[ABEHONEST]

Bodog is the absolute best book. I love them. I recommend everyone sign up there. Did I mention that I think they're the best?
--VeggieDog
--Account #1478963250

No USA players, though? Right?

[4sees]

Exactly why it's not worth the risk (not just winning the wager, but actually getting paid), to send large sums offshore. If any of them decide to not pay for whatever bogus reason they claim/close up shop, you are at their mercy. Brings back nightmares of many books, some that were high rated for years, that absconded with the loot.

By the time WSEX closed their doors, players were owed over $1 million. The sportsbook closed its doors in April, 2013. It is also reported that they did not give their employees their final paychecks.
The message left on their homepage of WSEX was this:

“Dear WSEX customer,
We have been forced to halt business activities at this time due to inadequate capitol resources. The financial position of the company is currently under review and we will keep you informed as to the future plans for WSEX and the repayment or transfer of your balances.
We sinisterly apologize for this unfortunate situation and will be doing everything we can to rectify it as soon as possible.
-WSEX Management

Soon after the message was posted, WSEX went completely offline.

[4sees]

No USA players, though? Right?

When the U.S. Feds shutdown the bodog.com website, I believe they then created bovada.lv, which is the bodog of the USA now. Though to me bodog and bovada are one and the same site, lines, offerings, etc., I seem to recall they sold the US accounts/bovada to someone else that now owns it.

[KittiP]

Mhh let met think about. Why didn't I place this bet at a highly rated book?

Reason 1: My accounts at highly rated soft books are all limited to cents.
Reason 2: All the other highly rated books do not offer the matches I want to place my bets on.

So your conclusion in this case would have been: Don't place the bet at all.

My conclusion was: Place the bet at as many books as possible and hope for the best.

What happened? I placed the bet at around 15 books and 12 paid, the rest voided or made problems.

P/L in my scenario: +17k (33k have been voided, but still a nice profit)
P/L in your scenario: +0k

Would you still say it's not worth it?

Very true, good point and I am totally with you on this.

Would you still say it's not worth it? - Depends, if you did it a million times, how many times do you think you would get paid to the point that you are still in a profit.

The answer to that is probably more times than not right? Otherwise you wouldn't still be doing it.

[cashin81]

lonnie you play cyprus 2 yesterday?

they went hard.

[lonnie55]

nope

[Treppenwitz64]

Scary stuff for a book to feel entitled to unilaterally decide it has been defamed, then award itself seemingly arbitrary damages.

[thechaoz]

Wow. Just sue

[fried cheese]

lol i guess even sportsbooks think they can get away with punishing ppl for posts on the internet since ppl are getting fired for offending ppl online and even being arrested for misgendering on twitter.

[JayZ]

Depends on the jurisdiction but arbitration services these days are rarely worth bothering with where you can do legal claims online. IBAS works primarily by measuring up what a book says in its rules against how it acts. Unless there is some term relating to player conduct (!) then there shouldn't be any trade-off.

For those interested in history IBAS has its root in the 'Green Seal Service' of the Sporting Life newspaper, where readers could ask the paper to intervene in betting disputes. After the demise of the paper it became its own organisation. However, a lot of this became moot in the UK when betting again became a contract enforceable in law. I believe they claim to come down in favour of the player around a third of the time, but a lot of their cases revolve around interpretation of ambiguous hand-written betting slips in shops.

[Pinocchio]

Bodog is the absolute best book. I love them. I recommend everyone sign up there. Did I mention that I think they're the best?
--VeggieDog
--Account #1478963250

200% Cash Bonus with 1x rollover incoming...

[Pricetopher]

Oh. My. God. Wow.

[lonnie55]

Gesendet: Dienstag, 12. März 2019 um 17:13 Uhr
An: IBASTEAM
Betreff: Aw: Mr B Sxxxxxx 0066310 Wir-Wetten
Hello,


thanks for your reply.


First of all I would like you to send me my original complaint text.


Second, you said that other betting firms voided the bets, too. May I ask for evidence? I can provide evidence of several other books that regularly paid out.


Third, you say Wir-Wetten is entitled to void all the other bets of an accumulator bet which contains a price error. Can you explain why? Why do you think all the other valid bets on other matches of an accumulator bet should be voided if there is a price error at only one match which has nothing to do with the other matches? I don't see the logic behind this argumentation. Once again, please have a look at the following bets that have been voided beside the bets on the match Klingnau-Bramois:


#1 Football | DFB-Pokal | Hastedt - Borussia Mönchengladbach | Any Other Score First Half @2.60
#2 Football | Bundesliga | Borussia Mönchengladbach - Bayer Leverkusen | Draw No Bet 1 @2.00
#3 Football | Asian Games | Taiwan W - Indonesia W | Away No Goal @3.85
#4 Football | Bundesliga | Bremen - Hannover | Home Win @2.05
#5 Football | Asian Games | Taiwan W - Indonesia W | European Handicap -1 @3.00
#6 Football | Bundesliga | Hertha BSC - Nürnberg | Home Win @2.05
#7 Football | Asian Games | Iran U23 - Myanmar U23 | Double Chance X2 @4.40
#8 Football | La Liga | Getafe - Eibar | Home Win @2.05


8 undisputedly valid bets that have nothing to do with the match Klingnau-Bramois.


