[Dark Horse]

USER AGREEMENT FOR SBR MARKETING, LTD.

Effective Date: October 13, 2006

Last Modified: October 13, 2006

I. PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS

A. DISCLAIMERS:

1. THIS SITE INCLUDES INFORMATION ABOUT ONLINE GAMING – WE ARE JOURNALISTS WHO WRITE ABOUT GAMING, AND OFFER OTHERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO EXPRESS THEIR VIEWS AND OPINIONS. This website does not recommend or encourage gambling, whether it is illegal or legal. This website is a journalistic enterprise that acts as a watchdog over the online wagering industry. If you are seeking anything other than neutral reportage on this industry, you are visiting the wrong website and you should exit this website immediately.

How does the above journalistic intent fit with the requirement that contestants in free SBR contests should sign up with a NEW sportsbook, and deposit a minimum of $100?

Beat The Prick Football Contest
SBR's Exclusive NFL & College Football Handicapping Contest

RULES & PRIZE INFORMATION

* GETTING STARTED
* HOW TO PLAY
* PRIZE POOL
* THE FINE PRINT

GETTING STARTED:

* Full registration at SBR Contests is required for this contest.
* Contestants are required to open a NEW sportsbook account with one of the following sponsors (in accordance with the rules and policies of each book) and make a minimum deposit of $100 (pre-existing accounts do not qualify):

* Bookmaker
* DSI
* Legendz
* BetJamaica
* 5Dimes
* The Pig
* BetCRIS
* Las Palmas
* Intertops

Are journalists now actively recruiting for sportsbooks, thereby "recommending and encouraging gambling", and if so, what are the legal implications of doing so?

[Mudcat]

I get what you're saying and I don't disagree. I'm not as shocked as you seem. You are treating this like something brand new and eye-opening. To me it is just a continuation of what has been happening since this forum began and before.

I have never thought of SBR as being as squeaky clean as the wording of that USER AGREEMENT sounds. SBR is the best at what it does by a longshot IMO but describing themselves as straight-up journalists is going overboard.

They have been receiving money from and promoting books all along. I'm pretty sure there have been deposit requirements for past contests. I mean, they have a thing called a RECOMMENDED LIST of sportsbooks so it's hard to say that doesn't fall in the category of recommending gambling.

Basically I guess what I'm saying is, I think you could have posted and questioned the wording of that USER AGREEMENT every single day since it was created and had a reasonable debate. Has it gone to a new level today with this BTP stuff? Mmmmm, sure I guess so, a bit.

[durito]

I don't see how this is any differen't from any of the past contests including many that you have played in DH.

If you don't want an account at any of those books, don't sign up.

But, you needed 5 accounts for the 128man handicapping tourney, I didn't see you complaining then.

You had to deposit at cris for BTP in 2006. If you didn't have a cris account, you had to make one. This year you have a choice of books.

I can't see how you can have a problem with this particular contest and not all of the previous ones. There is a very fine line if any between them.


SBR makes money with advertising from sportsbooks. It's in their nature to encourage people to sign up at sportsbooks. Do you use sbrodds for information purposes? No, you use it to gamble at the sponsored books.

[durito]

And to be clear. I am not arguing with what you are saying.

I'm just saying that it's always been like this.

It's like this at Standard's and Poor's when they rate companies that they do business with. It's the nature of the business.

[Dark Horse]

To give information, and provide links, is still a neutral activity. It can easily be presented and defended as providing a useful service to the public.

But to insist that people sign up with books, if they want to participate in free contests, is entirely self-serving. You now MUST sign up with a new book... You may argue that nothing has changed and that it was always like this, to which I can only say that I disagree. Mudcat, for instance, can no longer participate in BTP because he already has accounts everywhere. And, if I remember correctly, SBR did drop the BTP requirement that contestants have a CRIS account following the new anti gambling legislation. So this latest development is an aggressive leap in the other direction.

The first statement that I quoted is SBR covering themselves legally. I understand why this is necessary. What I don't understand is why SBR then proceeds to do exactly what it said it would not do: to recommend and encourage gambling.

This is not about my belief in a squeaky clean SBR. What I'm suggesting is that SBR is no longer operating in accordance with its own legal statement. And if I'm right about that, -I'm hoping SBR can point out that I'm wrong-, then SBR can, in a worst case scenario, be taken to court.

And should that happen (it must at least be considered as a potential), do you really want SBR to have your personal information, including your sportsbook accounts?

