A NEW QUESTION...

[Bookiebar]

Unfortunatly their will always be 5% (or 2% whatever) shifty, dodgy buggers out their. The job of the sports book I think is to ensure the rules are clear and that their incompetance does not create the situations that can be explioted by the nasty ones.

Take a bank for an example, there are a few people who like to try and steal from banks. The banks have 3 foot thick steel vaults, time delay locks, smelly hairy 300 pound dudes with guns, CLEAR rules usually upholdable in Court on what you can and cannot do, and software that checks all transactions. (among other things). If your running a business that people are going to exploit, and with sports books people are bloody well going to, then make damn sure you know the loopholes plug them and stop making up the rules as they go along to steal peoples money.

Firststake, although slightly off topic, were accepting betting up until they posted up their notice of being a little short on cash on their site. Rumors have been flying around on a few forums about their financial strife, but they were still accepting bets. Now it seems that they will be refunding peoples money via sportingbet.com but "Unfortunately, it is not possible to transfer/honour any open bets you have with Firststake."

How frigging convienient is that?? Making up the rules when the shite hits the fan. (at least the customers will get back their balances, eventually,... possibly....)

[This message has been edited by Bookiebar (edited 02-08-2001).]

[REALITY]

BOOKIEBEAR,

THE PLAYERS AT FIRSTSTAKE SHOULD BE IN CHURCH TONIGHT THANKING THE GOOD LORD THAT A FINANCIAL POWERHOUSE LIKE SPORTINGBET AND MARK BLANDFORD PICKED UP THE PIECES HERE AND IS GOING TO HONOR THOSE FIRSTSTAKE ACCOUNTS.

HOW MANY COMPANIES GO BELLY UP AND NOBODY GETS PAID WHEN NO SUCH SUITOR IS AVAILABLE???

REALITY

[Bookiebar]

Indeed, the 5000 or so players at firststake are very lucky indeed, however "please note also that withdrawal requests cannot be processed by sportingbet until the 19th February" ... at least 11 days till one knows the full story.

By the way how much are 5000 or so active bettors worth to a sportbook? this represents an increase of over 5% instantly of sportingbets customer base of 60 000(assuming most stick around).

[ShiftySheik]

Reality, What if the bet lost??? Would the book have given the guy back his money?

I have another question for the forum...What about a situation where you have 2 seperate books that are owned by the same company. Books like CRIS/ABC, Rio/Skybook, WIT/Las Palmas, Sportingbet/Sportingbet USA. What if a player simiultaneously double hit the same game with 2 of those books using the phone and the internet. Do you see any problem with that? Let's say he was betting something obscure like a golf match.

[REALITY]

Originally posted by ShiftySheik:
Reality, What if the bet lost??? Would the book have given the guy back his money?

MAYBE THE THIEF BECOMES THE VICTIM,A LITTLE POETIC JUSTICE...

HAD THE PLAYER BEEN PAID WOULD HE SUFFER A PANG OF CONSCIENCE AND RETURN THE WINNINGS OF AN OVER LIMIT WAGER?

I THINK NOT...

I have another question for the forum...What about a situation where you have 2 seperate books that are owned by the same company. Books like CRIS/ABC, Rio/Skybook, WIT/Las Palmas, Sportingbet/Sportingbet USA. What if a player simiultaneously double hit the same game with 2 of those books using the phone and the internet. Do you see any problem with that? Let's say he was betting something obscure like a golf match.

NO PROBLEM WHATSOEVER.

IN TWO OF THE ABOVE EXAMPLES THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT SITTING B.M.'S AND ALL OF THE ABOVE COMPANIES ARE OPERATED AS SEPERATE ENTITIES.

REALITY

[Jeff]

What about two books with one bookmaker??

[ShiftySheik]

I once asked Chester that question. No problem whatsoever.

[sportshobby]

Interesting question. What about Sports-Market and Aces Gold?

[sportshobby]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by REALITY:
IF I TELL YOU THERE IS A DIME LIMIT ON THE GAME WHEN YOUR MAKING YOUR DIME PLAY ON THE PHONE AND YOU THEN GO MAKE A DIME PLAY ON THE INTERNET,YOU HAVE NO SHOT TO GET PAID YOUR INTERNET BET.

But if I made the first bet by phone and was told the limit was a dime, I could call back in a couple of minutes and ask again, right? Then the answer would be either yes or no, but a second confirmed wager wouldn't be thievery.

There's no difference whether the second wager attempt is by phone or by internet. What's important is whether there was a sufficient amount of time between the two to avoid intentionally circumventing the limits.

[sportshobby]

I think there may be another solution to this that has been overlooked. Why not either set this player's online limits to zero, or (if the software won't allow that) just delete his internet account. If he persisted in stretching the limits even after a warning, this seems a reasonable response.

[ShiftySheik]

Originally posted by sportshobby:
Interesting question. What about Sports-Market and Aces Gold?

That's a different situation since they both use the same lines...but if you give them time to move the line after your first bet, it should be okay.

[Chester]

Jeff,
First off let me say I owe you an apology for yesterday.
Secondly our system is integrated with the phones, unfortunately if the clerk doesn't check to see if the client has a previous wager our limits are extended with these situations I do nothing.
With this system (the forum's) The book can never win a dispute. The player exceed's the limit. The wager wins the wager is paid. The wager loses then the guy wants to check his account and have it adjusted, if I don't do this he squeals in a forum and I get smeared to the extent that I no longer want to post in a forum much less read it.


[This message has been edited by Chester (edited 02-09-2001).]