[kaliboyz]

Hello all, today i placed a bet on tennis (Donald Young -150 to win $100 at ************) and his opponent withdrew from the match (1st set Donald Young won 7-6, 2nd set Donald Young leading 2-1) and my bet is canceled, i looked at their Rules and here it is :

BookMaker provides all tennis wagers on the individual matches or sets. Betting must be fully completed without player's withdrawal, incapacity or disqualification for bets to stand. If a match is rescheduled due to scheduling, weather problems, bad light, etc. then all bets will have action and all wagers will stand. All tennis future bets are placed as *"All In"* unless otherwise stated. If a player withdraws before participating, then all bets on that player are settled as a loss.

After looking at the highlighted words, i feel so unfair for players and myself. i think even if you bet on the one that withdrew then your bet have to be cancel too, or if the one withdrew graded as loss then please grade my bet as a win. Do you think i have the case here? or this Book should change their Tennis rules?

[BranchDavidian]

Hello all, today i placed a bet on tennis (Donald Young -150 to win $100 at ************) and his opponent withdrew from the match (1st set Donald Young won 7-6, 2nd set Donald Young leading 2-1) and my bet is canceled, i looked at their Rules and here it is :

BookMaker provides all tennis wagers on the individual matches or sets. Betting must be fully completed without player's withdrawal, incapacity or disqualification for bets to stand. If a match is rescheduled due to scheduling, weather problems, bad light, etc. then all bets will have action and all wagers will stand. All tennis future bets are placed as *"All In"* unless otherwise stated. If a player withdraws before participating, then all bets on that player are settled as a loss.

After looking at the highlighted words, i feel so unfair for players and myself. i think even if you bet on the one that withdrew then your bet have to be cancel too, or if the one withdrew graded as loss then please grade my bet as a win. Do you think i have the case here? or this Book should change their Tennis rules?

The opposing player did not withdraw before participating. The match was in the second set. This would put you in the blue underlined situation. It would appear that the book acted according to their rules. You have no case here, and whether or not a book should change it's rules is not decided by public vote!

[robmpink]

I know this isn't the case here, but don't people clean house or take gross advantage of betting the other player when the other doesn't play? I'm sure their linesman doesn't get word that very second.

[BranchDavidian]

I personally would like to see all the books change their rules on tennis. It seems to me that if a player is going to be graded as a loss if he withdraws prior to the match starting, then he should be graded as a loss if he withdraws during the match. Suppose a player is losing, and has a bet on himself. All he has to do is withdraw and save his bet -- he has the chance to freeroll the book. If he is ahead, continue playing, if he is losing - withdraw. A little more consistency ( either action in both cases or no action in both) would make more sense that the way they have it now.

[BranchDavidian]

I know this isn't the case here, but don't people clean house or take gross advantage of betting the other player when the other doesn't play? I'm sure their linesman doesn't get word that very second.

Thanks for another example of why more consistency is needed.

[kaliboyz]

IMO, Tennis rules should change to "No action for both players if one is withdraw from the match" then i think it would be fair for myself and all!

[BranchDavidian]

Well, to be fair, the withdrawing player should lose in all cases. That is the only way to prevent cheating.

[kaliboyz]

any mods can help me on this case?

[Justin7]

The second part is for futures. You had a match bet. It is fair.

[shari91]

I know this isn't the case here, but don't people clean house or take gross advantage of betting the other player when the other doesn't play? I'm sure their linesman doesn't get word that very second.

No. Players don't withdraw from the match at the last second. When a book went to check the final result on that match in order to grade it, they'd see a w/o (walkover, indicating the match wasn't played at all due to a withdrawal if it was in the 2nd round or later) or another player (lucky loser) in place of the retired player if it was in the 1st round. At that point it becomes like a pitching change in baseball.

And yes kaliboyz, Justin7 is indeed right. Retirements once a match has started at bookmaker = cancelled bet. Even if they retired in the last game of the 3rd set. A few other books have different rules ie 1st set must be completed, 2 sets must be completed (like the SBR book), etc... It's important to check the rules regarding retirements at any book you play at because many books will be different.

[Legions36]

Mods help him.

[shari91]

I personally would like to see all the books change their rules on tennis. It seems to me that if a player is going to be graded as a loss if he withdraws prior to the match starting, then he should be graded as a loss if he withdraws during the match. Suppose a player is losing, and has a bet on himself. All he has to do is withdraw and save his bet -- he has the chance to freeroll the book. If he is ahead, continue playing, if he is losing - withdraw. A little more consistency ( either action in both cases or no action in both) would make more sense that the way they have it now.

Re-reading your post I'm assuming you were responding to the part kaliboyz highlighted in red? If so, the important part of that rule is in the sentence prior that kaliboyz didn't highlight: "tennis future bets" ie who's going to win Wimbledon next year. Even if your player doesn't play a match in Wimbledon, your bet loses. That rule isn't referring to wagering on an individual match.

[Legions36]

There u go OP u asked and u got like 5 mods here for u.

[bigboydan]

There u go OP u asked and u got like 5 mods here for u.

It appears my colleagues have already assisted this gentlemen with this matter. So my presence isn't needed here at this time however, I too will monitor the situation sir.

[kaliboyz]

All, thank you very much!!

[ABEHONEST]

Personally, I would be shocked if the Books find another way to gouge their customers!

"Genuine" gamblers on this site need to have a revolution against tyrannical Books [ which most are, presently]. Otherwise, you're pissing in the wind with that 7 % chance of staying afloat for an entire sports season.

That's my educated opinion. Tyrannical: Meaning the rules and odds are so tight against you! And, they DO NOT need to be, either! Excessive line-changing, fees, over-expensive odds lines, and dominating rules, will sooner or later decimate the living room gamblers. Then, many Books will go under for lack of players.

I see many of you do not believe or listen to what I suggest, hey, that's okay, not many listened to Ron Paul either!

[Hareeba!]

Pinnacle and Betfair void only if the first set isn't completed.
Most other books void unless the match is completed.
I have no problem with either rule, though I prefer the former.
The important thing is to know which rule applies where you are betting.
All fair books (and there are a handful that aren't) will void sets betting unless the match is completed.
The general rule for futures, as in all sports I can think of, is that they are "all in" so if your player doesn't front up you lose. Again I have no problem with that as it is the only way it can be worked fairly.

[BranchDavidian]

Re-reading your post I'm assuming you were responding to the part kaliboyz highlighted in red? If so, the important part of that rule is in the sentence prior that kaliboyz didn't highlight: "tennis future bets" ie who's going to win Wimbledon next year. Even if your player doesn't play a match in Wimbledon, your bet loses. That rule isn't referring to wagering on an individual match.

I see I was a little confused as to the difference between future bets and match betting. However, it still seems to me that according to the rules for match betting at most books, like Bookmaker, ( voiding bets if a player withdraws before the end of the second set ) any tennis player has a perfect opportunity to freeroll the book by withdrawing when losing and continuing play when ahead.

[BranchDavidian]

I see I was a little confused as to the difference between future bets and match betting. However, it still seems to me that according to the rules for match betting at most books, like Bookmaker, ( voiding bets if a player withdraws before the end of the second set ) any tennis player has a perfect opportunity to freeroll the book by withdrawing when losing and continuing play when ahead.

Hey, maybe that is why you often see a clearly lesser opponent win the first set overwhelmingly, only to get blown out the last two. The clearly better player is giving up the first set to induce his opponent into continuing play past the withdrawal deadline!