 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
is this a bad line?
i bet +1875 that a game would go to overtime. i see it was cancelled. the "no remained the same, they just changed the yes. the sites new line says:
Jan 08 86543 YES-WILL GAME GO OT PIT/DEN +800
1:30 PM 86544 NO-WILL GAME GO OT PIT/DEN -3500
Player Messages
NO PLAY YES-OT +1875 CORRECT LINE +800
No its not a bad line.
Betfair currently has:
Overtime 14-18
No overtime: 1,06-1,08
So the "corrected" line they gave you is actually closer to a bad line than the original. Bad for you, but not for them naturally.
can you translate the betfair line into terms i can understand+?????
Seems to be +1000ish around the UK firms on Oddschecker - +1100 best price at Hills.
Most seem to be around -3300 on "No" but 1 firm is -1400 on "No" however they seem to be stand out, and that alone isnt an excuse to void, so the +800/-3500 on the corrected line they gave seems pretty standard.
Doesnt necessarily mean that the +1875 was a bad line though
I cant say that this is a market that I pay a lot of attention to usually - would +1875 be a standard price for OT on a normal game with an average total and is this just a case where the linesmaker hasn't taken into account the low total of the game and adjusted accordingly, or would +1875 be big even on a game with a much higher total ?
In american odds that would mean that you could back "OT played" at +1300 ( and the odds were actually +1500 close to game time)
well its cancelled. im wondering if i have any recourse. im also wondering what sbr thinks of the cancellation
thanks for the info pareto.
dont you agree that "american" odds are so much simpler??
No, i prefer decimal odds. But thats probably because I have gotten used to them.
wow, decent chance this game gos to OT. i may be out 4,688
+800/-3500 does not seem like a fair correlation to me. the 1875 seems more correct but i could be wrong.
bad beat bro, i would look into filing a dispute with this
Dispute it...they fckd u
yuck, feel like shit. its an sbr sponsor book too. i dont know what the protocol is for a non bad line cancelled shortly before the game. please tell me!
That sucks man. Sorry to hear this happened to you. File a complaint with SBR and they will look into it for you. Justin7 is very good working these types of situations and he can tell you if you have a leg to stand on here.
Did you end up re-betting it at the new odds?
did not rebet, while i thought +1800 was a fair price, anyone knows +850 is not. if you see a line +800/-3500 or whatever it was, there is small chance either of those has any value.Originally Posted by ehp6737
It sucks now you know it would have been a winner.
But if they cancelled pre-game not much complaint really. Unless you honestly think you would still think it 'should' be honored had the bet lost too.
if it was unjustifiably cancelled then i think the book needs to be held accountable. if not then no. was the cancelling justifiable??
if your saying i wouldnt complain had it lost, i agree. but this situation is soley because of the books doing. i did not cause the situation at hand, the book did. i did not have the time to fight with them in the 1/2 hour before the game.
That's what I used to think as well, but I've seen a few cases here lately where if it can be determined that the original line on his accepted bet was not a bad line then he still has a case, even if it was cancelled prior to the game. And being such a large discrepancy between the original and the re-hung odds, this should be an easy one for SBR to get to the bottom of.
the more i think about it, how can +1875 be a bad line if the other side is -3500. its not.
It may not be a bad line as such as it would depend on the books exact rules on the matter - as I said though, the standard I saw right before game time was +1000/-3300 which equates to a % of 106.15% (+800/-3500 is 108.33%)
+1875/-3500 works out at a booking percentage of 102.28% - now I am not saying that this makes it a bad line as such, but is it is a very similar sort of % to a pickem game on a 10 cent line.
With this particular bet being a prop bet then in most cases for most books they would be unlikely to hang a line with such a tight betting % which is why the +1000/3300 line seemed more like a common, standard betting % you would be likely to see on a prop bet.
In this particular scenario, I can sort of see the books argument that the line is a "bad line" as for them the lines they had would most likely have been offered at a much lower betting % than they would normally want on a market like this.
