Problem with 5Dimes' Tony - robbed of $3600 in winnings

[libra2jay]

SBR gave a reason. It said it was reasonable to conclude that the player had multiple accounts. As precedent, this means if any player has a shared IP with another player in the future, that is sufficient proof of multi-accounting (even though this ignores prior SBR precedent).

Poor decision on the part of SBR here. Suspicion=guilt is the way they view this.

As if the books don't have enough of an advantage, they get to freeroll players too.

[The Kraken]

It's simple

Tony believes this guy was circumventing limits. So, Tony paid out money based on his friends limits, and refunded the rest of his deposit. This is a reasonable outcome.

Based on Daringly's prior statements, this is a "bad limit" and seeing as 5D caught it after the first play, on the first day, what Tony did was the correct thing to do.

[trytrytry]

LOL --

Professional card counters are prohibited. If you are found to be a professional card counter playing in our Live Dealer, your account is subject to immediate closure and all winnings will be forfeited.

[trytrytry]

All wagers are final once accepted by 5Dimes and confirmed by the player, either over the phone or online.

[trytrytry]

5dimes what is the definition today of the word ALL??

[libra2jay]

It's simple

Tony believes this guy was circumventing limits.

Belief = proof?

[Hareeba!]

It's simple

Tony believes this guy was circumventing limits. So, Tony paid out money based on his friends limits, and refunded the rest of his deposit. This is a reasonable outcome.

No!
Putting limit on ok.
Doing it AFTER accepting a bet and AFTER it wins is not reasonable.
It's a freeroll.

[The Kraken]

Belief = proof?

He doesn't need proof, it's not a court of law, it's his business. I assume he felt strongly enough with whatever evidence he had that the two friends were somehow trying to circumvent limits.

Having ran many businesses, and sold a few, I understand that sometimes you make these decisions. It's ok to take a stance and lose a customer or two, to take an unpopular position, it's part of it. You can't make everyone happy all the time, so this time no one's happy. Except Tony. The next logical step is to pull your money out of 5dimes.

[bocajuniorska]

He doesn't need proof, it's not a court of law, it's his business. I assume he felt strongly enough with whatever evidence he had that the two friends were somehow trying to circumvent limits.

Having ran many businesses, and sold a few, I understand that sometimes you make these decisions. It's ok to take a stance and lose a customer or two, to take an unpopular position, it's part of it. You can't make everyone happy all the time, so this time no one's happy. Except Tony. The next logical step is to pull your money out of 5dimes.

I also believe customers arent happy with "businesses" scamming them so yeah, nice argument.

Tony "believes" there's a way to freeroll a customer today. Let's do it.


"All wagers are final once accepted by 5Dimes and confirmed by the player, either over the phone or online."

Would anyone be able to tell me if there are two contradictory rules dictated by a bookie in their T&C which one prevails? Oh wait I know the answer, Tony decides.

[The Kraken]

Tony decides.

Benefit of being the boss

Don't like it, go elsewhere. Otherwise, you deal with Tony.

Doesn't get much more simple than that.

[libra2jay]

He doesn't need proof.

Obviously.

He ripped off a customer.

Wild wild west Costa Rica.

[Caip34000]

But of course 5d. Would have partly refund the customer based on those limit of the bet was lost.....
Sbr obviously prefer to make profit o' scam bet rather that put all the energy to defend customers

[evo34]

Someone who bets when the odds say to, rather than trying to pick winners.

Someone who only places bets at the book when they have the best odds in the market.

Someone who works advantageous angles in the books betting system.

Someone who focuses on smaller inefficient markets.

Stuff like that.

No.

1) Steam players. Nothing sharp about that.

2) Line shopping. That's not sharp; it's just common sense.

3) No idea what you are talking about. Correlated parlays?

4) Most sharp players want to make money. To make money (without enormous hassle/risk), you have to find an edge in major sports. This is not 2002.

Sharp players are those who can find an edge by picking winners, not those exploiting short-term market inefficiencies, slow lines, or Austrian volleyball.

[evo34]

Interesting. I see that Pinny had St Louis +7 -110 10 minutes before the game began. If you bet earlier in the day, youcould have gotten +7.5 -120. Best price I see at 5Dimes on Game day was +7 -120 early in the morning, and +7.5 -130 for most of the day.

Did you pay normal vig? Why would you take a crummy number?

This makes even less sense from Tony's perspective than before. Tony probably could have laid off your bet and scalped you for 10 cents.

Huh? A book like 5 Dimes is worried enough about a $4k bet to bother selling it out?

[evo34]

Thread is over.

How many times have we seen this?

Here's my problem with this kind of shit, I've won a lot at 5dimes, much more than $4,500, and I got paid no questions asked.

Then this guy comes in, like many others, with some vague story, omits important facts and details, and tries to leverage his way into a bigger payout. Not gonna work.

