Incorrect pitcher listing, action bet cancelled

[headgames]

Hi everyone.

I've not come across this before so I'm just asking whether or not this is standard in the industry so I know in future.

Earlier I wagered (action/action) Texas Rangers to beat Oakland Athletics at my favourite place, Pinnacle Sports. Logged in just now and found the wager was cancelled with the reason "Incorrect pitcher for OAk T. Ross was listed instead of T.Cahill".

Have I bet a 'bad line' here as that's the only rule (general or sport specific) that I can see might relate to my bet? I just thought my bet would stand as it was a team v team bet but that a price adjustment might occur depending on who pitched.

Thanks.

[Hareeba!]

Have you checked what their rules say about such an occurrence ?

[big joe 1212]

Hi everyone.

I've not come across this before so I'm just asking whether or not this is standard in the industry so I know in future.

Earlier I wagered (action/action) Texas Rangers to beat Oakland Athletics at my favourite place, Pinnacle Sports. Logged in just now and found the wager was cancelled with the reason "Incorrect pitcher for OAk T. Ross was listed instead of T.Cahill".

Have I bet a 'bad line' here as that's the only rule (general or sport specific) that I can see might relate to my bet? I just thought my bet would stand as it was a team v team bet but that a price adjustment might occur depending on who pitched.

Thanks.

They should pay you with the price adjustment.

Did you call them to find out an explanation?

[BigDaddy]

incorrect pitcher

its no bet

as no price adjustment ever occurred.

[Santo]

Interesting one -- What BD says makes sense but a price did exist for the matchup between the two pitchers that started, and so you could argue an action bet between the two teams was possible to grade.

[WileOut]

Should stand. Action means if they start a guy from the stands the bet is on. Especially since no price adjustment occurred? Not sure what else could be in play here but pinny will do the right thing. Had this happen once, got a good price on Garza and action on the other pitcher as the only other possibility if he was scratched was a worse pitcher. He was scratched and everything stood. Small time local though. At least that is what he would lead me to believe. $500 limits on MLB sides after we started at 2k and I won 2 games lol.

[OSUCOWBOYS]

incorrect pitcher

its no bet

as no price adjustment ever occurred.

End of thread.

[dazed99]

Please update when you get a response from Pinnacle. I like to bet action on baseball and rarely look at the starting pitchers. Thanks in advance

[Hareeba!]

1. Money-line wagers on baseball will be accepted in the following manner:
   • Action - team against team, regardless of the starting pitchers.
   
   
2. In the event there is a pitching change prior to the game, the money-line will be re-adjusted and "action" wagers will be graded using the opening price for the new pitcher.

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

OP's bet stands at adjusted odds

What am I missing ?

[cobra_king]

There was never a pitching change though. Pinnacle had just listed the incorrect pitcher for Oakland. Cahill always was going to start, even though they listed Ross for the longest time.

[Hareeba!]

There was never a pitching change though. Pinnacle had just listed the incorrect pitcher for Oakland. Cahill always was going to start, even though they listed Ross for the longest time.

yes, but: Action - team against team, regardless of the starting pitchers

surely that's definitive enough ?

[cobra_king]

My point was that number 2 on their rules doesn`t apply in this case. From what it seems to me, every bet, action or listed, was cancelled until they put the correct pitcher up. OP may have a point, and would surely get paid if he pressed (likely losing his account), but Pinnacle has decided that posting an incorrect pitcher, thus leading to an incorrect line, voids all wagers, action or otherwise.

[Hareeba!]

My point was that number 2 on their rules doesn`t apply in this case. From what it seems to me, every bet, action or listed, was cancelled until they put the correct pitcher up. OP may have a point, and would surely get paid if he pressed (likely losing his account), but Pinnacle has decided that posting an incorrect pitcher, thus leading to an incorrect line, voids all wagers, action or otherwise.

yes, I can see the logic of saying 2 doesn't apply but that leaves you with a very positive statement in rule 1 and the only question to be determined then is what odds should be applied

whilst rule 2 doesn't appear to apply it must be the most appropriate guide to what should occur ... and they need to fix their rules to cover this eventuality in future

[boscokid]

incorrect pitcher its no bet as no price adjustment ever occurred.

correct

[Hareeba!]

correct

that seems an overly technical interpretation of the situation in the absence of a rule to cover the contingency

how do you justify going against:

Action - team against team, regardless of the starting pitchers ?

