**help with grading error at bookmaker please

[dynamite140]

Well for the playoffs, you still need a 2 pt attempt. That is the issue here. If no 2 pt attempt, well no 2 pt conversion.


The wording even though its confusing... its obvious what it means. Thus no 2 pt attempt would mean No wins this prop bet.


The one issue i have with this is this line of -250 just looks extremely low for a NO for this type of prop bet.

[ichiro4thehall]

I understand props move easily in terms of juice. The props you mention do move a lot. But what was the Yes for the prop bet you bet on? You said it was -250 for No but what was the line for Yes?

No clue but it was obv around +200. Yes had hit 4 out of previous 7 playoff games.

[JAKEPEAVY21]

you will get it back...eventually...

[bubba]

Well yes because of the playoffs, the odds of someone going for 2 is higher.


Do you or anyone else have the no/yes line for this same prop for the other games like the chargers/pats and the other nfl playoff games? That -250 for the NO just looks really low to me even if the lines moved. What was the line on the Yes on that prop?

Why (do you say) are there more 2s in the playoffs? Do you have a stat to back this up? I cant imagine there is a much higher "going for 2 rate" than the regular season. Nothing to do with the issue at hand, just curious.

[Optional]

The point of screwing is simple.. It’s a dog eat dog world.. Either the book fcks you or you fck the book... it’s really not that hard... If you or the op can’t see that...

Look, this man slammed another poster for even thinking about keeping a double deposit.

Do you really have so little ethics you are typing this with a serious face????

Man, I guess gambling does attract some scum. But never ceases to amaze me people like you are JoeCool openly saying you steal and don't understand why everyone else does not feel the same way.

[MrCavalier]

Do you really have so little ethics you are typing this with a serious face????

Man, I guess gambling does attract some scum. But never ceases to amaze me people like you are JoeCool openly saying you steal and don't understand why everyone else does not feel the same way.

If your going to quote me, please do it accurately.. I’ll wait while you post where I said I ever stole anything?
No ethics in unregulated internet gaming.. No ethics for books who skirt American law to alllow gambling on the net.. No ethics in books who allow player to deposit with no id then slow roll that player for verify on withdrawal..No ethic for books that cancel winning bets hiding behind bad line bs, no ethics for books that prey on gambling addicts.. Fck your ethics and fck feeling sorry for books that a player beats... fck your rating on books.. A+ for betonline? Ever see the video of the dealer fcking cheating at blackjack? Fck your other A+ bookmaker.. Looks like they’re fcking Milwaukee..
Scum like you pick and choose what to copy and paste.. Slandering fck post a quote that I robbed a book..

[MrCavalier]

Do you really have so little ethics you are typing this with a serious face????

Man, I guess gambling does attract some scum. But never ceases to amaze me people like you are JoeCool openly saying you steal and don't understand why everyone else does not feel the same way.

Ethics? This site takes blood money from books that daily try to fck players.. Imagine the people who get fcked by your holy than thou books everyday... Forgot to mention your other A+ book 5dimes.. Trying fck player out of 54k.. Sure I’m the scum bud? Or are you the scum for backing the books?

[Optional]

Ah semantics! The first refuge of the scammer!

Prove I said "stole".

You have a dozen posts on this forum bragging you are happy to steal from books buddy. That's been your main argument!!!


Anyway, this thread is about Mike's grading problem.

No need for you to be trying to call out his ethics to try to de-rail his thread. He clearly has a level of understanding of ethics that you will never achieve.

[MrCavalier]

Ah semantics! The first refuge of the scammer!

Prove I said "stole".

You have a dozen posts on this forum bragging you are happy to steal from books buddy. That's been your main argument!!!


Anyway, this thread is about Mike's grading problem.

No need for you to be trying to call out his ethics to try to de-rail his thread. He clearly has a level of understanding of ethics that you will never achieve.

Typical, you call me a thief I ask you to prove it and you punt... Good game, you lost but good game.

[MrCavalier]

Ah semantics! The first refuge of the scammer!

Prove I said "stole".

You have a dozen posts on this forum bragging you are happy to steal from books buddy. That's been your main argument!!!


Anyway, this thread is about Mike's grading problem.

No need for you to be trying to call out his ethics to try to de-rail his thread. He clearly has a level of understanding of ethics that you will never achieve.

