The bovada case - that can change the whole betting industry

[PD77]

1) Fair odds should have been around +200 or +250, I agree to most of the posters in this thread.

+100 would be too low,

This is what I what I was after, if Bovada would’ve canceled his wagers on 11/21 he could’ve most likely placed the same wagers with the same odds as what Bovada paid him out at. They didn’t do him any favors, these were not better than “correct” odds.

[lonnie55]

This is what I what I was after, if Bovada would’ve canceled his wagers on 11/21 he could’ve most likely placed the same wagers with the same odds as what Bovada paid him out at. They didn’t do him any favors, these were not better than “correct” odds.

Yeah, I agree. That's the fair solution:

The bookie has to ask the player within a reasonable time frame (24-48h would be acceptable in his case) if he wants
- his bets stand at correct prices or
- his money back.

The player has another 24-48h to decide. If he doesn't reply the bet will be automatically refunded. Done.

But Bovada didn't do this, instead they were sitting and watching and obviously hoping he will lose his bet anyway.

[JAKEPEAVY21]

Amusing thread. OP is lucky he got paid at a fair price.

[HedgeHog]

On this subject, is there any industry standard on where odds variance ends and bad lines begin?
I ask because I make bets everyday and I usually have my money in 4 or 5 different books because I want the best odds possible. For example I placed a moneyline bet today on a team that was +148, but every other book had them at +130 or +135. If it had been +500 when everyone else was +200 I wouldn't have bet it because that's an obvious line error and will get cancelled.

Bad lines, like pornography, are difficult to define. However, you'll know it when you see it.

[milwaukee mike]

After being hit for 25K, Mike, my guess is they would pay more attention in the future. Painful lessons are the ones best learnt.

good point

if they were held to a reasonable standard there would be less "bad lines" that they could cancel after the fact

[ace7550]

Bad lines, like pornography, are difficult to define. However, you'll know it when you see it.

Haha true.

[infotimbo]

They were leading the group with two matches to play.
They were chalk faves on the 3 way line in both remaining group matches.

They were 2nd at that point:

1. Sporting - 9pt / 7-4 goals
2. LASK 7pt / 6-3 goals
3. Eindhoven 7pt / 8-7 goals
4. Rosenborg 0pt / 1-8 goals

so to get into 1st, LASK basically had to win both remaining matches (against Rosenborg and Sporting).

Opening odds at Pinnacle to win the first match were @2,01 and opening odds for the the 2nd one were @2,10, so that +200 given by Bovada is not exactly generous, but may display more or less the outright odds available elsewhere at that time.

Overall I agree though, Bovado should have let him know earlier, but it's not completely unreasonable to act this way, and something you have to deal with if you take a shot at bad odds

[Natty68]

This is the bottom line!!

I don’t understand some people. I really don’t.

^^^^ this. ^^^

[Ant23]

Sick of these guys trying to "make a lick" on bad lines.....in my hood if you try to get over on the "man" he will send his cronies to your job, your house, or your mother's house and you will wish you never took a shot at trying to get over on a bad line.
These crooks make it harder for guys who are trying to do it legitimately. I wish these offshore books would BAN there azz so that they can't play with any offshore books. That may make em think twice before trying to make licks off bad lines. Be honest and tell the bookie and you may be rewarded for your honesty with a free play or something? Damn crooks!!!

[PD77]

Cliff notes version: Shot taker takes shot at Sports Book. Sports book free rolls shot taker. Sports book settles post match for perceived reasonable odds. Shot taker files SBR complaint, SBR trashes shot taker while embellishing sport book’s settlement. Shot taker no worse than free roller but should consider himself lucky to get anything, cough-cough. Case closed.

[NBAtanker]

Having read this thread since yesterday has the betting industry been changed yet ?

[ace7550]

Having read this thread since yesterday has the betting industry been changed yet ?

[ace7550]

Seriously how f'n self absorbed do you have to be to think that your only post on SBR is going to change the industry...