[Monte]

It's his responsibility to check what he bets on, someone who is serious about a mlb bet would *always* look on the pitchers listed...even if he bets action..to understand the odds etc.
This has nothing to do with action or listed, all bets should be cancelled if the book made a mistake on the pitcher.
I don't see how there can be a discussion about this.

[Hareeba!]

It's his responsibility to check what he bets on, someone who is serious about a mlb bet would *always* look on the pitchers listed...even if he bets action..to understand the odds etc.
This has nothing to do with action or listed, all bets should be cancelled if the book made a mistake on the pitcher.
I don't see how there can be a discussion about this.

If I see a pitcher different to the one I had expected I simply assume that there has been a change. How is the player supposed to know it was an error to start with ? You don't expect Pinnacle to make such basic errors.

One prior poster said he always bets Action and never concerns himself with pitchers at all.

Pinnacle is at fault here in not have a rule in place to cover this contingency and the obvious fair settlement is to pay the bet at the price they put on correcting their error.

[Ruifgalmeida]

action is action doesnt matter who is pitching , pinny should grade the winner

[headgames]

Thanks for all the responses however you've concluded. I am awaiting their decision as my query has been passed to the relevant department.

I'm not suggesting they are wrong but, as my initial post set out, I was wondering about the industry 'norm' (if there is one) in the apparent absence of a rule covering this situation.

I looked, and it appears some of you have too, and I just can't see what rule it is which is why I asked if this comes down to a 'bad line'. If you think about tennis, it could be a Nadal v Federer final and priced 'correctly' but if they say Murray instead of Nadal, it's a cancelled bet, right? So that's why I'm asking is that's what's happened here regardless of the fact it's baseball and an action bet where all I was betting on was team v team, regardless of who pitched.

From my point of view, no I'm not knowledgable about baseball and no I didn't check the pitcher. Being a poor bettor is to my detriment of course! But I do not see how that point has any relevance as I'm only enquiring if this kind of cancellation is the 'norm'.

Whether I am an informed bettor or not in terms of who is pitching, to avoid placing this bet I would still need to understand from their rules that to bet action when the incorrect pitcher is listed would lead to a cancelled bet. At the time I bet I did not know that and from looking at the rules, I still do not know that. So knowing who was pitching is one thing, but knowing how a wrong listing affects an action bet is a separate issue.

Of course, if this is 'the norm' then that's that. I'm not trying to scam Pinnacle (as they will know from my long bet history) nor is this dealing with much money at all so i'm trying to present a situation that has happened to a fair, if not very good, bettor since it seems others may not have expected this either - whether it's a right or wrong decision.

[Hareeba!]

I don't think there is a 'norm' here as this is a pretty unique situation.

[durito]

1. Money-line wagers on baseball will be accepted in the following manner:
   • Action - team against team, regardless of the starting pitchers.
   
   
2. In the event there is a pitching change prior to the game, the money-line will be re-adjusted and "action" wagers will be graded using the opening price for the new pitcher.

Seems pretty clear-cut to me.

OP's bet stands at adjusted odds

What am I missing ?

everything as usual

[shari91]

It was a bad line. Ross is on the DL and has been since May 20. There was no conceivable possibility of him starting this game as he's not on the active roster - MLB rules wouldn't have allowed it. Pinny may as well have put shari91 as the starting pitcher. Same difference.

[Hareeba!]

It was a bad line. Ross is on the DL and has been since May 20. There was no conceivable possibility of him starting this game as he's not on the active roster - MLB rules wouldn't have allowed it. Pinny may as well have put shari91 as the starting pitcher. Same difference.

Yes, I think everyone acknowledges that but it was an 'Action' bet :

Money-line wagers on baseball will be accepted in the following manner:

• Action - team against team, regardless of the starting pitchers.

so what does it matter what the line was for the pitchers quoted ?

[big joe 1212]

Did they cancel the wager before the game started?

[shari91]

Yes, I think everyone acknowledges that but it was an 'Action' bet : Money-line wagers on baseball will be accepted in the following manner:

• Action - team against team, regardless of the starting pitchers.

so what does it matter what the line was for the pitchers quoted ?

