Betcoin.ag account locked

[Optional]

Optional, wouldn't it be prudent for SBR to contact them and tell them they were a bunch of clowns? And then subsequently downgrade them? By you (an SBR employee) responding to this thread, that means that SBR is aware of the issue. A solid watchdog agency would take note of this somewhere. Yet I see no news/ratings changes on the Betcoin review --- the last activity was from 2016. Do better.

If SBR acted like you think we should, all books would think we were the clowns and would not work to resolve complaints with us.

So short answer. No. Don't agree. But thanks for your input.



If you read the thread before posting your critique, I did pretty much call them clowns in post #16 btw.

[Alfie White]

It is fantastic how people think insulting companies and their representatives will get you anywhere lol, faboulous.

[Judge Crater]

OK I will be the one to ask.

Is Surebet a specific software or are they asking if he has some software that guarantees a profit through arbing?

[Optional]

OK I will be the one to ask.

Is Surebet a specific software or are they asking if he has some software that guarantees a profit through arbing?

Everyone seems to have a definition for this.


I think it means any combination of bets that cannot lose. Arbitrage fits definition but depending which book you speak to so does; Match Fixing, Inside knowledge, taking a bonus and hedging it out against another book for a gtd profit, etc.

[jacksonstreet]

I took a peek at "surebet" software -- was the first result on google -- and it looks like they give you 3 lines and tell you the amount to bet on each, and you'll net a minimum profit and cannot lose. The catch is, these lines are (almost always?) from 3 separate books. SO you need to funded in a bunch of different places to even get an opportunity to do something like this. So Betcoin can penetrate off. If someone is using Surebet and Betcoin is involved, then they shouldn't give a penetrate because his other 2 bets are being placed elsewhere. If it's at books they own, then that's on them to forbid accounts in multiple places --- or else it's on them.

[DontTailMe]

I took a peek at "surebet" software -- was the first result on google -- and it looks like they give you 3 lines and tell you the amount to bet on each, and you'll net a minimum profit and cannot lose. The catch is, these lines are (almost always?) from 3 separate books. SO you need to funded in a bunch of different places to even get an opportunity to do something like this. So Betcoin can penetrate off. If someone is using Surebet and Betcoin is involved, then they shouldn't give a penetrate because his other 2 bets are being placed elsewhere. If it's at books they own, then that's on them to forbid accounts in multiple places --- or else it's on them.

Yeah, you're describing arbitrage. Books don't love arbitrage bettors because - even though they are typically playing the other side(s) at other book(s) - in order for there to be an arbitrage in the first place, there has to be at least one, but more likely two slow lines involved. All they can really do is suspect a player of arb betting. Either way, they don't love it because the player is almost certainly taking advantage of their stale odds.

Tough cookies, you say? Yeah, I agree with that. Manage your book better. Unfortunately, they make the rules.

[jacksonstreet]

If SBR acted like you think we should, all books would think we were the clowns and would not work to resolve complaints with us.

So short answer. No. Don't agree. But thanks for your input.



If you read the thread before posting your critique, I did pretty much call them clowns in post #16 btw.

Yes - my post was hyperbolic. I did read the thread - and I appreciate you calling them out. However, I'd venture to guess that 90+% of people that use your rating guide don't peruse the forums. It's on SBR to bring this information to light --- why not post it on the Betcoin rating page and knock their rating down?

[raiders72001]

Yes - my post was hyperbolic. I did read the thread - and I appreciate you calling them out. However, I'd venture to guess that 90+% of people that use your rating guide don't peruse the forums. It's on SBR to bring this information to light --- why not post it on the Betcoin rating page and knock their rating down?

Although the case above is a hiccup, Betcoin should be rated much higher.

[Optional]

Yes - my post was hyperbolic. I did read the thread - and I appreciate you calling them out. However, I'd venture to guess that 90+% of people that use your rating guide don't peruse the forums. It's on SBR to bring this information to light --- why not post it on the Betcoin rating page and knock their rating down?

Because our aim is to support the offshore industry and players. Help retain player confidence in it and do what we can to make sure everyone gets treated fairly.

Betcoin are fine. Pretty good in fact usually. The person who tried to handle this matter was just bad at their job. Betcoin see that and did the right thing. And as long as they show genuine good intent in trying to be fair in decisions, there is not much utility in trying to shame them over this sort of error. Especially when they have made it right.

[jacksonstreet]

Because our aim is to support the offshore industry and players. Help retain player confidence in it and do what we can to make sure everyone gets treated fairly.

Betcoin are fine. Pretty good in fact usually. The person who tried to handle this matter was just bad at their job. Betcoin see that and did the right thing. And as long as they show genuine good intent in trying to be fair in decisions, there is not much utility in trying to shame them over this sort of error. Especially when they have made it right.

Fair enough - thank you for the explanation.