Fourth, you stated "the customer voiced his displeasure on a forum operated by Wir-Wetten". Two things: I posted in the forum after my efforts to resolve the case via emails have failed. Moreover the forum (Wettforum.info) is not operated by Wir-Wetten. It's the biggest German-speaking betting forum. It's a free and widely independent forum promoting more than 30 different sportsbooks and being operated by "soccer on the web KG, Pillbergstraße 55, 6136 Pill, Austria". Wettforum.info can confirm that it's not operated by Wir-Wetten. Why is Wir-Wetten claiming the opposite?


Fifth, I would like to remind you once again of the first bet slip. Please have a look at it once again:

(link deleted)

This bet slip has absolutely nothing to do with the Klingnau-Bramois match. It was randomly voided. Wir-Wetten insinuated to pay out this betslip before I contacted IBAS so they already admitted that they made a mistake by voiding that betslip. How can you accept that Wir-Wetten now legitimates the cancellation of that bet based on the argumentation that I caused a company damage in excess of the owed sum? I am betting for almost 16 years but I never heard that posting a review in a forum makes a valid claim invalid. If you assume that every negative public post causes a provable and quantifiable company damage don't you think all the companies in this world would sue the composers of negative reviews? No court on this planet would accept that a negative review which is based on facts and which intends to inform the public about an issue can be considered as a justiciable defamation. Otherwise the court rooms would be full of legal cases about negative reviews. The internet is full of negative reviews. But the court rooms are not. Why not?


Anyway, I am willing to find a solution for this case and therefore I would like to propose a compromise:


1. I reluctantly accept that all bets on the Klingnau-Bramois match will remain voided.
2. All other bets must stand and have to be paid.
3. I accept that my forum posts concerning the whole issue can be removed from the relevant forum.


You can forward this proposal to the betting company.


In the case my proposal will be rejected I will take legal action against the betting company in Alderney.


Regards,
Bastian Sxxxxxx

[lonnie55]

[lonnie55]

IBAS is useless as F

nothing but a bunch of individualized stock answers

not that I expected anything else

still disappointing


/ and yes, it was wirwetten.com as someone guessed before in this thread

[cashin81]

how is voiding a bet not a betting dispute lol

[cashin81]

i think my first book was interwetten nearly 20 yrs ago!

cant believe they are this bad after so long

[lonnie55]

i think my first book was interwetten nearly 20 yrs ago!

cant believe they are this bad after so long

wirwetten ≠ interwetten

[cashin81]

ohhhh...

[lonnie55]

Dear Bastian

Thank you for your email. AGCC can confirm that we have completed our investigations into your complaint against Wir-Wetten and support the decision made by IBAS. Wir-Wetten acted in accordance with their terms and conditions, specifically point 2.4:

Wir Wetten reserves the rights at any time, to “cancel bets and set its quotas to 1.0 should there be the suspicion that events in the bets be subject to manipulation and/or influenced by external forces; in case the bet requires combinations of several bets, the whole bet slip with be cancelled.

All players are required to agree to adhere to the terms and conditions, which you did so upon registration. Therefore, AGCC see no basis upon which to progress with your complaint.

Kind regards

Alderney Gambling Control Commission

I'm sick and tired of spending any more time on this.

Every, I mean EVERY freaking licensor from the islands Curacao, Malta, Alderney etc is a corrupt and useless authority (if you even can name it as such)

Dealing with corrupt authorities is a complete WASTE OF TIME!

[Optional]

Alderney has been quite responsive in the past.

That looks like they were only looking for any angle to not disagree with IBAS though this time.

[Barrakuda]

Mhh let met think about. Why didn't I place this bet at a highly rated book?

Reason 1: My accounts at highly rated soft books are all limited to cents.
Reason 2: All the other highly rated books do not offer the matches I want to place my bets on.

So your conclusion in this case would have been: Don't place the bet at all.

My conclusion was: Place the bet at as many books as possible and hope for the best.

What happened? I placed the bet at around 15 books and 12 paid, the rest voided or made problems.

P/L in my scenario: +17k (33k have been voided, but still a nice profit)
P/L in your scenario: +0k

Would you still say it's not worth it?

So why did the other two books void?

[lonnie55]

So why did the other two books void?

Only one other book voided (Tiptorro) but they regraded it as winner when I said that I will take legal action.

Campobet gave me a hard time to receive my winnings (extensive KYC, only one withdrawal of 1k per week, 3x turnover of deposit in the Casino because betting limits were capped to 1 EUR on any market) but they finally paid out the whole sum.

So in fact, it was only Wirwetten that voided the bets.

[lonnie55]

Alderney has been quite responsive in the past.

That looks like they were only looking for any angle to not disagree with IBAS though this time.

They basically say: If the sportsbook has a term that says this or that than it is legit to do this or that. Like any other licensor.

They didn't answer my questions at all. Just pointed to their ToS. And they repeated the statement of the book that my forum postings led to the decision not to pay (one of the five betslips).

