Pinnacle issue, they scammed me!

[Optional]

Simple- it depends of their definition of overtime so 2 options
1-not draw results so not overtime-> bet win
2- extra time called overtime is counted ->bet lose

There is no mention of a match draw being required in their rules.

I see no possible way they could grade this bet any other way under the rule 'any wager on the game will include any overtime'.


You're welcome to believe the rule is better at William Hill than Pinny if you like, but trying to claim Pinnacle can use those rules to grade this bet any way they like is a ridiculous claim.

[piterp]

There is no mention of a match draw being required in their rules.

so what for you trigger overtime if ML is for single match only?

[DontTailMe]

so what for you trigger overtime if ML is for single match only?

The rules. The rules say overtime is required when goals and away goals across the legs are tied. It's unique situation for sure, but it is what it is.

[JoeCool20]

"if the second leg is not tied but OT is played due to each team WINNING one game - then OT will not count"

thats from ladbrokes,

"in the event that a match does not finish in a tie, but OT is played for qualification purposes - the markets will be settled according to the result at the end of regular time"

thats from betfair.


so thats 3 big books (willhill) settling the way the OP thinks it should be.

WOW! Crystal clear there! Another way to say it is:

"If you bet a moneyline bet and your team wins, then you win, and we pay you!"


I will opine to say that Pinnacle will soon have this clarification too about "extended play for qualification purposes"

not counting against a moneyline bet! Otherwise they'd have to say: "If you win your moneyline bet by

the exact amount of points that requires extra play to determine a series winner, then you really don't win yet!

And we will us that extra play to see if we can cheat you out of your clear moneyline bet win!" LOL

[JoeCool20]

There is a rule in place covering this. OT counts. The absence of exception case language doesn’t mean they get to invent exception case language. They just defer to the rule which is there on the books. A literal reading of the rules is always correct.

you right -but is not definition of overtime for pinnacle so people can read this in different ways

so what for you trigger overtime if ML is for single match only?

The rules. The rules say overtime is required when goals and away goals across the legs are tied. It's unique situation for sure, but it is what it is.

LOL This guy is not quoting Pinnacle's rules for winning a moneyline bet!!

He is quoting the rules of the LEAGUE that show how they determine the series winner!

This was not a series bet! It was a moneyline bet! And his team won the game by 2 points! And we ALL know it!

There is no damn rule at Pinnacle that says you DON'T win a moneyline bet because the amount of points

you won the game by in regulation caused more play to determine the series winner! LOL



Show me a "rule" at Pinnacle about a moneyline bet that says:

"If you bet a moneyline bet, and you WIN the game in regulation, then you really might not win."

LOL There is no such rule.

[JoeCool20]

Trying to claim Pinnacle can use those rules to grade this bet any way they like is a ridiculous claim.

LOL ANY offshore sportsbook can grade any bet any way they like and steal people's money any time they want to!

And there ain't a damn thing anybody can do about it either!

This thread is only one example of many! The guy bet a moneyline bet, then CLEARLY won the game by 2 points,

then they played more time to see who won the SERIES, and Pinnacle cheated the dogshit out of the guy!

And there ain't a damn thing he can do about it!

Who says Pinnacle DID NOT tell the people that bet the other team on the moneyline that they also lost

because their team lost the game by 2 points in regulation, and the extra time to see who won the series doesn't count?

Then they steal ALL the money bet on BOTH SIDES of the moneyline when really there was a clear winner by 2 points!

LOL I wouldn't doubt it for a second! They could if they wanted to!


And one thing is for sure! There wouldn't be a damn thing anybody could do about it!

[Alfa1234]

Joe, you keep talking about "stealing money". It's entirely possible and even fairly likely Pinnacle paid out MORE on the other side by grading this the way they did. OP took an arb which means the side he took at Pinnacle was the odd that was climbing. That means they received more bets and a bigger odd drop on the side that dropped, hence the winning bet, hence they likely paid out more on that side. It's how their model works.

[JoeCool20]

Joe, you keep talking about "stealing money". It's entirely possible and even fairly likely Pinnacle paid out MORE on the other side by grading this the way they did. OP took an arb which means the side he took at Pinnacle was the odd that was climbing. That means they received more bets and a bigger odd drop on the side that dropped, hence the winning bet, hence they likely paid out more on that side. It's how their model works.

