-
Comment -
Winning poker players are very methodological and specific in everything they do. Some idiot with spelling errors in his posts, leaving details out and complaining about a $300 payout from years of grinding 0.25-0.50 NLE are the charge-back, chip-dumping kind. There are numerous examples of these types in the forum. Greg seems way more credible at this point than someone who is "not too specific".Comment -
BOL rep Alex has been silent. Can't believe he hasn't seen this thread yet. Perhaps someone should PM him.Comment -
Betonline has offered piss poor customer service and has shown to be incapable of paying in a timely fashion and communicating with their players over the last year. Far too many complaints, from both respected posters at SBR and new posters, for SBR to sweep their issues under the rug any longer. Absolutely a joke that not one single complaint has made the SBR newswire talk about a "WHITEWASHING".
No more smoke and mirrors the players are getting fed up with the terrible customer service at Betonline because they have shown no interest in fixing it. This to me reeks of the type of book who is getting ready to pull a stiff job.
Even if the OP did chip dump Betonline should be held partly responsible for being so fukkin incompetent that they would run a poker room where they had absolutely no security set up to protect them from this. Judging by how they run their sportsbook I do believe that it is completely possible that the folks over there are just flat out incompetent fukkin morons.Comment -
This is good news for the OP imo. The fact J7 posted in this thread, BOL is responding to him and another pro had his funds released. Some points here though.
Disclosing Hand Histories
Justin brings up the question of what's reasonable for the site to release hand histories. Very serious response here, 72 hours? 1 week at most? The thing is most sites release hand histories upon requests (not just in times of disputes, but anytime they're requested). I'll point out though that no this isn't true of every site but it is true of most, and the ones that don't have a shady stigma attached to them for other reasons as well.
Hand histories are what uncovered the biggest insider cheating scandals at sites such as Pitbull Poker, Absolute Poker, Ultimate Bet where someone from inside the company was cheating players through access of their hole cards. Additionally, if a player suspects other players might be colluding against him - he can use the hand histories to investigate on his own and avoid those players if his own investigation warrants so. There is an option at BetOnline to check a button and have all hand histories stored to computer. As a courtesy if a player hasn't done this they should be able to go to the site and ask for them. In times of disputes then for sure the hand histories should be released (immediately in my opinion - though can understand why they wouldn't if perhaps going to be paying the player in the near future). At this point the site is slow paying a player and NOW doing an investigation. It's a damn good thing sites like SBR and 2+2 exist and other forums have brought attention to this too, because this site (BetOnline) had already told the player he was guilty on multiple occasions.
Regarding BetOnline Poker a 3rd Concern
What you need to understand here is that affiliate manager Simon Eaton showed up on affiliate forums talking BetOnline up as the solution to PokerStars and Full Tilt leaving the US, and that BetOnline was rushing to get affiliate tracking for their poker room. They then hired one of the best known poker affiliate managers Stephen Freund. Stephen has was the AM of Paradise Poker for ages (the first major site in the US market) and when they left the US, he moved over to Sportsbook.com / PlayersOnly and dealt with tons of affiliates - he's a fixture as a poker affiliate manager and was hired by BetOnline. Now BetOnline advertises on the largest affiliate forum and until recently had CPA deals (cost per acquisition) at two "poker" affiliate networks.
Now check this out: http://pokerscout.com/SiteDetail.asp...ion&ab=1298276
Look at the six month trend for evidence of this. The size of the Action Poker network has nearly quadrupled due to BetOnline introducing US players to it. It might have more than quadrupled due to way average player volume is counted but the exact figure isn't important.
There are advertisements all over the net marketing BetOnline as a the best poker site for US players.
It appears very much they got in over their head and were not prepared. @ Justin: what you suggest is that BetOnline does not have enough staff qualified to do this audit is probably true, but is ALSO a VERY serious issue. This is a major poker site in the US market and they've been seizing funds.