Mikes grading problem goes hand in hand in what I preach.. The books will fck a player every chance they get.. Unless you think Mike is the only player ever bookmaker did this too ( you can’t be this dense) The player will fck the book ever chance they get.. dog eat dog business bud...

[milwaukee mike]

Mikes grading problem goes hand in hand in what I preach.. The books will fck a player every chance they get.. Unless you think Mike is the only player ever bookmaker did this too ( you can’t be this dense) The player will fck the book ever chance they get.. dog eat dog business bud...

some truth to this, and i can understand the attitude of "life's a hustle, be the dog or the hydrant" even if i disagree with it

in this case i don't know what the deal is, i'm pretty sure they had more action on the "yes" so they are just ignorant to what happened, ignorant to how the bet works, or stubborn (or some combination of the 3)

[milwaukee mike]

maybe i should've called/emailed a manager? when i went on chat originally i thought he went and asked a manager.

then i thought it was being handled by sbr but maybe justbet doesn't even know enough about the situation, and when they do they will want to fix it?

[Optional]

maybe i should've called/emailed a manager? when i went on chat originally i thought he went and asked a manager.

then i thought it was being handled by sbr but maybe justbet doesn't even know enough about the situation, and when they do they will want to fix it?

Yes, as per PM an email instead of live chat, asking for a manger to review, is a good idea.

But it's getting late at night there now. Might not get fixed until morning.

[scrambles]

Did you only talk to one chat support person? In the past i've found that if one chat support persona has been un-helpful thanking them for their time and trying someone else a little bit later has paid off. I think certain CS people don't even bother asking management and just try to employ tactics to get you to go away, not really the books fault, might just be the wrong employee having a bad day. I am unfamiliar with how justbet's chat support works, nonetheless could be worth a shot.

I wish you luck, you appear to have a pretty good grip on the situation, and quite a compelling argument.

[dynamite140]

What was the line on the Yes in this prop bet? The No is +250 but what was the yes?

[milwaukee mike]

What was the line on the Yes in this prop bet? The No is +250 but what was the yes?

for god's sake who cares and what does it matter how much juice there was? let's just say the no was -250 and the yes was +200

the line opened somewhere around yes +250 no -300

i've already shown that true odds on the NO should be -200... and yet you continue to argue that the no should be what, -400? that makes no sense for a playoff game with a high total

betonline had -300 on the no for this prop, and graded the no as a winner like they always do when there is no attempt

[dynamite140]

So i took a look at the other thread someone here mentioned that had a very similar situation with grading and it was between the jaguars and jets a while ago and the yes was +325 and the no was -400. I can understand why the juice for no is that high for those type of teams since they can't score much.


You then mentioned the no was -250 but the yes was +230 at bookmaker. If that is the case, that is already a bad line because there is no way a prop bet like that would have that type of juice. That is a dime line on a prop bet. The yes should be between +200 to +210 at bookmaker if this was the case.


Why would it not matter what the line was for the prop bet yes? So if its no at -250 and the yes was at +270, that should be ignored? You said the yes was +230 for that game. That is far off from the +200 you hypothetically used as a number.


You honestly think the true odds for no 2 point conversion should be -200? You are out of your mind if you think that is the number. If that is the case, look at the next 2 games with even higher totals. You telling me the no 2 pt conversion would by -200? I guarantee its minimum -280 and these games are higher totals than the eagles/saints game.


You showed the 2 point attempt/conversions for the last week of the football season and completely ignored the entire nfl season. Why are you only calculating the 2 point conversion for only the last week of the season. That is not only bias but you dismiss everythng before that. I guarantee you no nfl game had a no bet on a 2pt conversion with -250 odds ever.


I never said the No should be -400. I would say it should be -300 to -350 or so.

[dynamite140]

The betonline -300 of seems accurate. But the bookmaker line of -250 of no and +230 of yes is bad line for one of two reasons. 1st is -250 for no might be the lowest number for any nfl game for 2 point conversion if i had to take a good guess.


And second, the yes at +230? No book would put a prop bet like that at -250 for no and +230 for yes and you know that.


Also for you to say you showed the true odds for this no bet is -200... I'm honestly very disappointed with you saying this because you know that is not true. You not only showed bias but only used week 17 stats but completely ignored all the weeks before that to help your case. You really think the true odds are -200 when you factor all the nfl games in the season? Of course not and you know it man.


