BetOnline wager dispute - getting its own thread now

[Chris@thegreek]

One since out odds were taken off our site


Syracuse was +1200 to win BE reg season and +175 to win post season

Cal was + 600 for Pac 10 and + 160 to win post season


Nobody put up post season conference odds in November, as look at NC who were +150 to win the ACC and +1500 to win the Post season


and I put Post season odds up for major Conferences post season on

3-6 - 8

Those are just the facts

[HedgeHog]

Game, set and match. BOL needs to pay all Syracuse and Cal bettors.

[Chris@thegreek]

Syracuse was +1200 to win BE reg season and +175 to win post season

Cal was + 600 for Pac 10 and + 160 to win post season


Nobody put up post season conference odds in November, as look at NC who were +150 to win the ACC and +1500 to win the Post season


and I put Post season odds up for major Conferences post season on

3-6 - 8

Those are just the facts[/quote]

[sam b.]

I guess because I am ahead at BOL since I began betting with them less than a year ago, that makes me "smart." But they have since cut my limits on props and futures to $1, so I thought that was the price I had to pay for being "smart." You win, so you can no longer bet what you are good at. They're a recreational book, so I must accept it's their right to do it. I've never done anything there to abuse policies or manipulate lines, I only made bets on sides that I thought were good bets. The fact that I'm not getting paid on a bet that was made before my limits were reduced is simply inexcusable.

For those that haven't seen this from another thread, here is the wording of the bet at Bet Online (cut and pasted):
Ticket Number:XXXXXXX-X
Accepted Date:11/25/2009 - EST
Graded Date:3/14/2010
Wager Type:Future/Prop
Wager Status:Loss
Risk:$X.XX (USD)
To Win Amount:$X.XX (USD)
Description:Conferences - To Win the Big East Conference Championship - Syracuse +1200

And here is the wording from The Greek (same type of bet made at the same time, but on a loser [who won the Pac-10 Conference Tournament]):

1. Basketball Futures - 2009 - 10 NCAA Conference Championship
PAC 10 Conference
Team to win the PAC 10 Conference Championship
Washington (+500) [loss]

Bill: Did the player list the odds for this bet at BetOnline vs. other books? No, I did not think to do that at the time I made the wager. From now on, you better believe I will.

Tom: Thank you for expressing how I feel inside about all of this, although I'm trying to remain somewhat cool on the outside.

skrtelfan: My buddy that uses the mirror/credit site (although neither place recognizes this) has faxed me the printouts of his bets with the dates changed. It is obvious. I can fax them to whoever needs to see them. Just PM me. My bets at BOL never showed an event date of any kind. What makes this even worse is that, although my friend also had his bet graded as a loser (because the grading came for the same source), his agent wound up paying him in full out of pocket, and I think his total winnings were more than mine!

Alex: Of the 2 posters that wrote it is a slam dunk for you at LVA Sports, one of them has only 1 lifetime post. At first I thought it might have been a shill for BetOnline, but I continue to give you the benefit of the doubt because of your rating here and the fact that you have always paid in a timely manner.

Peep: What is OGD? I would like to read/participate in the discussion there.

Sam

[Thremp]

I wonder if BetOnline is doing this out of malevolence or incompetence. 99% of errors seem to be the latter. Atleast all my Greek/Cris/5Dimes angleshoots have been someone being too ****ing stupid to know the difference.

[NDIrish9]

Wow BetOnline now determines who the actual conference champion is! Someone inform the conference commissioners that their champion will be announced after BetOnline evaluates its profit/loss scenarios.

Look, you BetOnline prick:

HAVE SOME CONSISTENCY.

Did you offer:
Odds to win SEC East
Odds to win SEC West
AND Odds to win SEC Championship?

If there was no option to bet on SEC Championship outright winner, then every other argument is moot and these wagers must be graded in regards to the regular season winner.

Further - how can you even offer such ambiguous wager options? What a shit operation you have over there.

And quit mailing me shit. I don't like you.

[NDIrish9]

What kind of idiotic mongoloid comes up with BetOnline as a company name anyway. Tunnel vision. Body Odor. B.O.

[Stumpage]

This seems to be one of the easiest "disputes" to rectify that I can recall reading of in a very long time. BOL, pay him. Are you kidding me? The excuses to continue dragging this out have crossed into the threshold of unintentional comedy, to be honest.