[Lanceman]

Guys,

Thank you so much for all your opinions and suggestions you posted for just a day.
I've read them all even the ones that are laughing at me.

I chose the title ''The Bovada case - that can change the whole betting industry'' because:

1) If the bookmakers could change/adjust odds, not before the event but after the fact - post match (after the results are final - in my case waiting 21 days to see who will be the winner of the group) IMO is totally unfair

2) Without any written notice of changing the odds to what the bookie think are the 'correct odds'

3) Not giving me a chance to accept the odds they believe are ''correct'' or cancel my bet

Guys, some of you think that what BOVADA did to me is fair ...!?

PD77 said: ''this type of behavior is very common in the unregulated online sportsbook world''

How confident are you going to be next time when you decide to place a bet and you know for a fact that these bookies are unregulated and if you win this bet it'll be questionable if your bet is going to be canceled or the odds will be adjusted/changed and basically you will have no idea how much money you are winning ?

[Lanceman]

Guys,

I see that some of you couldn't understand what I bet and when exactly I placed my bets.
Let's make the picture clear so you have more details and better understanding.

I'll attach some screenshots from my account.

picture 1 : https://ibb.co/rfTgxwH
It's showing when I deposited funds in my account and when I placed the bets.

picture 2 : https://ibb.co/RD7K0yh
It's showing what happened on 12/12/2019 and how Bovada reacted when they saw 2 separate winning bets

picture 3: https://ibb.co/YXz1NWz
Here you can see the transaction details for the 2 team parlay, odds are not changed the amount is paid in full but later on they just took it from my balance after someone from BOVADA took this decision ( you can see the actual adjustment of the amount at picture 2 )

picture 4: https://ibb.co/XXMtGr1
The single bet I placed , the odds are +525 but the winning amount Bovada decided to pay off is at +200 and it does not include my wager amount - mistake from their side , of course they add it later and you can see that at picture 2

[themike78]

You should be banned for life from every single offshore book for betting a bad line and then complaining about it. Goodnight.

[HedgeHog]

Cliff notes version: Shot taker takes shot at Sports Book. Sports book free rolls shot taker. Sports book settles post match for perceived reasonable odds. Shot taker files SBR complaint, SBR trashes shot taker while embellishing sport book’s settlement. Shot taker no worse than free roller but should consider himself lucky to get anything, cough-cough. Case closed.

Definitely not a free roll. A free roll is when a book "cancels" the bet after the fact. Settling winning bad bets at "fair value" is the right thing to do. Not sure what fair value is, but the OP is lucky to get back his wager and any profit at all.

Revised cliff notes: OP took a shot and got caught. His winning ticket was reduced to la lesser amount that Bovada thinks is fair. Their adjusted price my be on the low side, but it's more realistic than the OP's original odds.

[PD77]

Guys,

Thank you so much for all your opinions and suggestions you posted for just a day.
I've read them all even the ones that are laughing at me.

I chose the title ''The Bovada case - that can change the whole betting industry'' because:

1) If the bookmakers could change/adjust odds, not before the event but after the fact - post match (after the results are final - in my case waiting 21 days to see who will be the winner of the group) IMO is totally unfair

2) Without any written notice of changing the odds to what the bookie think are the 'correct odds'

3) Not giving me a chance to accept the odds they believe are ''correct'' or cancel my bet

Guys, some of you think that what BOVADA did to me is fair ...!?

PD77 said: ''this type of behavior is very common in the unregulated online sportsbook world''

How confident are you going to be next time when you decide to place a bet and you know for a fact that these bookies are unregulated and if you win this bet it'll be questionable if your bet is going to be canceled or the odds will be adjusted/changed and basically you will have no idea how much money you are winning ?

Lonnie summed it up best. They really can do whatever the F they want. When it comes down to it, if the actions are egregious enough, SBR can step in and try to reason with the sports book but even they have no authority or recourse. If the book is a sponsor, forget it.