I believe BetOnline has been confiscating balances based only on mere suspicion of cheating, chip dumping and collusion and then claiming it was conclusive. I believe based on their great reputation and a few people being guilty that some legit complaints may have fallen through the cracks. I can't say that for certain, but I tend to feel strongly full audits on other complaints have not been done. I don't mean external third part audits (this part I'm rather sure of it hasn't happened). I mean I believe BetOnline is confiscating funds because they strongly suspect wrong doing and perhaps lack the skills to make a conclusive determination, so for them, close enough is good enough. But really, close enough is NOT good enough - because... legit players who go on a heater and run well will then end up being accused of cheats and run the risk of being wrongfully accused, convicted and not being paid. (as of now: BetOnline is judge, jury and executioner in these matters).
I hope this post is coherent and you guys understand where I'm coming from. Perhaps no intent on BOLs part - but with what I believe is happening any past complaints where there might be some doubt, you guys might want to at least scan them and ask "did this site provide sufficient evidence to reasonably assume the fund confiscation was just". I can understand taking a site who had a great reputations word as being true (so apologize for some of my past comments - if you guys were not aware of the looming issues) but now based on Greg's case here please consider asking for a little more evidence in BetOnline disputes because I believe they are a poker site that had good intent, got in over their head, are now just doing the best they can, but as a result are also a site legit winners have a high risk playing with. In any case for whatever reason these issues exist really what needs to happen is BetOnline needs to fix it and fix it fast because otherwise players who play in their poker room and go on a legit heater are likely to be wrongfully accused and have funds confiscated from them as well.
Reminder:
To point out again, this is a poker room that likely accounts (by my math) for 83% of the real money ring game players seated on the network during US peak hours. They might be massive for sports betting, but this is far less of a side offer than say 5Dimes throwing in a poker skin players can use. The poker is a secondary offer only holds minor weight when there is combined 7 figures passing through their poker room routinely. Ignoring network rooms and focusing only on operators: by player volume of sites offering a sports/poker/casino product that accept US players - they are #2 in size for poker, with only Bodog well ahead of them.
Please understand my only intent here is to introduce facts perhaps poster and SBR are not aware of.Last edited by prop; 11-23-11, 03:44 AM.Comment -
65k is petty? Seriously, BOL owes some kind of direct response. I don't know if the OP is 100% in the right or perhaps a complete fraud, but I do know he's the only party presenting his case. I think BOL's silence speaks volumes as well as SBR's treatment of this case thus far. BOL drags its feet and SBR does nothing--not even a mere mention on its news page that a 65k dispute even exists with BOL. Shame on SBR..Last edited by HedgeHog; 11-22-11, 06:21 PM.Comment -
jajaja this is amazing, seriously. I've seen a guy complaining for not getting paid $500 hitting the newswire, but a very loud and clear situation like this one gets all the circles possible.
It is unbelievable someone actually believes the ratings, anything from A-B are just books sponsoring the site or being cultivated for future sponsorships.
Guys at SBR please, lets pretend to be impartial and put a note on the wire, this can not be ignored.Comment -
I requested a hand history for sat night's hands to send them which tourneys i was kicked out of during their poker problems. I requested this at 9 am on sunday, was told it would be sent within 24 hours.
I checked back last night and they said 'we thought we sent it, but will request it again'.. Got response today that 'request has been submitted'...
its pretty patheticComment -
The tops at SBR would be fantastic congressmen. They Know how to take bribes like the best of them. Sadly, the paper has circumvented all integrity. Let's try and be honest here, sbr. The least you could do is put this on the news wire.Comment -
The analysis of the hand histories can take a while. People are not upset with BOL that much in regards to time for analysis. Take your time and get it right.
What is grating is the refusal to turn over raw data...ie the complete hand histories of the OP to the op and a third party like SBR. Defendants are allowed disclosure of evidence when face with accusations.