[NDIrish9]

He's here.. and I have been following this and dealing with it behind the scenes. Aside from this player, we've had ZERO others complain--and we had plenty of others on the bet. I'll look into it, and these other allegations, and get back to you. Alex

By plenty of others, do you mean 5 to 10 people who didn't bet WVU or Syracuse?

Or people that had 3 dollars on it and had no idea they should be winners?

[NDIrish9]

Oh, and that lofty rating BetOnline has is completely unwarranted. BetOnline came out of nowhere and all of a sudden had an A rating? They paid SBR a shit ton of money.

[michael777]

terrible book,i had a dispute with them years ago,they stiffed me out of a few thousand,they should be avoided for sure

[Justin7]

terrible book,i had a dispute with them years ago,they stiffed me out of a few thousand,they should be avoided for sure

Did you file a complaint? If not, do it.

[Patrick McIrish]

I'm not an insider but rumors are heavy there is Bet on Sports (BOS) ownership in place now at BOL. If so that would explain this, very BOS like move here.


Sam - link for OGD is peepsplace.com, at least that's the easiest one to remember. If this is inappropriate please edit my post mod crew. No problem, not sure of your policy.

[BetOnline]

I'm not an insider but rumors are heavy there is Bet on Sports (BOS) ownership in place now at BOL. If so that would explain this, very BOS like move here.

We have nothing to do with BOS. That thread is finished.

The regional championships are determined by the regional tournaments; the only thing being on top for the season gets you is a spot in the Championships, like Syracuse got, who then promptly lost. Hence.

[skrtelfan]

Yeah, some guys say it's a slam dunk on our side as well in some forums; this is what happens when smart guys (this player is smart, my lines guy is as well) bump heads.

Uh, no. If your lines guy was "smart" he would have a) phrased his prop better b) not needed to steal the prop line from the Greek c) not changed the wording of the prop midstream.

Why would you possibly offer SEC regular season bets and Big East tournament bets on the same prop with the same wording??? Anyone with a room temperature IQ can tell that doesn't make sense, you don't need to be a "smart guy" to understand that one.

[skrtelfan]

We have nothing to do with BOS. That thread is finished.

The regional championships are determined by the regional tournaments; the only thing being on top for the season gets you is a spot in the Championships, like Syracuse got, who then promptly lost. Hence.

Then why did you offer the same prop on the SEC divisions and not on the overall SEC champion, if the prop was supposed to be on the SEC tournament winner?

[LT Profits]

He's here.. and I have been following this and dealing with it behind the scenes.

Aside from this player, we've had ZERO others complain--and we had plenty of others on the bet.

I'll look into it, and these other allegations, and get back to you.

Alex

This seems like a slam dunk. Since you did not include the word "tournament" in the wager, the bet is based on the regular season champion by default. Both the OP and the other poster that had Cal to win the Pac-10 should get paid.

[Chuck Sims]

Hey BetOnLine: Pay up on those winning tickets. You are crooks for even trying to defend this thievery.

[Peep]

Oh oh.

Sounds like BOL has drawn a line in the sand, they are not going to pay out on their winning futures.

Ball in your court SBR.

How do you rule?

[BillyCostigan]

"skrtelfan: Then why did you offer the same prop on the SEC divisions and not on the overall SEC champion, if the prop was supposed to be on the SEC tournament winner? "


+1000. Exactly! Did you morons think there were two SEC tournaments? Stop trying to defend this, Alex. You sound like a dipshit.

[Justin7]

I can understand Betonline's position. If you use the phrase "Big East Champion" with no other context, it would mean the winner of the Big East tournament. Per Wapedia, "The Big East Men's Basketball Tournament determines the Big East Conference champion and the winner of the conference's automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament." Wikipedia says the same thing here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Eas...all_Tournament

Absent anything else, I could understand Betonline's position. There are other factors though which make this prop very ambiguous, and I can understand the player's position as well.

The Big East site lists 2 champions for basketball - regular season and post-season at this link: http://www.bigeast.org/ViewArticle.d...ATCLID=1583916

Clearly, the Big East sees them both as a "championship". But which did Betonline intend? Or did Betonline even know there were two different ways to grade this wager?

Regardless of what Betonline thought, what matters is "what would a reasonable person" think? In this thread, I'd have to call Chris@TheGreek the voice of reason. Greek doesn't often have problems like this though, because their rules are very clear - they frequently use explanations in the prop wording and in teh rules.

