Fair or foul?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • trixtrix
    Restricted User
    • 04-13-06
    • 1897

    #141
    Originally posted by wrongturn
    The point is there is no need to argue what is a bad line. Everybody has their own defiintion. The solution though, should at least include a choice for bet to stand, like Pinnacle usually does.
    entirely disagree, if you don't explicitly explain what the bettor is doing is wrong, then it is unfair punish them afterward for being "wrong".

    the choice of having your bet stand and your acct canceled is still punishing the bettor.
    Comment
    • trixtrix
      Restricted User
      • 04-13-06
      • 1897

      #142
      Originally posted by HedgeHog
      If you consider this a moral issue, you may ask "What would Jesus do"? I think of it more as gambling issue, so I'd ask "What would Tony do"? Can you imagine how that live chat would go?:

      Me: May I speak to Tony please?
      Tony :How can I help you?
      Me: Why has my arena bet on Arizona canceled?
      Tony: Obvious bad line.
      Me: Obvious?
      Tony: Very.
      Tony: Correct line is 12 not 2
      Me: Arizona was -2 at all my other Books, so it was not an error.
      Tony: You think 2 is a fair line for an 11-2 team at home?
      Tony: Versus a sub .500 team?
      Tony: You took a shot.
      Me: No I didn't. It's a small market event, so a larger line variance is to be expected.
      Tony: 10 point variance?
      Me: Justin7 and other respected SBR forum members think AZ-2 is a fair bet.
      Tony: I could care less what the forums say.
      Tony: Anything else?
      Me: Yes, you can reinstate my AZ-2 bet.
      Tony: No can do.
      Tony: But I can disable your account if you persist with this nonsense.
      Me: Never mind
      Tony: Good. Take another shot and your account will be closed.
      Tony: Now get off my live chat.
      incomparable, tony = jesus's father
      Comment
      • yisman
        SBR Aristocracy
        • 09-01-08
        • 75682

        #143
        Originally posted by RickySteve
        I've never understood why the market openers don't do this all the time.
        Do what? Void bets if the market moves a lot?
        [quote=jjgold;5683305]I win again like usual
        [/quote]

        [quote=Whippit;7921056]miami won't lose a single eastern conference game through end of season[/quote]
        Comment
        • durito
          SBR Posting Legend
          • 07-03-06
          • 13173

          #144
          Originally posted by yisman
          Do what? Void bets if the market moves a lot?
          open way off, and then bet into the copiers
          Comment
          • trixtrix
            Restricted User
            • 04-13-06
            • 1897

            #145
            Originally posted by durito
            open way off, and then bet into the copiers
            i happen to know that this happens in a lot of smaller mma markets, the trick is also to have smaller limits so your personal book does not get hit hard by knowledgeable bettors (while not making that aspect visible), i prolly already gave up the farm..
            Comment
            • yisman
              SBR Aristocracy
              • 09-01-08
              • 75682

              #146
              Originally posted by Frank

              CRIS probably took some bets, bet out five times as much at the offscreens who copy their lines exactly, then said we will honor the bets so the offscreens would do the same.

              CRIS probably made more that way then they would canceling and on top of it made every other book look stupid.
              Even if this happened, I'm not sure it worked out so well for CRIS considering at least some of the offscreens voided the bets.

              Originally posted by durito
              open way off, and then bet into the copiers
              Yeah, now I see. It was talked about later in the thread. thanks

              Originally posted by ItsOnly$$$
              There are some stories at the other forums of how back in the early days of offshore gambling, the linesmakers would PURPOSELY set bad opening lines so they could personally bet them (through beards) at the copy cat books- and they got paid!

              You know what's funny? If more people cared about AFL, you'd see threads about how the original -2 line was a trap and that you should bet +2.
              [quote=jjgold;5683305]I win again like usual
              [/quote]

              [quote=Whippit;7921056]miami won't lose a single eastern conference game through end of season[/quote]
              Comment
              • yisman
                SBR Aristocracy
                • 09-01-08
                • 75682

                #147
                Originally posted by Justin7

                Reading the rules of most books, "obvious error" is not defined. Everyone knows that if a book puts up +3.5 on an NFL game when the market is -3.5, that is an obvious error. In every single dispute I have ever seen with SBR, the market price is a starting point to determine whether there was an obvious error. What if there is no comparable market, like in props? The legendary Henry chewed me out once for voiding wagers once. I screwed up, and a price was set at pick when the fair price was about -500. But, there was no market. Per Henry, "When there is no market, you can't void bets for a bad line".