LOL Neither of us knows what they did! That's why I said "I wouldn't doubt it" if they did!

Maybe they did what you said and took a loss, maybe they did what I said and stole the money

from both sides of the moneyline bets! But you missed my point Sir! My point is they COULD do it

if they wanted to, and there ain't a damn thing anybody could do about it!



And you keep talking about an "Arb" when it has NOTHING to do with CLEARLY winning a moneyline bet

and then getting your money stolen because they had to play more to determine the series winner!

[JoeCool20]

I did some "role play acting" tonight and I called my friend and told him: "Hey man, I had this moneyline bet,

and I lost the game by 2 points in regulation, but they told me that I really won the moneyline bet!!"


LOL No matter HOW I tried to explain it to him about them playing extra time solely to determine who advanced,

and the sports book "Counted" that extra time towards the moneyline bet that I had already lost by 2 in regulation,

he NEVER understood it!

He just kept saying: "But you lost the game in regulation, so therefore you lost the moneyline bet!!"

LOL "No man, they counted the extra time towards the moneyline bet even though I had already lost it in regulation!"

He NEVER believed that I WON a moneyline bet that I really lost by 2 points in regulation!!

[Optional]

Wow, that's amazing Joe!

You mean you have a friend who does not understand how rules work too??

Birds of a feather...

so what for you trigger overtime if ML is for single match only?

You claimed they could grade this match any way they wanted.

Explain your logic. I already told you mine.



But you won't because you cannot. You are talking absolute rubbish.

[Alfie White]

Have been reading this thread for a while, but I didn't want to jump to a conclusion and act out of emotions.

Anyway, the Pinnacle graded this correctly. Their rules are clear on this and this is the MOST BORDERLINE SITUATION that ever can happen and will almost never, ever happen again.

What I would suggest OP to do is reach out to them again, tone down as much as you can, explain that it is a freaky situation out of this world and try to ask them to at least "compensate" (void) the bet as that would be the most fair outcome you can hope for. You will not get your winnings in this lifetime, but at least try to be polite and understanding with them and hope for the best.

Good luck!

[cashin81]

That’s great. And if Pinnacle had that same stipulation in their rules then they should grade the same way. But they don’t. Are you suggesting we give books the freedom to ignore published rules when they grade? I hope not. Yikes.

No what im saying its that it is possible that they didnt account for this situation. They can have whatever rule they want, but they would need to explain it if its in dispute, if its unfair rule or doesnt make sense

The fact that 3 big books dont use this rule, and also many others state "unless otherwise stated" means all books ive looked at, will at least accept that there are other scenarios than just standard overtime.
My point is backed up by many books, all you are saying is that "its in the rules" - without questioning the rule.

[dealer wins]

Joe, you keep talking about "stealing money". It's entirely possible and even fairly likely Pinnacle paid out MORE on the other side by grading this the way they did. OP took an arb which means the side he took at Pinnacle was the odd that was climbing. That means they received more bets and a bigger odd drop on the side that dropped, hence the winning bet, hence they likely paid out more on that side. It's how their model works.

I wouldnt put it past Pinny settling those as a loss as well

[lonnie55]

I wouldnt put it past Pinny settling those as a loss as well

Never ever

[lonnie55]

this is the MOST BORDERLINE SITUATION that ever can happen and will almost never, ever happen again.
(...)
a freaky situation out of this world

Well, I'm not an expert on Basketball but this situation doesn't seem to be as rare as you think. Otherwise it would not have happened twice this round:

https://www.oddsportal.com/basketball/europe/champions-league/csm-oradea-szombathely-vRegQLEL/#1X2;2

[opedja95]

Joe, you keep talking about "stealing money". It's entirely possible and even fairly likely Pinnacle paid out MORE on the other side by grading this the way they did. OP took an arb which means the side he took at Pinnacle was the odd that was climbing. That means they received more bets and a bigger odd drop on the side that dropped, hence the winning bet, hence they likely paid out more on that side. It's how their model works.

Thats usually the case, but not this time sir.

Opening odd was 4.32 on away team, and I waited it to climb, but it started to fall, and I have made a bet on 4.25 to save my profit.

