Corey up to no good again, this time at Heritage. Hits 2 Royals and is owed 43K

[MonkeyF0cker]

EXACTLY. People who think this thread is going to determine how people look at Heritage are delusional. There are what 10 posters MAX in a 1650+ post thread that agree with Cory (who have voiced their opinion) and that is probably generous. Anyone that actually PLAYS at Heritage (I'm sure half of those 10 don't play there actively) knows they pay, they answer your questions, and they have some cool offers/contests.

Of course the people who play there currently aren't worried about getting paid. They're GUARANTEED to be long term LOSERS. LMAO.

Heritage Insider- This thread and situation will do nothing to harm your book. The only people arguing against you are the same who wear tin foil hats and think that ALF possibly lives next door to them. Make your offer to Cory to return the initial deposits and then go into a new arbitration at square 1...if he refuses that is his choice and just move on.

Show one thread where prop or I have spoken out against a book's rules being unfair/disadvantageous for players without due cause. ONE THREAD. Yeah, we wear tin foil hats like the Pope is a lesbian. I will never support a book freerolling a player. Any prospective clients of Heritage's reading this thread will know that they are so risk averse that the site should be considered a money pit rather than a sportsbook and that they'll freeroll players to ensure it. Long term losing players such as yourself might not care about it, but some people actually play at sportsbooks with the expectation that they have a chance to win.

[Heritage Insider]

Of course the people who play there currently aren't worried about getting paid. They're GUARANTEED to be long term LOSERS. LMAO.



Show one thread where prop or I have spoken out against a book's rules being unfair/disadvantageous for players without due cause. ONE THREAD. Yeah, we wear tin foil hats like the Pope is a lesbian. I will never support a book freerolling a player. Any prospective clients of Heritage's reading this thread will know that they are so risk averse that the site should be considered a money pit rather than a sportsbook and that they'll freeroll players to ensure it. Long term losing players such as yourself might not care about it, but some people actually play at sportsbooks with the expectation that they have a chance to win.

You do not have a copy of our client list. You are incorrect that the clients that play here are long term losers. Many are professional gamblers that win every year.

You certainly have a right to say we "free rolled" Cory. We don't share your opinion and we have gone to mediatioin on this and are willing to go again. This seems to be a fair solution to us.

[MonkeyF0cker]

You do not have a copy of our client list. You are incorrect that the clients that play here are long term losers. Many are professional gamblers that win every year.

You certainly have a right to say we "free rolled" Cory. We don't share your opinion and we have gone to mediatioin on this and are willing to go again. This seems to be a fair solution to us.

Holy shit. Now I've heard it all.

Then why were people denied accounts in the transfer? Because they're too square? LOL.

[SBR_John]

MF,
Just curious do you think players should be allowed to break any rule without being "freerolled"? If not, which rules can a player not break and still have his wagers cancelled(which I believe is your definition of freerole)?

[MonkeyF0cker]

Cory was barred because we were uncomfortable with his pattern of play.

Now, you're going to sit here and tell us you're not a recreational book?

You can't be fukking serious.

Unbelievable.

[MonkeyF0cker]

MF,
Just curious do you think players should be allowed to break any rule without being "freerolled"? If not, which rules can a player not break and still have his wagers cancelled(which I believe is your definition of freerole)?

I don't believe it's right for either side to freeroll unless the party being freerolled offers the freeroll. There are no scenarios which merit cancelling wagers after the event is complete for a player breaking rules. You took the bet, you pay it.

[Heritage Insider]

Holy shit. Now I've heard it all.

Then why were people denied accounts in the transfer? Because they're too square? LOL.

No one was denied an account in the transfer. I don't know where you got this.

[MonkeyF0cker]

There is no recourse for a player in this situation if he/she loses. That's why the bets must stand.

[Heritage Insider]

Now, you're going to sit here and tell us you're not a recreational book?

You can't be fukking serious.

Unbelievable.

