[JoeCool20]

amazing how every single time the vast majority of posters always come to the players defense.In reality,about 80% of the time the book is in the right,c'mon guy's,wise up

LOL What a flaming ignorant "guess" at something that you have NO IDEA whether it is true or not!


Have you not looked at the first part of this thread? You told the player he was "taking a shot"

and 3 other posters immediately called the poor guy a "scammer"!! Dude he made a bet in the SIXTH inning and

they waited until the cubs hit a grand slam in the EIGHTH inning before they voided his bets!


You are a fellow player dude! If you are going to make an ignorant guess about who is right 80% of the time, then

why don't you make an ignorant guess that the PLAYER is right 80% of the time?!

[rangerz2478]

Optional, respectfully, I don't understand why you are getting on OP for dwelling on the fact that they didn't cancel until 2 innings later. That IS a substantial factor here when it comes to live betting. Of course, we need to know how off the lines were when placed (if at all, really doesn't seem worthy of a cancel based on the info we have so far)

But OP's point about being ok with it if it was cancelled shortly after is a completely valid one in live betting. For pregame betting, as long as a wager is cancelled BEFORE the game starts, then I can live with it. But live betting wise, whether then player is making a trade off another site, or a regular one book wager, cancelling 2 innings later is a big deal.

[Optional]

Optional, respectfully, I don't understand why you are getting on OP for dwelling on the fact that they didn't cancel until 2 innings later. That IS a substantial factor here when it comes to live betting. Of course, we need to know how off the lines were when placed (if at all, really doesn't seem worthy of a cancel based on the info we have so far)

But OP's point about being ok with it if it was cancelled shortly after is a completely valid one in live betting. For pregame betting, as long as a wager is cancelled BEFORE the game starts, then I can live with it. But live betting wise, whether then player is making a trade off another site, or a regular one book wager, cancelling 2 innings later is a big deal.

I guess I do sound like that in reply to Bubba. Unfortunately Bubba takes shots at me and either lies or makes false implications on the reg. So I do admit to being annoyed almost any time I am forced to respond to him.

As I said in reply to OP, after his further explanation of why the 3 min thing was so important to him in his fist post, I do now get why he was so worried about it. He was used it it one way, it changed unexpectedly for him.


Again I get it, but there was no way a BOL rep or probably even the SBR rep taking complaints would have acted on that rant. As they can do nothing if a platform error occurred and took 20 mins to ID/fix. That's just bad luck this time. No use arguing they should not cancel an error in that circumstance, and just as useless to be questioning their bona fides in response.

Just explain how he placed the bet in good faith and did not think it was out of line with the market, so even if it was, believes they should still honor a win at 'correct odds'.


They may not help him out still. But I'd be pretty confident if he started out that way, instead of multiple messages implying they have lied to him, he'd probably already have this solved to his satisfaction.

[bubba]

I guess I do sound like that in reply to Bubba. Unfortunately Bubba takes shots at me and either lies or makes false implications on the reg. So I do admit to being annoyed almost any time I am forced to respond to him.

As I said in reply to OP, after his further explanation of why the 3 min thing was so important to him in his fist post, I do now get why he was so worried about it. He was used it it one way, it changed unexpectedly for him.


Again I get it, but there was no way a BOL rep or probably even the SBR rep taking complaints would have acted on that rant. As they can do nothing if a platform error occurred and took 20 mins to ID/fix. That's just bad luck this time. No use arguing they should not cancel an error in that circumstance, and just as useless to be questioning their bona fides in response.

Just explain how he placed the bet in good faith and did not think it was out of line with the market, so even if it was, believes they should still honor a win at 'correct odds'.


They may not help him out still. But I'd be pretty confident if he started out that way, instead of multiple messages implying they have lied to him, he'd probably already have this solved to his satisfaction.

The last lie I made was?????? I have said this before, there is 1 person I know of on this earth who appears to have a personal problem with me. I have also offered to donate $ to charity in the past based on the number of "lies" you have caught me in. I heard crickets out of you after that.