How can you say with a straight face the TRUE ODDS for this prop bet was -200? To make it sound you like you got it at worst by laying -250? If that is the case, why didn't you bet the yes at +230 at bookmaker or probably +250 or better at betonline if the true odds were -200 for no?


Again for you to say why does it matter what the yes was... that means quite a bit. If no was -250 and yes was +245, you don't think that is a bad line? -250 for no and +230 for yes for a prop bet like that is already a bad line because that is better than a dime line on a prop bet which never happens and bookmaker would never post something like this.

[littlekona]

The betonline -300 of seems accurate. But the bookmaker line of -250 of no and +230 of yes is bad line for one of two reasons. 1st is -250 for no might be the lowest number for any nfl game for 2 point conversion if i had to take a good guess.


And second, the yes at +230? No book would put a prop bet like that at -250 for no and +230 for yes and you know that.


Also for you to say you showed the true odds for this no bet is -200... I'm honestly very disappointed with you saying this because you know that is not true. You not only showed bias but only used week 17 stats but completely ignored all the weeks before that to help your case. You really think the true odds are -200 when you factor all the nfl games in the season? Of course not and you know it man.


How can you say with a straight face the TRUE ODDS for this prop bet was -200? To make it sound you like you got it at worst by laying -250? If that is the case, why didn't you bet the yes at +230 at bookmaker or probably +250 or better at betonline if the true odds were -200 for no?


Again for you to say why does it matter what the yes was... that means quite a bit. If no was -250 and yes was +245, you don't think that is a bad line? -250 for no and +230 for yes for a prop bet like that is already a bad line because that is better than a dime line on a prop bet which never happens and bookmaker would never post something like this.

It’s graded wrong period....if not it’s a free spot to take the other side as 2pt conversions hit 60% clip and your getting +200 or more....it would be a void due to bad line by any book...just have to get right CS manger involved or even tweet the boss he is active on twitter

btw prop bets and true odds are only in dreamland

[milwaukee mike]

The betonline -300 of seems accurate. But the bookmaker line of -250 of no and +230 of yes is bad line for one of two reasons. 1st is -250 for no might be the lowest number for any nfl game for 2 point conversion if i had to take a good guess.


And second, the yes at +230? No book would put a prop bet like that at -250 for no and +230 for yes and you know that.


Also for you to say you showed the true odds for this no bet is -200... I'm honestly very disappointed with you saying this because you know that is not true. You not only showed bias but only used week 17 stats but completely ignored all the weeks before that to help your case. You really think the true odds are -200 when you factor all the nfl games in the season? Of course not and you know it man.


How can you say with a straight face the TRUE ODDS for this prop bet was -200? To make it sound you like you got it at worst by laying -250? If that is the case, why didn't you bet the yes at +230 at bookmaker or probably +250 or better at betonline if the true odds were -200 for no?


Again for you to say why does it matter what the yes was... that means quite a bit. If no was -250 and yes was +245, you don't think that is a bad line? -250 for no and +230 for yes for a prop bet like that is already a bad line because that is better than a dime line on a prop bet which never happens and bookmaker would never post something like this.

where did i say the yes was +230? it was probably +200, i don't remember even caring since i was betting the NO... i do remember seeing something like +250 on the yes and -300 on the no earlier at justbet, which was the same -300 as betonline so i waited for a better price and bet it when it was -250.

you think a fair line should be -300 to -350 and that -250 would then be a bad line? on a prop? that's crazy, especially when it was -300 earlier and only went down because people were betting the YES. which had been hitting a bunch of times.

if you think the odds of a 2 point conversion being attempted over the course of the regular season, when you have garbage games thrown in there, are the same as the odds of a 2 point conversion being attempted indoors in the playoffs with a higher than average total, then i don't know what to tell you.

[vampire assassin]

There were 66 2-point conversions in the 256 game regular season... so for a typical game, -290 is a possible no-vig price. New Orleans and Phili are two of the top teams, with 9 2-pt conversions in their 32 team-offenses (or 16 games). The correct price is arguably between -290 and -100, and -240 looks like a good juiced price.

