[moonbeam]

I placed the following bet at sportsinteraction: Uruguay v Germany (Anytime Goalscorer) Miroslav Klose.
But Miroslav Klose doesn't enter the field of play during the game at all.
So this player is a "non-runner" - and bets on this player should be void.

SIA answers:
the player was on the active roster, then the bet has action. It does not matter if he did not come off the bench. As per our rules:
Player proposition bets (Props) will have action as long as the player is on the active roster.
Please go to the 'Help' tab, then select 'Help Center'. Enter 'prop bets' in the Keywords section. Select the option of 'Do player proposition bets (Props) have action if the player doesn't play in the game?'. The answer that you see will be the following:
Player proposition bets (Props) will have action as long as the player is on the active roster.

IMO this rule is very unusual and not industry standard.

Every book I know use one of the following rules:

1) A proposition bet concerning if a player will score, or not score, in a specific match includes regulation time (plus injury time) only. Own goals do not count. For wagers to have action, the player must start the match. Bets on any player who does not start the match will be cancelled. (this is pinnacles rule and also the rule of every book I know except betfair)

or..

2) Will the named player score in 90 Minutes, plus injury time? Own goals do not count. The player does not need to play the full match, with bets standing if the player plays any part in the match. BetFair will void all bets on players not playing (this is betfairs rule)

Any Thought?

[Justin7]

SIA's rule is different from the industry norm, but is it unfair?

My guess is that they offered higher odds on that than other books. What odds did you receive?

[moonbeam]

I received +130 (Pinni offers +127 at this time)

Iīm wondering about your question because this rule is very unfair, for example because you canīt bet the opposite (will not score)

P.S.:
also you canīt find this rule in their soccer rules (which I read before) only in their prop bets rules

[AimingHigh]

I've noticed that quite a few (maybe the majority, I haven't done a statistical survey) of the offshore books have this "all bets are action" rule for golascorers. So I think it may be AN industry standard in the offshore world. Not so for Euro-facing books, where the expectation is that it's void. As SIA is mainly US-facing, I don't think their rule is out of the ordinary, unfortunately.

I remember a dispute from a couple of months ago over this exact issue with Bodog, because their US-facing franchise had the action rule, when their Euro-book had void rule. Becky explained that they would respond by making their rules consistent across the board, and voiding at all of their franchises.

[Thremp]

Fair IMO. You need to understand the prop rules you're betting.

[betbetter]

I placed the following bet at sportsinteraction: Uruguay v Germany (Anytime Goalscorer) Miroslav Klose.
But Miroslav Klose doesn't enter the field of play during the game at all.
So this player is a "non-runner" - and bets on this player should be void.

SIA answers:
the player was on the active roster, then the bet has action. It does not matter if he did not come off the bench. As per our rules:
Player proposition bets (Props) will have action as long as the player is on the active roster.
Please go to the 'Help' tab, then select 'Help Center'. Enter 'prop bets' in the Keywords section. Select the option of 'Do player proposition bets (Props) have action if the player doesn't play in the game?'. The answer that you see will be the following:
Player proposition bets (Props) will have action as long as the player is on the active roster.

IMO this rule is very unusual and not industry standard.

Every book I know use one of the following rules:

1) A proposition bet concerning if a player will score, or not score, in a specific match includes regulation time (plus injury time) only. Own goals do not count. For wagers to have action, the player must start the match. Bets on any player who does not start the match will be cancelled. (this is pinnacles rule and also the rule of every book I know except betfair)

or..

2) Will the named player score in 90 Minutes, plus injury time? Own goals do not count. The player does not need to play the full match, with bets standing if the player plays any part in the match. BetFair will void all bets on players not playing (this is betfairs rule)

Any Thought?

freeshot = loss.

[Justin7]

I have two thoughts... The rules as written 1. clearly mean the player loses, and 2. surprise players that don't read the rules.

A good sportsbook should strive to have rules that don't surprise players. If I bet this prop without reading the rules, I would be surprised at how it was grading. It's no excuse for not reading the rules, but similarly, all A-rated books are consistent on this prop.

I'm trying to discuss this particular prop (and their prop rules) with SIA.

[increasedodds]

I think key rules like this should be listed on the prop, but in the end it is in their rules.

I try to make my prop bets at books that define things like this on the prop

[Santo]

I think a wider discussion about how they present rules is worthwhile, but we'd be setting a dangerous precedent if we start asking books to settle in contradiction of their written rules...

[moonbeam]

Anytime goalscorer bets are idiot bets. I guess everyone knows this (I donīt know this somtimes)

But its good to hear people think its ok when sportsbooks fugg you the way they want

[Justin7]

Anytime goalscorer bets are idiot bets. I guess everyone knows this (I donīt know this somtimes)

But its good to hear people think its ok when sportsbooks fugg you the way they want

One player who filed a complaint had his losing wager voided. Was your wager voided, Moonbeam?

[lukahh]

I have two thoughts... The rules as written 1. clearly mean the player loses, and 2. surprise players that don't read the rules.

A good sportsbook should strive to have rules that don't surprise players. If I bet this prop without reading the rules, I would be surprised at how it was grading. It's no excuse for not reading the rules, but similarly, all A-rated books are consistent on this prop.

I'm trying to discuss this particular prop (and their prop rules) with SIA.

Justin - actually, this is not different than a situation with partybets, where you bet on tenis sets and in case match doesn't complete, you can only lose or push, and you state your position firmly against it. i am surprise that you are having different standards for SIA.

Nevertheless, i do think that if a book offers higher odds to compensate for this, it is ok; the player can then himself decide if he takes extra risk or not. it usually doesn't pay to take extra risk.

[chachi]

At Interwetten, their First Goalscorer markets are also effectively ante-post / all-in, and they also retain 10% on an AH0 push (but state so very clearly)

[Slim]

SIA has the highest juice in the industry. Their baseball lines are worse than Bookmaker's which is hard to believe.

[moonbeam]

One player who filed a complaint had his losing wager voided. Was your wager voided, Moonbeam?

They really voided my wager Justin.
this brings me back to believe in the strength work of SBR.
Sometimes in the past I thought SBR is only an advertising company, but now I know you really work for the players.

Thanks a lot

[durito]

SIA has the highest juice in the industry. Their baseball lines are worse than Bookmaker's which is hard to believe.

It's remarkable how you continue to fail so bad at this.

[ArminMD]

what is SIA ?)) give me they'r site pls

[Hareeba!]

what is SIA ?)) give me they'r site pls

http://www.sportsinteraction.com/