[Parplay2023]

EDIT BY MOD:


Message from Betonline management;

The odds on Erasmo Ramirez to have 4+ hits allowed was 13.85. The correct odds should have been around 1.88.

So in other words, the odds were way off due to technical issue. It was an obvious error. When there are palpable errors we have the right to no-action the wager per our site rules.

Unfortunately it took our provider longer than we like to catch the error. With so many markets offered and countless bets coming in, they aren’t always caught early unfortunately.

If the correct odds were offered on this wager the payout would have been $759.78. We are going to round-up to $1,000 and put it in his account as a one-time courtesy. However, it must be stressed not to bet obvious bad lines. Whereas some books will severely limit and/or kick the player out for “taking shots” we give the player the benefit of the doubt; however, if a player continuously takes shots he will run the risk of having his limits slashed or account closed.

-----------------------------------------------------------








At 5:39 PM on August 18, I placed a bet on BetOnline in their props builder of Erasmo Ramirez to have at least 4 hits allowed and Brendan Rodgers to have at least 1 base, wagering $450 at odds of +1900. In terms of game timing, the Rodgers leg started 3 hours later (8:40 PM ET) and Ramirez 4 hours later (9:38 PM ET). Both players met all of the requirements to win per BetOnline’s rules, with both players starting in their games, Rodgers recording 5 bases and Ramirez allowing 5 hits, and both games concluding after 9 innings.

From the time my bet was placed until the time the games started, the bet showed as it normally would, in an “Open” status and remained that way until the games ended, after which it was graded to a “Win” and $9,000 was added to my account. From there, I continued to place more parlays as I normally do. However, when I checked my account three days later, the balance had been reduced by >$8,000 with no explanation as to why. Then, after chatting with support and reviewing my bet history, it appeared that an entire 3 days after the bet had won and settled, on August 21 BetOnline decided to go back and deem the Ramirez leg an error and void my entire bet (reducing my $9,000 win back to my original $450 wager).

It is complete theft in my opinion to void a proper winning bet, let alone deciding to void entirely 3 days after the bet had correctly won and I had already played through some of the winnings.

Can someone please assist?

https://ibb.co/y6V4jTm

[Optional]

What did they say the odds should have been?

[Parplay2023]

They never said what the odds should have been, just that they were voiding for being an error.

[Optional]

Check your PM inbox

[bruloc]

Things aren't looking good for BOL. After a very profitable week of betting, they decided to block my account and ask for documents. I was told to wait up to 48 hours for the review but that time has passed and no answer yet.

[vampire assassin]

Quick look at Ramirez. He gave up 4+ hits 4 out of last 7 games. Rodgers has 17 hits in 20 games. Guessing quickly, fair price might be +150. +1900 is an obvious error.

[Stallion]

Any updates on this?

[Titan]

Quick look at Ramirez. He gave up 4+ hits 4 out of last 7 games. Rodgers has 17 hits in 20 games. Guessing quickly, fair price might be +150. +1900 is an obvious error.

That makes a lot more sense. Feel bad for OP but quite honestly, other issue from BRULOC, on this thread scares me a heck of a lot more!

[aak114]

That is kind of crazy - I've had a few bets voided before but only before the game starts, never 3 days after the game ended and the bet won. Would imagine had this bet lost they wouldn't have even considered voiding it...

[Crusherrr]

That is kind of crazy - I've had a few bets voided before but only before the game starts, never 3 days after the game ended and the bet won. Would imagine had this bet lost they wouldn't have even considered voiding it...

The bet wouldn't have happened as he bet it knowing it was a bad line.

[aak114]

The bet wouldn't have happened as he bet it knowing it was a bad line.

What do you mean wouldn't have happened? He clearly placed the bet... had Ramirez only allowed 3 hits or Rodgers not gotten a hit, you think they would have voided it after it lost?

[Da Manster!]

What do you mean wouldn't have happened? He clearly placed the bet... had Ramirez only allowed 3 hits or Rodgers not gotten a hit, you think they would have voided it after it lost?

But that's besides the point. The two are mutually exclusive. OP was clearly a shot taker at a bad line and then has the nerve, gall, and chutzpah to cry and complain about it when he gets caught and has his "winnings" voided. I'm pretty sure just about every credible "A+" offshore book has in their disclaimer/rules section about the right to reserve, cancel, or void any wagers where a bad line or number (i.e. obvious error) was bet on.

[Thefix13]

What do you mean wouldn't have happened? He clearly placed the bet... had Ramirez only allowed 3 hits or Rodgers not gotten a hit, you think they would have voided it after it lost?

That would just be some level of justice when you take a shot at a bad line and still lose. For some reason people think they are in control when they bet at these books that have pages and pages of rules yet they still try to finesse them.

[aak114]

But that's besides the point. The two are mutually exclusive. OP was clearly a shot taker at a bad line and then has the nerve, gall, and chutzpah to cry and complain about it when he gets caught and has his "winnings" voided. I'm pretty sure just about every credible "A+" offshore book has in their disclaimer/rules section about the right to reserve, cancel, or void any wagers where a bad line or number (i.e. obvious error) was bet on.

