personal attacks thats entertaining
Wagerweb Theft of almost 10K
Collapse
X
-
siabdo23SBR Sharp
- 12-02-09
- 300
#36Comment -
RickySteveRestricted User
- 01-31-06
- 3415
#37It's very unfortunate that they're choosing to steal from you. I question why WagerWeb is rated C given their history.Comment -
Justin7SBR Hall of Famer
- 07-31-06
- 8577
#38If no new facts come out, and they don't pay Trixtrix, I'll be very surprised if they keep a rating above D or D+. The let squares bet "accidental CPs" because they will lose, and don't want to piss them off. Take one, take all. You cannot selectively enforce rules. They need to pay the player here.Comment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#40pls don't let the sole presence of the one and only wagerweb shill that we have grown to expect and love, disrupt/mis-direct the purpose of this thread, this thread is created to expose the unscrupulous and malicious practices of WAGERWEB for STEALING money from large WINNERS.Comment -
Jrod124SBR Hall of Famer
- 10-31-09
- 5622
#41I actually never had a problem with wagerweb, but I never played for those limits either. My biggest deposit there was 100 bucks. So they prolly just don't cater to the higher rollerComment -
robmpinkSBR Posting Legend
- 01-09-07
- 13205
#43Vpls don't let the sole presence of the one and only wagerweb shill that we have grown to expect and love, disrupt/mis-direct the purpose of this thread, this thread is created to expose the unscrupulous and malicious practices of WAGERWEB for STEALING money from large WINNERS.Comment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#44
it has nothing to do w/ "catering" to high-rollers, i had absolutely no problem w/ them cutting my limits to 100$, i simply stopped playing there, mission accomplished.
what i have a significant problem w/, is for them to STEAL from large winners.
let me put it another way, let's say by some stroke of amazing luck you manage to turn your 100$ into 20k there (isn't that what every punter dream of doing?), as per their current policy, do you think they will pay you?Comment -
Jrod124SBR Hall of Famer
- 10-31-09
- 5622
#46it has nothing to do w/ "catering" to high-rollers, i had absolutely no problem w/ them cutting my limits to 100$, i simply stopped playing there, mission accomplished.
what i have a significant problem w/, is for them to STEAL from large winners.
let me put it another way, let's say by some stroke of amazing luck you manage to turn your 100$ into 20k there (isn't that what every punter dream of doing?), as per their current policy, do you think they will pay you?Comment -
robmpinkSBR Posting Legend
- 01-09-07
- 13205
#47
It is sad that grown men report things such as this. An opinion.
Furthermore, I don't deal with investigations, sharp play, player fraud, etc because it isn't my job. I haven't been a forum world regular for 10 years like others and could care less.
I don't think you got robbed because you knew what you were doing. They have a rule, whether it be vague, addressing sharp play. Betting a lot of correlated parlays is sharp play in my mind. I don't know all of the facts either. Last time I read the report it said you were warned. I don't talk to Wagerweb management about players disputes and only read what is posted here.
It doesn't hurt my feelings about whatever you people say or think because I wouldn't want to know a single one of you personally.Comment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#48
and while we're at it, i have another question for you: since you admited you have NOT even read any of the facts of the case and subsequent findings by any persons other than wagerweb.
why then are you still posting on this thread at all? when you admit to having only incomplete information and displayed no desire to obtain more. you said your piece, wagerweb is great in your opinion. fine we accept, for the rest of the time, please stay out of this thread unless you actually have something new and relevant to add..Comment -
acarmelo1SBR Hall of Famer
- 09-29-09
- 6321
#49het got robbedComment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#50
read the last paragraph, wonder which well-wisher did the deedComment -
robmpinkSBR Posting Legend
- 01-09-07
- 13205
#51you think it's sad that grown men report on you, i think it's sad that a VET for 10 YEARS!! would resort to such childish offensive jibs abotu posters' penises and sexual orientations instead of focusing the topic of the thread at hand
and while we're at it, i have another question for you: since you admited you have NOT even read any of the facts of the case and subsequent findings by any persons other than wagerweb.
why then are you still posting on this thread at all? when you admit to having only incomplete information and displayed no desire to obtain more. you said your piece, wagerweb is great in your opinion. fine we accept, for the rest of the time, please stay out of this thread unless you actually have something new and relevant to add..
I'm glad this thread is keeping you busy. Anyway, if you know a book is really strict with sharp play, why would you take a chance? I know you have read all of the past wagerweb threads or at least most of them.