I aim for honesty and the truth whether it makes a sponsor look good or not. No agenda other than the truth and fairness. Optional has a problem with me for some reason. I assume its related to that.

I dont remember my post from a few days ago and am not going back and read it here. But can someone point out the untruthfulness or misrepresentation I have made in this thread? Ill own it and apologize if it indeed happened.

[Optional]

The last lie I made was?????? I have said this before, there is 1 person I know of on this earth who appears to have a personal problem with me. I have also offered to donate $ to charity in the past based on the number of "lies" you have caught me in. I heard crickets out of you after that.

I aim for honesty and the truth whether it makes a sponsor look good or not. No agenda other than the truth and fairness. Optional has a problem with me for some reason. I assume its related to that.

I dont remember my post from a few days ago and am not going back and read it here. But can someone point out the untruthfulness or misrepresentation I have made in this thread? Ill own it and apologize if it indeed happened.

You do not aim for truth!!! You bend the truth to make points a lot.

The last lie I actually called you out about was when you posted SBR had declared a book was right to steal off someone (SBR had said NOTHING about who was right or wrong at that point).

Even in that thread you lied over and again denying you said it. In the same thread it still showed!


And if you don't want to hear my thoughts about you, best you just not tell me what you think of me, or suggest I say things I have not!

Believe all books all the time(with 0 proof)? A-f? Or just sponsors?

A technical problem does not automatically create an obvious bad line

I HAVE to be here. You can choose to leave. If you continue to take shots at me, eventually you wont have a choice anymore.

And when I have not said something is a bad line or not, addressing me with a statement like this suggesting I have done that, is your standard MO when it comes to smearing me or books on here. YOU JUST MAKE CRAP UP. That's why I call you a liar.

[eaglesfan371]

Can we put opinions aside and please get a BOL manager to address this already. It would be nice if they took a proactive approach to dealing with customers like Heritage does with their Heritage Insider account.

As others have stated, the cancellation innings later is not acceptable. Late in game those odds look perfectly fine. Considering these are large wagers it looks like a freeroll by BOL unless somewhat provides clear evidence otherwise.

Bubba if SBR refuses to address your complaint, whether Optional is involved or not, there are other groups that can/will reach out to get answers. I am not on good terms with Optional either and share a somewhat mutual opinion but arguing further with him will do no good and just create spam on the forum.

[Optional]

Can we put opinions aside and please get a BOL manager to address this already. It would be nice if they took a proactive approach to dealing with customers like Heritage does with their Heritage Insider account.

As others have stated, the cancellation innings later is not acceptable. Late in game those odds look perfectly fine. Considering these are large wagers it looks like a freeroll by BOL unless somewhat provides clear evidence otherwise.

If a book has an outage on their live betting platform, and it takes 20 min to rectify and cancel the bets, it is acceptable by fair industry practice.

He (and you) can argue against that as long as you like. You won't get anywhere.


I asked the OP to reply to his complaint submission and tell the dispute agent it's not just about taking more than 3 mins to cancel as it sounds, and why he believes his bets are not bad odds/lines despite the outage.

And also suggested how he might handle the book to get a result from them directly.

But you can only lead the horse to water. He can choose to do what he wants.

[bubba]

You do not aim for truth!!! You bend the truth to make points a lot.

The last lie I actually called you out about was when you posted SBR had declared a book was right to steal off someone (SBR had said NOTHING about who was right or wrong at that point).

Even in that thread you lied over and again denying you said it. In the same thread it still showed!


And if you don't want to hear my thoughts about you, best you just not tell me what you think of me, or suggest I say things I have not!



I HAVE to be here. You can choose to leave. If you continue to take shots at me, eventually you wont have a choice anymore.

And when I have not said something is a bad line or not, addressing me with a statement like this suggesting I have done that, is your standard MO when it comes to smearing me or books on here. YOU JUST MAKE CRAP UP. That's why I call you a liar.

