Sportsinteraction "dispute" - what do you think?

[mathdotcom]

On Saturday I made a wager at SIA on Game2 - WSox @ Royals. The bet won but was voided because SIA claims they had Jackson as the WSox listed pitcher. I was watching the line for hours before I bet it, and I am pretty sure Pena was listed everywhere as the WSox starting pitcher (and Pena did start).

The bet history at SIA does not show who the listed pitchers were; they claim it was still Jackson.

Is SIA known for being very slow to change listed pitchers? I don't believe they are actually lying, but wondering how hard I should push this if at all. From now on I will be taking screenshots.

[ForgetWallStreet]

Is SIA known for being very slow to change listed pitchers?

They were in my experience. I would just let them have this one.

[Dark Horse]

From now on I will be taking screenshots.

Always best. They don't have a 'bet history'?


Here is the line history for the game.
covers.com/sports/odds/linehistory.aspx?eventId=308257&sport=ml b&t=0

You'll see that the total moved from 9 to 9.5 around 5 pm at different books. So they were clearly looking at the same total as the other books, and therefore most likely also at the same pitchers. (it would be ridiculous to even post a total without knowing who was pitching, and their total was the same as everywhere else, including the change to 9.5)

[mathdotcom]

Sounds about what I thought.

Thanks gentlemen.

[durito]

I'd let it slide.

[Justin7]

Sounds about what I thought.

Thanks gentlemen.

If you can't tell who the listed pitchers are from reviewing your wager history, there is a problem.

[mathdotcom]

I agree that they are pretty weak for not having this information in their wager history. However, we are all playing at SIA specifically because they are weak. Can't have it both ways I guess.

[mtneer1212]

If you can't tell who the listed pitchers are from reviewing your wager history, there is a problem.

Unless you select 'action'

[-105]

How the hell does SIA let you play there?