WAGERWEB incapable of keeping their word on ANYTHING

**tomcowley** · 12-29-10, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by Eagle1958

Never had a problem here. Collected over 10 grand this past year with no glitches

Of player money you personally stole. LOL.

**Monte** · 12-29-10, 11:07 AM

Years ago a decent book, and now a scam. Anything else is a lie.

**trixtrix** · 05-04-11, 03:12 PM

bump

still nothing in terms of contact or payment of a single dollar from wagerweb

**BigDaddy** · 05-05-11, 11:28 AM

wagerweb needs downgraded for this outright theft.

**trixtrix** · 05-07-11, 08:11 PM

there's another wagerweb dispute on the front page

"5/7/2011 02:24 PM
wagerweb balance confiscation
A wagerweb (SBR rating D-) player reports having his account disabled with a $2,252 balance. The player was accused of operating multiple accounts on March 3rd, 2011. The player admits to having a friend access his computer to log into wagerweb months ago, but claims that this was an isolated incident. SBR is following up on this sportsbook complaint."

why would anyone besides actual shills deposit there?

**robmpink** · 05-07-11, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by trixtrix

there's another wagerweb dispute on the front page

"5/7/2011 02:24 PM
wagerweb balance confiscation
A wagerweb (SBR rating D-) player reports having his account disabled with a $2,252 balance. The player was accused of operating multiple accounts on March 3rd, 2011. The player admits to having a friend access his computer to log into wagerweb months ago, but claims that this was an isolated incident. SBR is following up on this sportsbook complaint."

why would anyone besides actual shills deposit there?

Hmm, if they offer a good line with a max bet, your "friend" opens and account and bets more to go around the limit. Do you think this hasn't been done? You took them for a ride, but they had your # in the end.

**robmpink** · 05-07-11, 08:38 PM

T&C's

One account per household.
One account per IP Address.

Hmmm, what happens at SBR if this situation happens? Someone doesn't get points. Seems like the same rationale with ww and sbr.

**BET THE HOOK** · 05-07-11, 11:15 PM

This book sucks. They called me today looking for a deposit. They offered 100% FP with 10 x roll but I get the same at AmericasBookie with 5x roll.

**BrickJames** · 05-07-11, 11:27 PM

Cant expect anything but a hard time from a D- book.

**trixtrix** · 05-08-11, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by robmpink

Hmm, if they offer a good line with a max bet, your "friend" opens and account and bets more to go around the limit. Do you think this hasn't been done? You took them for a ride, but they had your # in the end.

WTF are you talking about? that's another bettor they're referring to in the announcement. one more instance of rob coming to rescue of wagerweb without even comprehending the details

**mikeyg** · 05-08-11, 09:57 AM

This book is terrible I got a phone call yesterday from them begging for money and i closed my account last year with them

**Thremp** · 05-08-11, 11:46 AM

Considering the issues with IPs, closing accounts and robbing balances (which should never be done) for an isolated instance of a single login is ridiculous.

Though, SBR John has shown a complete lack of understanding with IPs and the situations that come up. Perhaps this idea is pervasive to SBR as a whole or perhaps not. Either way, IPs are a loophole that allows books to steal from players (along with the entire idea of balance confiscation).

**The Bet Master** · 05-08-11, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by robmpink

T&C's

One account per household.
One account per IP Address.

Hmmm, what happens at SBR if this situation happens? Someone doesn't get points. Seems like the same rationale with ww and sbr.

I agree with you if both of them were betting on the same Items and putting it over the betting max for them, but if they are betting different items or not betting on one item over the max the IP thing should not be a problem.

**Extra Innings** · 05-08-11, 05:14 PM

Disgraceful!

**robmpink** · 05-08-11, 05:49 PM

Originally posted by trixtrix

WTF are you talking about? that's another bettor they're referring to in the announcement. one more instance of rob coming to rescue of wagerweb without even comprehending the details

Trix, I don't know you from a hole in the ground, but gather you are somewhat smart. I didn't think this pertained to you in any way, shape or form. You aren't associated to this at all.

