******* Sportsbook

[woodpony]

I just read a thread where the name ******* sportsbook was mentioned, I read 4 or 5 guy's say real nice things about ******* sportsbook and then I read where the site owner said that ******* sportsbook was not a reputable book because of longevity. I know that several guy's have been banned from this site for in my view lack of freedom of speech, I on the other hand felt it not necessary to come in your forum and get into a pissing contest about things I was not 100% sure of. But the post I am referring to, IMO I can address without assuming. I have been paid twice from ******* sportsbook and feel that longevity is not the real reason the thread was closed. IMO the thread was closed because the site owner got in the last word and never feels he is wrong. I know this may very well be my last post here at BW, but I feel ******* sportsbook got shafted and feel that closing the thread was the wrong thing to do. I hope you will finally wake up and smell the coffee and understand what you choose to do, always is not the right thing to do and freedom of speech is what makes our country great. Bottom line camelot sportsbook does not pay you and if they did longevity would not be an issue here. I know i am gone, and will no loger be able to post here - so in closing I wish you the best of luck.

[chestrockwells]

IMO, the role and the job of a "offshore watchdog site" is to monitor the books and excercise their judgement and their discretion as to which books are reputable and safe etc etc with our interests in mind. I come here to shoot the breeze, like a lot of you, but the main reason I come here now and for the last few years is because I play offshore and I want to stay on top of things. I want the site owners to be as safe and as cautious as possible with their recommendations (the list). I want them to look very suspiciously at any book that's been around for a few months and if they don't see fit to recommend them for whatever reason.......fine, and frankly, so what? We do the equivalent of this in our personal and business lives all the time. So if one of the site owners doesn't recommend a book because he thinks the guy is unprofessional, fine. Don't we use our personal intuition to make these type of judgements? I know I do. The whole freedom of speech argument is a catch all fall back position. After all, who would argue against it?? The internet has millions of places where you can excercise those rights to your hearts content. I may not agree with all the tactics that have been employed by the site owners in relation to this issue, but I can certainly understand why they've done so. I hope that most of you can see how easy it is for a book and/or their friends, followers etc. to come in and create scenarios that bring them potentially premature and undeserved recognition, publicity and business. I expect a watchdog site to use whatever means they feel necessary to rid themselves of "concerted efforts" by books and their allies to achieve those selfish goals..........and that's pretty much what BW has done.

[ 07-18-2001: Message edited by: chestrockwells ]

[bgeorgia]

woodpony

your staatement that we do not consider them reputable simply because of longevity is incorrect.

please find where that statement was made being sure to point out "longevity" as an only reason for our strong concerns.

bg