I just had $1530 stolen off me by a SBR "A+" book. (Resolved)

**Justin7** · 10-27-09, 02:51 PM

I agree, is theft. I don't think this is the behavior of an "A+" book.

**pokerplayer22** · 10-27-09, 02:54 PM

Well cmon Justin...help Peep out...do your thing....If you agree with him, lets get him paid.

Peep...sorry to hear about your money being stolen. I hope you get this resolved

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 02:55 PM

Thanks Justin for your help.

I am taking your advice and filing with IBAS as well. In the meantime, I wanted to post about the outragous behavior of this book. I certainly did not expect this to happen there.

Now at some of my "D" buddies... well.. :smile:

No, you know what? Even they wouldn't have the balls to pull this sort of regrading after the fact because they can sh*t.

**Karayilan9** · 10-27-09, 02:59 PM

Outrageous.
Contact them directly, Ladbrokes are one of the biggest and oldest books in the UK, they should be able to sort this out for you.

**Justin7** · 10-27-09, 03:04 PM

Originally posted by pokerplayer22

Well cmon Justin...help Peep out...do your thing....If you agree with him, lets get him paid.

That's the goal. I'll do everything in my power to help him get what he is owed.

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 03:06 PM

I have been in contact with Ladbrokes daily by e-mail Karayilan.

They are refusing to address the issue. Most of my e-mails they ignore, then ones they respond to they do with form letters and generalities.

If you know anyone there you can forward this to who can do something, please do. I did file an IBAS complaint as well, maybe that will help. I really don't understand their behavior here. It is crazy.

**nobs** · 10-27-09, 03:08 PM

lets just all remember, there are 2 sides to every story.

That is what rx moderator "peep" used to always say back in the day when he was at the rx, well thats what he said when he wasn't calling the poster a liar or shot taker or thief anyway.

**Chuck Sims** · 10-27-09, 03:10 PM

Robbery without a gun.

IBAS will of course rule in Ladbrokes favor. Have they ever ruled in the players favor? Hell, IBAS ruled in favor of a book that stole all the winnings from a player saying it was a recreational book.

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 03:12 PM

Would you like to give the books story then Nobs?

Would love to hear it, and they won't give it. They are just keeping my money.

I hope IBAS is not that bad Chuck. But I guess "we shall see".

**nobs** · 10-27-09, 03:15 PM

chuck sims,

I know you have been around the forums for a while. We all know there usually turns out to be more to the story, especially when we are talking about an A + book.

Either way, If IBAS rules in ladbrokes favor, there would be quite an irony here. Peep used to do the same thing over at therx. He would always back the book over the player regardless. This is quite ironic.

Just the same I believe there is more to this story.

**nobs** · 10-27-09, 03:17 PM

Peep,

I dont know the books story, of course.

But I know they have a great reputation and I doubt they are going to pick someone who has been involved with the forums for what 10 years ? to screw.

I am sure they know you have strong relationship going back many years with a lot of big names in the forum industry. You are probably the last one they would just decide to fuk.

**Chuck Sims** · 10-27-09, 03:17 PM

Peep, 14-1 would pay $2380 + $170. Is the $2870 a typo or am I missing something?

**patswin** · 10-27-09, 03:19 PM

wow sounds like you got ripped off peep, keep us updated on what happens here

**nobs** · 10-27-09, 03:24 PM

The amount they originally paid $2870, isnt even right.

Bet $170 @ + 1400 = $2380 winnings + $170 = $2550

Unless the extra $320 is related to the fact that its CAD.

Then they change it to close to +900 as they are paying $1510 on a $170 bet.

I dont what double result lines should be as I dont play this type of bet. Maybe it was a bad line at +1400 so they adjusted it to +900 ??? Just a guess.

Could there have been a limit of to win $1500, and the software didnt catch it ? Again, just a guess.

I doubt Ladbrokes wont cill come into this thread to give its side, but we all know that it standard practice when an A+ book is accused.

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 03:25 PM

That is interesting Chuck, I donno.

I just got upset when I saw the price adjusted. Never bothered to figure it out myself.

Maybe they should have adjusted it to $2550. And then screwed that up by putting in $1530 instead?

