[milwaukee mike]

lot of guarantees by dynamite

guaranteed that these would be -280 minimum OOPS WRONG
guaranteed no -250 ever OOPS WRONG

[JAKEPEAVY21]

glad you finally got paid mike

[dynamite140]

Would you had posted that had you been wrong and i been right? Probably not. The Rams/Saints line im not that surprised because of the Rams coach. I had thought i posted that but i see i did not. But still, the fact that you used week 17 games to come to an argument of the true line should be -200 was pretty bad and ignore all the other weeks.


The issue with you is you seem to talk like you know everything and say how everyone else is wrong. In the other thread, you tell people how they are wrong because its not true youwager pays only 1k btc per payout and say its 2k or 3k. You did not know some people had max 1k payouts only and assume because your max payout was 3k, others are the same. You would tell others how don't worry about a btc payout taking long because you got yours in a day or so. So you have to stop assuming because you have no issue here, that is not the same for everyone else.


Also i have never seen someone on the forum always aiding the book's side almost always. Everytime someone makes a post about a site issue whether its payout or whatnot, you seem to be always thinking the poster is a scammer. Now if they are a first time poster, obviously i understand that. But when posters have been here for a while and post this, you always would ask them questions such as trying to implicate they did something wrong. And some posters, well they probably never heard of this forum or anything like that. You think everyone who bets online even knows of sites like this... well no they don't. And the worst thing about you is you actually say things like some ppl in this site want a book to go belly up or something just to say i told you so. Umm no. For you to even think or say something like that says a lot about your character.

[milwaukee mike]

Would you had posted that had you been wrong and i been right? Probably not. The Rams/Saints line im not that surprised because of the Rams coach. I had thought i posted that but i see i did not. But still, the fact that you used week 17 games to come to an argument of the true line should be -200 was pretty bad and ignore all the other weeks.


The issue with you is you seem to talk like you know everything and say how everyone else is wrong. In the other thread, you tell people how they are wrong because its not true youwager pays only 1k btc per payout and say its 2k or 3k. You did not know some people had max 1k payouts only and assume because your max payout was 3k, others are the same. You would tell others how don't worry about a btc payout taking long because you got yours in a day or so. So you have to stop assuming because you have no issue here, that is not the same for everyone else.


Also i have never seen someone on the forum always aiding the book's side almost always. Everytime someone makes a post about a site issue whether its payout or whatnot, you seem to be always thinking the poster is a scammer. Now if they are a first time poster, obviously i understand that. But when posters have been here for a while and post this, you always would ask them questions such as trying to implicate they did something wrong. And some posters, well they probably never heard of this forum or anything like that. You think everyone who bets online even knows of sites like this... well no they don't. And the worst thing about you is you actually say things like some ppl in this site want a book to go belly up or something just to say i told you so. Umm no. For you to even think or say something like that says a lot about your character.

you talk about character, yet hijack a thread where i made a fair bet at a fair price, to imply numerous times that i was betting a bad line.

when i asked questions about the youwager guys, it was because i was told they were part of a group and one of the members of the group was recorded making those payouts in the same voice to the same bitcoin address... it wasn't because i just randomly wanted to accuse them of something.

but i am quite relieved that the worst thing about me is what i say on the sbr forum, whew! i thought it was that i was a drunk, or a bad father. thank god!

[HedgeHog]

good to hear

i just want them to grade things properly, not gonna lose sleep either way

Glad it worked out for you and surprised it took them so long to see this obvious error. Typically you need to skip CS and go straight to management in a situation like this, especially involving prop bets like yours. I hope you'll remember this in the future when one of us are on the wrong end of the Book's mistake, because you are so quick to take their side time and again. It's like you take some perverse pleasure in seeing the rest of us getting fukked. Someone else made that point in this thread earlier and I've noticed it too. Congrats to SBR for resolving this matter.