BOL and SBR are skipping, skirting, avoiding, and ignoring the question of why hasnt the raw data been turned over to the OP. The rake that the OP paid includes services like hand histories on a timely basisComment -
Im not talking about this situation im talking about all the complaints as a whole, if u look threw all the threads about compliants most of them are petty and get resolved. U might be a believer of this guy Greg but im not, also he claims he is a regular online player then why would he not have his hand history saved to his computer thats "online poker 101" ,oh he must have just forgotten.Thats pretty much the first thing i do when playing somewhere.
Also i think i have read 5 different cases about poker chargebacks from Betonline and all took like some weeks to complete, why does everyone think this would be different. Everyone in this forum knows that Betonline can't take time to do things, I know this but i still use them because it gives me an edge especially now with the dimeline hockey, i have yet to have any issues with them and even then i know that i will be paid. I also know about the live chat wait so now when i need to get a quick answer i just call them up.
I personally think this needs to be cleared up faster but im not a believer of this guy nor will i endorse scammers especially poker cheats. I would rather just sit on the sidelines now and wait it out.Comment -
I know your issues with them are sour but u don't have to use them, there are so many books out to use. If u want good customer service and want to be pampered then use Betislands also fast payouts. For me i like have alot of options as they have great lines and it works for me, so if i ever have an issue with them i wouldn't be to mad.Comment -
-
Greg seriously I'd put Legions on mute if you feel the need to respond to him. I'm not sure if he's a shill or what the deal is here, but don't get worked up to the point you have all your cards on the table as a result of sharing things with him. This threads been linked to on several large forums and as a result there's plenty of eyes on it. It has to suck sweating this one out - but be patient for a little longer. You give BetOnline anything but the facts and only the facts relevant to this issue and its more potential things you introduce for them to cheat you (for the record: I'm not saying that's their intent - just saying its a possibility getting off topic comes back at you). If you're a legit professional there are ways to prove this conclusively and without any shadow of doubt and you'll have a lot of support at 2+2 where all sorts of ideas will be posted. At this point, wait for SBR to render a decision on your complaint before throwing out anything else. Hopefully it turns out as such that you'll be paid soon and can keep your privacy about your stats and accounts (nothing any poker player should be willing to easily give up). Also be reminded should they clear you - its will take you a while to get all $65,000 off their site so keep calm and just focus on being paid. Trust me I know that isn't easy because I've been stiffed many times in my day. Yours is about 4 times my largest but back then it freaking hurt - I never had as many eyes on my complaint as you got here though so hopefully that helps. Anyways - Good luck.Comment -
This was a very irritating thread to read yesterday, and I wound up thinking about it today. That led me to realize that I don't understand various aspects of poker network money dynamics.
Let's say a network has 15 offshore books putting skins on it. Then a customer at one book(BOL here) scores a large win, and asks for the money. Does the money come from the customer's host book? Does it ever come from a pool created by the 15 books? Is it possible that the large volume of money in that big win came from customers at other books? Thus the host book is being asked to pay money that it never had in its possession? Do the skinning books ever make contracts with each other to apportion large wins?
Is it "obvious", for some reason, that the particular host book has theoretical liability of close to the total of all the skinning books on the network? If so, in the current environment created by those bastards at the DOJ, isn't it insane to play high limits on a network skin?Comment -
Well before getting into your question a couple things to address:
1) BetOnline is the only US site operating on this network (if there are others they are unknown and insignificant).
2) It is obvious and irrefutable that BetOnline and the ActionPoker network share players - the table names are the same and people have tested it and confirmed. Don't even need an account to see this. However both deny any association with one another.
3) you refer to this as offshore books and books when discussing this. Most networks are have a flagship poker only skins and also have partners that are completely legitimate respecting laws and not taking players from anywhere that would present legal challenges. Also they are powered by a network which is its own separate entity. From here with some networks US sportsbooks contribute traffic to them - this is a larger factor at some networks than others.
4) BetOnline is the largest site on this network they deny being a part of by a MILE (obviously if BetOnline says they are not on the Network, and the Network says the same they are not - but this is by means of technicality - they have some other agreement with each other.)