What does being a recreational book have to do with being uncomfortable with someone's style of play? We may have barred 1 other player from casino play since we have had one. Considering the history we thought it was prudent to bar Cory. In retrospect that looks like a great call by our manager.

[Heritage Insider]

I don't believe it's right for either side to freeroll unless the party being freerolled offers the freeroll. There are no scenarios which merit cancelling wagers after the event is complete for a player breaking rules. You took the bet, you pay it.

We took the bet and we are paying it. However our opinion is that a barred player is disqualified from receiving the winnings. BUT that's just our opinion - that's why we agreed to arbitration - we wanted to be fair. This isn't about the money - it's about the principle - that's why we are donating the money to charity. We are making a point.

[MonkeyF0cker]

What does being a recreational book have to do with being uncomfortable with someone's style of play?

Are you or are you not a "recreational" book?

[Heritage Insider]

There is no recourse for a player in this situation if he/she loses. That's why the bets must stand.

There sure is recourse at Heritage. If we can't agree to a mutually agreed upon settlement we are always open to mediation.

[MonkeyF0cker]

There sure is recourse at Heritage. If we can't agree to a mutually agreed upon settlement we are always open to mediation.

So, you're saying that all players who bearded are now allowed to seek compensation on their deposits if they happened to lose? Is that what you're agreeing to? If you put that rule on your website, then we are fine.

But we both know you're just talking out of both sides of your mouth again - like a true weasel.

[Heritage Insider]

Are you or are you not a "recreational" book?

If I have a different definition than you let me know. I will answer you based on my definition. Recreational books kick out winners. We do not do that.

[MonkeyF0cker]

If I have a different definition than you let me know. I will answer you based on my definition. Recreational books kick out winners. We do not do that.

How about dealing dual lines and limiting them to virtually nothing? Is there a difference?

[Heritage Insider]

So, you're saying that all players who bearded are now allowed to seek compensation on their deposits if they happened to lose? Is that what you're agreeing to? If you put that rule on your website, then we are fine.

But we both know you're just talking out of both sides of your mouth again - like a true weasel.

You seem to want to resort to insults and name calling when I answer your questions. We are not going to post a rule to make you fine. We will stick to our long term policy of letting 3 parties settle disputes.

[MonkeyF0cker]

You seem to want to resort to insults and name calling when I answer your questions. We are not going to post a rule to make you fine. We will stick to our long term policy of letting 3 parties settle disputes.

You get one insult for every time you try to deceive people. Seems like a fair trade to me.

Of course, you're not going to post the rule. BECAUSE YOU LIED. You're not going to give back deposits if people were bearding and happened to lose.

So now, just admit... THERE IS NO RECOURSE FOR A PLAYER IN THIS SITUATION IF HE/SHE LOSES.

There is no compensatory freeroll for the other side. There is an inherent player disadvantage.

[SBR_John]

I don't believe it's right for either side to freeroll unless the party being freerolled offers the freeroll. There are no scenarios which merit cancelling wagers after the event is complete for a player breaking rules. You took the bet, you pay it.

That's what I suspected. Not really much to discuss. We both agree if you book a bet you pay it. If you are not allowed to place a bet then you are simply not allowed. There is no book a bet pay a bet because the bet is not allowed in the first place hence, it is cancelled.

[HedgeHog]

You get one insult for every time you try to deceive people. Seems like a fair trade to me.

Of course, you're not going to post the rule. BECAUSE YOU LIED. You're not going to give back deposits if people were bearding and happened to lose.

So now, just admit... THERE IS NO RECOURSE FOR A PLAYER IN THIS SITUATION IF HE/SHE LOSES.

There is no compensatory freeroll for the other side. There is an inherent player disadvantage.

The recourse is to stay the fuk away in the first place when you get banned. If not for Cory bearding, none of this shit would have happened. How about pointing your finger of blame in the right direction for once. Cory is the cause of all this.

[Heritage Insider]

You get one insult for every time you try to deceive people. Seems like a fair trade to me.

Of course, you're not going to post the rule. BECAUSE YOU LIED. You're not going to give back deposits if people were bearding and happened to lose.