Where did anyone acknowledge that? And thanks for repeating the definition of an action bet. I'm well aware of what it is. Maybe logic should be applied as to why Pinnacle voided the bet and this is the first time most of us have heard of them doing this?

If they had the Cookie Monster listed as a pitcher, should the bet have stood or would you say it was an obvious error? He had as much chance of pitching as someone who is not even on the roster.

[Hareeba!]

Where did anyone acknowledge that? And thanks for repeating the definition of an action bet. I'm well aware of what it is. Maybe logic should be applied as to why Pinnacle voided the bet and this is the first time most of us have heard of them doing this?

If they had the Cookie Monster listed as a pitcher, should the bet have stood or would you say it was an obvious error? He had as much chance of pitching as someone who is not even on the roster.

sorry Shari but I still can't understand why it should matter who was listed to pitch if the player elected to bet on one team to win regardless

[headgames]

Did they cancel the wager before the game started?

I believe so as I placed the bet at 5.12am (server time) on the 10th July and when I expand the settlement in the statement it then lists a time of 7.25am with the incorrect pitcher detail. After placing that bet I placed a series of others but only across the following half hour. I logged out and then didn't get back to the PC until it was too late (games finished) which is when I saw the notice.

I haven't yet heard back since it was passed on to the relevant department but thanks again for everyone's comments.

[Jontheman]

Where did anyone acknowledge that? And thanks for repeating the definition of an action bet. I'm well aware of what it is. Maybe logic should be applied as to why Pinnacle voided the bet and this is the first time most of us have heard of them doing this?

If they had the Cookie Monster listed as a pitcher, should the bet have stood or would you say it was an obvious error? He had as much chance of pitching as someone who is not even on the roster.

So what if they did have Cookie Monster up at +10000 (or would he be -10,000!!). The OP can't disadvantage the book as they can clear any error, reset any relevant lines, start the market again at the price of their choosing and take his action. Letting the bet stand in the situation described is good for the player (they wanted to place the bet and have chosen to accept any pitcher-induced line changes) and good for the book (they take action at a price they are happy with - that's how they make money, yes?). Voiding the bet is utterly illogical and unfair.

Pinny should pay up here at the fair price. If it happens that the price was intended for the true pitchers (and therefore was a palp while the error pitchers were listed) then that's completely irrelevant in these circumstances. All that matters is that the bettor is placing a fair bet which will be booked at a fair price. Well-run honourable books shouldn't be cancelling these.

[shari91]

sorry Shari but I still can't understand why it should matter who was listed to pitch if the player elected to bet on one team to win regardless

To me it just seems like any other case when we sit here and discuss whether or not it's logical for a book to declare a bad line or not. If a line is hung and it's impossible for one side of the line to eventuate then is that a bad line? To me it is. The OP stated the bet was cancelled before the game started but he didn't notice because he was away from his computer. So they've obviously noticed the mistake 2hrs later, took down the line and cancelled bets before rehanging it with the correct pitcher.

If Pinny had decided not to cancel this bet then you'd have people on the losing side complaining they wanted their money refunded because it would've been impossible for Ross to pitch. I can't imagine that would go down too well if people lost money when Cookie Monster was listed.

[shari91]

So what if they did have Cookie Monster up at +10000 (or would he be -10,000!!). The OP can't disadvantage the book as they can clear any error, reset any relevant lines, start the market again at the price of their choosing and take his action. Letting the bet stand in the situation described is good for the player (they wanted to place the bet and have chosen to accept any pitcher-induced line changes) and good for the book (they take action at a price they are happy with - that's how they make money, yes?). Voiding the bet is utterly illogical and unfair.

Pinny should pay up here at the fair price. If it happens that the price was intended for the true pitchers (and therefore was a palp while the error pitchers were listed) then that's completely irrelevant in these circumstances. All that matters is that the bettor is placing a fair bet which will be booked at a fair price. Well-run honourable books shouldn't be cancelling these.

What well-run honourable book are you aware of that would cancel an obvious error and throw your money on the re-hung line without confirming with you first? Do you think the people on the A's in this bet would agree with your assessment if that's what Pinny had decided to do?