Well, the reality is that offshore books can do whatever the F they want without any legal consequences whatsoever. In light of this, we are dependable on their decisions, if we like it or not.

Did the book free-roll him? Yes. But should OP be glad that he at least got something out of this? Yes, because most books would have just voided the bets and showed him the door afterwards.

[Optional]

I’m not backing up the OP

Yes you are. Over and again. Desperately.

You're both similarly unethical to the other.





And what's with this the book free rolled him stuff?! Ridiculous.

SHOT TAKERS FREE ROLL THEMSELVES.

Of course they lose if their bet loses, and they setup the chance to not be paid if the bet does win. They CHOOSE this situation when they choose to take the shot. Part of the risk. Ya know, like a gamble?


The offshore fair industry practice for handling errors is very good. It attempts to keep BOTH sides from profiting from errors and still makes sure honest mistakes get paid out at fair odds.

[Optional]

This is not true.

Yes, Linz were heavy favourites in the last game vs Sporting. But that was only because Sporting had allready qualified for the next round and didnt care about winning the group. Only 3 players from Sportings normal lineup was on the team for the game vs Linz. And therefor the odds on Linz also dropped a lot before kickoff. Odds on Linz started at around +125, and ended around -160. I can assure you if Linz played a Sporting team that needed points in order to qualify the odds would have been much better than -160 and also better than +125.

1) Fair odds should have been around +200 or +250, I agree to most of the posters in this thread.

+100 would be too low, Opti. Bear in mind LASK was "seeded" #3 in this group. PSV #1, Sporting #2. PSV was away fav against Sporting and heavy fav in the last group match, so actually PSV should have been the odds-on fav for winning the group even after match day 4, followed by Sporting, followed by LASK

You SURE about this boys??

You sound like your guessing?

NBAtanker said he saw the odds himself here;

Every site had it at +120 at kick off so he should be happy with +200 go onto FlashScore and go Europa league it gives odds from loads of bookmakers all range around +120 to +130

And I asked a book manager I was speaking to at the time who said they booked bets that same day at +130


Bovada definitely gave the guy BETTER than market odds.

If someone can show a ticket from that date that disagrees (or agrees), please do.

[Pareto]

Yes I am sure. All the odds I have written can be looked up.

NBAtanker clearly mistook OP's future wager as a single wager against PSV. You can see that if you read NBAtankers post just 2 minutes earlier than the one you quote. Linz were +120 in their group match against PSV but that is completely irrelevant in this case.

I dont know why you are so adamant in your opinion that Bovada gave OP a better than market price? They gave the OP a price that is somewhat fair. A little short but not unreasonably short.

[infotimbo]

yeah, as mentioned above, Optional, you seem to have mixed things up at some point. LASK was not leading the group with 2 games to go, Sporting was, with a 2pt advantage

[Optional]

yeah, as mentioned above, Optional, you seem to have mixed things up at some point. LASK was not leading the group with 2 games to go, Sporting was, with a 2pt advantage

I must have misread. A book manger did tell me they took a bet at +130 1 day after this one, but if they were 2 points down instead of equal on points at top as I thought, +130 does seem a bit low. Either way, +200 still seems like a fair decision to me.

[pologq]

i agree bovada could have told him sooner but obviously it was a bad line just from what i read as i do not know soccer. be glad they paid you still.

[lonnie55]

And what's with this the book free rolled him stuff?! Ridiculous.
(...)
It attempts to keep BOTH sides from profiting from errors and still makes sure honest mistakes get paid out at fair odds.

Either way, +200 still seems like a fair decision to me.

The thing is: If you bet on fair odds you will lose in the long run. So it's kind of a free roll anyway. Better than just voiding but still a free roll.

[TommieGunshot]

that sounds good in theory, but if they let every shot taker in the world hit them for 25k then they wouldn't exist for long

what if it's a -500 that they have accidentally listed for +500?