What I commented on, was your conclusion to this new situation. You automatically try and make it seem as if WW is screwing this player. Worst case scenario and if they want to be dicks just to be dicks, a rule was broken. it happens everywhere. This rule is mostly universal. SBR released scant details. If this guy proves his case to WW, I'm sure they will be fair. It is 2k.

**robmpink** · 05-08-11, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by The Bet Master

I agree with you if both of them were betting on the same Items and putting it over the betting max for them, but if they are betting different items or not betting on one item over the max the IP thing should not be a problem.

I agree 100%. I don't know the details. Lets see how it plays out. I could see this situation happening as it is spelled out here and being an honest mistake. It happens. From my dealings, if the claimant could prove his case, they are mostly reasonable. If there is more to it based on the data they have, then it is a different story.

**robmpink** · 05-08-11, 05:56 PM

Originally posted by mikeyg

This book is terrible I got a phone call yesterday from them begging for money and i closed my account last year with them

I doubt they were "begging". Bookmaker cold calls. So what?

**trixtrix** · 05-08-11, 08:30 PM

i disagree, IF the situation is as described in the sbr posting, THEN wagerweb at the very least is guilty of operating in BAD FAITH. there is implicit expectation of good faith by business and their customers when entering into a business contract, one side cannot maliciously try to injure the opposing party. a business who constantly operate out of bad faith is not a reliable trustworthy company, it is important to spread the word to potential customers so that they can be warned of expecting shady dealings w/ the same ahead of time.

login from a duplicate IP address as an another account take in isolation is not sufficient justification for account seizure. individual bettors can never be sure that they will never a duplicate login as a previous book's customer, what if they just recently moved, used internet from a pool of shared IPs, goes on vacation, logins at work etc etc etc...? the only reasonable justification of any offending action in this case is if the duplicate accounts were used to exceed wagering limits and/or bonus abuse, neither of which was mentioned in the original flyer.

of course, when dealing w/ wagerweb, who accuses you of circumventing limits by betting on opposing sides of the same game, i guess they can (in bad faith) accuse their potential player base for circumventing limits by peeing in the same restroom once.... which is why it's important to disseminate these stories to other players

**Jimsox511** · 05-08-11, 09:08 PM

I dont know how any of you guys deal with online sportsbooks and that extended wait time for payouts

**robmpink** · 05-09-11, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by trixtrix

i disagree, IF the situation is as described in the sbr posting, THEN wagerweb at the very least is guilty of operating in BAD FAITH. there is implicit expectation of good faith by business and their customers when entering into a business contract, one side cannot maliciously try to injure the opposing party. a business who constantly operate out of bad faith is not a reliable trustworthy company, it is important to spread the word to potential customers so that they can be warned of expecting shady dealings w/ the same ahead of time.

login from a duplicate IP address as an another account take in isolation is not sufficient justification for account seizure. individual bettors can never be sure that they will never a duplicate login as a previous book's customer, what if they just recently moved, used internet from a pool of shared IPs, goes on vacation, logins at work etc etc etc...? the only reasonable justification of any offending action in this case is if the duplicate accounts were used to exceed wagering limits and/or bonus abuse, neither of which was mentioned in the original flyer.

of course, when dealing w/ wagerweb, who accuses you of circumventing limits by betting on opposing sides of the same game, i guess they can (in bad faith) accuse their potential player base for circumventing limits by peeing in the same restroom once.... which is why it's important to disseminate these stories to other players

I can't argue with your description above. It is a valid point. Dual ISP could also spell multiple accounts as well. Wasn't it the great Fishead who had over 50 accounts at 1 place years ago under different names?

**trixtrix** · 05-15-11, 04:34 PM

bump

**trixtrix** · 05-29-11, 09:08 PM

bump

**PoweRay** · 05-29-11, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by robmpink

I can't argue with your description above. It is a valid point. Dual ISP could also spell multiple accounts as well. Wasn't it the great Fishead who had over 50 accounts at 1 place years ago under different names?