Two factors make it look like the player was betting on the regular season. First, the accepted odds were "at market" - similar to Greek's - for the regular season championship. Second, the original date of the event was March 1, not March 15th. These two factors would make most people (including the player here) think they were betting on the regular season championship.

I can fully understand Betonline here. In changing the date, they were probably trying to clarify that it intended this wager to be on the tournament. I think it's likely that Betonline wasn't quite sure itself until recently, and then it made its best guess of what this wager meant.

The future as worded can certainly be ambiguous. However, it is the sportsbook's job to make sure any wager it accepts has only one way to be graded. Beonline failed to do that in this instance.
I hope Betonline takes another longer look at this one. While it's not as black and white as some people say, I think the player has a legitimate gripe.

[tomcowley]

Offering both of the SEC divisions, but not SEC as a whole, also makes this a slam dunk. If they intended tournaments, they would only offer the latter. They're arguing that their props, all identically worded, are actually for different things. Some downie copied a prop from Greek, badly. Some (other?) downie is now ignoring basic logic, probably to give BoL the best financial outcome.

[Chuck Sims]

Chris@TheGreek posted because he suspects BetOnLine copied their odds for the regular season champion. The date for the wager to be graded also lines up with the reg season ending.

As posted by many posters here, BetOnLine had the same wording for the East & West divisions for the SEC. This blows away any attempt by the stiffs at BOL to say "you know what we meant".

Clear case of a stiff job here.

[ForgetWallStreet]

I know for a fact that BoDog and Sportsbetting.Com ripped these same odds from the Greek too, and I'd lay 10,000 to win 1 that they managed to grade them properly based on the results of the regular season. Shame on BOL & SBR if these players don't wind up getting paid.

[Chris@thegreek]

Only way BOL would be right in this case is if they kept the odds open for Dec, Jan, Feb and Some of March and closed them when Post Season Tournaments started, which I doubt happened as we put Post Season Odds up 3-6-8 on the major conferences and if you looked at Reg Season to Post Season odds were totally different

Syr was +1200 to win Big East Reg Season and +175 to win post

Cal was +600 to win Pac 10 and +165 to win post

and SEC were list every team as unlike Reg Season which is split by East and West

Post Season is every team is combined




But looking at odds players bet they are exactly the same I opened on those teams

[HedgeHog]

I can understand Betonline's position. If you use the phrase "Big East Champion" with no other context, it would mean the winner of the Big East tournament. Per Wapedia, "The Big East Men's Basketball Tournament determines the Big East Conference champion and the winner of the conference's automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament." Wikipedia says the same thing here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Eas...all_Tournament

Absent anything else, I could understand Betonline's position. There are other factors though which make this prop very ambiguous, and I can understand the player's position as well.

The Big East site lists 2 champions for basketball - regular season and post-season at this link: http://www.bigeast.org/ViewArticle.d...ATCLID=1583916

Clearly, the Big East sees them both as a "championship". But which did Betonline intend? Or did Betonline even know there were two different ways to grade this wager?

Regardless of what Betonline thought, what matters is "what would a reasonable person" think? In this thread, I'd have to call Chris@TheGreek the voice of reason. Greek doesn't often have problems like this though, because their rules are very clear - they frequently use explanations in the prop wording and in teh rules.

Two factors make it look like the player was betting on the regular season. First, the accepted odds were "at market" - similar to Greek's - for the regular season championship. Second, the original date of the event was March 1, not March 15th. These two factors would make most people (including the player here) think they were betting on the regular season championship.

I can fully understand Betonline here. In changing the date, they were probably trying to clarify that it intended this wager to be on the tournament. I think it's likely that Betonline wasn't quite sure itself until recently, and then it made its best guess of what this wager meant.

The future as worded can certainly be ambiguous. However, it is the sportsbook's job to make sure any wager it accepts has only one way to be graded. Beonline failed to do that in this instance.
I hope Betonline takes another longer look at this one. While it's not as black and white as some people say, I think the player has a legitimate gripe.

But it is. No Book puts out college hoops "tourney" odds in November. Next consider that BOL copied The Greek's prop. Further, The Greek paid out on regular season champions as they should have. Plus some of the props were on divisions which can only mean regular season. This is not black or white. It's about green ($$$). SBR would be all over any non-sponsor Book that tried to pull this BS. It's one of the easiest disputes to resolve if you're objective.

[BigDaddy]

justin is one smooth cat.


he wouldn't be a lawyer would he?