                The market price is the standard for whether there is an obvious error. If you start looking at line movements to determine this, you are suggesting that a weak line put up initially can be voided if there is a big move. There was an NBA game with a 6-point move near the end of last season. Was that bad?

                I once wrote for the Pinnacle Pulse about bad lines. Let me quote myself... "A general rule of thumb is that a number is bad if it gives you a 7% EV (expected value) versus the market price." (Pinnacle Pulse #25, incorrectly listed as #24 here: http://www.bettorsworld.com/pinnacle-pulse/24.htm )

                I was actually searching for anything regarding that line you quoted from Henry and came across you posting that back in 2006.
                [quote=jjgold;5683305]I win again like usual
                [/quote]

                [quote=Whippit;7921056]miami won't lose a single eastern conference game through end of season[/quote]
                Comment
                • wrongturn
                  SBR MVP
                  • 06-06-06
                  • 2228

                  #148
                  Originally posted by trixtrix
                  entirely disagree, if you don't explicitly explain what the bettor is doing is wrong, then it is unfair punish them afterward for being "wrong".

                  the choice of having your bet stand and your acct canceled is still punishing the bettor.
                  Well, books have right to close account for any reason, as long as balance paid in full. Although it sounds unfair to players, it is still better than being paid in full and account closed a day later, without receiving a second choice.
                  Comment
                  • skrtelfan
                    SBR MVP
                    • 10-09-08
                    • 1913

                    #149
                    Originally posted by Justin7
                    The flagrantly violate gaming law (i.e. offering a line, and refusing to take a bet on a line).
                    BetUS does this and you recommended them in your book.
                    Comment
                    • Justin7
                      SBR Hall of Famer
                      • 07-31-06
                      • 8577

                      #150
                      Originally posted by skrtelfan
                      BetUS does this and you recommended them in your book.
                      BetUS is not without faults... But any bet I have tried to place, they have taken. Do you have a dissimilar experience?
                      Comment
                      • durito
                        SBR Posting Legend
                        • 07-03-06
                        • 13173

                        #151
                        They have a selective delay. Line is +4, I try to bet, it thinks for 90 seconds and says no line is now 3.5. I don´t bet, refresh lines, or have someone else check, line is still 4 for everyone else but i can´t bet, they are effectively dealing me +3.5 and -4.
                        Comment
                        • ForgetWallStreet
                          SBR Sharp
                          • 04-27-07
                          • 342

                          #152
                          They were doing this to me on EVERY premier leagues soccer line I tried to bet when I last played there.
                          Comment
                          • Justin7
                            SBR Hall of Famer
                            • 07-31-06
                            • 8577

                            #153
                            Originally posted by durito
                            They have a selective delay. Line is +4, I try to bet, it thinks for 90 seconds and says no line is now 3.5. I don´t bet, refresh lines, or have someone else check, line is still 4 for everyone else but i can´t bet, they are effectively dealing me +3.5 and -4.
                            Another poster sent me an email of a similar complaint. I asked for some sort of proof, and didn't get it.

                            Any chance you could do a short vid showing this? Or even screen-shots?
                            Comment
                            • durito
                              SBR Posting Legend
                              • 07-03-06
                              • 13173

                              #154
                              It was over a year ago, I don´t have money there anymore.
                              Comment
                              • bubba
                                SBR MVP
                                • 09-29-05
                                • 2432

                                #155
                                Originally posted by Justin7
                                Another poster sent me an email of a similar complaint. I asked for some sort of proof, and didn't get it.