So now, just admit... THERE IS NO RECOURSE FOR A PLAYER IN THIS SITUATION IF HE/SHE LOSES.

There is no compensatory freeroll for the other side. There is an inherent player disadvantage.

It doesn't seem fair to me that you get to insult us every time YOU think we try to deceive someone. Since we don't agree can we go to mediaton?

If you are saying that there is an inherent disadvantage for a barred player I would agree. One brought on by the barred player. The barred player is free rolling himself. However that is just my opinion. One I would submit to mediation if my client asked me to.

[MonkeyF0cker]

That's what I suspected. Not really much to discuss. We both agree if you book a bet you pay it. If you are not allowed to place a bet then you are simply not allowed. There is no book a bet pay a bet because the bet is not allowed in the first place hence, it is cancelled.

Ok. Then you MUST open the door for bearding accounts to recover losses. The bets are not allowed. Right?

[MonkeyF0cker]

Either the bets stand or they don't. One party doesn't get to win both ways.

Heritage: You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[Heritage Insider]

Either the bets stand or they don't. One party doesn't get to win both ways.

Heritage: You can't have your cake and eat it too.

The bet stands. Determining the recipient is still in question.

[MonkeyF0cker]

The bet stands. Determining the recipient is still in question.

Umm. That means the bets DON'T stand. You don't get to send off other people's money to whomever you wish. That's not your place.

[Kindred]

You do not have a copy of our client list. You are incorrect that the clients that play here are long term losers. Many are professional gamblers that win every year.

You certainly have a right to say we "free rolled" Cory. We don't share your opinion and we have gone to mediatioin on this and are willing to go again. This seems to be a fair solution to us.

Yeah long term losers like corey have their account closed and are shown the door


Hey Insider why did you close corey's account in the first place? Are you guys really that stupid or is there more to the story

[Heritage Insider]

Umm. That means the bets DON'T stand. You don't get to send off other people's money to whomever you wish. That's not your place.

It's not his money. He got his money back. These are winnings. Winnings made by a barred player. You talk about Las Vegas all the time, they did something simlilar. The only difference was there the player had to take them to court. We volunteered to go to mediation and let the player pick the mediator.

This isn't about the money. It is the principle. To prove that point we are donating the money to charity UNLESS an industry expert rules that Cory has some entitlement to the winnings or unless Cory take SBR John up on his arbitration offer.

[Heritage Insider]

Yeah long term losers like corey have their account closed and are shown the door


Hey Insider why did you close corey's account in the first place? Are you guys really that stupid or is there more to the story

If you have an active account with Heritage please PM me and I will explain. If not we don't feel like answering questions where insults are included.

[MonkeyF0cker]

It's not his money. He got his money back. These are winnings. Winnings made by a barred player. You talk about Las Vegas all the time, they did something simlilar. The only difference was there the player had to take them to court. We volunteered to go to mediation and let the player pick the mediator.

This isn't about the money. It is the principle. To prove that point we are donating the money to charity UNLESS an industry expert rules that Cory has some entitlement to the winnings or unless Cory take SBR John up on his arbitration offer.

What do you not understand about a bet? If the bets stand, it is the player's money. It is not yours. It is not a charity of your choosing's. If the bets do not stand, the player receives no winnings.

And PLEASE with the charity angle. There was never an original offer of donating the money to charity. That is purely PR spin.

You're not proving any point other than the fact that you think you can freeroll players while the players have no opportunity to freeroll you on the other side of the coin. Solid point to try to rub in people's faces.

[prop]

How many times can you keep spinning that you allowed the player to pick their mediator/arbitrator. PLEASE CAN WE KNOCK THIS OFF!?!?

Is this or is this not how it happened?