It's the same fukking thing over and over with 5dimes, and every time it always ends the same, with Tony giving you the finger.

After reading this post by Lou, assuming it's correct and I assume it most likely is, but who could ignore the blatantly obvious and contest that he should be paid? By circumstances alone, I think he's lucky this happened at 5dimes and not a handful of other books.

Just my opinion but this story comes across like so many others that turned out to be fraud.

Generalize much?

[evo34]

Hi edawg,

That is what 5Dimes did, paid the wager at the limit account one was given before cashing out. It is very reasonable to conclude from the available information provided by both parties (player and sportsbook) that account two was simply a beard for account one.

'You book the bet, you pay the bet' is intended to keep scam sites from inventing reasons not to pay players - but this player's winning bet was paid. There is a very clear and evident reason why this player's wager had its limit changed. If 5Dimes were free rolling or looking to enforce their rules to the max, the deposit would be refunded and no winnings paid. They could have also allowed the player to keep betting instead of immediately suspending the account after the first bet.

Applicable rules:
1. Use of multiple accounts to circumvent limits is prohibited.
2. Use of multiple account numbers or names in order to receive bonus promotions, referral awards, or exceed limits is forbidden and may result in the forfeiture of ALL funds received/won as a result of these actions.

What's also worth keeping in mind as it relates to industry standards and precedents is that if this were a dispute at a sportsbook licensed by say the UK Gambling Commission - which some of the biggest books in the world are - there would be no chance that any of the winnings would be paid to account two due to the obvious rule breach. As Optional, who does a fine job here mediating many cases, pointed out, a much heavier-handed outcome would be the case in this scenario at most sportsbooks.

5Dimes is a tightly run shop that is active in their risk management, this thread is an example of why circumventing limits is not a good idea.

This is legitimately the biggest load of horseshack I have ever read on this site. It's not like my respect for SBR was sky high before reading it, but wow. Just wow.

[Goat Milk]

you made an honest mistake but my tony sources say your initial deposit which appears to be very bold. (you may be rich but a 4800.00 first time deposit drew a red flag). then the 4500.00 bet drew another red flag. you didn't exactly fly under the radar here. yes, if you lost it, of course they would have kept it. wouldn't you if you were them. however, you won and the blame is with your friend who should have told you he had reduced limits. using his device drew another red flag and is against tony's rules. of course he was suspicious and did what he had to do. hopefully you will get your 5700.00 and spread some deposits around to different books to avoid situations like this.

So you're saying that if I tell all my buddies about 5dimes, and they go and register, and we all watch football at my house on Sundays, and we all log into 5dimes using my wifi and all of us place wagers/talk about wagers, you're saying that if I hit big, that Tony will keep my money?

WTF kind of business is this where you getting them customers can lead to future investigations?

[evo34]

I think SBR should provide the reason that this ruling was made. The combination of the ID's plus the bets being made from a different IP should have been enough in this case. SBR does not have the best reputation and should at least comment on the reasoning behind this.

Exactly. I highly doubt SBR will say a word further. Would love to see a spreadsheet with the correl. of SBR's per-book revenue vs. the book's SBR rating.

[Goat Milk]

This question needs to be addressed immediately by SBR staff or someone else:

1. If multiple users (who all registered from different IP address -- different addresses, people, everything obviously) are together in the same room on Sundays (same IP) placing NFL bets, then what?

What kind of sportsbook investigates you for bringing in customers? Someone please answer that.

I've never heard of this. And it worries me because I play at 5 dimes with many others I know. They all play there b/c of me.

No one has ever had a problem cashing out, but if they happened to win 20 30k, and they had trouble b/c of something dumb like this, I would not be in a good spot.... That would very very bad for me.

[Rollins08]

This is insane. The wager wasn't placed at the same IP as far as I could tell. If this player was trying to commit fraud he could easily have made the deposit and wager from the second IP address. The fact that he didn't leads me to believe that what he is saying is true. 5dimes could have gained 4500 here against a risk of only 900? This seems right to SBR?

[Grivas_Digeni]

SBR gave a reason. It said it was reasonable to conclude that the player had multiple accounts. As precedent, this means if any player has a shared IP with another player in the future, that is sufficient proof of multi-accounting (even though this ignores prior SBR precedent).

So is it ok to have multi accounts if they all lose?

[milwaukee mike]

No.

1) Steam players. Nothing sharp about that.

2) Line shopping. That's not sharp; it's just common sense.

3) No idea what you are talking about. Correlated parlays?

4) Most sharp players want to make money. To make money (without enormous hassle/risk), you have to find an edge in major sports. This is not 2002.