So the last lie you remember me saying was 6 months ago when I clearly made an exaggeration in regards to sbrs complacence. Pathological liar indeed. heehee.
\
I asked a question in this thread when quoting you. The question is the lie? The obvious statement that followed it? I honestly have no idea what your problem is in general or specifically in this thread. Conversation is good and important for the players and the upstanding books to survive. Silencing me (and other posters who disagree with you or question you at times) would be great for shady books and books that make questionable decisions. I dont get what the problem is. Honestly. I disagree with you getting upset over my exaggeration made 6 months ago with sbr looking the other way but i guess i can see how one could get offended.(i dont even remember what book or case we are talking about). But in this thread? really? what you quoted above is out of line on my part? wow.

[Optional]

The question is the shot at me Bubba "Believe all books all the time(with 0 proof)? A-f? Or just sponsors?"

The next line suggesting I said it was bad line is your lie in this case. "A technical problem does not automatically create an obvious bad line"


Now please stop cluttering up this thread and move on.

[bubba]

If a book has an outage on their live betting platform, and it takes 20 min to rectify and cancel the bets, it is acceptable by fair industry practice.

He (and you) can argue against that as long as you like. You won't get anywhere.


I asked the OP to reply to his complaint submission and tell the dispute agent it's not just about taking more than 3 mins to cancel as it sounds, and why he believes his bets are not bad odds/lines despite the outage.

And also suggested how he might handle the book to get a result from them directly.

But you can only lead the horse to water. He can choose to do what he wants.

So any book, can just claim to have had a "live betting outage" and cancel any pending wager they like 20 minutes later? 2 hours later? 3 days later? No proof needed? We are just on the honor system? I am asking these respectfully. Trying to have a dialogue on the topic please.

[eaglesfan371]

Why is it the player's responsibility to prove the line was right?

We are talking about $4-5k here. This is not just $10. Betonline should be able to provide explanation of why the lines were supposedly wrong. Provide hypothetical examples and then Bubba can provide his version of evidence. Teams up 1 run with 2-3 innings left to bat are generally +150 to +200 to be -1.5. None of the lines seems outrageous.

What I imagine happened, book took 4-5k in action, a lines manager was called to review, he did not like the action and canceled the bets. Similar to how william hill bans winning players. These books report to no one, no new jersey state requiring them to honor their bets. Live betting failure, oh well consider it like a bug bounty then. The lines were not outrageous.

Hell, this past weekend, I wagered $1200 on a prop "MLB player vs player total bases", their maximum, paying INSANE -122/-122 juice, the bet pushed and now I can't bet h2h. Linesmaker banned my account from using the prop builder. Previous $100 bets never were an issue but 1k+ bet always brings attention. If OP had bet $10 he wouldve had winners.

[bubba]

Why is it the player's responsibility to prove the line was right?

We are talking about $4-5k here. This is not just $10. Betonline should be able to provide explanation of why the lines were supposedly wrong. Provide hypothetical examples and then Bubba can provide his version of evidence. Teams up 1 run with 2-3 innings left to bat are generally +150 to +200 to be -1.5. None of the lines seems outrageous.

What I imagine happened, book took 4-5k in action, a lines manager was called to review, he did not like the action and canceled the bets. Similar to how william hill bans winning players. These books report to no one, no new jersey state requiring them to honor their bets. Live betting failure, oh well consider it like a bug bounty then. The lines were not outrageous.

Hell, this past weekend, I wagered $1200 on a prop "MLB player vs player total bases", their maximum, paying INSANE -122/-122 juice, the bet pushed and now I can't bet h2h. Linesmaker banned my account from using the prop builder. Previous $100 bets never were an issue but 1k+ bet always brings attention. If OP had bet $10 he wouldve had winners.

You are right. Of course it's not the players responsibility to prove a line good.

I'm not the OP btw. But I have had super questionable cancellations by this group of books

[Optional]

Why is it the player's responsibility to prove the line was right?

We are talking about $4-5k here. This is not just $10. Betonline should be able to provide explanation of why the lines were supposedly wrong. Provide hypothetical examples and then Bubba can provide his version of evidence. Teams up 1 run with 1-3 innings left to bat are generally +150 to +200 to be -1.5. None of the lines seems outrageous.