Eventually, odd was 4.27 before the start of the match as you can see here on oddsportal.

https://www.oddsportal.com/basketball/europe/champions-league/sk-legia-warszawa-z-mobile-prishtina-WOWTJJik/

Now, I must say, that there has been situations in the past when pinnacle was fair to me.
But, that doesnt mean that they now have the credit to fck me up and regrade my winning bet.

Yes the rules say any overtime, but they are NOT specific for this kind of situations, because this is not a overtime by definition.

If that is enough, than other books WOULD NOT HAVE a special section for situations like this.

Special section in the overtime rules is necessary for this situation to be fair and square, because Pinnacle has every right to claim both sides in this match as a losing side.

1. For home team they can say, " Yes sure in our rules it says every overtime that may occur, but this is technically not a overtime, away team has won in regular time and we do not count that tie breaker overtime for who wins the series.

2. For away team they can refer again to that rule saying: "Well, here is the part from our rules where we say that any overtime counts, as we see from official FIBA basketball champions league website, this was an overtime, so we will count it for this bet.

SO yes, THEY CAN DECIDE NOT TO PAY BOTH SIDES, and can decide to payout both sides if they want it.
Either way, there is nothing a player can do, and thats the point.

I haven't made a complaint for 3 days now..
Should I try again? What do you think?

What new to say?

[DontTailMe]

No what im saying its that it is possible that they didnt account for this situation. They can have whatever rule they want, but they would need to explain it if its in dispute, if its unfair rule or doesnt make sense

The fact that 3 big books dont use this rule, and also many others state "unless otherwise stated" means all books ive looked at, will at least accept that there are other scenarios than just standard overtime.
My point is backed up by many books, all you are saying is that "its in the rules" - without questioning the rule.

Questioning the logic of the rule as it applies to this type of exception case is perfectly fine...for the purposes of FUTURE games. In fact, I've done exactly that earlier in this thread. I think there SHOULD be an exception case outlined in the rules to prevent such a weird

But that's irrelevant to OP's claim. What you cannot do is question the rule once an event has already been decided, no matter how illogical you might think it is.

You're probably correct - Pinnacle likely didn't account for this unique situation. Therefore, they must apply the existing rules, and the existing rules are clear - overtime counts.

I can't believe people who use these online sportsbooks are actually advocating giving them the ability to grade wagers differently than their published rules prescribe. If you allow it here, then you're allowing it anytime the book thinks it's warranted. As players we have very little power in this game. The one thing we have is that we expect books to strictly adhere to their own rules. And we have support groups such as this community and the SBR organization who will back us up if they deviate. What you're suggesting breaks that vital principle.

[DontTailMe]

Yes the rules say any overtime, but they are NOT specific for this kind of situations, because this is not a overtime by definition.

Even those special sections in the other major books quoted above call it "overtime". Every source discussed so far in this thread calls it overtime. Whether we like it or not, it is overtime...by a definition that is different than in 99.9% of cases.

If/when Pinnacle adds a special section which treats this type of overtime differently from the traditional type of overtime, then we should hold then and only then should we expect them to grade differently. But since they don't have that exception language, they should follow their rules as is and treat it just like any other OT.

Yeah, it's a really weird outcome. And they should probably fix it for next time.

[opedja95]

Even those special sections in the other major books quoted above call it "overtime". Every source discussed so far in this thread calls it overtime. Whether we like it or not, it is overtime...by a definition that is different than in 99.9% of cases.

If/when Pinnacle adds a special section which treats this type of overtime differently from the traditional type of overtime, then we should hold then and only then should we expect them to grade differently. But since they don't have that exception language, they should follow their rules as is and treat it just like any other OT.

Yeah, it's a really weird outcome. And they should probably fix it for next time.

No, thats not true.

They call it "A two leg tie overtime"
And thats a whole different animal.

Series overtime and match overtime cant be the same.
Thats why every book has 2 different bets:
1. Moneyline - Who will win the match
2. Who will qualify - Who wins the series.

[JoeCool20]

Wow, that's amazing Joe!

You mean you have a friend who does not understand how rules work too??

LOL No man I have a friend who doesn't believe somebody could lose a moneyline bet by 2 points

in regulation and really win it! LOL You KNOW Pinnacle made a mistake by not clarifying this good enough in

the rules! But you can't say it on here! You know you can't win a moneyline bet that you have already lost by 2 points!

And you sure as hell know you can't lose a moneyline bet that you have already won by 2 points!!