Dear Bastian

Wir-Wetten cancelled four combined bets as follows:



Before the match began between FC Klingnau and FC Bramois, the bets on this game were cancelled due to a mistake made with the odds. The third party provider withdrew this match before it began and an investigation was conducted. You have accepted that these bets were invalid and would not be paid out.

In relation to the other bets placed on the Asian games, Wir-Wetten concluded that these bets would be paid out. The stake for these was €100 with a pay out of €825. However your excessive use of the Wettforum resulted in Wir-Wetten retaracting their offer and your account was closed. We would like to draw your attention again to point 2.4 of the terms and conditions:
Wir Wetten reserves the rights at any time, to cancel bets and set its quotas to 1.0 should there be the suspicion that events in the bets be subject to manipulation and/or influenced by external forces; in case the bet requires combinations of several bets, the whole bet slip with be cancelled.
All players are required to read and understand the terms and conditions before they accept them. AGCC supports IBAS’s decision and sees no basis upon which to progress with your complaint.

Kind regards


Alderney Gambling Control Commission

[lonnie55]

Sent: 11 June 2019 12:17
To: Info
Subject: Aw: RE: FW: IBAS Ruling relating to case 0066310



Hello,



why don't you answer my questions? I asked you:


1. Do you think it is a fair business conduct to void 15 different bets on 9 different matches within 4 days? Bets on Bundesliga, La Liga, DFB-Pokal among others:



#1 Football | DFB-Pokal | Hastedt - Borussia Mönchengladbach | Any Other Score First Half @2.60
#2 Football | Bundesliga | Borussia Mönchengladbach - Bayer Leverkusen | Draw No Bet 1 @2.00
#3 Football | Asian Games | Taiwan W - Indonesia W | Away No Goal @3.85
#4 Football | Bundesliga | Bremen - Hannover | Home Win @2.05
#5 Football | Asian Games | Taiwan W - Indonesia W | European Handicap -1 @3.00
#6 Football | Bundesliga | Hertha BSC - Nürnberg | Home Win @2.05
#7 Football | Asian Games | Iran U23 - Myanmar U23 | Double Chance X2 @4.40
#8 Football | La Liga | Getafe - Eibar | Home Win @2.05



2. You point to their ToS but I have asked you before if you think that these ToS and especially the practical application of the relevant terms are in accordance with the laws of Alderney. Moreover, do you think it is a fair business practice to void the whole betslip if only one bet on the betslip has been voided? Be aware this is not the industry standard. Industry standard is that all the other bets stand.



3. You said "However your excessive use of the Wettforum resulted in Wir-Wetten retaracting their offer". Please explain what an "excessive use" of a forum is. At first I tried to solve the issue in dialogue with the support but they said that their decision is final. So I went on to the Wettforum which Wirwetten is partnering with, posted the whole story and answered the questions that came up from other users. That was it. How is this an "excessive" use of a forum? How is that even defined and what is your opinion on that?



4. Can you explain why Wirwetten voided the first betslip? It had nothing to do with the Swiss cup match. No pricing error. No suspicious odds moves. The first bet on North Korea-Myanmar was already graded as won but 4 days later they voided the whole betslip. They later stated that they initially intended to pay out this betslip but due to my forum posts they won't. What else is this statement if not an admission of guilt? What's your comment on this?



I would like to repeat my claims:



1. I reluctantly accept that all bets on the Klingnau-Bramois match will remain voided.

2. All other bets must stand and have to be paid.

3. I accept that my forum posts concerning the whole issue can be removed from the relevant forum.

In the case that my proposal will be rejected I will take legal action against Wirwetten in Alderney.



Regards,

Bastian

Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. Juni 2019 um 09:42 Uhr
Von: "Info"
Betreff: RE: RE: FW: IBAS Ruling relating to case 0066310

Dear Bastian

AGCC will address each of your points in order.

1. You agreed to adhere to the terms and conditions upon registration. The specific term we are referring to in this instance is as follows:

Wir Wetten reserves the rights at any time, to cancel bets and set its quotas to 1.0 should there be the suspicion that events in the bets be subject to manipulation and/or influenced by external forces; in case the bet requires combinations of several bets, the whole bet slip with be cancelled.
AGCC have approved Wir-Wetten’s terms and conditions and therefore, we have no further comment regarding this point.

1. Please refer to point one, which addresses your questions in point two.

1. AGCC are not required to answer general questions. We can confirm that your comments in the forum resulted in Wir-Wetten withdrawing their offer.

1. AGCC have addressed your comments in previous emails. We are satisfied that Wir-Wetten acted accordingly and agree with IBAS’s resolution.

In conclusion, AGCC have provided you with all the relevant information from our investigations. You agreed to adhere to the terms and conditions, specifically 2.4 above. We wholly agree with IBAS’s decision and will be taking no further action on your complaint.

Kind regards

Alderney Gambling Control Commission

...

[Poisec]

Disgraceful.

[Optional]

Did the admin at Wettforum have anything to say about the ruling?

[lonnie55]

Did the admin at Wettforum have anything to say about the ruling?

He banned me because of that thing

[Optional]

.

[bitking]

...