If BOL say their live platform went down for 20 mins and they cancelled betting over that time, sorry if it offends you, but I do accept that until there is some reason to question it. And I certainly don't start any negotiation process by demanding proof.

And I also did not say the player had responsibility to prove the line was good.


Look at the thread title. Look at his first post. Look at his conversations with CS. He hardly makes mention of the odds being right, it's all about this red herring issue of the cancel not happening fast enough.

All I have said is to stop that and just explain why he thinks his bets are good lines!



Bubba wants to twist that good advice into "You believe them without proof as its a sponsor". Bubba makes his own problems with books by acting exactly how I am counselling the OP not to act. By his own post here he will keep demanding proof for 20 emails in a row.

[JoeCool20]

Previous $100 bets never were an issue but 1k+ bet always brings attention. If OP had bet $10 he would've had winners.

Great point. If he bet $10, then they don't cheat him 2 innings later, they just pay it.

But as it stands, waiting 20 minutes (or 2 innings) until they hit a grand slam, and then cancelling the bet

is as obvious as it gets that they free-rolled him! They took the bet and then sat there and waited to see what happened!

Then when they saw the grand slam, they immediately cheated and cancelled the bet!

If the OTHER team hit a grand slam 2 innings later, does ANYBODY on earth think they cancel the bet and return

his thousands of dollars to him? LOL

[JoeCool20]

If a book has an outage on their live betting platform, and it takes 20 min to rectify and cancel the bets, it is acceptable by fair industry practice.

He (and you) can argue against that as long as you like. You won't get anywhere.
.

WOW! Opti, are you serious? 20 mins on live bet cancels is "Acceptable"?
If that is true then who the hell would EVER make a live bet? I know you won't say the "cheat" word
against the S-books because of obvious reasons sir. But if that's true then that means that the books have a
"20 minute cheat window" on EVERY live bet that they accept!
That means they can wait 20 minutes to see what happens in EVERY game and then cheat a player out of their
winnings ANY time they want on live bets! As long as it is within 20 minutes? Is that really "acceptable" in the industry?

Who the hell would EVER send their money overseas to strangers and make live bets if the S-book gets a
"20 minute cheat window" on every live bet that is made?? Because you'd have to know good and well that
they will pay off all the games with little amounts bet, but if you bet big, then they'd sit there for 20 minutes
and see what happened in the game, and if they were losing (like a grand slam got hit against them within 20 mins)
then they would cancel the bet and cheat the player! Somebody could say: "No they wouldn't do that." All they want!


But it is the "trust" thing again! Who the hell would send their money overseas to a bunch of strangers knowing
that they had to "hope" or "trust" that the S-book wouldn't use the "20 minute cheat window" to cancel big winners??

[eaglesfan371]

If the entire live betting was down / giving bad lines for 20 minutes, all bets cancelled during then, where are all the other unhappy customers? 100,000+ daily users on Betonline platform, live betting is huge, accounts for 30% of state bets so far by statistics. I'd imagine tens, if not hundreds of unhappy customers with their bets cancelled posting here but it looks like only one who was affected had 5 very large wagers cancelled. Coincidence? Doubtful.

With that I am going to exit out the conversation. If I felt freerolled for 5k, a month salary or more for most people I would be unprofessional too.

However, I am ignoring all the drama and focusing on the specific situation. The lines of the bet were reflective the game situation and fair odds within reason. Thus, the bets should be paid.

Since SBR has a strong relationship with many books, why not ask Bookmaker or another sharp book what their live odds were at the time of the involved wagers? I think it would be a fair attempt to help/neutral the player to prove either side.

[Optional]

WOW! Opti, are you serious? 20 mins on live bet cancels is "Acceptable"?

If it's a genuine outage, yes.

How could they do anything sooner?



Plenty of Euro books run incident feed data against their live betting logs overnight and cancel stuff the next day, routinely.

You guys have no idea how good these offshore books are in reality.

[JoeCool20]

If it's a genuine outage, yes.

How could they do anything sooner?