This is between you people and I'll comment if I want to. If you didn't bet many correlated parlays and won 9k, we wouldn't be discussing the matter since you would have been paid without a hitch.Comment -
acarmelo1SBR Hall of Famer
- 09-29-09
- 6321
#52nice
Comment -
robmpinkSBR Posting Legend
- 01-09-07
- 13205
#53http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagerweb
read the last paragraph, wonder which well-wisher did the deed
How did they extort you? I'm curious?Comment -
BigDaddySBR Hall of Famer
- 02-01-06
- 8378
#54trix put the clown on ignore he is ruining your thread.
this is outright theft and anyone that doesn't understand that has no clue.
i will say though i have found it is better to keep balances low when doing this sort of thing but these are not the days of neteller when it was easy to move money around and i don't think books paid as much attention to payouts as they do now.
it took one book i played these at 30k before they said hey stop that but they paid with no problems but i wouldn't have expected anything else from the A book i was at.
i hope you get paid trixComment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#55can mod just stop robmpink from posting in this thread unless he has something relevant to say? also can someone pm me how put some chucklehead on ignore?Comment -
robmpinkSBR Posting Legend
- 01-09-07
- 13205
#56trix put the clown on ignore he is ruining your thread.
this is outright theft and anyone that doesn't understand that has no clue.
i will say though i have found it is better to keep balances low when doing this sort of thing but these are not the days of neteller when it was easy to move money around and i don't think books paid as much attention to payouts as they do now.
it took one book i played these at 30k before they said hey stop that but they paid with no problems but i wouldn't have expected anything else from the A book i was at.
i hope you get paid trix
Sour grapes I guess since your days of doing this at Phoenix are gone. You are a rec player though, right?Comment -
robmpinkSBR Posting Legend
- 01-09-07
- 13205
#57
Relevant to what? You getting paid? Sorry if you don't like what I say. Everyday isn't sunshine and lollipops. I'm not maching your situation. I hope you get paid but you flirted with a possible red flag.Comment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#58lol, thanks troll; btw, whether i like what you have to say is irrelevant, as long as you reach your conclusions from a logical manner. the most power feeling EVERYONE have towards you is indifference. it's clear you 're just here to troll. this is why everyone wanted you out of this thread.Comment -
BigDaddySBR Hall of Famer
- 02-01-06
- 8378
#59If everything is on the up and up you shouldn't have to worry about your balances being high. You people are dopes that you don't think these books know what you are doing. Basically you imply you were able to quick hit them and xfer the money out quickly before they could investigate and take action. Trix just chose the wrong book to get greedy.
Sour grapes I guess since your days of doing this at Phoenix are gone. You are a rec player though, right?
betphoenix is not an SBR A rated book moron but i'm certain they also would pay the CP's with no problems.Comment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#60back on topic, wagerweb tactics of stiffing large winners are unacceptable, i'm glad that everyone w/ the exception of rob is on the same pageComment -
MudcatRestricted User
- 07-21-05
- 9287
#61If no new facts come out, and they don't pay Trixtrix, I'll be very surprised if they keep a rating above D or D+. The let squares bet "accidental CPs" because they will lose, and don't want to piss them off. Take one, take all. You cannot selectively enforce rules. They need to pay the player here.
Strange to see this coming from you. Over the last few years when I was reporting a series of unethical acts by WagerWeb which were also about selective enforcement of rules, you defended WW every step of the way.
Every report would be followed by Justin from SBR and robmpink saying everything was fine at WW.
I actually had someone asking me for help and sending me proof of their complaint - long after I had severed my connection to SBR. From reading your stonewalling on the forum, they had concluded SBR was not to be trusted with WagerWeb.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you this complaint has suddenly gotten your attention. It's just puzzling.Comment -
Justin7SBR Hall of Famer
- 07-31-06
- 8577
#62Strange to see this coming from you. Over the last few years when I was reporting a series of unethical acts by WagerWeb which were also about selective enforcement of rules, you defended WW every step of the way.
Every report would be followed by Justin from SBR and robmpink saying everything was fine at WW.
I actually had someone asking me for help and sending me proof of their complaint - long after I had severed my connection to SBR. From reading your stonewalling on the forum, they had concluded SBR was not to be trusted with WagerWeb.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you this complaint has suddenly gotten your attention. It's just puzzling.
This case is very different. Wagerweb had the means to stop these types of bets if they wanted to. They either chose not to, or didn't realize the strength of the plays.Comment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#63Strange to see this coming from you. Over the last few years when I was reporting a series of unethical acts by WagerWeb which were also about selective enforcement of rules, you defended WW every step of the way.
Every report would be followed by Justin from SBR and robmpink saying everything was fine at WW.
I actually had someone asking me for help and sending me proof of their complaint - long after I had severed my connection to SBR. From reading your stonewalling on the forum, they had concluded SBR was not to be trusted with WagerWeb.