Okay to answer your questions:
Does the money come from the customer's host book? No it comes from players on the network, technically cash outs and withdrawals and players wins and losses should have no effect on the networks win/loss or the sites win/loss. Money in poker is made from the rake (I could give a much longer response on this about liquidity, ecology etc. but lets keep this short answer FAQ).
Does it ever come from a pool created by the 15 books? yes this is referred to as the network bank.
Is it possible that the large volume of money in that big win came from customers at other books? As far as I know there are no other sportsbooks on this network. But yes, it could come from another poker site.
Thus the host book is being asked to pay money that it never had in its possession? poker sites take 4-6 weeks to cash out at some US networks right now. At many networks these payments are handled by the network. In any case the batching here is timely and unless a network goes bust (which has happened) this is not an issue.
Do the skinning books ever make contracts with each other to apportion large wins? These books do not operate independently. This is facilitated by a separate entity "the network".
Is it "obvious", for some reason, that the particular host book has theoretical liability of close to the total of all the skinning books on the network? sorry I'm tired here but didn't understand the final question.
Also in trying to understand networks its important to note: this network operates much different than industry standard.
Action Poker network has a long history of slow paying cashouts dating back a couple years now. When inquiring about the slow pay the email generally comes from the fraud department and its odd - because it seems like the people that complain the most get paid the fastest. Of all networks they are by far the shadiest. They have no protection at for the players to ensure games are fair, and are a haven for scammers. This was an initial concern back in August when a few poker news sites raised concerns/questions about BetOnline's decision to share players with this network. Their own software has the same issues which lead to a high probability players will be cheated (no protection from two computers from same household playing together - I don't know of any other site that's possible). In addition, BetOnline joining the network added a new element to security leaks. It was soon discovered by 2+2 posters investigating BetOnline claim they were not on Action, that it's also possible to open an account at a network skin and BetOnline and play both accounts from the same computer. Meaning you can take two seats at the same real money cash game table with just a single computer. (never ever ever even heard of the ability to do this elsewhere outside a hack/glitch at pokerstars way back in the day - but it took some skills to do and still after reading the reports didn't understand it and couldn't replicate it myself in the hours before it was spotted and quickly fixed - this was a very high profile issue on 2+2 at the time).Last edited by prop; 11-23-11, 03:11 AM.Comment -
if anyone has dealt with the customer service at betonline you will quickly realize they are far from geniuses, so it wont surprise me if this takes a long time to resolve, which is what they want to do anyway..gl hope you dont get stiffed.Comment -
BOL is also aggressive in pushing their new casino games. I can see it is stretching too thin (too greedy?). Hate to see its sporting side is dragged down by issues in poker/casino.Comment -
Another day, another failure of BOL to provide hand histories as requested? What day are we on now?
Justin, any comment about the reasonableness this far out?Comment -
No hint of the $65,000 BOL case on the newswire yet. On the bright side, the BetGrizzly $50 freeplay caper was solved
11.22.2011 06:01 PM
BetGrizzly dispute update
The BetGrizzly (SBR rating D) dispute SBR reported on November 18th is now resolved. BetGrizzly has reopened the account of the player who had his log-in disabled after converting the free starter bonus. The player originally told SBR that he registered for BetGrizzly on November 13th, 2011 and proceeded to take his $50 free trial bonus and increase it to $250. After requesting a payout, the player states that his account was closed.
BetGrizzly management tells SBR that the player's account is now enabled and that it was temporarily closed after the player demonstrated that he did not want to follow the rules of the freeplay. SBR considers this dispute closed.
BetGrizzly has been assessed with an initial rating of D in the SBR Sportsbook ratings guide.