                                Any chance you could do a short vid showing this? Or even screen-shots?
                                they definitely did this to me too! if a price looked good, half the time i was unable to bet it.
                                Comment
                                • evo34
                                  SBR MVP
                                  • 11-09-08
                                  • 1032

                                  #156
                                  I love how being in a renegade industry (immune to regulation and lawsuits) allows for absurd policies. If a market maker in stock trading makes a big mistake and gets destroyed, guess what...he eats it. He doesn't try to cancel it, claiming he followed some other market maker who made an error. It's very clear what the right ruling is here; the only reason the "obvious error" defense even exists is that sportsbooks have zero responsibility for their actions.
                                  Comment
                                  • wrongturn
                                    SBR MVP
                                    • 06-06-06
                                    • 2228

                                    #157
                                    Why is it a surprise for betus dealing dual lines? Bodog is a leader in that technology . I still think it is a great book though.
                                    Comment
                                    • yisman
                                      SBR Aristocracy
                                      • 09-01-08
                                      • 75682

                                      #158
                                      Originally posted by durito
                                      They have a selective delay. Line is +4, I try to bet, it thinks for 90 seconds and says no line is now 3.5. I don´t bet, refresh lines, or have someone else check, line is still 4 for everyone else but i can´t bet, they are effectively dealing me +3.5 and -4.
                                      It sounds to me like the delay doesn't play into it. If the line was still 4 for everyone else after rejecting the bet, they're just not allowing you to bet +4. It doesn't sound like they'd need a delay to do that.
                                      [quote=jjgold;5683305]I win again like usual
                                      [/quote]

                                      [quote=Whippit;7921056]miami won't lose a single eastern conference game through end of season[/quote]
                                      Comment
                                      • Justin7
                                        SBR Hall of Famer
                                        • 07-31-06
                                        • 8577

                                        #159
                                        Originally posted by wrongturn
                                        Why is it a surprise for betus dealing dual lines? Bodog is a leader in that technology . I still think it is a great book though.
                                        The claim against BetUS is worse. It is fair for a book to deal dual lines. The claim here is that BetUS is offering a line, but only willing to take one side of the bet. If you take the "good side", they are claiming the line moved.

                                        If anyone could replicate this with proof, I would do a feature on it. I imagine that if they do this, they only do it to certain accounts.
                                        Comment
                                        • wrongturn
                                          SBR MVP
                                          • 06-06-06
                                          • 2228

                                          #160
                                          Originally posted by Justin7
                                          The claim against BetUS is worse. It is fair for a book to deal dual lines. The claim here is that BetUS is offering a line, but only willing to take one side of the bet. If you take the "good side", they are claiming the line moved.

                                          If anyone could replicate this with proof, I would do a feature on it. I imagine that if they do this, they only do it to certain accounts.
                                          Maybe I misunderstood. But after the line moves from +4 to +3.5, can he cancel the +4 bet, and then bet -3.5? Because if it is allowed to bet -3.5, that is essentially dual line, although the setup is much worse than bodog, which is upfront about it.
                                          Comment
                                          • durito
                                            SBR Posting Legend
                                            • 07-03-06
                                            • 13173

                                            #161
                                            Originally posted by yisman
                                            It sounds to me like the delay doesn't play into it. If the line was still 4 for everyone else after rejecting the bet, they're just not allowing you to bet +4. It doesn't sound like they'd need a delay to do that.
                                            They don't. The delay is used to pretend they aren't selectively taking action. It is supposed to appear that the line just happened to change during the delay.
                                            Comment
                                            • skrtelfan
                                              SBR MVP
                                              • 10-09-08
                                              • 1913

                                              #162
                                              Originally posted by durito
                                              They have a selective delay. Line is +4, I try to bet, it thinks for 90 seconds and says no line is now 3.5. I don´t bet, refresh lines, or have someone else check, line is still 4 for everyone else but i can´t bet, they are effectively dealing me +3.5 and -4.
                                              Same thing here, as ForgetWallStreet says below, the dual line thing seems worse with soccer. As the other poster says, the delay really isn't necessary to do that, and sometimes the line changes immediately while other times it does the 90 second pause.

                                              I don't understand why Justin7 doesn't seem to know about this issue because I've read many threads where this issue has been discussed in response to Justin7's discussion of BetUS.
                                              Comment
                                              • skrtelfan
                                                SBR MVP
                                                • 10-09-08
                                                • 1913

                                                #163
                                                Originally posted by Justin7
                                                The claim against BetUS is worse. It is fair for a book to deal dual lines. The claim here is that BetUS is offering a line, but only willing to take one side of the bet. If you take the "good side", they are claiming the line moved.