This is good info to know. I was over at a friends house and he wanted me to show him how placing wagers online works. Was going to place a wager and show him how its done from a to z, then thought about the ip issue, figured it wasn't a good idea. It would suck not getting paid over an issue like this especially when the books want us to refer our friends.

**dbnmln** · 05-30-11, 01:28 AM

Online gambling is getting to be overated.

**trixtrix** · 08-14-11, 07:56 PM

bump

**trixtrix** · 08-14-11, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by PoweRay

This is good info to know. I was over at a friends house and he wanted me to show him how placing wagers online works. Was going to place a wager and show him how its done from a to z, then thought about the ip issue, figured it wasn't a good idea. It would suck not getting paid over an issue like this especially when the books want us to refer our friends.

lol, no reasonable/honourable book will confiscate balances in instances like this

**trixtrix** · 08-14-11, 07:57 PM

"A WagerWeb (SBR rating D-) player reports receiving $2,500 of a $5,000 withdrawal request on Thursday, July 7th. The player tells Sportsbook Review that he has currently unable to arrange for payment for the rest of his balance. WagerWeb has allegedly offered to send another portion of the funds owed to the player.

WagerWeb is currently on SBR's sportsbook blacklist with a rating of D-. | WagerWeb player speaks out

WagerWeb player: Wagerweb,
I am done arguing over the phone over this matter. As I told you last night. Wagerweb's proposal of sending $1500 and keeping my $1000 till the money was sent back was NOT accepted by me in ANY form. I told you I would like an email with Wagerweb's offer in writing. You replied you will work on that. You did not do that!... and 16 hours later this has NOT been fulfilled. Dan left a message saying that my withdrawal is beyond declined and that $1500 will be sent. No!, that is not how business is ran in ANY FASHION and is unacceptable! No more offers will be made via the phone. I respect that you want out of this situation and thats fine. The only deal now is I want my $2500 minus $65 for a cashier's heck. Plain and Simple. I wanted to continue to do business with you and this relationship has been scarred. I have kept outside parties from involving themsleves in hopes of completing this in a timely manner and moving on with the business at hand. I gave Wagerweb 7 weeks without any pressure from me or any outside party, and you guys to screw that up. Time is money and I want my money!"

**skrtelfan** · 08-15-11, 08:54 AM

Wagerweb farts on cakes!

**trixtrix** · 08-18-11, 06:08 PM

inspired by cory's unrelenting efforts, this thread will be bumped again!

**chemicalbrother** · 08-18-11, 07:46 PM

trix, what are you looking for, exactly?

**BrianLaverty** · 08-18-11, 08:21 PM

Originally posted by chemicalbrother

trix, what are you looking for, exactly?

I'm not a genius or anything, but my guess is..... the money that he is owed?

**Justin7** · 08-18-11, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by chemicalbrother

trix, what are you looking for, exactly?

I think Trixtrix wants his full balance paid, but would settle for wagerweb's office getting firestormed.

**BET THE HOOK** · 08-18-11, 08:55 PM

I will never send another dime to WagerWeb. Even after telling Marcel and Dan to go Fack themselves they still call asking me to deposit.

**trixtrix** · 08-19-11, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by chemicalbrother

trix, what are you looking for, exactly?

5'2, 100lbs, blonde/dirty blonde, B cup or better, what are you offering?

**KGambler** · 08-21-11, 11:56 PM

Wagerweb is now cold calling Bodog players. Their sales pitch is that the caller is a former Bodog employee, that he knows Bodog has major problems and that he can get you a 100% bonus at WagerWeb. They had my phone number (obv) and email. I'm glad I checked out their SBR review and also found this thread. I won't be depositing there.

One funny thing about the email they sent me is that they included an image (with a link) of a graph which showed Bodog's site traffic falling off a cliff. Of course it was for Bodog dot com, not .eu