Dude already said they very often do it sooner. Within 2 or 3 minutes, and he had NO problem with those cancellations.

He has got a BIG problem with waiting until he gets a grand slam hit to his advantage and then they suddenly

pop up and say the are cancelling his huge winning bets!

[JoeCool20]

You guys have no idea how good these offshore books are in reality.

LOL You KNOW good and well that I know how "good these offshore books are"!!

They just saved themselves 5 grand by shit-shanking this guy right after a grand slam got hit!

[JoeCool20]

It is stories like these that make me so happy about the times that I used to find ways to put one up the ass of these

sorry-ass cheating S-books! I'd say: "Remember when you cheated me? Well how do you like GETTING cheated?"

LOL But It is hard to cheat them now! You can only GET cheated by them!

I wish I could find a way to shit-shank BOL out of 5 grand!

I'd say "Remember when you flat out free rolled a guy and then cheated him out of his $5 grand right after he

got a grand slam hit for his team? Well now you just got cheated out of $5 grand! So you are even!" LOL

[JoeCool20]

I'm going to bed.

[moojoo]

Is there any evidence bol was out for period of 20 minutes. Are all other bets made by other customers canceled. What Euro books cancel live bets tomorrow. Name 1 from top list.
I bet at marathon my bet finish i request payout and get it in 15 minutes how do they cancel bet tomorrow?

[bubba]

WOW! Opti, are you serious? 20 mins on live bet cancels is "Acceptable"?
If that is true then who the hell would EVER make a live bet?

Bingo. If its acceptable to cancel wagers willy nilly (the more time the worse) nobody would ever place a live bet. Its important for the industry as a whole that this just isnt happeneing. Books would get no more action, they dont want that either.

Maybe, instead of a "payouts thread" where we list amount and time it took, we should start a "wager cancelled thread" and keep track of everything there. heeeheeheeheee.

Yes a book can conveniently say "outage", but that just helps the scam books even more if that were acceptable.

[Optional]

Bingo. If its acceptable to cancel wagers willy nilly (the more time the worse) nobody would ever place a live bet. Its important for the industry as a whole that this just isnt happeneing. Books would get no more action, they dont want that either.

Maybe, instead of a "payouts thread" where we list amount and time it took, we should start a "wager cancelled thread" and keep track of everything there. heeeheeheeheee.

Yes a book can conveniently say "outage", but that just helps the scam books even more if that were acceptable.

Once again your premise is made up Bubba.

To be doing this willy nilly, you'll need point out all the other times you have heard them say bets were void due to this reason!


Next time you ask me "when did I lie?", this is the exact sort of implied lie you use almost constantly. It's habitual with you.

[michael777]

Bubba's premise is almost always wrong

[bubba]

Once again your premise is made up Bubba.

To be doing this willy nilly, you'll need point out all the other times you have heard them say bets were void due to this reason!


Next time you ask me "when did I lie?", this is the exact sort of implied lie you use almost constantly. It's habitual with you.

Replace "willy nilly" with " without any proof of valid reason". better????

Optional- we clearly disagree on 1 thing. I think its a big freaking deal to cancel a wager. It should only be done in the most extreme of circumstances. An (unproven ) outage that probably did not result in a "bad line" at the time a wager is placed, is so far away from the circumstances needed to cancel a wager in my opinion. You disagree. I wont call you a liar for disagreeing with me on the protections players need from books that hold our money.

[michael777]

Bubba is consistent,always wrong

[bubba]

Bubba is consistent,always wrong

I now know of 2 people on this planet who have problems with me. Optional and Michael777. Lets try to stay on topic and keep the personal attacks to a minimum people!

[Optional]

Replace "willy nilly" with " without any proof of valid reason". better????

Optional- we clearly disagree on 1 thing. I think its a big freaking deal to cancel a wager. It should only be done in the most extreme of circumstances. An (unproven ) outage that probably did not result in a "bad line" at the time a wager is placed, is so far away from the circumstances needed to cancel a wager in my opinion. You disagree. I wont call you a liar for disagreeing with me on the protections players need from books that hold our money.

We are not really as far apart as you imagine.