                                                If anyone could replicate this with proof, I would do a feature on it. I imagine that if they do this, they only do it to certain accounts.
                                                I deposited a very small amount there, only made a few bets, and they weren't very large at all, so I would be flabbergasted if they somehow targeted my account. Did you ever bet soccer there? I would further be flabbergasted if you were able to bet soccer there without any problems, as I've seen numerous threads about BetUS's soccer shenanigans.
                                                Comment
                                                • Justin7
                                                  SBR Hall of Famer
                                                  • 07-31-06
                                                  • 8577

                                                  #164
                                                  Originally posted by skrtelfan
                                                  Same thing here, as ForgetWallStreet says below, the dual line thing seems worse with soccer. As the other poster says, the delay really isn't necessary to do that, and sometimes the line changes immediately while other times it does the 90 second pause.

                                                  I don't understand why Justin7 doesn't seem to know about this issue because I've read many threads where this issue has been discussed in response to Justin7's discussion of BetUS.
                                                  I have heard about it. I have asked for proof. If I am going to blast a book, I need to confirm or duplicate the issue.
                                                  Comment
                                                  • ForgetWallStreet
                                                    SBR Sharp
                                                    • 04-27-07
                                                    • 342

                                                    #165
                                                    Originally posted by Justin7
                                                    I have heard about it. I have asked for proof. If I am going to blast a book, I need to confirm or duplicate the issue.
                                                    When you get kicked from there they make it so you that can't even log in so most of those who have experienced this issue in the past won't be able to help you here.
                                                    Comment
                                                    • trixtrix
                                                      Restricted User
                                                      • 04-13-06
                                                      • 1897

                                                      #166
                                                      Originally posted by wrongturn
                                                      Well, books have right to close account for any reason, as long as balance paid in full. Although it sounds unfair to players, it is still better than being paid in full and account closed a day later, without receiving a second choice.
                                                      the pt of contention is NOT whether book has the right to close account, it's whether it would be fair to the players if they don't explicitly define the reason for doing so up front.

                                                      that is explicitly punishing the players for something the book could've spelled out up front, essentially punishing the players for a book's laziness
                                                      Comment
                                                      • Frank
                                                        SBR Wise Guy
                                                        • 10-13-07
                                                        • 918

                                                        #167
                                                        Originally posted by trixtrix
                                                        the pt of contention is NOT whether book has the right to close account, it's whether it would be fair to the players if they don't explicitly define the reason for doing so up front.

                                                        that is explicitly punishing the players for something the book could've spelled out up front, essentially punishing the players for a book's laziness
                                                        Taking a shot at a book is reason enough to punish a player and it doesn't need to be spelled out in a rule.

                                                        It's like a boxer smashing his oppenent's face at the beginning of the fight when he was trying to touch gloves. There isn't a rule on that.

                                                        It's a cheap shot.
                                                        Comment
                                                        • trixtrix
                                                          Restricted User
                                                          • 04-13-06
                                                          • 1897

                                                          #168
                                                          Originally posted by Frank
                                                          Taking a shot at a book is reason enough to punish a player and it doesn't need to be spelled out in a rule.

                                                          It's like a boxer smashing his oppenent's face at the beginning of the fight when he was trying to touch gloves. There isn't a rule on that.

                                                          It's a cheap shot.
                                                          there is an explicit rule on that: "protect yourself at all times" (in fact the ref reiterates this at the beginning of every fight)
                                                          Comment
                                                          • wrongturn
                                                            SBR MVP
                                                            • 06-06-06
                                                            • 2228

                                                            #169
                                                            Originally posted by trixtrix
                                                            the pt of contention is NOT whether book has the right to close account, it's whether it would be fair to the players if they don't explicitly define the reason for doing so up front.