Any book that did that without speaking with the client first wouldn't be considered honourable for very long. Bad line = bets voided before the game and customers notified ideally with time to re-bet. That's what happened here. If the OP were on the As in this game, this thread wouldn't exist.

[iQon]

It would help to know what other offshores had Oakland listed as at the same time.

For example, if Pinny had Oakland @ +200

But the best price you could get anywhere else would be... +150.

I'd say you're screwed. But if every book roughly had the same odds, than you should be paid.

[headgames]

If the OP were on the As in this game, this thread wouldn't exist.

I'm absolutely fine with your summary but that character inference is not true whatsover.

From post #1, I have tried only to find out what rule it is that means this bet could be cancelled. From the beginning I asked if it was simply counting as a 'bad line' and some have said it is. If that is the case then, as I said, at least I know what rule is being implemented which is all I've asked Pinnacle themselves to state.

Whatever side of the bet I had been on, I would have wanted to find out what's happened. Someone else in this thread also said they don't check pitchers for action bets. If it's necessary to do so in case they have put up the wrong name, then it would be worth knowing.

I was simply betting action on favourites (14 of them across two days: 12 won, 1 lost and 1 was cancelled). The wagers were small and the outcome of this settlement is insignificant. It's the rule I wanted to ask about.

iQon, I can only tell you the odds I took on Texas as I didn't look anywhere else but Pinnacle that day. I took 1.671 decimal so -149 American?

[shari91]

headgames I honestly didn't mean any disrespect to you by saying that but the simple fact is that the people who took the A's in this instance obviously wouldn't have started this thread as they wouldn't have a problem with Pinny's decision to void it. In fact, if Pinny had followed the direction that a few have suggested and just re-placed everyone's bets without consulting them, I'm sure there would be more threads than just one from people on the A's who felt robbed because an impossible pitcher was listed to begin with. That's why I think their decision was fair. Void everyone's bets with enough time for the bettor to take the correct line. If this had happened after the game was finished or even during the game, then that would be a different story.

Best of luck with it all.

[headgames]

No problem.

I guess the way you're coming at it brings is asking this question: if you were on the other side to me and Pinnacle had put up the wrong pitcher and let your action bet stand (so you lost your money), would you complain?

Well you may but surely a legitimate complaint would only arise if it was in their rules to cancel the bet and they failed to. "Hey you listed the wrong guy and even though I was betting on action and the team to win, your rules still say I should get my money back!" This is why I'm saying I would be posting regardless since I looked at their rules and could see nothing covering this scenario except the chance that this may count as a bad line.

So if the rule is the 'bad line' rule and that applies to this specific scenario of a wrongly listed pitcher invalidating team v team action bets, then I am 100% fine. The most important thing is that any bookmaker acts out their rules whether it mean I would win or lose. I still await their response and will post up whatever way it goes and hopefully anyone interested will at least know, if they didn't already, they really need to check the pitcher even when betting action.

Thanks.

[shari91]

No problem. I guess the way you're coming at it brings is asking this question: if you were on the other side to me and Pinnacle had put up the wrong pitcher and let your action bet stand (so you lost your money), would you complain? Well you may but surely a legitimate complaint would only arise if it was in their rules to cancel the bet and they failed to. "Hey you listed the wrong guy and even though I was betting on action and the team to win, your rules still say I should get my money back!" This is why I'm saying I would be posting regardless since I looked at their rules and could see nothing covering this scenario except the chance that this may count as a bad line. So if the rule is the 'bad line' rule and that applies to this specific scenario of a wrongly listed pitcher invalidating team v team action bets, then I am 100% fine. The most important thing is that any bookmaker acts out their rules whether it mean I would win or lose. I still await their response and will post up whatever way it goes and hopefully anyone interested will at least know, if they didn't already, they really need to check the pitcher even when betting action. Thanks.

The thing is, posting an impossible occurrence to me constitutes a bad line. You can't set odds on something that could never happen that day.

So if they didn't void my bet, yeah of course I'd argue as to why this was a bad line. Although I guess they could counter-argue that I should know that Ross had no hope of starting and since it was an action bet it should stand, I'd simply say that basic logic should assume that an action bet involves the possible interchange of pitchers who are actually on the roster. Not someone who hasn't played in close to 2 months and is still on the DL and is therefore forbidden to play.