BetRevolution Scam: Sportsbook winnings confiscated for Syndicate Betting
BetRevolution Sportsbook (SBR rating D+) has confiscated $26,908 from two players citing syndicate betting. A third player was also alleged as being part of the betting group, though this player was previously paid in full. BetRevolution and the players have authorized Sportsbook Review to share the facts of the case.
The first player opened his account with BetRevolution in December 2011. He deposited $5,209 through six transactions for $3,870 in cash bonuses, made 874 wagers, and has been paid $8,220. His balance stands at $22,908. On February 27th, he was told that his account was under investigation. BetRevolution later accused him of being the ringleader of a betting group that included three players with a fourth suspected.
The second player's account was created in September 2012. He deposited $900 for a 50% cash bonus, made 76 wagers, and has never been paid. He requested an $800 payout on January 23rd, but this request was stalled for one month, meanwhile he continued to bet and add to his balance. With his account at $4,000, BetRevolution asked him to provide ID on February 21st. After providing his ID, BetRevolution indicated they were investigating his account. He was then accused of having irregular bet patterns and asked if he knew any other BetRevolution players: He denied the charge.
SBR contacts BetRevolution to discuss the cases on March 26th
Sportsbook Review.com contacted BetRevolution to discuss the two cases. BetRevolution provided an attachment containing screenshots of three Facebook profiles. The profiles included the full names of two of the players who filed SBR complaints and appeared to show these players were tagged as friends. The third player, who BetRevolution alleged is part of their 'betting group', was paid his $4,932 balance and has not filed an SBR complaint.
The crux of BetRevolution's argument is that the players conspired to circumvent house limits by betting in concert with one another. BetRevolution produced statistics indicating that of player number two's 76 wagers, 41 were placed on the exact same line as account number one. All 41 wagers were placed within 30 minutes or less of each other. BetRevolution went on to indicate 35 of the wagers were placed within 15 minutes, and 28 of the wagers were placed within 5 minutes as player one.
BetRevolution argued that their betting odds are not featured on any odds monitoring service and that the alleged ringleader dictated the bets to be made. All of account number one's wagers were for the maximum allowed by the sportsbook, typically $500. He was later limited to $250.
BetRevolution's house rules state: "If the wager(s) are deemed to have been placed by multiple players or syndicates in an attempt to circumvent the rules, limits, bonuses conditions, etc. If such wager(s) are taken in error they will be cancelled/revoked."
SBR follows up with the players
The players claimed not to know others with BetRevolution accounts. Each indicated that they frequented a free picks website operated by 2+2 forum poster "RickJ". After a discussion with SBR, player one conceded being friends with the other player and claimed that he was fearful an admission would lead to his balance being stolen.
Summary and SBR verdict
Sportsbooks are free to manage their risk and run their business using their discretion ... to a point. A sportsbook cannot give itself the power to seize a player's balance simply because it appears one of their rules were violated. The industry standard of "you book the bet, you pay the bet" applies. In this case, both users deposited cash. BetRevolution received the cash and booked their wagers. There is no possibility of deposit fraud in this situation (an exception to "you book the bet, you pay the bet").
The two players live in different states, use different computers, and as uncovered through BetRevolution's sleuthy social media investigation: They are friends. BetRevolution's position is that friends cannot share picks.
BetRevolution continued to accept wagers from the players for several months. When a sportsbook continues to accept wagers it has no intention to pay, that is referred to as a "freeroll": A common tactic employed by scam sportsbooks. The players could have each lost their combined $26,908, but being paid was not a possibility.
SBR has recommended that BetRevolution honor both balances.
Follow SportsbookReview.com on twitter. SBR has been the leading online sportsbook industry watchdog since 1999. Players in need of assistance should submit a sportsbook complaint form. Players with general questions may also contact SBR by writing to email@example.com.