And it is AT LEAST 3 to 1 AGAINST you by the other sports-books who say just that!


"if the second leg is not tied but OT is played due to each team WINNING one game - then OT will not count"


So you are losing your own reply post by AT LEAST 3 to 1!! LOL Very poor!

I know you can't help it,and it is your job to make excuses for these books that pay SBR,

but this one ain't making you look good dude! When your "Attempted excuses" are losing 3 to 1,

"That Ain't Good!" LOL

[lonnie55]

LOL

You missed the point. The other 3 books specify how to handle such a situation. Pinnacle doesn't. They only say "Any wager on the game or the 2nd half will include any overtime that may occur."

[JoeCool20]

You missed the point. The other 3 books specify how to handle such a situation. Pinnacle doesn't. They only say "Any wager on the game or the 2nd half will include any overtime that may occur."

LOL Nope you are totally missing the point that Pinnacle did not do this on purpose!

Their rules were too vague and it came back and bit them in the ass. they don't have a rule

that says a moneyline bet that wins in regulation does not win! Because that is stupid!

They made a mistake by not having it clarified and now they have cheated a guy that won

a moneyline bet by 2 points!! LOL You can't lose a moneyline bet that you won by 2 points!

We ALL know that!!


After this embarrassment by Pinnacle of not paying a moneyline bet that won by 2 points in regulation,

I will bet anybody on here that within a month from now Pinnacle puts up a clarification about moneyline bets!

Because you just can't lose a moneyline bet that you have already won by 2 points!!


Something similar to this: "if the second leg is not tied but OT is played due to each team WINNING

one game - then OT will not count."

[cashin81]

Questioning the logic of the rule as it applies to this type of exception case is perfectly fine...for the purposes of FUTURE games. In fact, I've done exactly that earlier in this thread. I think there SHOULD be an exception case outlined in the rules to prevent such a weird

But that's irrelevant to OP's claim. What you cannot do is question the rule once an event has already been decided, no matter how illogical you might think it is.

You're probably correct - Pinnacle likely didn't account for this unique situation. Therefore, they must apply the existing rules, and the existing rules are clear - overtime counts.

I can't believe people who use these online sportsbooks are actually advocating giving them the ability to grade wagers differently than their published rules prescribe. If you allow it here, then you're allowing it anytime the book thinks it's warranted. As players we have very little power in this game. The one thing we have is that we expect books to strictly adhere to their own rules. And we have support groups such as this community and the SBR organization who will back us up if they deviate. What you're suggesting breaks that vital principle.

I dont know if the rule is right or not. Which is why I asked anyone on this thread if they know of a books that follows Pinnys rule. It may be there are a few books, or even just Pinny who are happy with the rule and have their reasons for it (should be explained to OP)


But if its an over sight - then no it cant be fair the guy loses $100 on a team to win a game, they win - but he loses money on it.

[lonnie55]

they don't have a rule that says a moneyline bet that wins in regulation does not win!

For what? What is ambiguous about the sentence ""Any wager on the game or the 2nd half will include any overtime that may occur."

Because that is stupid!

I don't see one user in this thread defending this rule or saying "it's a good and fair rule". I think we all agree that this rule has to be specified and or to be adapted in the way William Hill or other major books did to avoid situations like these.


I agree. It's a stupid rule. But this is not the point here. A stupid rule has been applied. And that's it.

They made a mistake by not having it clarified and now they have cheated a guy that won

Nope. They didn't cheat anybody as players on the other side of the bet got paid.

[JoeCool20]

I dont know if the rule is right or not. Which is why I asked anyone on this thread if they know of a books that follows Pinnys rule. It may be there are a few books, or even just Pinny who are happy with the rule and have their reasons for it (should be explained to OP)


But if its an over sight - then no it cant be fair the guy loses $100 on a team to win a game, they win - but he loses money on it.

I guarantee you it is an"oversight" and a mistake!!

OF COURSE they didn't knowingly accept a moneyline bet & know that they were not going to pay it in regulation

if it won by exactly 2 points!! They didn't have their rule clarified as well as the other S-books do & it bit them in the ass.


Ask them where their "rule" is that says a moneyline bet that wins in regulation does not win!

Then when they say there is no such rule because that is stupid, then tell them to stop being stupid and pay it!

[JoeCool20]

They didn't cheat anybody as players on the other side of the bet got paid.