[milwaukee mike]

Glad it worked out for you and surprised it took them so long to see this obvious error. Typically you need to skip CS and go straight to management in a situation like this, especially involving prop bets like yours. I hope you'll remember this in the future when one of us are on the wrong end of the Book's mistake, because you are so quick to take their side time and again. It's like you take some perverse pleasure in seeing the rest of us getting fukked. Someone else made that point in this thread earlier and I've noticed it too. Congrats to SBR for resolving this matter.

i've taken the book's side in cases against thieves and scammers, because they hurt all of us

please give me some examples where i took a sportsbook's side against legitimate complaints... should be easy since it happens time and again

and please don't use that youwager example, unless you would agree to see things differently if you were told that they were all placing the same bets for a guy who had been banned and wanted to work around their betting and withdrawal limits, and if you were told one member of the group was taking all the money

[milwaukee mike]

here's some of my horrible examples of "taking the book's side" recently

- guy makes a parlay bet from over a year ago that lost, and now he claims bovada changed one of the bets to make it a loser
- guy gets accidentally paid twice and wants to keep it instead of returning it
that's the only ones i can think of

here's some where i took the player's side (oh no! it can't be!)

- dsi changing limits during rollover
- betus slowpaying/robbing people like usual
- mybookie making up ridiculous rules
- gtbets issues

so i sided with 1 book (youwager) that i apologized for, and will never side with again

[HedgeHog]

i've taken the book's side in cases against thieves and scammers, because they hurt all of us

please give me some examples where i took a sportsbook's side against legitimate complaints... should be easy since it happens time and again

and please don't use that youwager example, unless you would agree to see things differently if you were told that they were all placing the same bets for a guy who had been banned and wanted to work around their betting and withdrawal limits, and if you were told one member of the group was taking all the money

Thanks for being our hero. And who the fuk said anything about the YouWager case? Nice that you got that one right, as did the other 99% of us.

[milwaukee mike]

you don't want me here just say so hedgehog. still waiting for all those horrible times i defended an evil sportsbook against a mother theresa poster.

you sarcastically call me your hero, but i have done more for sbr posters than any non-mod here, and i will continue to give free tax advice, gambling advice, and sportsbook help to anyone that wants or needs it.

what are you willing to give? smarminess, condescencion, and judgement? NICE!

[dynamite140]

The thing was i asked you what were the odds on the Yes few times and you dodged the question so thats why i thought something was up. You said it was +230 in that thread where someone had the same issue and then say it was maybe +200 or so but forgot and said why does it matter? I thought that was strange because it looked like you knew what the number was and then say you dont remember and say why does it matter. Because if it was -250 for no and +230 and yes, well that is probably a bad line in terms of vig because bookmaker never puts a line like this for this type of prop. Thus the yes should be +200 to +210 or so. But that isn't anywhere bad line like if if a line was +300 and it should be -300 etc.


The youwager guys, the thing is you said this with several guys i recalled. But the thing is for some reason whenever someone has a complaint about a book and creates a thread, you always assume they did something wrong or shady. Now if you ask me what percentage is the player cheating vs the book... obviously its more the player of course. But you seem to think its like 95% player etc. The thing is when someone has been a poster here for a while, you still seem to side with book more often than not.


Also you would make certain statements and say how they aren't true like how someone says their max payout via btc with youwager is 1k and you say its 3k etc... without knowing some ppl max withdraw via btc with youwager is 1k. So you assumed the payout was the same for everyone just because yours was. Just because you never had a problem with a book doesn't mean everyone else is the same. You didn't even admit to being wrong there. Also you talk about character. You say things like others want certain books to not pay people or something like that to feel better about themselves or something like. What kind of person would even think of something like that? For you to even think something like that says a lot about your character. Obviously if a player played at a bad book even though they shouldn't and want to find a way to get paid, why would you say something like this.


Also there was an issue with someone here at nitrogen where someone had their account frozen but only had a tiny bit of btc left. I think he said something like he might have accidentally created another account and you said something like how is that even possible and assumed it was a lie and then some other poster said thats true and they done it many times by accident because clicking it once does create a new account. And these were 2 posters who i recalled were long time posters... not new accounts created recently. You were basically implicating they did something wrong without know the facts.


I recalled he said something like he said he bet like 10 dollars to 5k a game and automatically you thought it was strange. Now is that strange if he phrased it that way? Of course it does. But how do you know if he didn't place a few bets of 2k-5k a game years ago but now does not have the money to do so? Or he use to bet 10 dollars a game but then had a bigger bankroll to bet more? Or he just went all in because of a losing streak or was on a big rush and then bet 5k a game? People do tend to do that. Not everyone practices bankroll management. So just because you never bet 5k in a game, don't assume others haven't. Is it a small percentage? Of course. But you make it sound like almost noone ever did.