                                                            that is explicitly punishing the players for something the book could've spelled out up front, essentially punishing the players for a book's laziness
                                                            I'd love to see books clearly define what a bad line is. In reality they can't and won't. In most disputed cases it is totally unfair to players to have bets voided, but at the same time books feel it is unfair to them to let bets stand, and in some cases, justifiably so. So Pinnacle's two-choice solution is a good trade-off, and it is much better than voiding bets as the only choice.
                                                            Comment
                                                            • Frank
                                                              SBR Wise Guy
                                                              • 10-13-07
                                                              • 918

                                                              #170
                                                              Originally posted by trixtrix
                                                              there is an explicit rule on that: "protect yourself at all times" (in fact the ref reiterates this at the beginning of every fight)
                                                              That is not in the boxing rulebook.

                                                              It is something taught to boxers as a guideline to fight by kinda like don't take shots is a guideline to gamble by.
                                                              Comment
                                                              • trixtrix
                                                                Restricted User
                                                                • 04-13-06
                                                                • 1897

                                                                #171
                                                                Originally posted by Frank
                                                                That is not in the boxing rulebook.

                                                                It is something taught to boxers as a guideline to fight by kinda like don't take shots is a guideline to gamble by.
                                                                it is an explicit instruction given to the fighters both in their dressing rooms and before the match by the referee, you're 100% wrong here, i'm a bit of stickler when it comes to fight sports

                                                                Obey the referee's instructions. Protect yourself at all times. In the event of a knockdown, go to a neutral corner. Touch gloves and wait for the bell to start round one.


                                                                Comment
                                                                • sharpcat
                                                                  Restricted User
                                                                  • 12-19-09
                                                                  • 4516

                                                                  #172
                                                                  Originally posted by trixtrix
                                                                  it is an explicit instruction given to the fighters both in their dressing rooms and before the match by the referee, you're 100% wrong here, i'm a bit of stickler when it comes to fight sports

                                                                  Obey the referee's instructions. Protect yourself at all times. In the event of a knockdown, go to a neutral corner. Touch gloves and wait for the bell to start round one.


                                                                  http://ezinearticles.com/?Protect-Yo...mes&id=6092492
                                                                  +1


                                                                  Protect yourself at all times is warned seconds before the start of every single fight for at least the last 30+ years.

                                                                  You drop your guard and get KO'd you got KO'd!!!!!!!!!!
                                                                  Comment
                                                                  • soxwin1917
                                                                    SBR MVP
                                                                    • 09-09-08
                                                                    • 1188

                                                                    #173
                                                                    Originally posted by sharpcat
                                                                    +1 Protect yourself at all times is warned seconds before the start of every single fight for at least the last 30+ years. You drop your guard and get KO'd you got KO'd!!!!!!!!!!
                                                                    THIS. However let's not get too far off-topic here.
                                                                    Comment
                                                                    • Frank
                                                                      SBR Wise Guy
                                                                      • 10-13-07
                                                                      • 918

                                                                      #174
                                                                      Originally posted by trixtrix
                                                                      it is an explicit instruction given to the fighters both in their dressing rooms and before the match by the referee, you're 100% wrong here, i'm a bit of stickler when it comes to fight sports

                                                                      Obey the referee's instructions. Protect yourself at all times. In the event of a knockdown, go to a neutral corner. Touch gloves and wait for the bell to start round one.


                                                                      http://ezinearticles.com/?Protect-Yo...mes&id=6092492
                                                                      Either way smashing an opponent while touching gloves is totally frowned upon and thought of as unsportsmanlike.

                                                                      The same could be said as taking a shot at a book or a book taking a shot at a player.

                                                                      All are cheap shots.
                                                                      Comment
                                                                      • sharpcat
                                                                        Restricted User
                                                                        • 12-19-09
                                                                        • 4516

                                                                        #175
                                                                        Originally posted by Frank
                                                                        Either way smashing an opponent while touching gloves is totally frowned upon and thought of as unsportsmanlike.

                                                                        The same could be said as taking a shot at a book or a book taking a shot at a player.

                                                                        All are cheap shots.
                                                                        If a fighter drops his guard during a fight he is fair game.

                                                                        Gamblers dropping their guard are fair game to bookies.

                                                                        Why are bookies exempt from paying the price when they drop their guard?
                                                                        Comment
                                                                        SBR Contests
                                                                        Collapse
                                                                        Top-Rated US Sportsbooks
                                                                        Collapse
                                                                        Working...