[milwaukee mike]

There were 66 2-point conversions in the 256 game regular season... so for a typical game, -290 is a possible no-vig price. New Orleans and Phili are two of the top teams, with 9 2-pt conversions in their 32 team-offenses (or 16 games). The correct price is arguably between -290 and -100, and -240 looks like a good juiced price.

THANK YOU

i made a fair bet at a fair price that was graded wrong, it's clear as day

- bet was "will there be a successful 2 point conversion" yes/no

[dynamite140]

where did i say the yes was +230? it was probably +200, i don't remember even caring since i was betting the NO... i do remember seeing something like +250 on the yes and -300 on the no earlier at justbet, which was the same -300 as betonline so i waited for a better price and bet it when it was -250.

you think a fair line should be -300 to -350 and that -250 would then be a bad line? on a prop? that's crazy, especially when it was -300 earlier and only went down because people were betting the YES. which had been hitting a bunch of times.

if you think the odds of a 2 point conversion being attempted over the course of the regular season, when you have garbage games thrown in there, are the same as the odds of a 2 point conversion being attempted indoors in the playoffs with a higher than average total, then i don't know what to tell you.

I read you said the odds on the yes was +230 in that thread where someone else had a very similar issue with the grading. It looked like you copied and pasted it as you put down something like


yes +230
no -250


So how could you forget what the odds were on the yes when you just posted about it not long ago?

[dynamite140]

Look this bet is definitely graded incorrectly but this leans more to a bad line. When was the last time bookmaker put up a prop bet of -250 and +230 on a prop bet like this? Never. Now if its confirmed that the line was -250 on the NO and say +200 to +210 on the Yes, then yes this bet should be reversed. Also the fact that i asked what was the line on the yes and you doesn't even answer it and then said say it was +200 why does it matter ???... means a lot to it as you mentioned it was +230 no long ago. There is no way you didn't remember the odds on the yes since you posted +230. Had the line been +200 to +210 for the YES, then yes this bet should be graded a win.


That makes a huge significance in this. Also he said the true odds of the NO is like -200. There is no way that is the true line. You really think someone is willing to bet yes to this at +170 odds or so? The -200 would be printing money on the NO if this is the case. So basically he say true odds should be -200 on the NO... so he was willing to lay -250 on it getting the worst of it? The thing was he showed his calculation by looking at week 17 games for the 2 point attempt/conversions and completely dismissed any nfl games before that. If anything... week 17 means the LEAST since most games don't even mean anything. I literally could not believe he used that as how he calculated the true odds. If you going to use numbers, use all the nfl games being played. I would bet week 17 probably had the lowest percentage of as well to back his case.


Also im going to take a very good guess that what happened here is he bet the yes at +250 or bettor odds at betonline and bet the no at -250 at bookmaker to arb it. Not there is nothing wrong with that, but if the line is -250 on the no and +230 on the yes, this is a bad line especially if this was at bookmaker.

[milwaukee mike]

I read you said the odds on the yes was +230 in that thread where someone else had a very similar issue with the grading. It looked like you copied and pasted it as you put down something like


yes +230
no -250


So how could you forget what the odds were on the yes when you just posted about it not long ago?

i see now that i posted that in the betonline thread, it was a total guess on my part, you're right the juice would be wider

justbet hasn't claimed it was a bad line, just that the bet is NO ACTION if there is no attempt

we can split hairs all day on whether the no should be -250 or -300 or -350, but there is absolutely no way that the no should be the favorite if they are gonna grade it as no action with no attempts... then the NO would be a huge + and the YES would be the favorite

i think justbet recently added this prop with the nfl playoffs and didn't grade it properly, total honest mistake, and hopefully it gets fixed and they don't get freerolled going forward on people betting the YES at +200 or +250 if the bet will be cancelled with no attempts

[dynamite140]

Well I would have thought if you posted the +230 odds , i thought that was the odds. So that to me was the big issue. Such as why did you not mention what the odds on the Yes was as thats pretty important. Thus if the odds were -250 and +230, that would be a bad line because no prop bet like that should have juice that low.


Now if it was -250 and +200 to +210, then yes this bet should absolutely be graded as a win.


Obviously if they grade it like this with no action on no attempt, no way would the No be a favorite here and it would be flipped around but everyone here would agree with this. No one would disagree with you on this.


But he main issue is what was the line on the yes is what should be looked at here. If it was +230, well that would look like a bad line due to bookmaker never putting the -250 and +230 on something like this.


