Should the 5 dimes 32k casino seizure complaint be put on SBR's front page?

topgame85 · 05-17-11, 08:03 AM

It should and hopefully will be, report the news and let people make their own mind up about the way it gets handled

pokerplayer22 · 05-17-11, 09:26 AM

It definately should be. SBR needs to do the right thing here

Euphoria38 · 05-17-11, 09:42 AM

LOL 5Dimes sucks and are a bunch of theives.

Chopsticks · 05-17-11, 09:49 AM

Just to play devil's advocate.... Except for general information like... this book bought that book, this book no longer taking clients from here and there, this book offline because of ddos....

Other than that we usually see the complaints if there is a pattern, like with Betus, oddsmaker, apex, BetPhoenix ewallets, betqs slowpays... Or if there is an imminent danger to funds, like the sbr impostor case, the getwin scam case, betonline247 extreme slowpays..

Is the voiding of casino wagers a pattern for 5Dimes? Maybe, afterall they have voided two sizable balances recently. Is there an imminent danger to player funds? Judging from the first casino complaint; funds may be in danger if you are a professional VP player and you know how to play fast, 5dimes may cite bot use. Looking at the second complaint, funds are not in danger unless you are looking to win in a way that is not fair (some would argue)..

Dozer & Co wrote in the main thread for this, as they have earlier, that 5Dimes are good to work with and that they have worked on a lot of cases, including cases that have not been mentioned in these forums or on the main site. As long as 5dimes abide by the arbitration provided by SBR, I do not think that sbr will post it on the front page.

In this case though.. God himself said there will be no arbitration. If there wont be any arbitration then Sportsbookreview have no choice to warn the players that despite 5Dimes being an A+ bookie, Sportsbookreview may not be able to help you if you have a complaint.

FreeFall · 05-17-11, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by topgame85

It should and hopefully will be, report the news and let people make their own mind up about the way it gets handled

If only that was how the news was presented in the media.

scarface · 05-17-11, 11:21 AM

5dimes is a paid advertiser for sbr, sbr will always have their back just as the rx has ez st since they are paid advertisers...sbr is not as unbiased as they claim to be

ncsubowen · 05-17-11, 11:34 AM

The Sportsbook seems to be fine, good lines and prices, but the casino is rubbish. The real question is how do you separate the two? They are clearly both run by the same people and subject to the same policies.

I think you have to avoid the casino and just stick to the book. I don't see how you can go on without downgrading them however.

chachi · 05-17-11, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by Chopsticks

In this case though.. God himself said there will be no arbitration. If there wont be any arbitration then Sportsbookreview have no choice to warn the players that despite 5Dimes being an A+ bookie, Sportsbookreview may not be able to help you if you have a complaint.

Nail ... head ...

sideloaded · 05-17-11, 11:48 AM

whats the point of playing at A+ book that has no arbitration?

wtt0315 · 05-17-11, 11:57 AM

wonder what would happen if everyone charged back their deposits to 5 dimes that lost in their casino saying they had unfair advantange? I am glad i have never played there

mighty maron · 05-17-11, 01:14 PM

Ive dropped over 600 in 5dimes casino....I wonder if I could claim some sort of error that was too much in the house favor...

donkdown · 05-17-11, 01:18 PM

100% I just stated this in another thread!! Any other book SBR would be on them like fly's on shit.

Wiggums5 · 05-17-11, 01:34 PM

of course it should...

mighty maron · 05-17-11, 01:35 PM

Originally posted by sideloaded

whats the point of playing at A+ book that has no arbitration?

How can it be considered an A+ book when there is no arbitration?

barcelonafc · 05-17-11, 02:33 PM

can we hear from lou or bill?

can one of them tell us if 5dimes will be downgraded??

i think if it was any other book they would be downgraded.

Dark Horse · 05-17-11, 03:07 PM

No it should not be on the front page. The problem is that there are errors in the 5D casino, but no cheating. No lynch mob needed. Try to look at it without the emotion. The player did take a shot at the book, because he knew the whole time that he had an absurd advantage (+390%). He identified an error. And he knew that going in. Whether you like it or not, books do cover themselves against obvious errors.

Here's an example of an absurd advantage. Bet 1 to make 4, now bet 5 to make 20, now bet 25 to make 100, bet 125 to make 500, bet 625 to make 2500, etc. How can anybody in his right mind argue that this should be paid?