That would make sense. But why couldn't they tell me that then in two weeks of correspondance, or tell Justin that.

Good post, thanks. Makes more sense than them outright cheating me, I agree with that. I have been playing there pretty well daily for six months now and have had absolutely no problems until now.

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 03:26 PM

Maybe Nobs.

I am glad I posted to it, there are a lot more possiblities here than I thought of.

**Chuck Sims** · 10-27-09, 03:28 PM

nobs, I only remember Fishhead as the boot licking mod that defended the shady sportsbooks as if his life depended on it.

**nobs** · 10-27-09, 03:30 PM

peep,

Last thing I have to say. I do remember Gameday dealing a line on an NBA team + 3 points and + 140 or something like that. That line was on their screen for 7-8 hours and then when the team in question won the game straight up, they cancelled the bet saying bad line.

I remember the poster across the street saying he should get the win at ML +140 and gameday said it was supposed to be +3 -110 and ML + 140 so they cancelled it on bad line technicality.

You backed Gameday like a lionness defending her Cubs.

I think this is very ironic.

**Dark Horse** · 10-27-09, 03:38 PM

Euro books and their f*cking self-serving laws.

Gimme a pirate anytime over a corrupt banker or politician.

**BigDaddy** · 10-27-09, 03:51 PM

theft by the book.

but you don't notice a 14-1 bet got overpaid?

seems if all those #'s are incorrect

how long has justin been working on this?

any notice the difference?

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 04:15 PM

Sorry, I made a mistake.

Original bet price offered that I accepted was +1600, not +1400.

NFL
Buffalo Bills at New York Jets
Double Result
2009-10-18 21:15:00
New York Jets / Buffalo Bills @ +1600
Win

Channel Internet

Bet Placed At 17/10/2009

Bet Type Single

Stake Per Line CAD 170.00

Number Of Lines 1

Total Stake Paid CAD 170.00

Total Tax @0.00% (Stake) CAD 0.00

Winning lines 1

Losing lines 0

Void Lines 0

Returns CAD 2,890.00

It was computer done, I never did think to check it. So the original numbers stand, and I don't know why the "corrected" price.

**magnavox** · 10-27-09, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by Peep

If they want to cancel a bet before the event, no complaints.

You gotta be kidding...

**chance** · 10-27-09, 04:46 PM

This is straight theft. We as gamblers must fight to get some protection from this type of bookmaker robbery. I unfortunately do not have any suggestions. IBAS normally is just a frustrating time wasting processfor the person filing the complaint.

Over time Peep you will get that money back from Ladbrokes by continuing to bet with them. Piss them off more and they will limit your bets and you will lose again.

You are caught between a rock and a hard place

**tltaylor89** · 10-27-09, 04:55 PM

I call shanagans

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 05:06 PM

Well, my time there is pretty well up anyways Chance. They have me down to $10 to $40 limits on most everything now. I just would like to be paid with a check as they show me the door.

**moonbeam** · 10-27-09, 07:36 PM

Interesting post Peep.

At the end voided winning wagers after the event has finished imo is nearly the same thing than an "no pay"

And I guess "No Pay" books should be rated betweeen D and F.

...just a silly thought to think about...

**Halifax** · 10-27-09, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by Peep

Original bet price offered that I accepted was +1600, not +1400.

The +1600 line seems quite generous, but I'm not sure that it's generous enough to call a bad line.

If you look at a game lined -9.5, -200 would be generous odds for the favourite winning the first half, and +400 would be generous odds for the underdog winning the full game. If you parlayed these 2 individual bets (-200 with +400), the parlay payout odds would be +650.

This +650 is considerably lower than the +1600 odds that you received.

But you also have to consider a couple of other features of the bet that you made, features that make your bet more unlikely to win than the simple +650 parlay that I compared it to ...

First, if the first half ends in a tie, your bet would lose, whereas the 2-leg +650 parlay would reduce to a straight bet. I'm not sure of the frequency that a 9.5-lined game is tied at the half, but it would be good to know.

