Its certainly fair to say that an announcement being made stating that Player A has been traded to team A is significant news and the player wagered into a line that was only relevant BEFORE THE NEWS ANNOUNCEMENT. The clear resolution to this complaint is to void the wager and give the player his money back with a stern warning that any further attempts to STEAL money from the book will result in his account being closed. Normally SBR is right on the money with their rulings but they are dead wrong with this one.Comment -
What event are you all taking about?
Why are you defending betvictor??? fu ck the books they are all corrupt scum.Comment -
So if I hear about a trade and essentially bet a stale number, I'm at fault?
I don't really know what's going on here but it sounds like a punter got some news that he knew would move a line and hit the line before it moves. Is that accurate?
If so, I can't understand why J7 would be taking the stance he is.
No fault of the punter here if I understand correctly.Comment -
announced = stale line
official as declared by the league = past-postComment -
If the news were "Teams X and Y are discussing trading this player", the line would move. That would be a stale line, and the wager would stand.
If the news were "Teams X and Y agreed to trade this player", the result is now certain. It isn't simply a stale line; you can grade the wager.Comment -
Ok i just saw the video. Bet victor will claim at the minute the bet was placed - the market price wasnt 4/1 - so they can claim palaple error rule. (obvious error)
The problem is no one really knows what an obvious error is, its open to interpretation.
In some cases as long as the bet isnt past eventing, ie it wasnt 100% (like if a score is 2-1 and you bet over 2.5 goals) - then the book pays you - but closes account.
Primarly because as far as I am aware in UK it is a binding contract covered in the 2005 gambling act.
Ive seen books pay put on a lot worse than this...Comment -
you can't claim obvious error on a line movement. if d-wade, lebron, and bosh all break their ankles in practice, and you get your bet in after announcement, but before odds change, your bet should stand.Comment -
Obvious error would come into play because no other book would have had odds, or if they did it wouldnt be anything like 4/1.
Here in UK, if the book fu cks up - they say "what was the market price" then they check the bigger books to see what the price was, and they should settle at that price. Even on some of their terms it says they offer what Ladbrokes were showing etc if they make a mistake.Comment -
If he bet after annoucment, its likely a lot of the other books would have pulled the bet at that specific time.
So betvictor look at the other books and how they handled it and realise they should have pulled the market and made a palaple error.
I dont agree with it...Comment -
If BetVictor can show that the trade was stated and not reported as rumor then, yes, we'd agree with the title of this thread.Comment