Don't get me wrong, I'm glad you this complaint has suddenly gotten your attention. It's just puzzling.Comment -
UV82SBR Sharp
- 07-25-09
- 396
#64I have been following up on Justin7 actions and comments over time and I must say that he has been very good with his judgement of bookies & players actions.Comment -
RickySteveRestricted User
- 01-31-06
- 3415
#65http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wagerweb
read the last paragraph, wonder which well-wisher did the deedComment -
dwaechteSBR Hall of Famer
- 08-27-07
- 5481
#66as i stated in the previous thread, this is what makes this situation so grievious
1.) wagerweb have correlated parlay stipulation in rules, however many other books have the same rules in affect, and then they config their software to disallow those parlays.
2.) wagerweb software DISALLOWS/RESTRICTS high correlated parlays, (ie 1st half fav -20/ over 28), their software restricts any parlays where the spread/total ratio exceeds 50%.
3.) so by the fact that they restricted highly correlated parlays, and their software ACCEPTED my plays which i consider to be loosely correlated (1st H: C Mich -9.5 parlayed w/ 1st H: total over 23. another example: 1st H: Kansas -11.5 parlayed w/ 1st H: total over 28.5.)
what can any reasonable/logical man conclude from this except these accepted parlays would be considered FAIR consider they have the ability and did block out those cps that the book believed to be unfair.
that and their admitted selective use of this rule (where they will steal from winner who won these parlays, but NOT refund the losers who lost the parlays) is why this theft is injustifiableComment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#67i don't really want to argue the point of loose vs. tight correlation any longer, hell if robbie can learn to play nice then certainly so can i.
what should be noted however that terms such tight/loose is v relative. so they need to objectively measured against something
so there are 2 ways. 1.) Measure the performance of those parlays, my back of envelope guess is +5% roi, (in line w/ say nfl b.s teasers w/ liberal rules) people disagrees yet cannot give me their fair assessment of the edge.
or 2.) measure it against other benchmark books. in this case would be books rated b or higher. in one instance, one b rated book allowed all the similar parlays that wagerweb allowed, and paid it w/ smile, after my winning exceeded 25k, their headlinesman calls me up and you've been killing on this and we know edge exists and this is for squares. so i will restrict your parlay limits but will pay you full balance with smile. Another top-tier book would let you parlay as much as you on the similar correlate lines, but once you've shown that you have a clue, they will limit your max parlay/teaser wagers to be 50 and then 5. but you would've still been paid. even in vegas, lets say a book had inadvertantly allowed me to kick his butt in during the week by sneaking in parlays when he wasn't looking. vegas book will still end up paying me in full then making sure i can never come back to that property again.Comment -
gym ratSBR Sharp
- 01-25-07
- 476
#68Well it seems obvious that you know these correlated parlays are taking free shots at the books. You claim you have made over 25K from a book that banned you and you have even been banned in Vegas for similar wagers. Anybody who makes these types of wagers is taking a huge risk and I can't blame the book for no actioning all these wagers. Don't all posters here at SBR know that correlated parlays are not tolerated by virtually all books? Same goes for multiple accounts! These are the top two reasons for being banned and having balances forfeited.Comment -
Justin7SBR Hall of Famer
- 07-31-06
- 8577
#69Wagerweb is taking shots with their policy.
Correlated parlays are taken by tons of books - Bookmaker, Greek, Legends and BetPhoenix to name but a few. Most Las Vegas books take them. Most books offering them don't even know they are.Comment -
trixtrixRestricted User
- 04-13-06
- 1897
#70Well it seems obvious that you know these correlated parlays are taking free shots at the books. You claim you have made over 25K from a book that banned you and you have even been banned in Vegas for similar wagers. Anybody who makes these types of wagers is taking a huge risk and I can't blame the book for no actioning all these wagers. Don't all posters here at SBR know that correlated parlays are not tolerated by virtually all books? Same goes for multiple accounts! These are the top two reasons for being banned and having balances forfeited.
b/c it's not the industry norm, the industry norm by b rated boooks and above is to pay you then either lower your limit or fix their software. that's the whole pt i was trying to makeComment
SBR Contests
Collapse
Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
Collapse
#1 BetMGM
4.8/5 BetMGM Bonus Code
#2 FanDuel
4.8/5 FanDuel Promo Code
#3 Caesars
4.8/5 Caesars Promo Code
#4 DraftKings
4.7/5 DraftKings Promo Code
#5 Fanatics
#6 bet365
4.7/5 bet365 Bonus Code
#7 Hard Rock
4.1/5 Hard Rock Bet Promo Code
#8 BetRivers
4.1/5 BetRivers Bonus Code