Second, the other thing that is working against the bet you made (and in return, raising the proper odds on that bet) is the fact that there is a negative correlation between the favourite winning the first half and the underdog winning the full game. No intelligent sports bettor would make the +650 parlay that I used in comparison to your bet, because if the -9.5 favourite wins the first half, it is very unlikely that the underdog would come back to win the full game.

So, in summary, you can take the base price of +650 on the parlay that I mentioned as a starting point. Factor in the chance of the first half ending in a tie, and also factor in the negative correlation between the two legs of the bet that you made, and you can bump up the line/odds on the Ladbrokes bet that you made.

How far can you bump it up ? What's a legitimate line on that bet ? Not sure, but I'd guess it would be in the +1000 to +1200 range ... not +1600, but probably close enough to +1600 that an A-rated book shouldn't be crying "bad line" after the fact.

**acarmelo1** · 10-27-09, 07:54 PM

Any book that calls Bad Line Excuse is not an A+ rated book

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 07:56 PM

They have no right offering this bet if they don't want to honor it Halifax.

And I did not have much the best of it, if any. It was not a bad line.

I have 301 games in my NFL database lined at -9 or -9.5.

Out of these, the favorite was (1) in front at the half and then proceeded to (2) lose the game outright only 19 times. 19/301 = .063123 percent of the time. This equates to a one in 15.8 chance of this event taking place. And the odds were +1600.

The book knew exactly what they were doing when they offered this bet. It was only after I won that they didn't want to pay.

Well, Justin thinks I should get paid Moonbeam. Let's see how it plays out. If they don't pay I suspect SBR does lower them. Do you know anyone at Ladbrokes or have any experience with IBAS? I did file my complaint there as well.

**PAPSMEAR** · 10-27-09, 08:02 PM

It never ceases to amaze me that these books put their hard earned reputations on the line over chump change to stiff a player that has legitmately won. Not best business practice in my opinion. Perhaps stick to D books...at least when you do get screwed it comes as no major surprise

**Peep** · 10-27-09, 08:05 PM

No kidding Paps. It really is "chump change" for a book their size.

I do have a few supporters in all this. Looks like their winklepedia page already took a turn for the worst.

The Company was founded by Messrs Schwind and Pendleton in 1886 as commission agents for horses trained at Ladbroke Hall in Worcestershire.[2] The name Ladbrokes was adopted in 1902.[2] In 1956 the Company was acquired by Cyril Stein and Max Parker.[2]
In 1961 the Government legalised betting shops under the Betting and Gaming Act. Stein used profits from the traditional areas of the business to establish a chain of betting shops: he was the first to introduce fixed odds football betting.[2] On the last Saturday of 1963 football results cost the Company over £1 million.[2]
In 1967 Cyril Stein became chairman of Ladbrokes and floated the company on the London Stock Exchange.[2]
The Company acquired Texas Homecare in 1986[2] and in 1995 sold it to J Sainsbury plc who integrated it into its own Homebase chain.[2]
In 1999 the Company acquired the Stakis Hotel chain and rebranded itself as Hilton Group plc. On 29 December 2005 the Company announced the sale of its the hotel operations to Hilton Hotels Corporation for £3.3bn and once more rebranded itself Ladbrokes plc.[3]
Following the introduction of the Gambling Act 2005 in the United Kingdom and the subsequent relaxation of advertising laws for gambling companies in 2007, a TV campaign by Ladbrokes, that included a host of ex-professional footballers, was the first to result in complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA): however the ASA cleared the campaign.[4]
[edit] Operations

Overall the largest betting company in the UK and largest retail bookmaker in the world, Ladbrokes owns over 2,200 retail betting shops divided between the UK, Ireland, Italy and Belgium. It also operates several online gambling websites offering sportsbook, poker, casino, games, bingo and backgammon. Ladbrokes uses the OpenBet system from Orbis Technology. Ladbrokes run the Albos screen system and EPOS from Alphameric.
Ladbrokes formerly owned Vernons. Founded in 1925, until the intervention of the National Lottery, Vernons concentrated on Football pools. The company also owns and operates two greyhound stadia at Crayford and Monmore.
Ladbrokes has recently gone into partnership with the Chinese government to offer the first betting shops in China betting on the state lottery.
The company came under fire in January 2009 from the Advertising Standards Authority due to complaints received relating to a recent advertising campaign.[5] On October 2 2007 Ladbrokes became the first major bookmaker to advertise on national tv. In 2009 they have launched their 'Bet British' Campaign.
In October 2009, Ladbrokes was accused of changing the odds of a bet after the contest was completed. A bettor was initially paid $2,870 for a winning bet. Hours later, Ladbrokes removed $1,360 from the bettor's account with no explanation. The issue is still unresolved.[6]