They didn't have their rule clarified as well as the other S-books do and it bit them in the ass.

And if they REALLY paid the players who made a moneyline bet and lost by 2 points in regulation,

then that is beyond stupid! And I guarantee you that the rule will be clarified very quickly so that

the clear winners of a moneyline bet will NEVER get cheated again!

[Optional]

Have been reading this thread for a while, but I didn't want to jump to a conclusion and act out of emotions.

Anyway, the Pinnacle graded this correctly. Their rules are clear on this and this is the MOST BORDERLINE SITUATION that ever can happen and will almost never, ever happen again.

What I would suggest OP to do is reach out to them again, tone down as much as you can, explain that it is a freaky situation out of this world and try to ask them to at least "compensate" (void) the bet as that would be the most fair outcome you can hope for. You will not get your winnings in this lifetime, but at least try to be polite and understanding with them and hope for the best.

Good luck!

Is it?

Scores being drawn after a home/away series would not be an uncommon result.

How often basketball uses this format I am not sure of though.




Joe and Cashin seem to be assuming Pinnacle have never encountered nor thought about this outcome when framing rules, as their main objection to accepting what is written down.

That assumption is probably just as flawed as the one assuming this will never happen again.

[cashin81]

Is it?

Scores being drawn after a home/away series would not be an uncommon result.

How often basketball uses this format I am not sure of though.




Joe and Cashin seem to be assuming Pinnacle have never encountered nor thought about this outcome when framing rules, as their main objection to accepting what is written down.

That assumption is probably just as flawed as the one assuming this will never happen again.

I literally just said pinnacle might be happy with the rule. But without a specific mention of this situation - it leaves the question.

[piterp]

No, thats not true.

They call it "A two leg tie overtime"
And thats a whole different animal.

Series overtime and match overtime cant be the same.
Thats why every book has 2 different bets:
1. Moneyline - Who will win the match
2. Who will qualify - Who wins the series.

Thats main point here- if market who will qualify was available in play , your bet ML should be winner

[opedja95]

As far as I know, Pinnacle did not had *who will qualify* market.

But that is not the point here.

I did not made a bet on series winner, I bet on moneyline, and my team won in regular time.

Every response I get from pinnacle about my complaint, they seem to be more and more confusing with answers...

I dont know if they are really that lost, or they are just playing dumb.

Didnt had a single straight and clear explanation on why my moneyline bet was graded as lost, only some generic answers that makes you think that fcking robots are working at traders positions in Pinnacle...

[piterp]

ok than correct name is series winner for pinnacle


So ask pinnacle nicely what is difference between series winner and moneyline for them in basketball
and ask them overtime for single match and for qualification is the same for them or not

[fried cheese]

ok than correct name is series winner for pinnacle


So ask pinnacle nicely what is difference between series winner and moneyline for them in basketball
and ask them overtime for single match and for qualification is the same for them or not

if they won by 1 they wouldnt win the series.

[DontTailMe]

No, thats not true.

They call it "A two leg tie overtime"
And thats a whole different animal.

Series overtime and match overtime cant be the same.

I agree it *should* be a different animal. But their rules don't differentiate between them like other books do. So according to their rules, overtime is overtime. Yes, they should fix it. But it's too late for this game.

But if its an over sight - then no it cant be fair the guy loses $100 on a team to win a game, they win - but he loses money on it.

Why not? That's what the rules prescribe. Should we give OP the win and hand a loss to everyone who bet the other side, even though the rules don't allow for that?

[Optional]

Thats main point here- if market who will qualify was available in play , your bet ML should be winner

"Main point"??? now you are grasping.

That is not only NOT the main point its an irrelevant red herring.

ok than correct name is series winner for pinnacle


So ask pinnacle nicely what is difference between series winner and moneyline for them in basketball
and ask them overtime for single match and for qualification is the same for them or not

Oh boy, now you have to be trolling, or very slow.

You seem desperate to come up with some logic to say Pinny is wrong here.

But like your other stupid claim that the rules allow them to grade this any way they want, you cannot come up with anything close to sound logic to support this dumb theory either!

if they won by 1 they wouldnt win the series.

^^^ @Piterp... you need to consider all options when designing a boom rule. You are obviously out of your depth here.

[piterp]

You can be arrogant to me but you are only troll designed here to support and defense bookmakers