We've crossed over into a whole new dynamic. A dynamic where, potentially, SBR becomes a liability to you or me (if you live in the US, that is).

[durito]

SBR is in Coast Rica, they don't exactly have much of a court system there.

I could live on the moon, the US gov't still considers my actions and income their business.

[Willie Bee]

Oh, good lord! If you have the least bit of worries, then don't gamble. If you think our recommended list is crap, then don't gamble there. If you don't want SBR to have your account numbers, then don't play in the contests (and when you have a dispute, don't let us know your account numbers then as well). Pretty simple, actually.

[Dark Horse]

Yes, you're probably right Willie.

I send you a pm.

So I guess that's it, then. Huh.

Oh well, all good things must end. Adios, and thank you SBR for all you've done on behalf of players.

[Willie Bee]

Got it; sent you one back and awaiting your confirmation.

[biggamer3]

So sad, 6K posts and leaving on "moral" grounds?

[dwaechte]

Now, I've read every word of your posts, and I don't see a single point that applies in the case of BTP that wouldn't also apply in every other contest held this year.

So why DH, are you making a fuss over BTP, but none of the other contests this year? If it's because of the $100, that's fine, but realize that your points don't make the case for that part being any more "wrong".

[The HG]

DH, I think you're playing semantics with the word "recommend". Just because SBR has a list of books that they "recommend" if you are going to gamble, it doesn't follow that SBR "recommends" that you gamble in general.

[durito]

DH will be back.

He's said "that's the last straw, I'm leaving the US" numerous times over the years, yet is still there."

[BigD]

I don't mind having to deposit for BTP I don't like having to sign up for a new account when I already I accounts at 3 or 4 of those books

[bettilimbroke999]

I don't think DH has a problem depositing 100 bucks as that is chicken feed, but many of the posters here with thousands of posts already have accounts at most if not all of the sponsored books that SBR requires you to open up a NEW account with. If you already have accounts at all of them I guess you are just excluded from the best contest SBR's ever put on, which makes no sense to penalize the longest/most frequent posters, when some chick with 2 posts who doesn't have an account at any of them is eligible

[VBOMBER]

It doesn't seem unreasonable to me to have to open a new account at one of the nine books on the list, as they all seem to be "safe" books with no complaints(we could argue what is safe pertaining to offshore all day).

I do think that SBR is alienating some of their base and most likely strong or informative posters who already have accounts at all 9. Presumably, most of these posters have opened accounts at a number of these books because of SBR's rating and recommendation - generating revenue for SBR.

A possible solution to the few in this conundrum would be for SBR to allow them to replenish an account at one of these books that the poster has a current zero balance, with the same terms as the rest of the contestants. For those that actually have all nine currently funded, maybe a more sizable deposit to one of the books (min $500?) of their choice would be a workable solution. Just throwing out ideas as I think it is important to be loyal to posters and past customers who have helped SBR succeed in the past and would be an asset in the future.

[JBC77]

I'm not too hot on the idea of having to sign up at books to play contests. Guess thats why I don't play in the contests.

I inquired about playing in one a few weeks back, but was told I need to have a roster of 3 books. Didn't feel like expending the effort.

Moral of the story, you don't have to play if you don't want to. Just like bonus whores, we now have contest whores.

[1st and Ten]

DH will be back.

He's said "that's the last straw, I'm leaving the US" numerous times over the years, yet is still there."

[twister]

I see this guy post everyday. So much for the moral stance.

[Dark Horse]

At the time, before the 2008 football season, the question was important to me. I came back, because I realized I was about to go 4-0 four times in BTP for, I think, the second spot on the seasonal money list. And the only reason such success is lacking in 2009 is that somebody forgot to pull up this thread before this season. You, my friend, are late!

Do I still consider the question of SBR's intent important? Not in the slightest. SBR is a fluid concept that may go from the gold standard in watchdog organizations all the way to sportsbook. Or they may all end up in jail. lol In any case, I'm just along for the ride.

And, for the record, I am leaving the US. Just a matter of time.

[topgame85]

fuggeta aboud it SBR is technically aiding and abeting offshore betting and I hope those working in the texas office have a very good attorney on retainer just in caee, if it makes it to federal court in DC know a few guys, but lets just hope it never gets to that and that hopefully any employees or contests are run out of the costa rica offices

[_Stat_]

Damn, read this thread then realized its soo old. hate it when that happens.