[middy]

It's this kind of crap that keeps people away from online gambling. I understand scraping odds if you're unable to come up with the #'s yourself. BUT YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE OFFERING.

Like Chris said, no book offers conference tourney odds in November. Swallow your pride and admit your bookmaking staff has no idea what they're doing, aside from regurgitating what the competition has put out. As everyone has repeated ad nauseum, you cannot argue a 'grey area' when you're posting division odds (which can NEVER be decided by a tournament) with the same wording as the rest of your futures.

As for SBR, it's absolutely disgusting that the so-called protectorate of online gamblers has allowed advertising revenue to keep them from any measured response to this besides "we're looking into this".

Pay this man out yesterday.

[Bill Dozer]

Middy, You havent been around long enough (...or maybe you have) to see advertisers come down from the site or be downgraded while a banner is on the forum. SBR isn't driven by ad money and is by a reputation of integirty. There is little benefit to judging a book that is willing to consider and respond to the points made in open discussion. If anything, SBR should have discussed the complaint with upper mgt sooner.

I'm confident BetOnline will pay the player's winnings. Hopefully we hear that is the case today.

[Justin7]

I'm confident BetOnline will pay the player's winnings. Hopefully we hear that is the case today.

It's always good when the good guys win.

[middy]

Thanks Bill.

I've followed SBR for years and while I feel you guys mostly provide a great service, that somebody dropped the ball along the way here. If this is cleared up soon and the player in paid out, you'll have nothing but my praise. That said, you have to understand that there will always be concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest between SBR and having to defend their advertisers/source of revenue.

[Bill Dozer]

Thanks Bill.

I've followed SBR for years and while I feel you guys mostly provide a great service, that somebody dropped the ball along the way here. If this is cleared up soon and the player in paid out, you'll have nothing but my praise. That said, you have to understand that there will always be concerns regarding potential conflicts of interest between SBR and having to defend their advertisers/source of revenue.

I do but everything is archived in the forum and on SBR search. SBR has a 10 year history of taking on promoters and their sponsors who collaborate on scamming players or covering up the right decision. That's why books want to be here. BetOnline has always stressed they are open to mediation.

[HedgeHog]

Disappointed that BOL couldn't figure this out on their own, but equally proud that SBR is taking the right course. TY, Bill.

[skrtelfan]

I can understand Betonline's position. If you use the phrase "Big East Champion" with no other context, it would mean the winner of the Big East tournament. Per Wapedia, "The Big East Men's Basketball Tournament determines the Big East Conference champion and the winner of the conference's automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament." Wikipedia says the same thing here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Eas...all_Tournament

Absent anything else, I could understand Betonline's position. There are other factors though which make this prop very ambiguous, and I can understand the player's position as well.

The Big East site lists 2 champions for basketball - regular season and post-season at this link: http://www.bigeast.org/ViewArticle.d...ATCLID=1583916

Clearly, the Big East sees them both as a "championship". But which did Betonline intend? Or did Betonline even know there were two different ways to grade this wager?

You ignored the most obvious point. Why would they offer a line on the SEC's individual divisions rather than the overall SEC tournament if they meant for these wagers to be for the entire tournament?

It's obvious that some lackey copied the odds from the Greek having no idea what they were copying, so I'm sure "what Betonline thought" is no more advanced than "Mmm... donuts," but any reasonable person would assume those odds were for the regular season since the SEC was broken down into divisions.

[Patrick McIrish]

We have nothing to do with BOS. That thread is finished.

The regional championships are determined by the regional tournaments; the only thing being on top for the season gets you is a spot in the Championships, like Syracuse got, who then promptly lost. Hence.

Don't address this drivel to me you self-righteous twat!! Contrary to what SBR is saying you aren't partially wrong, you are 100% wrong. You're making this outfit look like a JOKE right now. I find it hard to believe you aren't top dog over there, no way your bosses are reading this and not reeling you in. Nobody over there understands college basketball?? Nobody over there understands how to deal a prop with an 8th grade level of clarity? I'm going to put my hat back on before you piss down the back of my neck again and tell me it's raining, this is atrocious this is allowed to go on by a so-called B+ book here at SBR. I'm going to go run around the block a couple times before I get angry but this is pathetic John, absolutely pathetic! Welcome back Clive, I can see nothing's changed, be careful with your parlays men, they may get regraded in the coming months.