[dynamite140]

The point is this, anytime someone made a thread and a complaint, you seem to always implicate the player did something wrong without knowing the entire facts. Example the player that posted about nitrogen, if you look at his posts and his join date and the way he was speaking, it was obvious this player did not do anything wrong. And you just assumed he did something wrong based on some of the posts and reasoning he gave. Also some posters were agreeing with him as well with certain things so it was pretty obvious he didn't do anything. Yet you were looking for a reason on why he did something wrong such as his bet size being not normal etc when you don't even know if his big bets were from a long time ago and he bets smaller now. It was obvious this player did not do anything wrong.

[milwaukee mike]

dynamite you make some good points

always hard to get someone's tone on a post though, and sometimes it can seem like i'm being accusatory when i am just asking a question

and part of it is that over the years in the sportsbook and industry forum there have been SO MANY false statements/lies/scams by posters that i guess when it's an A+ book i play devil's advocate just because the player has been untruthful so often

with regards to that nitrogen issue, i went on nitrogen on my phone to try and recreate "accidentally" creating a new account, and it asked me for a captcha, so this was my post... if you reread it with the thought that i had no ill intentions it doesn't sound that bad

"how can you accidentally create a new account? doesn't it require entering a captcha?

i'm also confused how you are a normal user betting average amounts, yet have run 250-500btc in action? i would think average bet size would be $50, that takes a lot of bets."

[HedgeHog]

dynamite you make some good points

always hard to get someone's tone on a post though, and sometimes it can seem like i'm being accusatory when i am just asking a question

and part of it is that over the years in the sportsbook and industry forum there have been SO MANY false statements/lies/scams by posters that i guess when it's an A+ book i play devil's advocate just because the player has been untruthful so often

with regards to that nitrogen issue, i went on nitrogen on my phone to try and recreate "accidentally" creating a new account, and it asked me for a captcha, so this was my post... if you reread it with the thought that i had no ill intentions it doesn't sound that bad

"how can you accidentally create a new account? doesn't it require entering a captcha?

i'm also confused how you are a normal user betting average amounts, yet have run 250-500btc in action? i would think average bet size would be $50, that takes a lot of bets."

Keep fighting for the Books Mike, no matter how wrong you are.

[dynamite140]

The issue i have is almost everyone who post a a thread about an issue, almost everytime you question and sound like you are interrogating them. If you read some of your posts and questions and ask yourself if this was someone else who posted that... does this person seem like he is asking a question or accusing? The nitrogen guy it was beyond obvious he did not do anything wrong. If you didn't do this to almost everyone, i would not say anything at all.


Yes i know that there are many lies and scams etc by posters especially if its their 1st post. But again, you have to remember lot of ppl don't even know a forum like this exist. Not everyone goes to forums like this. Many people who doesn't know what to do, they probably just email the site etc as they don't know sites like this could help them out etc. Many times you would have someone post in behalf of a friend or they post for themselves because they get advice from a poster or someone they know about it etc. It happens quite a bit. But yes obviously majority of these threads are scammers. But when someone is a long time poster here with many posts and others agree with some of what they say and are similar in terms of long user and many posts, there should be a heavy lean towards this poster did nothing wrong.


The nitrogen thing... the line you just copied and pasted... well if you read it the way you posted it... it sounds a bit accusatory a little even with the way you phrased it. Thats the thing. If you make posts like this, other posters might not even offer help or offer insight because they think a statement like this means the OP is a liar. Such as it probably does require a captcha and OP is lying. It sounds like how can someone create an account by accident, you think we are stupid to believe it? Then they won't even give their opinion.



Also your 2nd line questions on how he is a normal user betting average amounts but run 250-500 btc in action. Well btc back then was much lower so its not that hard to run that much btc when the price was very low. He said he has been betting there for many years already. So if he bet 5k a game few times back then, well there is 20 plus btc on one bet. Then say he started betting 1 btc a day on average a day when btc was a low price. Or he bet 1 btc per game. He can easily have 10 btc in action a day easily. That is not unusual when the btc price was very low. He would easily have 300 btc in action in just a year. So there was nothing unusual about that.