However, I can also see that you have been screwed as well to some extent - the betting % might have been tight for a prop bet from the books point of view...but at the end of the day the % was still in the books favour, and its not like the correct line would have been something like +800/-1800 at which point it would have been more obvious that the line was bad.
The difficulty you have is in trying to convince the book that the difference the line change made probably shouldnt have been enough of a difference to warrant the bet being voided, but unfortunately I have a feeling that you will have no chance of this considering the game is over and the bet would have won - had the game been in a couple of days then you *might* have have a slightly better chance of getting it reinstated, but would have to have been done before the game started.
In this case, I see almost zero chance they reinstate the bet, but wish you luck all the same.
|
|
I know nobody would complain if it had lost. What I meant was, can you look into your heart and imagine it had lost, and then see if you really think it was an unfair move.
Not saying you don't feel that way. Just suggesting that's the best test if you are able to do it.
i thought it was unfair the second i noticed my wager was gone. thats why i started the thread
bubba, fill out a Complaint and someone will review it for you.
name the book pls, i mean we all know it's something like Bet3.65
rather then was time with a complaint, can i be told if i have a leg to stand on? why go through the process if the answer is no? im pretty sure the facts here are indisputable.bubba, fill out a Complaint and someone will review it for you.
not 365, do they even take US customers?? id rather not say the name of book if it may hurt me in a potential settlement..
Cancelled before the game started is a bummer for you. At the end of the day, you're probably fighting a losing battle unfortunately. No one is going to fight w/ someone who pays them a decent chunk of affiliate money over a bet that was cancelled in a pre-game situation. Just my 2c
That is a tough one to call.
In Superbowl betting, you usually see the "No Overtime" priced between -800 to -1000. You'd expect to see Yes overtime at +600 to +800.
If you saw the yes at +1800, it is arguably a bad line. They should probably have eaten the bet though, because the difference between +1800 and +800 is not that huge... But I would give them the benefit of the doubt if they canceled the bet pre-game.
i think your off, i have never ever seen "no overtime" priced as low as -800 or even -1000 at any sportsbook(maybe it has at some exchange but i have certainly never seen it). i challenge you to show me where this was the case. and this said sportsbook thought no overtime was priced fairly for them at -3500. they thought +1875/3500 was a bad line and they though +800/-3500 was fair.
and looking at this game specifically, while the total was low, about 34, the spread was high at about 8 or 9. i honestly dont know if this game would be looked at as more or less likely then average to go into OT. i would think the spread would be more important then total and this game was "less than average" in terms of likeliness to go to OT.
In the superbowl you usually dont have a hugh favourite like the steelers were yesterday. This naturally affects the odds on the game going to OT.
As i mentioned earlier the odds at Betfair were close to what the OP had gotten originally. I even saw +1700 at one time. The odds on "not going to OT" was pretty much at all time between 1,06-1,07 ( decimal odds) which would mean if you were to lay the odds, you would get odds between: +1428 / +1667 before commision. If the fair market line is somewhere between 1500-1600. Then +1800 is not a bad line. +800 is on the other hand a really really bad line.
The difference between +800 and +1800 is huge, when the overall chance of going OT is around 4% (my guess).
Edit: It looks like the OT occurred about 7% when away team is -7 to -8. Using this percentage, +1800 is +EV (5.26% break-even), while +800 is -EV (11.11% break-even).
Last edited by wrongturn; 01-09-12 at 11:29 AM.
Not at shitbooks who cancel his bet, i'd expect to see +500 -1000 etc. there...
we all know what kind of juice they take, don't we.
bubba, fill out a Complaint and someone will review it for you.
Bubba,
Basically what Shari is saying here is that SBR would be glad to crumple up your complaint and throw it away for you if you would like to waste your time.
I have filed a few complaints against 5pennies for canceling bets similar to this and SBR always sides with Toni and their affiliate books and "whitewash" complaints, so don't waste your time.
Reply With Quote
RickySteve gave Maniac 7 SBR Point(s) for this post.