Yeah I'm not disagreeing with you based on their terms nor based on principle of having bad lines voided. I just don't think any reputable sportsbook should be freerolling - if it's a bad line then void it before the game (and/or limit the guy, etc), not days after someone has already played through winnings

OP, what were the odds of each individual leg (if Ramirez is the one they're saying is the error)?

[Mr. NBA]

I'll never understand taking shots at bad lines that are OBVIOUS errors. It's NEVER worth the risk and ya see sooooo many players do it. Nothing good comes of it ever.


Stupid

[MoneylineExpress]

Don't try to take advantage of line errors. 19-1 odds was an obvious error given those propositions. Probably should have been around 2-1 to 3-1 given those propositions. Either contact that sportsbook there is an error or pass.

[Thefix13]

Yeah I'm not disagreeing with you based on their terms nor based on principle of having bad lines voided. I just don't think any reputable sportsbook should be freerolling - if it's a bad line then void it before the game (and/or limit the guy, etc), not days after someone has already played through winnings

OP, what were the odds of each individual leg (if Ramirez is the one they're saying is the error)?

They take in so many bets that it was probably only realized way after the fact as an anomaly upon review. Certainly was not going to happen before the game since it was a prop line.

[Optional]

The odds on Erasmo Ramirez to have 4+ hits allowed was 13.85. The correct odds should have been around 1.88.So in other words, the odds were way off due to technical issue. It was an obvious error. When there are palpable errors we have the right to no-action the wager per our site rules. Unfortunately it took our provider longer than we like to catch the error. With so many markets offered and countless bets coming in, they aren’t always caught early unfortunately. If the correct odds were offered on this wager the payout would have been $759.78. We are going to round-up to $1,000 and put it in his account as a one-time courtesy. However, it must be stressed not to bet obvious bad lines. Whereas some books will severely limit and/or kick the player out for “taking shots” we give the player the benefit of the doubt; however, if a player continuously takes shots he will run the risk of having his limits slashed or account closed.

[PD77]

The odds on Erasmo Ramirez to have 4+ hits allowed was 13.85. The correct odds should have been around 1.88.So in other words, the odds were way off due to technical issue. It was an obvious error. When there are palpable errors we have the right to no-action the wager per our site rules. Unfortunately it took our provider longer than we like to catch the error. With so many markets offered and countless bets coming in, they aren’t always caught early unfortunately. If the correct odds were offered on this wager the payout would have been $759.78. We are going to round-up to $1,000 and put it in his account as a one-time courtesy. However, it must be stressed not to bet obvious bad lines. Whereas some books will severely limit and/or kick the player out for “taking shots” we give the player the benefit of the doubt; however, if a player continuously takes shots he will run the risk of having his limits slashed or account closed.

Very generous of BetOnline and props for making it right. I freerolled myself once, 20+ years ago and learned my lesson.

[ki dice]

I don’t understand some people, how many times does a player make a mistake and we gotta own it. Example if we live bet a game in a hurry and bet the wrong side by accident we lose do they give us a break. Another thread I saw yesterday someone won a poker bet it was graded a loss he must own up to it. However once in a blue moon a book makes a mistake and just confiscates the money get the penetrate out of here ridiculous they should of owned up and paid way more then that

[ki dice]

Everyone on here is all talk kissing a books ass if they made a mistake pay it just like we do when we lose. If the better keeps take advantage of errors that’s a different story then you kick him out this did not look like a situation like that. It’s already hard enough to win books have all the advantages and then when someone wins they get it taken away sorry that shit just pisses me off and it should everyone on this site

[Thefix13]

Everyone on here is all talk kissing a books ass if they made a mistake pay it just like we do when we lose. If the better keeps take advantage of errors that’s a different story then you kick him out this did not look like a situation like that. It’s already hard enough to win books have all the advantages and then when someone wins they get it taken away sorry that shit just pisses me off and it should everyone on this site

The update should squash your argument. Also the poker hard, the guy is basically already admitting that he can't say without a doubt that he did not fold. Lot of emotional posts on here that are later settled by facts. This guy is SUPER lucky to not only be paid but also given extra by a book that simply not have his name dragged through the mud. That being said greed will cause people to keep doing this and eventually get owned.

[Cicadasinthe]

The update should squash your argument. Also the poker hard, the guy is basically already admitting that he can't say without a doubt that he did not fold. Lot of emotional posts on here that are later settled by facts. This guy is SUPER lucky to not only be paid but also given extra by a book that simply not have his name dragged through the mud. That being said greed will cause people to keep doing this and eventually get owned.

As a bootlicker, unless it’s some BDSM thing in which case fair enough, what are you getting out of it?

[bruloc]

Things aren't looking good for BOL. After a very profitable week of betting, they decided to block my account and ask for documents. I was told to wait up to 48 hours for the review but that time has passed and no answer yet.

[RESOLVED] My account has now been reinstated.

But I'm not happy with the customer service provided. They took 10 days to review a couple of documents (selfie + utility bill).

I'd like to thank Optional and Dave Mason for the assistance!