Now if all his betting was recent, sure that would seem a bit fishy. But I wouldn't think much about it because ppl bet what they can. Some ppl bet everything on one bet whether they like it, or on losing streak or just on a hot streak. The average bet size varies depending on the person. I think he mentioned he no longer have the funds to bet amounts like this before but use to back then so that is pretty normal.

[HedgeHog]

The point is this, anytime someone made a thread and a complaint, you seem to always implicate the player did something wrong without knowing the entire facts. Example the player that posted about nitrogen, if you look at his posts and his join date and the way he was speaking, it was obvious this player did not do anything wrong. And you just assumed he did something wrong based on some of the posts and reasoning he gave. Also some posters were agreeing with him as well with certain things so it was pretty obvious he didn't do anything. Yet you were looking for a reason on why he did something wrong such as his bet size being not normal etc when you don't even know if his big bets were from a long time ago and he bets smaller now. It was obvious this player did not do anything wrong.

Spot on.

[milwaukee mike]

oh the irony in dynamite saying i implicate the player, in a thread where he repeatedly claimed i was betting a bad line

[milwaukee mike]

and then dynamite GUARANTEED that those lines would be -280 minimum this week

well they are still sitting at -220 and -250, and yet rather than apologize and move on, we get paragraph after paragraph repeating the same nonsense about how horrible i am

my judgement isn't perfect, nobody's is, i sincerely apologize for anything i posted that may have been too harsh

let's move on and work together to make this site as helpful as possible

[dynamite140]

So what was the line for the Yes then? Why did you say it was +230 in that thread? Did you know that was the number or you took it out of thin air? Then why did i ask you what was the yes odds and you dodge the question multiple times and then said i think it was +200 but why does it matter? It sound like you were avoiding the question... oh you know similar to how certain scammers don't want to answer certain questions where you repeated would ask them to answer the question? I find it hard to believe you forgot that number that you posted in that thread. Also for someone that knows a bit of prop betting, im surprised you would post -250 for no and +230 for yes as you know the juice for that is higher. That's why i thought +230 must been the odds for the yes.


You were incorrect in telling another poster they were wrong the youwager max payout via btc was 3k. They said it was 1k and you said they were wrong etc without knowing certain ppl have different btc payout limits. So you not going to admit your mistake there? Well if the line was in fact -250/+230, would that be close to a bad line on a prop like that with you clearly know the juice for prop bets like that? Now if you said the juice was -250 for no and yes was +200 to +210, clearly you were right in it. But you dodged that question multiple times so its wrong for me to assuming its a bad line? So if it was -250/+235, thats not a bad line on a prop like that?

[HedgeHog]

oh the irony in dynamite saying i implicate the player, in a thread where he repeatedly claimed i was betting a bad line

LOL. The Book is always right unless it involves you. The only irony is that you were actually right in this case w/o question. Funny thing is, if the misgraded bet involved anyone else, you would have your lips firmly implanted on the Book's ass--supporting their position. It's what you do.

[milwaukee mike]

LOL. The Book is always right unless it involves you. The only irony is that you were actually right in this case w/o question. Funny thing is, if the misgraded bet involved anyone else, you would have your lips firmly implanted on the Book's ass--supporting their position. It's what you do.

i apologize and promise to be better and you still continue? what do you want? one of my testicles cut off? 13 apologies instead of 2?

sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry


maybe you should check the threads where i said bets were graded wrong, even when sbr disagreed... like the betonline version of this, the tiger/mickelson bets, etc

[HedgeHog]

i apologize and promise to be better and you still continue? what do you want? one of my testicles cut off? 13 apologies instead of 2?

sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry
sorry


maybe you should check the threads where i said bets were graded wrong, even when sbr disagreed... like the betonline version of this, the tiger/mickelson bets, etc

We're good. Keep your balls, I've got my own-my wife has them stored somewhere. I am relieved Justbet finally figured out their obvious error as I play there too.