The problem is the apparent incompetence at the 5D casino. They'll pay whenever somebody wins fair, but it is a worry to see such errors being made at this book. It creates a terrible impression of a book that is wide open to attacks. The guy that 'won' 32K did Tony a favor. But it was the same type of service that a beta tester offers. He deserves some reward, but nothing close to 32K. Anybody thinking that Tony owes him 32K is just not thinking straight.

stevenash · 05-17-11, 03:09 PM

Justin?
Video?

mighty maron · 05-17-11, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by Dark Horse

No it should not be on the front page. The problem is that there are errors in the 5D casino, but no cheating. No lynch mob needed. Try to look at it without the emotion. The player did take a shot at the book, because he knew the whole time that he had an absurd advantage (+390%). He identified an error. And he knew that going in. Whether you like it or not, books do cover themselves against obvious errors.

Here's an example of an absurd advantage. Bet 1 to make 4, now bet 5 to make 20, now bet 25 to make 100, bet 125 to make 500, bet 625 to make 2500, etc. How can anybody in his right mind argue that this should be paid?

The problem is the apparent incompetence at the 5D casino. They'll pay whenever somebody wins fair, but it is a worry to see such errors being made at this book. It creates a terrible impression of a book that is wide open to attacks. The guy that 'won' 32K did Tony a favor. But it was the same type of service that a beta tester offers. He deserves some reward, but nothing close to 32K. Anybody thinking that Tony owes him 32K is just not thinking straight.

Tony brings it on himself. He is hard and usually fair. Its over the top statments like I designed the games and never back down attitude that fuels a mob mentality. A person that so goes by the book or when he does bend it costs you your account there that does this. A mistake was made and he expects grace on it. Sorry our bad...we take all the winnings...every last mf cent. No organization is perfect..no one expects them to be perfect but when the general manager comes off having an air of perfection, the mistakes that are made should be treated with less grace than a rep who is polite and will not yank accounts when he is wrong or has to compromise.

Dark Horse · 05-17-11, 04:06 PM

There are those who don't like Tony. He doesn't give a f*ck about that. I like that.

The problem, in my mind, is not that the 32K won't be paid. It is that these type of errors are occurring at the 5D casino. As a result, I do not feel that my funds at 5D sportsbook are as secure as they were a week ago. I don't know if that is deserving of a downgrade, but it's starting to lean that way. If Tony wishes his casino escapades to take down his sportsbook, by damaging the public image of 5D, that is his decision.

(I love the court of public opinion. Because it's almost always wrong. If 5D was a stock the price would have dropped sharply over the past week. A great buy.)

robzilla · 05-17-11, 04:09 PM

wow the poll is 29-0. I'd really like to hear the conferance calls at SBR today.

mighty maron · 05-17-11, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by Dark Horse

There are those who don't like Tony. He doesn't give a f*ck about that. I like that.

There is a difference between not caring what one thinks and an air of infallibility. When the customer is in the wrong he lets them know it if they persist in their errors. When he or his organization makes an error like this he wants grace. (ie the free and unmerited favour of God shown towards man). No harm no foul let me take all the winnings and no repercussions for my error.

Dark Horse · 05-17-11, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by robzilla

wow the poll is 29-0. I'd really like to hear the conferance calls at SBR today.

The question is phrased in a way that makes it harder to vote the other way. It does not concern the validity of the complaint, and simply suggests that A+ books are above criticism if you would vote the other way. Since nobody would agree to that, the 'choice' is to either not vote or vote as the question intended.

homerbush · 05-17-11, 05:11 PM

I think the votes speak for themselves

Dark Horse · 05-17-11, 05:18 PM

Most people would.

For the record, it would only be a headliner if SBR decided that Tony should pay the 32K and he would refuse. Right now the matter is being looked at, and there is no need to publish a headline to satisfy the sensationalists.

HedgeHog · 05-17-11, 06:15 PM

Tony IS standing by his original decision. It's front page news now.

WVU · 05-17-11, 06:39 PM

so the guy gets a little over $320? SBR should push the issue further.

BigDaddy · 05-17-11, 06:50 PM

Originally posted by WVU

so the guy gets a little over $320? SBR should push the issue further.

a complete joke of an amount.

KGambler · 05-17-11, 08:59 PM

SBR does not put negative issues concerning sponsors on their front page. This is a thoroughly dishonest practice and does damage their credibility. You will see all manner of minor complaints listed on the front page if the book in question is not a sponsor. If the book is a sponsor, you will not see any complaints, just news about DOS attacks, new features, etc.

I first noticed this when I had a major complaint against BetPhoenix. I realized that despite there being almost 10 major complaints against BP during the same time period, none of them made the front page. Meanwhile, you could read about a small slow pay from some non-sponsor... The funny thing is that as soon as BP stopped being a sponsor, SBR immediately posted negative press about them on the front page (involving slow pays). This happened the first week they stopped advertising!

I think the poll results are instructive. This practice is really hurting the credibility of SBR.

Doug · 05-17-11, 09:20 PM

I can see reporting it since it shows management incompetance.