Now did anyone here bet the YES on this bet? If so, did their wager get graded as no action? Im assuming yes based on this. The main issue here is what were the odds on the Yes at the time of the bet when it was -250 on the No.

[bubba]

Well I would have thought if you posted the +230 odds , i thought that was the odds. So that to me was the big issue. Such as why did you not mention what the odds on the Yes was as thats pretty important. Thus if the odds were -250 and +230, that would be a bad line because no prop bet like that should have juice that low.


Now if it was -250 and +200 to +210, then yes this bet should absolutely be graded as a win.


Obviously if they grade it like this with no action on no attempt, no way would the No be a favorite here and it would be flipped around but everyone here would agree with this. No one would disagree with you on this.


But he main issue is what was the line on the yes is what should be looked at here. If it was +230, well that would look like a bad line due to bookmaker never putting the -250 and +230 on something like this.


Now did anyone here bet the YES on this bet? If so, did their wager get graded as no action? Im assuming yes based on this. The main issue here is what were the odds on the Yes at the time of the bet when it was -250 on the No.

You think if a book hangs a -250/+230 on a line, they should cancel all wagers after the game? Sometimes? Always? When they are in the mood?

Holy cow, players have no chance if that's the case. You book it, you pay it. Cancelling wagers should be a last resort for the most obvious of errors. Especially after a game. This is so far from that.

[dynamite140]

Well if this was a prop bet, i think it should be cancelled immediately. But since they did not, its a bit of a sticky issue if the odds were -250 and +230. The thing is no prop bet should have -250 and +230 on a line ever. The issue here is this. So someone without a clue about propbetting, this might look normal to them since it looks like a 20 cent line like -110 each way. But if someone has a clue about prop bets, they know if one side is -250, the other side would be be like +200 to +210.


Obviously cancelling this bet after the game is incorrect. But the reasoning they use for cancelling is obviously incorrect as well as the no attempt thing is obviously wrong as odds would been flipped.


What im curious about is who bet the yes on this and what was the odds for the no if they recalled what the other side was. But the most important thing here is what were the odds on the YES when the NO was -250. If it was +200 to +210, then clearly this bet is a winner. If its +230, it gets a bit sticky. I have seen many betting options whether its a prop bet or something else where if you look at the line, most people could not tell its a bad line or interpret it incorrectly. Some lines are very borderline in terms of a bad line and in things like that, you generally want to stay away from it. I mean if you saw a wager with something like total field goals made is 3.5 and its over -115 and under +110, would you not think this is a bad line because of the juice? So the juice is the most important thing here.

[SBR Forum]

Yes the OP was correct. Justbet will credit.

[milwaukee mike]

sbr proves once again they are the best in the industry by far at fixing problems/issues.

and kudos to justbet as well, sometimes these props aren't the easiest to wrap your head around.

[bubba]

Well if this was a prop bet, i think it should be cancelled immediately. But since they did not, its a bit of a sticky issue if the odds were -250 and +230. The thing is no prop bet should have -250 and +230 on a line ever. The issue here is this. So someone without a clue about propbetting, this might look normal to them since it looks like a 20 cent line like -110 each way. But if someone has a clue about prop bets, they know if one side is -250, the other side would be be like +200 to +210.


Obviously cancelling this bet after the game is incorrect. But the reasoning they use for cancelling is obviously incorrect as well as the no attempt thing is obviously wrong as odds would been flipped.


What im curious about is who bet the yes on this and what was the odds for the no if they recalled what the other side was. But the most important thing here is what were the odds on the YES when the NO was -250. If it was +200 to +210, then clearly this bet is a winner. If its +230, it gets a bit sticky. I have seen many betting options whether its a prop bet or something else where if you look at the line, most people could not tell its a bad line or interpret it incorrectly. Some lines are very borderline in terms of a bad line and in things like that, you generally want to stay away from it. I mean if you saw a wager with something like total field goals made is 3.5 and its over -115 and under +110, would you not think this is a bad line because of the juice? So the juice is the most important thing here.