American regulated sportsbooks would pay out and they seem to be doing better than ever. The key is that they actually developed sufficient quality control, so they really don't get hit very hard by that stuff. Bovada (and all the others) could do that, but they get to keep their A+ rating without doing it, so there is no reason for them to offer a better service.

[PhillipKessel]

i agree bovada could have told him sooner but obviously it was a bad line just from what i read as i do not know soccer. be glad they paid you still.

This is the most blatant (documented) shot taking I have seen here ... deposit and bet into a bad line a few minutes later ... twice! Should have only had his wagers refunded IMO ... and he's here complaining about payout adjustments. I'm assuming Bovada is no longer an out for him.

[PD77]

Yes you are. Over and again. Desperately.

You're both similarly unethical to the other.





And what's with this the book free rolled him stuff?! Ridiculous.

SHOT TAKERS FREE ROLL THEMSELVES.

Opti, I have zero reasons to defend OP or Bovada. None. However, your allegiance to Bovada is painstakingly clear, I get it, you did not want this thread started. OP was wrong for taking a shot. Bovada clearly sat on his $5000 wager on a stale line for 21 days with no intention of paying him at the agreed upon odds, when they could’ve easily offered him the choice of the adjusted odds or canceling the wager and avoided this entire scenario. Instead, they adjusted the odds post match to what they perceived fair. Was it fair? I don’t know. Was it more than fair, highly unlikely. Bovada handled this situation poorly and should not be glorified for paying out the wager. They were both wrong. Is OP lucky to get paid? Absolutely, we’re all lucky to get our money back when we send $5000 to a third world country in Central America, no matter the circumstances.

[RonPaul2008]

I wonder if anyone bet the dog, the opposite side of his bets. Do you think they readjusted their odds higher? Somehow I doubt it.

[infotimbo]

I wonder if anyone bet the dog, the opposite side of his bets. Do you think they readjusted their odds higher? Somehow I doubt it.

well, probably not, but those bets were lost anyway, so they could change them to 1000-1 without risking a dime.

[Hu$tle]

Its an online book what are you going to do call the cops?? You take what they give you and move along

[im over here now]

Only Jokers play on line any more... If you live In USA and your state allows betting why aren’t you doing it? better odds? Maybe.. Add in fee do deposit fee to withdraw.. it’s about even.. if it’s not look at this case.. book booked the bet, games played out graded and book swiped winning.. never Ever going to happen in the US book. So once again the 4 cent extra juice you pay to play in your state really isn’t anything. It’s also comical so many people attacking the OP as a fraud dishonest shot taker, who knows if those are correct odds Bovada posted. How can an online book ever lose if they claim it was a bad line? How come no losing tickets are ever refunded claiming it was a bad line? Why is it just winning bets are confiscated because of a bad line? Online books have Been the biggest shot taker in the last 30 years..

[Optional]

Opti, I have zero reasons to defend OP or Bovada. None. However, your allegiance to Bovada is painstakingly clear, I get it, you did not want this thread started.

FU pal.

I don't care that the thread started.

Everyone else with half a brain and an ounce of ethics told him the truth.

I did object to you joining him in unfairly trashing the book and confusing the situation.

But just like you, I "get it". You have no honor like the OP, and genuinely don't understand what was wrong here.

[wiseguyjer]

bovada took a shot at him as well, they waited to see if it was gonna be a lost, books freeroll players like this all the time post suspect lines and play dumb when they hit, 5dimes is notorious for that

[PD77]

FU pal.

I don't care that the thread started.

Everyone else with half a brain and an ounce of ethics told him the truth.

I did object to you joining him in unfairly trashing the book and confusing the situation.

But just like you, I "get it". You have no honor like the OP, and genuinely don't understand what was wrong here.

Wow , “FU pal”? I can’t possibly think of anything more clever to say than that, so you got me. I’ll never question your version of events or integrity again. You win.