I do think it's a big deal and needs to be justifiable.

But unlike you I also accept that stuff happens from time to time and cancels can be justifiable in some cases. (I still do not know with this one)


In regards to Betonline, I don't have a perfect memory, but I can hardly recall anyone on here complaining about live betting cancels there. In comparison to Bet365, WillHill or any big UK book I'd guess BOL does this maybe 2% as often.

You want to hold offshores to a very high standard, and that is fine in itself, but it seems to escape your notice just how good and fair the big ones really are in comparison to the rest of the world.

[moojoo]

Can you please tell us more about Bet365 and WH cancelations,time frame and what was cause.
Im betting over 15 years online and never had live bet canceled,nor regular pre game ticket.
If you compare A and A+ liste US/Euro im 100% sure they cant even compare when it comes to problems. For at least 30+ situations at Bol you may have just 1 at Bet365.

Ps im not using WH anymore,like 365 more,so im not expert when they are in question.

[eaglesfan371]

Does someone have access to bookmaker or another sharp book live odds history so we can get to the bottom of if the lines were consistent with market. No need for bickering back and forth, neither side will agree with the other, its like democrat vs republican on twitter.

[JoeCool20]

Bingo. If its acceptable to cancel wagers willy nilly (the more time the worse) nobody would ever place a live bet. Its important for the industry as a whole that this just isnt happeneing. Books would get no more action, they dont want that either.

Maybe, instead of a "payouts thread" where we list amount and time it took, we should start a "wager cancelled thread" and keep track of everything there. heeeheeheeheee.

Yes a book can conveniently say "outage", but that just helps the scam books even more if that were acceptable.

It is two simple words for the S-books. SHEER GREED! They KNOW good and well how often there are going to
be problems with live wagers because of the ultra-short time frame that is involved when they have to monitor
and change 20 or 30 lines every half-minute or so! But are they EVER going to say "We aren't accepting live bets anymore because there are too many fuk ups due to the fact that it is WAAY to difficult to keep up with."??

HELL no they aren't going to say that! Because of sheer and utter greed!

And unlike "regulated" Books in the USA that PAY OFF if they ever fuk up, these places have NOBODY overseeing them that could make them pay off instead of blatantly cheating people! They can cheat a player ANYTIME they want to! As plainly proven by the fact that they took this guys $5 grand worth of bets, then saw a grand slam get hit TWO INNINGS LATER, and then suddenly canceled the bets and cheated the shit out of him!

So they are NEVER going to stop accepting live bets because of all the glitches and fuk ups that continually happen!
Instead they will just keep on doing it, and just call a "fuk up" anytime they want and cheat the shit out of people.

And I will reiterate it for the 20th time! If you send your money to a bunch of strangers, and then they cheat
the dogshit out of you, then there ain't a DAMN thing that you can do about it!

[bubba]

We are not really as far apart as you imagine.

I do think it's a big deal and needs to be justifiable.

But unlike you I also accept that stuff happens from time to time and cancels can be justifiable in some cases. (I still do not know with this one)


In regards to Betonline, I don't have a perfect memory, but I can hardly recall anyone on here complaining about live betting cancels there. In comparison to Bet365, WillHill or any big UK book I'd guess BOL does this maybe 2% as often.

You want to hold offshores to a very high standard, and that is fine in itself, but it seems to escape your notice just how good and fair the big ones really are in comparison to the rest of the world.

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...-live-mlb.html

https://www.sportsbookreview.com/for...cceptable.html

[JoeCool20]

They ought to just put a "disclaimer" up there on the live betting that says:

"Look y'all if you don't know that we can cancel these live bets any time we want and flat out cheat the shit out of you,

then please just don't even place any live bets!" LOL

[horja1]

I had a book canceling a bet because they claimed there was a technical issue causing the odds to stop updating for 8 seconds (just for the match I was betting on). My bet was placed and in pending mode just before that 8 seconds period, but it was accepted 1 second after the odds stopped updating - so they decided to cancel my bet. Couldn't do anything about it, regardless how many emails I sent them.