I would not expect a 250/+230 bet to be cancelled. I wouldnt expect a -102/-102 wager to be cancelled either. I get that the bigger the number, the bigger the gap needed, and I dont know which 1 is higher juice. But I wouldn't expect either to be cancelled before/during or after the game. If you think player is taking a shot at you by betting the lines you set, ban him. but pay him. wagers should be contracts. cancelling them is a last resort that should only be done in extreme situations. -250/+230 is sooooo far from that.

[bubba]

sbr proves once again they are the best in the industry by far at fixing problems/issues.

and kudos to justbet as well, sometimes these props aren't the easiest to wrap your head around.

Sbr should not be needed to fix obvious errors like this, but good to know they are there.

[dynamite140]

I would not expect a 250/+230 bet to be cancelled. I wouldnt expect a -102/-102 wager to be cancelled either. I get that the bigger the number, the bigger the gap needed, and I dont know which 1 is higher juice. But I wouldn't expect either to be cancelled before/during or after the game. If you think player is taking a shot at you by betting the lines you set, ban him. but pay him. wagers should be contracts. cancelling them is a last resort that should only be done in extreme situations. -250/+230 is sooooo far from that.

Well if this bet was before the game started, then i do not think a cancellation is that bad. Obviously it needed to be before the game started. Again, no props have juice this low. Example if it had a prop bet like -102 on both sides and the prop was something like over 3.5 field goals... that would clearly be a bad line in terms of juice. Because if this was the case, the books can't make much money from that low of a vig. That's why prop bets are minimum 20 cent lines... usually 30 cent lines. If they made lines like -102 on every prop bet, they aren't going to have that much of a hold. Even if it was -105, they would not make much either.


The -250/+230 line if this was the line is more of a bad line because its a prop bet. Now let say it was -250/+240, would you say that is a bad line? Because that clearly would be. But i get what you mean with the even if its -102 each way it should not be cancelled. But had they cancelled it before the game started, i would say that would be fine because no prop bets like that will have a vig that low. Bookmaker never does this. But since its afterwards, well its hard for them to have a case especially that reasoning they gave... which is beyond ridiculous as not one person would support their reasoning But had they said it was a bad line because of the juice... well then they would have some say in it... but in the end that line isn't that that bad for them to keep their decision. They did make the right decision here especially since the reasoning they gave for it cancelling was completely ridiculous.


The thing is here most likely he bet the other side of YES at +250 at betonline to do an arb.

[MrCavalier]

Sbr should not be needed to fix obvious errors like this, but good to know they are there.

Well SBR thinks books aren’t scumbags, which most intelligent people know isn’t true, the books will fck you over in heartbeat.. This bettor got lucky, he knew he was being robbed, how many people did the book get away with robbing?

[milwaukee mike]

So i took a look at the other thread someone here mentioned that had a very similar situation with grading and it was between the jaguars and jets a while ago and the yes was +325 and the no was -400. I can understand why the juice for no is that high for those type of teams since they can't score much.


You then mentioned the no was -250 but the yes was +230 at bookmaker. If that is the case, that is already a bad line because there is no way a prop bet like that would have that type of juice. That is a dime line on a prop bet. The yes should be between +200 to +210 at bookmaker if this was the case.


Why would it not matter what the line was for the prop bet yes? So if its no at -250 and the yes was at +270, that should be ignored? You said the yes was +230 for that game. That is far off from the +200 you hypothetically used as a number.


You honestly think the true odds for no 2 point conversion should be -200? You are out of your mind if you think that is the number. If that is the case, look at the next 2 games with even higher totals. You telling me the no 2 pt conversion would by -200? I guarantee its minimum -280 and these games are higher totals than the eagles/saints game.


You showed the 2 point attempt/conversions for the last week of the football season and completely ignored the entire nfl season. Why are you only calculating the 2 point conversion for only the last week of the season. That is not only bias but you dismiss everythng before that. I guarantee you no nfl game had a no bet on a 2pt conversion with -250 odds ever.


I never said the No should be -400. I would say it should be -300 to -350 or so.

i guess you will be pounding these NO bets then since they should be -300 to -350 and my -250 was such a gift/bad line

New England Patriots @ Kansas City Chiefs Either Team to Score on a 2pt Attempt (PAT)
06:40 PM	27675	Yes		+210
27676	No		-250

Los Angeles Rams @ New Orleans Saints Either Team to Score on a 2pt Attempt (PAT)
03:05 PM	27551	Yes		+180
27552	No		-220