A player filled out a dispute at SBR. They had some form conversation with SBRLou (we won't go into details of that). They were very upset with SBRLou and asked SBR take him off the complaint and assign it to Justin. (perhaps said this to you or to SBR)

Is there anymore to it than that? Could the player have select Squared Box, McFly86, Scooter, skrtelfan, wrongturn, Tremp, Santo, durito, richsox24, sharpcat, BigDaddy, Patrick McIrish, dombrow3, hamneggs, Dark Horse, TheCentaur, tommygun, tuckman, Pareto, MonkeyF0cker, Prop, Kindred, Scooter, Winner_13, Reagan, Paddy, Will Race For Food, or perhaps his brother or anyone else? Please can we can knock off this ridiculous comment that he picked or that filing SBR complaint when a book is robbing you is agreeing to an arbitration. I think the last part of Cory's statement here is pretty funny.

Its funny how Heritage is saying my side and them have been through mediation 2x, first w/Lou then Justin, when all my mother did was file a complaint to SBR. Once SBRLou started saying we were guilty before we could even tell him the case we wanted Justin to take over. Why doesnt Heritage say we just went through arbitration 3x, the other time is when my mother asked Heritage to pay her?

[Heritage Insider]

What do you not understand about a bet? If the bets stand, it is the player's money. It is not yours. It is not a charity of your choosing's. If the bets do not stand, the player receives no winnings.

And PLEASE with the charity angle. There was never an original offer of donating the money to charity. That is purely PR spin.

You're not proving any point other than the fact that you think you can freeroll players while the players have no opportunity to freeroll you on the other side of the coin. Solid point to rub in people's faces.

Maybe we don't understand - however maybe you don't understand the principle of a barred player forfeiting winnings. We will have an experts opinion on this soon and then we will both know.

You seem to doubt that our stance is one of principle. You call the charity issue a PR spin. You act like we just came up with this. We don't mind arguing points - we do mind having our integrity questioned.

[Maximo]

I've read last few pages but i didnt get something. Heritage is saying that they are going for arbitration which is a good thing but they also stated that they already had arbitration twice. First one was SBRLou and the second one was Justin.

My question is: how come you can ask these guys to be arbitrator? In order for you to be an arbitrator, you have to have an experiance in this business. In Europe, there are some colleges offer an arbitration major and there are a lot of professional arbitration companies. What's Lou's and Justin's education for arbitration? Why would Cory accept them as an arbitrator?

[MonkeyF0cker]

Maybe we don't understand - however maybe you don't understand the principle of a barred player forfeiting winnings. We will have an experts opinion on this soon and then we will both know.

You seem to doubt that our stance is one of principle. You call the charity issue a PR spin. You act like we just came up with this. We don't mind arguing points - we do mind having our integrity questioned.

I understand your freeroll completely. Either the bets stand or they don't. You cannot put yourself in a win/win situation (well.. you can but that's otherwise known as a scam). That is unfair.

Show me where you first offered to donate the player's winnings to charity, and I'll show you multiple mentions of it being discussed by posters in this thread beforehand. It's purely reactionary PR garbage.

[Squared Box]

Maybe we don't understand - however maybe you don't understand the principle of a barred player forfeiting winnings. We will have an experts opinion on this soon and then we will both know.

Who is this expert?

[prop]

we do mind having our integrity questioned.

You might not like it, most people generally do not like to be questioned. But are you not in a position where it is reasonable for someone to question it?

Merriam Webster

1 firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values : incorruptibility
2 an unimpaired condition : soundness
3 the quality or state of being complete or undivided : completeness

Wikipedia:

Integrity is a concept of consistency of actions, values, methods, measures, principles, expectations, and outcomes. In ethics, integrity is regarded as the honesty and truthfulness or accuracy of one's actions. Integrity can be regarded as the opposite of hypocrisy, in that it regards internal consistency as a virtue, and suggests that parties holding apparently conflicting values should account for the discrepancy or alter their beliefs.

I personally see reason by all definitions to question your integrity. I also feel some of the PR spins you've used are at the very least slightly dishonest.

[Squared Box]

Who is this expert?

When you answer this question, can you also post the email to Cory where you informed him that he was banned? Or at least paraphrase it for us?