[milwaukee mike]

We're good. Keep your balls, I've got my own-my wife has them stored somewhere. I am relieved Justbet finally figured out their obvious error as I play there too.

good to hear (well actually not hear too well because they tell me i need hearing aids)
got this damn tinnitus too that has me apeshit the past couple months, so i'm sure that's partly responsible for some of my stupid posts.

justbet is great, last place i can live bet decent amounts on nba

[dynamite140]

Glad it worked out for you and surprised it took them so long to see this obvious error. Typically you need to skip CS and go straight to management in a situation like this, especially involving prop bets like yours. I hope you'll remember this in the future when one of us are on the wrong end of the Book's mistake, because you are so quick to take their side time and again. It's like you take some perverse pleasure in seeing the rest of us getting fukked. Someone else made that point in this thread earlier and I've noticed it too. Congrats to SBR for resolving this matter.

I was the one who noticed this and it seems you noticed it as well.


In that nitrogen thread, that person gave all the details and his reasoning. He still was accusing him. He said something like because you did transfers with other players even if you did nothing wrong, you are guilty by association... but it was only a few tiny amount of btc so be lucky about that. Yea... because its not your money you make a comment like this. Remember this is after the OP mentioned his reasoning and details and why his bet size varied a lot and those other details which are completely normal. He would say things like unfortunately it looks like you are going to get screwed but the way he says it, if you read the tone of it, its like he enjoys people getting screwed. Hedgehog says he notice it as well.

He also mentioned how its only money guys like its not a big deal. Yet he posted in that heritage free bet thread of how concerned he was on if he was eligible for that promo or not and needed to know before he placed the bet. For someone that says its only money guys, why would you be sweating out a 250 dollar bet that you can't cancel? Oh wait because its your bet thats why. Funny thing was you kept asking questions as it was a big deal for that freeplay bet eligibility. Also the thing was someone posted on how they hedge the other side and i forgot if they said they won or lost the hedge. But he had to make a snarky comment like you got lucky there with your win or you got unlucky there etc. But when you hear the tone of his post if someone say they loses, you could tell he wants other posters to lose and fail for some reason.


Put it this way, if another long time poster feels the same way and pointed this out, its most likely true. Again, the issue is you seem to do this to almost every poster no matter if its a long time poster or not who clearly explained everything.

[milwaukee mike]

I was the one who noticed this and it seems you noticed it as well.


In that nitrogen thread, that person gave all the details and his reasoning. He still was accusing him. He said something like because you did transfers with other players even if you did nothing wrong, you are guilty by association... but it was only a few tiny amount of btc so be lucky about that. Yea... because its not your money you make a comment like this. Remember this is after the OP mentioned his reasoning and details and why his bet size varied a lot and those other details which are completely normal.


He also mentioned how its only money guys like its not a big deal. Yet he posted in that heritage free bet thread of how concerned he was on if he was eligible for that promo or not and needed to know before he placed the bet. For someone that says its only money guys, why would you be sweating out a 250 dollar bet that you can't cancel? Oh wait because its your bet thats why. Funny thing was you kept making it like it was such a big deal. Also the thing was someone posted on how they hedge the other side and i forgot if they said they won or lost the hedge. But he had to make a snarky comment like you got lucky there with your win or you got unlucky there etc. But when you hear the tone of his post if someone say they loses, you could tell he wants other posters to lose and fail for some reason.

i was out of line, i admit

but no i never want other posters to lose and fail

in that nitrogen thread, it started out like usual "i'm just a normal small time bettor why would they ever review my account" then some more details came out, "well i did a bunch of transfers with other players" "i had multiple accounts" "i make 5k bets at times (that doesn't seem normal or small time to me)" etc

so it started smelling fishy when more details were known, and i pointed out that's why they put the account on review

as i said though i was too harsh in playing devil's advocate there

[milwaukee mike]

dynamite are we good and can move on now?

let's keep in mind that you posted 13 SEPARATE TIMES before the decision was made, suggesting that i was betting a bad line

so that certainly wasn't helpful while sbr and justbet were making a decision... just pointing out that you did exactly the same thing you are criticizing me for, except you did it to a much greater extent

but life goes on

[dynamite140]

How do you think others feel or think when you say something like unfortunately it looks like you will get screwed over even though its not your fault but be lucky its only x amount etc. Well if you never want others to lose or fail, then why did Hedgehog notice the same thing that i pointed out earlier. If others look at those lines you mentioned, most would agree that is what is meant.


