<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <o:OfficeDocumentSettings> <o:AllowPNG/> </o:OfficeDocumentSettings> </xml><![endif]--> Tuesday 22nd April…………..Wizards @ Bulls
My argument:
I have been a customer of CRIS the past 13 years since I was 18 years old. $10k is a typical wager size for me and I turnover $200k+ each week with them. We have a good relationship. I just strongly disagree with their decision here.
- · Washington up 2 with 14 seconds left in OT. Chicago had the ball.
- · BetCRIS opened in play and I made the bet Chicago +2.5 +286 ($10k to win $28,600)
- · Washington wins the game by 2 so I should win the bet.
- · BetCRIS cancels the wager after the game saying the price was meant to be for the moneyline hence it is a bad line.
My argument:
- I 100% agree that they intended their price to be for the moneyline but the difference between the ML price and the +2.5 price is not big enough to say this is a bad line because most of the time Chicago will miss and foul and Washington will win the game by 3 or 4. +286 is obviously too big but I’m still a dog here. I should not have to pay for their mistake.
- If this is allowed it sets a president where any book can freeroll you in this situation.
- Live NBA prices in the last minute are volatile and can often steam 100 cents or more. Most books do not offer them for this reason. If you choose to offer $10k limits with 10 seconds to go and no other website has one, unless it is a “totally obvious” bad line it is “Caveat Emptor”.
- Pinnacle later opened a moneyline that moved 120 cents in 45 seconds. Did Pinnacle cancel the bets on Wizards ML at -180 because that price moved to -300?
- If I had lost this wager I would have accepted the $10k loss. If I came on this forum having lost this bet saying BetCris should refund my $10k because it was a ML price what would your response be?
I have been a customer of CRIS the past 13 years since I was 18 years old. $10k is a typical wager size for me and I turnover $200k+ each week with them. We have a good relationship. I just strongly disagree with their decision here.