1. #36
    Bill Dozer
    @BillDozer110
    Bill Dozer's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 07-12-05
    Posts: 10,894
    Betpoints: 21705

    Quote Originally Posted by nicabet View Post

    You are backtracking after being called your for your complete fabrications in your last post.

    Same game side/total Parlays were blocked at WagerWeb up to a certain amount on all periods (Games, 1h,1q). The same way they are at Pinnacle/Bookmaker. There is no magic level where these pass from +ev to -ev, the level of correlation they are williing to accept is up to the bookmaker. Not that Pin/Bookmaker/Greek all have different cutoff levels.

    If the book is going to block -14 over 24 and not -7 over 17 then that is clearly a decision they have thought about in advance.

    These parlays are far from the automatic win you ascertain in your first post. They've lost over entire football seasons recently. This isn't parlaying +3 and +150, it's a slight edge. Taking the money is no different than books going back and taking money from teasers players that bet when 3 teamers paid +180. Those were +ev bets too. I bet you guys could steal a ton more money that way.
    Quote Originally Posted by Justin7 View Post

    They did not imply it was a software error; WW stated it as a fact.

    The difference: if there was an ASI software error, Wagerweb had a legal defense. If WW's claim were correct, and the ASI update screwed up, WW did not intend to offer an h1 CP that Trix took. If instead, WW did not understand CP EV, and chose to offer it, and did nothing for weeks about it, WW had no defense to Trixtrix's claim. There are other implications as well to WW's claim, but the goal is to resolve this dispute, and focusing on things outside that scope will be negative.
    Most of what I'm recalling is from our last phone conversation that followed our 3-way with them. So if you since have reason to conclude it's more egregious than mistaken setting, then can't hurt to lay it out and make another WW thread from the details. Right or wrong, intent of both parties is certainly a big part of their argument.

    Nica,
    He was playing sides and totals for halves, which according to Justin who analyzed the math of it, was a sure winner over that time. I was hoping we could show a good % chance of losing over that span because it makes it much easier to convince them that, personal feelings aside, he had a legit chance at busting out. We also argued that he could have busted out an each individual game and not have come back which is true. They would point to how he already withdrew x amount from these bets. Keep in mind that the argument is based on what's relevant to the book and best chance to get favorable results for the player Vs based on what we think they should do. You can only repeat "you book it, you pay it" so many times before they hang up.

    No one has to convince anyone in this thread. WW was upgraded to C- because time passed and they took care of other cases that their B- to D- was based on. I'm not here to debate details with our former case mgr of this. He'll beat me on Trix vs WW trivia.

    Also, I would argue that upgrade recognizing the bonus disputes from years ago and Obi getting his elusive check would mean better results for TrixTrix. It shows WW that the steps that got them blacklisted can be reversed and that SBR is fair even when forum users would prefer they stay buried.

    I heard Trix received an offer and declined which is certainly his right to play his hand that way.

  2. #37
    nicabet
    nicabet's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 12-27-12
    Posts: 11
    Betpoints: 48

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Dozer View Post
    He was playing sides and totals for halves, which according to Justin who analyzed the math of it, was a sure winner over that time. I was hoping we could show a good % chance of losing over that span because it makes it much easier to convince them that, personal feelings aside, he had a legit chance at busting out. We also argued that he could have busted out an each individual game and not have come back which is true. They would point to how he already withdrew x amount from these bets. Keep in mind that the argument is based on what's relevant to the book and best chance to get favorable results for the player Vs based on what we think they should do. You can only repeat "you book it, you pay it" so many times before they hang up.

    No one has to convince anyone in this thread. WW was upgraded to C- because time passed and they took care of other cases that their B- to D- was based on. I'm not here to debate details with our former case mgr of this. He'll beat me on Trix vs WW trivia.

    Also, I would argue that upgrade recognizing the bonus disputes from years ago and Obi getting his elusive check would mean better results for TrixTrix. It shows WW that the steps that got them blacklisted can be reversed and that SBR is fair even when forum users would prefer they stay buried.

    I heard Trix received an offer and declined which is certainly his right to play his hand that way.
    I'd like to see where Justin said this or see his math. The bets can certainly lose (and often do). Triix himself lost 11k over a few months playing them at WW before he started winning. They lose for entire years. I finished down lifetime on them. It's a small edge like a basic strategy teaser, it's not a handout. You should win in the long run, but no means would you be guaranteed to win over a small time period.

  3. #38
    MonkeyF0cker
    Update your status
    MonkeyF0cker's Avatar Become A Pro!
    Join Date: 06-12-07
    Posts: 12,144
    Betpoints: 1127

    Quote Originally Posted by Bill Dozer View Post
    Also, I would argue that upgrade recognizing the bonus disputes from years ago and Obi getting his elusive check would mean better results for TrixTrix. It shows WW that the steps that got them blacklisted can be reversed and that SBR is fair even when forum users would prefer they stay buried.

    I heard Trix received an offer and declined which is certainly his right to play his hand that way.
    In light of recent developments, I don't think anyone would call it "fair" that you're upgrading a book (from blacklist to C-) without paying its past debts. It really looks to most players like you're upgrading another undeserving book. Maybe, SBR hasn't learned its lesson. Maybe, they don't care. It doesn't look positive or fair from most players' perspectives.

    The offer to trixtrix was ridiculous. There shouldn't be an offer. There should be a payment. That's it. They've held his money for how many years now? And now they want to lowball him? LOL. They should be paying interest on that money. Instead, they're trying to get away with as much as they can. It's disgusting.

First 12
Top