Sharp players are those who can find an edge by picking winners, not those exploiting short-term market inefficiencies, slow lines, or Austrian volleyball.

i think pretty much every sportsbook would categorize all of those players as sharp... some try to pick winners in major sports, others take the low hanging fruit elsewhere.

[jjgold]

No.

1) Steam players. Nothing sharp about that.

2) Line shopping. That's not sharp; it's just common sense.

3) No idea what you are talking about. Correlated parlays?

4) Most sharp players want to make money. To make money (without enormous hassle/risk), you have to find an edge in major sports. This is not 2002.

Sharp players are those who can find an edge by picking winners, not those exploiting short-term market inefficiencies, slow lines, or Austrian volleyball.

Tremendous post and dead on

[milwaukee mike]

Tremendous post and dead on

so you're disagreeing with optional?

would you consider your buddy fishhead to be sharp? if so then that would totally contradict evo's post

[HuskerExpat]

I'm usually pretty skeptical of the complaint and I still am in this case. But, I don't see sufficient proof for the action taken. IF the guy provided an identification different from account one AND the bet in account two was made from an IP address that was in a different geographical location from any bet ever made in account one, then I don't see any justification for the action taken. Certainly 5Dimes has the right to decline future action from account two, but they should honor the bet.

[unusialsusp5]

time to let this go. tony will never cave in to someone who breaks his rules.

[Optional]

No.

1) Steam players. Nothing sharp about that.

2) Line shopping. That's not sharp; it's just common sense.

3) No idea what you are talking about. Correlated parlays?

4) Most sharp players want to make money. To make money (without enormous hassle/risk), you have to find an edge in major sports. This is not 2002.

Sharp players are those who can find an edge by picking winners, not those exploiting short-term market inefficiencies, slow lines, or Austrian volleyball.

You're mixing up Sharp with Intelligent.

You're right that 90% of people forced to approach their gambling this way actually aren't very smart. They just do what others tell them. You can see many posts from people who think/say they are sharp but don't even know what a book thinks it is or get why they think it is an issue. Dumb dumb dumb. Sharp does not equal smart.

[Rollins08]

If there is another part to this that we're missing SBR should let us know. There is no reason from the side of the story we heard for this man not to be paid. Why are they so silent on this?

[tommir99]

And 5dimes is an A+ sportsbook?

Doesn't surprise me though, even Bet365 is on that same list, although they limit you very quickly if you win anything.

[BigdaddyQH]

How stupid can all of you be? Did anyone read the start of this post. The guy was in VEGAS. Why not just place the wager in Vegas, where there are no question asked once you get the ticket. Only complete and total fools send money overseas to people they do not know and hope that they will get money back. If you are stupid enough to do this, while you are in Vegas of all places, you deserve to get your tail kicked for everything you have. No wonder all of you clowns lose your tails. You can count your IQ's on one hand. You people are total and complete losers. You are the fools of the gaming game.

[swordsandtequila]

How stupid can all of you be? Did anyone read the start of this post. The guy was in VEGAS. Why not just place the wager in Vegas, where there are no question asked once you get the ticket. Only complete and total fools send money overseas to people they do not know and hope that they will get money back. If you are stupid enough to do this, while you are in Vegas of all places, you deserve to get your tail kicked for everything you have. No wonder all of you clowns lose your tails. You can count your IQ's on one hand. You people are total and complete losers. You are the fools of the gaming game.

Did you read (better yet comprehend) the post? OP didn't place the wager until a week or so later, he was home by then. I doubt there was a line posted @ the time he was in Vegas. Jeezus you're a miserable little prick.

[libra2jay]

How stupid can all of you be? Did anyone read the start of this post.

Irony.

Bigdaddy should have read the entire post then he wouldn't look like such a fool here.

[dog]

I scalped when I played there and Tony figured it out and didn't like it. My limits went up and down, they would cancel wagers on lines which weren't off by much, and eventually I got booted. Unfortunately they are still one of the better offshore sportsbooks out there as far as what they offer.

[evo34]

You're mixing up Sharp with Intelligent.

You're right that 90% of people forced to approach their gambling this way actually aren't very smart. They just do what others tell them. You can see many posts from people who think/say they are sharp but don't even know what a book thinks it is or get why they think it is an issue. Dumb dumb dumb. Sharp does not equal smart.

I'm not mixing up anything. Sharp does in fact require being smart. E.g., "sharp money" is not used to describe someone picking off a bad line; it is used to describe action from people with skill in predicting an outcome or predicting (not following) a line move. People who are not smart, but taking advantage of slow lines or tiny sports are not sharp. They are simply annoyances with very limited lives.

[evo34]

so you're disagreeing with optional?

would you consider your buddy fishhead to be sharp? if so then that would totally contradict evo's post

Anyone who spends 18 hours a day trying to hit slow line moves across is not in any way sharp. Just an annoying leech, like the first HFT algos were in stock trading.