[bleedblue]

I am being told by my sportsbook, that there were multiple pitching changes for Cleveland yesterday, and it is their policy to no action wagers immediately regardless of who starts the game. The listed pitcher at the time of my bet was Huff, but the book is siting that there was a "double pitching change", claiming that Cleveland changed their listed pitcher from Huff to Ohka and back to Huff.

To the best of my knowledge this wager wasn't no actioned before the game, but I could be wrong.

So my questions I guess...

Did this "double pitching change" take place?

Were alot of Seattle-Cleveland bets no actioned yesterday?

Does it sound like I was being freerolled?

I'm not going to give the book's name at this time, as I have no problems with them and don't want to slander their name as of right now. Any information is appreciated.

[pdx107]

I did notice it off the board at one of the Reno casinos i think

[tomcowley]

It did double change. If your bet wasn't cancelled before the start, it should be action. Depending on the book and the rules, it may be action anyway.

[bleedblue]

It did double change. If your bet wasn't cancelled before the start, it should be action. Depending on the book and the rules, it may be action anyway.

Thanks. They told me it was cancelled at 5:17 pm, but I didn't see it in my wagering history until after the game. I kinda had a lot of pending wagers, and I wasn't looking for that game specifically, so I don't know for sure.

The lettering of their rules is alittle ambiguous, as it says "if there is a change in the listed pitcher, the game will be no actioned...", but also says "if the listed pitcher throws the first pitch that game has action..." I guess the second part of that is moot, if the wager was already no actioned.

Anyway, I was alittle worried that they no actioned the winning bets and graded the losers as losses.

If anyone has a losing wager on that game, I would look at the rules to see if it should have been no actioned.

[tomcowley]

Fill out a complaint form anyway. It's unlikely that they didn't have bets on both sides and it should be pretty easy to check what the book did.