Doing transfers with other players is not strange. I dont think he ever said he had multiple accounts. He said he had created multiple account by accident because clicking create account instead of login automatically creates an account and another long time poster confirmed yea you can create multiple accounts by accident easily by clicking create account with 1 click. Yea he if said he is normal small time bettor and bet 5k at times, sure that sound not normal. But he also mentioned he had an account there for years so most likely this was back then and not anytime recent. So from that, well its pretty likely he is telling the truth.


You have been harsh on almost every poster that has started a thread. Some have justification easily as you could clearly see the OP is lying. But some examples are clear cut that the OP is telling the truth and because of what you say, other posters on this thread might dismiss the thread and not help the OP out because of your comments. That is my issue here and im sure hedgehog notice this as well.

[milwaukee mike]

you're right dynamite, i've been out of line and off, i will be better... didn't really want to use lack of sleep and tinnitus as an excuse, but i certainly have been pretty damn grouchy lately getting hardly any sleep for months. so i will keep that in mind before i hit "post".

you've pointed out my failures multiple times, and yet not acknowledged that you posted 13 times in this thread suggesting i was betting a bad line (false) or scalping at betonline (false)

[dynamite140]

I had no idea the number of times i posted in your thread. I just know we went on and off in it. Was i implying you may be betting a bad line? Of course i was. Because i asked you what was the line for the YES and you ignored the question multiple times. What was i suppose to think? If you ask that person a question and they dodged it multiple times, do you think you are trying to hide some information? Well probably yea since this is a simple straight question. You didn't say immediately it was +230 or I don't remember what it was etc yet you posted like the day before it was +230 in that other thread with the similar issue. Had you said it was +200 or +210 like that, I immediately would have said the book is wrong and there was no doubt about it.


I think it took you like the 3rd reply or so before you said i think it was +200 or whatever but why does it matter... yet someone like you know clearly well the other side of the line would matter. If it was -250 and +250 obviously you know its a bad line. If its +270 the other side its a bad line. If its +200 to +210, obviously that line is legit. If its +230, thats something bookmaker would never put up with juice that low for a prop like that. Now is that a bad line... well its very borderline in terms of prop betting line but obviously you can't cancel this bet even if it was -250/230.


Well if what i did to you you didn't like, remember you did this to a huge number to a lot of posters here. They probably didn't like being interrogated when they knew they were right and it wasn't helping their case. The thing was that nitrogen guy basically told everything and you still think he was doing something wrong etc. Thats the issue here and seems hedgehog didn't like that as well.

[milwaukee mike]

I had no idea the number of times i posted in your thread. I just know we went on and off in it. Was i implying you may be betting a bad line? Of course i was. Because i asked you what was the line for the YES and you ignored the question multiple times. What was i suppose to think? If you ask that person a question and they dodged it multiple times, do you think you are trying to hide some information? Well probably yea since this is a simple straight question. You didn't say immediately it was +230 or I don't remember what it was etc yet you posted like the day before it was +230 in that other thread with the similar issue. Had you said it was +200 or +210 like that, I immediately would have said the book is wrong and there was no doubt about it.


I think it took you like the 3rd reply or so before you said i think it was +200 or whatever but why does it matter... yet someone like you know clearly well the other side of the line would matter. If it was -250 and +250 obviously you know its a bad line. If its +270 the other side its a bad line. If its +200 to +210, obviously that line is legit. If its +230, thats something bookmaker would never put up with juice that low for a prop like that. Now is that a bad line... well its very borderline in terms of prop betting line but obviously you can't cancel this bet even if it was -250/230.


Well if what i did to you you didn't like, remember you did this to a huge number to a lot of posters here. They probably didn't like being interrogated when they knew they were right and it wasn't helping their case. The thing was that nitrogen guy basically told everything and you still think he was doing something wrong etc. Thats the issue here and seems hedgehog didn't like that as well.