Chris Bell has worked for Ladbrokes since 1991 and became CEO in 2006, he is also chairman of the Bookmakers Committee.

**pokerplayer22** · 10-27-09, 08:09 PM

The book is deifnately in the wrong and should pay the player in this case. Peep...I really hope you do get paid but I wouldnt rely on Justin to do any good in this situation.

Best of Luck!!!

**acarmelo1** · 10-27-09, 08:11 PM

better stay with latin american books!!!

Those england guys think they are superior !!!!!

F&*K Them!!

**Halifax** · 10-27-09, 08:11 PM

The Company was founded by Messrs Schwind and Pendleton in 1886 as commission agents for horses trained at Ladbroke Hall in Worcestershire.[2] The name Ladbrokes was adopted in 1902.[2] In 1956 the Company was acquired by Cyril Stein and Max Parker.[2]
In 1961 the Government legalised betting shops under the Betting and Gaming Act. Stein used profits from the traditional areas of the business to establish a chain of betting shops: he was the first to introduce fixed odds football betting.[2] On the last Saturday of 1963 football results cost the Company over £1 million.[2]
In 1967 Cyril Stein became chairman of Ladbrokes and floated the company on the London Stock Exchange.[2]
The Company acquired Texas Homecare in 1986[2] and in 1995 sold it to J Sainsbury plc who integrated it into its own Homebase chain.[2]
In 1999 the Company acquired the Stakis Hotel chain and rebranded itself as Hilton Group plc. On 29 December 2005 the Company announced the sale of its the hotel operations to Hilton Hotels Corporation for £3.3bn and once more rebranded itself Ladbrokes plc.[3]
Following the introduction of the Gambling Act 2005 in the United Kingdom and the subsequent relaxation of advertising laws for gambling companies in 2007, a TV campaign by Ladbrokes, that included a host of ex-professional footballers, was the first to result in complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA): however the ASA cleared the campaign.[4]
[edit] Operations

Overall the largest betting company in the UK and largest retail bookmaker in the world, Ladbrokes owns over 2,200 retail betting shops divided between the UK, Ireland, Italy and Belgium. It also operates several online gambling websites offering sportsbook, poker, casino, games, bingo and backgammon. Ladbrokes uses the OpenBet system from Orbis Technology. Ladbrokes run the Albos screen system and EPOS from Alphameric.
Ladbrokes formerly owned Vernons. Founded in 1925, until the intervention of the National Lottery, Vernons concentrated on Football pools. The company also owns and operates two greyhound stadia at Crayford and Monmore.
Ladbrokes has recently gone into partnership with the Chinese government to offer the first betting shops in China betting on the state lottery.
The company came under fire in January 2009 from the Advertising Standards Authority due to complaints received relating to a recent advertising campaign.[5] On October 2 2007 Ladbrokes became the first major bookmaker to advertise on national tv. In 2009 they have launched their 'Bet British' Campaign.
In October 2009, Ladbrokes was accused of changing the odds of a bet after the contest was completed. A bettor was initially paid $2,870 for a winning bet. Hours later, Ladbrokes removed $1,360 from the bettor's account with no explanation. Ladbrokes has justified the funds confiscation, citing Section 2(3) of their Terms and Conditions: "No Ladbrokes Client is permitted to wear loud yellow Hawaian shirts while attending any gambling-related bashes in Las Vegas, Nevada."

Chris Bell has worked for Ladbrokes since 1991 and became CEO in 2006, he is also chairman of the Bookmakers Committee.

Looks like Ladbrokes management have done a recent edit to their Wiki page, explaining their position.