BetGrizzly players with payout complaints are asked to submit a sportsbook complaint form, or dial 1-830-255-4677 during normal business hours to speak with a Sportsbook Review dispute analystComment -
Day 13 of no hand histories. Have not heard back any further updates from Lou ...Comment -
SBR i think it's time to put this out on the news wire.Comment -
10.03.2011 06:13 PM
Sportsbetting.com cancels bet mispriced by .05 during game
A Sportsbetting.com (SBR rating C) player submits a sportsbook wagering complaint. The player tells SBR that he placed a $550 wager on the NY Giants vs Arizona Cardinals halftime total, which was listed at 21 points -105/-115. The player's wager was on "over", priced at -105. The player claims that after 14 points had been scored in the second half, he received an email message indicating that his wager had been canceled. Sportsbetting.com (ag) cited a line error, claiming that the correct line was 21.5 -110/-110.
Sportsbetting.com: The message is to inform you that the wagers on the Second Half total of the New York Giants vs. Arizona Cardinals NFL game scheduled for today Sunday, October 2nd, 2011 have been No Actioned due to a wrong line po sted. The total for the second half of the game was listed as 21.5, UN -115; the correct line was 21.5, -110 either way.
As per our rules,
"We will make every effort to ensure that all information available on our Site is accurate; however, in the case of obvious mechanical, technical or human error in the prices or conditions we publish, we reserve the right, at our discretion, to either modify your wager and to pay you out at the correct prices or to no-action your wager."
Thank you for your understanding.
SBR is attempting to verify this sportsbook complaint. A sportsbook cannot choose to void a wager if it is allegedly mispriced by a mere five cents. Additionally, the player's claim that the wager was accepted then voided during the game would cement the sportsbook's actions as unjust. SBR will update this report.
The Giants played the Cardinals on Oct. 2nd and this hit the SBR newswire on the 3rd absolutely no way that SBR even made an attempt to contact with Sportsbetting.ag and give them a chance to work this out before they put it on the newswire. The issue was resolved within 2 days.
The funniest part is that after I criticized BigBoyDan and SBR for this my SBR account was put on a 1 post per 6,000 second delay and was placed on SBR's ridiculously slow server which takes 2 minutes to load a page. Ironically my account has once again been placed on this same delay for the last 2 days for criticizing SBR in this thread for their actions.
I guess SBR can dish it out but they can not take it.
Comment -
First off I want to offer my services (free) to Greg, SBR (Lou), or BOL to get this thing resolved. I have plenty of experiences with dispute resolution with online casino and sportsbooks.
The real question to this whole dispute and one that can be compared to Justin7's final report on the Cory vs Easystreet case was if these allegations are actually true, then who was the victim here? If Greg was indeed involved in chip dumping then what was the reason for it and who was harmed by him doing it? The hand histories can prove whether chip dumping was used in this case or not, but more importantly it can prove (or disprove) that terms and conditions were breached.
The bottom line is everything is pure speculation without the hand history, but even with proof of chip dumping, the honus is on BOL to come up with a motive and possible damages that occurred due to the actions of Greg.Comment -
johnmoy,
My thoughts exactly. If SBR was a small community we would have a chance to boycott the system but not with 10,000,000,000 members.Comment -
Guys, let SBR work it out first. It is part of deal with sponsors.Comment -
I think that disregarding of letting them "work it out" SBR should by now put the newswire up. That so far is something everybody here agrees on.Comment -
a news report doesnt even have to be blatantly bashing betonline, but can give the unsuspecting/knowledgeable an idea as to what is going on.
"player had 65,000 frozen in his betonline account dating back to (said date). betonline is claiming some form of chip dumping/collusion. player maintains his innocence and has guaranteed the hand history will prove this. betonline has refused to provide the hand history to player or sbr and says they are investigating the matter. stay tuned for further updates."Comment -
I have not asked this question directly but I am assuming BetOnline has still not even released the hand histories to SBR, because if SBR got them they would have made them public already I would assume? Atleast, I would hope that SBR would make them public as soon as they got them since I have been trying to get them for 13 days now and still have got nothing ...Comment