-250/+230 isn't a bad line

not one gambler would agree that is a bad line, just because they didn't put enough juice to it

and i dodged it because i didn't realize in the other thread i made up a line and said it could've been +230/-250... i honestly didn't know what the yes was at the time, i saw the no went down to -250 and bet it

[milwaukee mike]

let's keep in mind i made at least 100 bets that day, so to remember exactly what the odds were on that yes would've been beyond my memory recognition skills

[dynamite140]

The thing is you been posting like this to others for a very long time. Even hedgehog says the same thing. Don't say because you are grouchy and that is the reason for you posting like this.


I am incorrect about the -280 line on the odds for the upcoming nfl games for 2 point conversion. I am incorrect on this as the patriots/chiefs game i did not expect a line this low. The rams/saints i was not thinking that well as the rams coach is different and it could be that low. But i am incorrect here when i say it should be minimum -280 odds. But this to me has to be the lowest odds for 2 pt conversion if i had to guess for the nfl ever.


Well if the odds are indeed -250/+200 or +210 for that eagles/saints game... then yes i am wrong. If it was -250 for no and +230 for yes, then i dont think im that wrong as that is bad line on a prop bet but they cannot change it as the reasoning they gave you for the cancelled bet would make it look very bad on them. I do not know if you scalped on the yes at +250 or bettor odds at betonline. You can say you didn't or you did... who knows. That has nothing to do with it and the reason i said that was because you mentioned it was +250 odds at betonline.

[milwaukee mike]

The thing is you been posting like this to others for a very long time. Even hedgehog says the same thing. Don't say because you are grouchy and that is the reason for you posting like this.


I am incorrect about the -280 line on the odds for the upcoming nfl games for 2 point conversion. I am incorrect on this as the patriots/chiefs game i did not expect a line this low. The rams/saints i was not thinking that well as the rams coach is different and it could be that low. But i am incorrect here when i say it should be minimum -280 odds. But this to me has to be the lowest odds for 2 pt conversion if i had to guess for the nfl ever.


Well if the odds are indeed -250/+200 or +210 for that eagles/saints game... then yes i am wrong. If it was -250 for no and +230 for yes, then i dont think im that wrong as that is bad line on a prop bet but they cannot change it as the reasoning they gave you for the cancelled bet would make it look very bad on them. I do not know if you scalped on the yes at +250 or bettor odds at betonline. You can say you didn't or you did... who knows. That has nothing to do with it and the reason i said that was because you mentioned it was +250 odds at betonline.

you're right, i'm sorry again, even sorry that my apology wasn't good enough

can we move on or do we have to go another 50 posts?

[dynamite140]

The -250/+230 odds on a prop bet if you ask is it a bad line if its a yes or no question.... the answer would be no of course.


How would i know you had over 100 bets that day? A prop bet like that is rare and i would assume you probably know what the other side odds on the yes was as there aren't many bets like this type.


Well if its a long time poster on this forum especially the ones that has lots of posts, just don't make statements where it would look like they are scamming or lying without getting the full story. Remember anytime you do this, other posters might not even help out or reply to back this player if they see even 1 post like this. This forum is to help others who have an issue with their sportsbook complaint. We can move on now.

[Optional]

For what it is worth, I think you guys are going overboard on MilwaukeMike.

He doesn't post in this sub forum very regularly usually to be "always on the books side" enough to be even noticed.

Plus it was less than 6 months ago I made comment to him almost the opposite of you guys, that he had seemed to have been 100% negative for a long time!


He has just disagreed with the consensus on that Youwager case that I have seen. Not sure which complaints you could be referring to apart from that one to justify the "always does it" claims.


I'm mostly mentioning this as it is almost amusing to see you guys crucifying him for daring to have an opinion the book may be correct there. And are now making broad statements that he is "always" doing this or that.

It's like a lynch mob here if anyone dares not go along with the outraged types. And the default cry baby complaint is "Why do you defend the book?".


It's called integrity that makes you want to defend the truth, whoever it helps.

It simply proves that you guys are the ones that are blindly biased when that is your argument against an opinion!


It's the same thing in here anytime any poster dares argue that a book may not be doing wrong. If a poster is silly enough to do it a few times, you guys drive them away. Every time.

I have to put up with the abuse and still speak the truth as I work here. But over the near 5 years I've been doing this, not one single open minded regular who dares agree with books more than 2 or 3 times has lasted in this sub forum