This one is easy--Major,Shrink,TOW and all the rest of us know what should've happened here. It is not the player's concern what the book's takeback is, only what the number they bet in to is, and +240 was not even in the stratosphere of being a bad line. The book screwed up on their math slightly while calculating their hold %. Players screw up like this all day every day, we take our lumps----so should the book. I can't even imagine calling up a book and saying: "look, I erroneously calculated buying off the 3 as being worth 32 cents, I'm gonna need to cancel my wager (or at the very least have you sell me the extra 1/2 pt for 27 cents instead of 32 cents". That sounds ludicrous right? The book would just laugh at me and say "kid, get your math right next time". Halifax and fishhead are dead on with their posts, see those for further clarification. A +240 payoff is owed along with an apology.
The Major said:
Russ,
this situation could never occur. According to your interpretation of BCN rules, BCN could simply cancel the wager. In fact the way you interpret the right to refuse a wager at any time, it doens't even seem like it should matter whether the game was completed at the time the wager was cancelled. If I am understanding you correctly, this isn't even neccesarily an issue of a :bad line". This could simply be BCN deciding that they don't want the action.
Let me ask this to all who believe that BCN has the right to simply cancel wagers at will. What if I were to bet on the redskins now vs the eagles. And between now and game time Mcnabb is injured. SO their is a huge line movement in my favor. Could BCN simply decide that they no longer want my wager and cancel it. And if you believe they have that right, why should anyone in thier right mind play wiht them. This isn't horse racing. You expect that when you place a bet on a fair line, your bet is locked in.
Regardless of what BCN does, it seems obvious that there is zero reason to play with them. As many posters have said time and again, the way to make money is by shopping for the best line. CLearly any time BCN is shoiwng the best line, you have to wonder whether you bet will be cancelled or not. ANd I don't care how good thier line might be, its never worth placing a bet, if you don't know if it will be honored.
BCN made a lot of mistakes here
1) they cancelled awager that should never have been cancelled. Even if they felt the line was a mistake, they should take it out on the clerk who posted it, not the customer.
2) When they emailed the customer, they should have sent the email with return reciept requested. That way, they would have known whether the cusotmer recieved the email before gametime.
3) THey should have put a note in the cusomters account, so again they would be able to check thier logs and see wehther the customer new befroe gametime that the wager was cancelled.
4) Any time there is a question about a money line wager, the wager should never be cancelled outright. What should be done is change the wager to reflect the correct odds, contact the customer, let them know of the change and give them the option of simply canceling the wager, or taking the wager with the new odds. That way, if thier is a dispute, the dollar amount will be much less.
I thought once BCN got rid of Chaz things would get better. But it seems to me, that it is a well funded but poorly run business. ANd if they don't get thier act together, it shouldn't take long before they become both poorly fund and poorly run.
Bcn Pays Out Gambler In Full At Plus $2.40!!!
I just had a conference call with BCN and the gambler. After hearing BOTH SIDES in detail, I recommended to BCN that the gambler be paid IN FULL at the plus $2.40 wager he thought he was getting...
I am pleased to say that BCN has agreed to pay out IN FULL...
I thank ALL of you for the tremendous and thoughtfull feedback...
It is very reassuring to know that our SPONSORS are not immune from correcting themselves after listening to the advice from this site...
I would recommend BCN to anyone looking for a sports book that is flexible and willing to allow us to arbitrate on your behalf when disputes arise...
The gambler is also to be commended for the way he handled himself on the phone and with our staff...
THE SHRINK
I just had a conference call with BCN and the gambler. After hearing BOTH SIDES in detail, I recommended to BCN that the gambler be paid IN FULL at the plus $2.40 wager he thought he was getting...
I am pleased to say that BCN has agreed to pay out IN FULL...
I thank ALL of you for the tremendous and thoughtfull feedback...
It is very reassuring to know that our SPONSORS are not immune from correcting themselves after listening to the advice from this site...
I would recommend BCN to anyone looking for a sports book that is flexible and willing to allow us to arbitrate on your behalf when disputes arise...
The gambler is also to be commended for the way he handled himself on the phone and with our staff...
THE SHRINK
OUTSTANDING TO HEAR!!
I now plan on re-depositing with BCN in the near future.
It says alot about a sportsbook that will allow an independant council to judge whether they were in the right or wrong................and act accordingly.
Thanks BCN......... and continued success with your sportsbook operation.
I now plan on re-depositing with BCN in the near future.
It says alot about a sportsbook that will allow an independant council to judge whether they were in the right or wrong................and act accordingly.
Thanks BCN......... and continued success with your sportsbook operation.
Hate to be the cynical one, but all it says to me is that they are reasonably skilled in the art of damage control. But to me the fact that it occurred in the first place is damning enough in itself.
Glad the guy got paid though and kudos to the RX for a job well done.
But I still need to add one more :nono5: to The Major for rationalizing and accepting a book's right to cancel wagers at their whim. Once again: it's not acceptable.
Glad the guy got paid though and kudos to the RX for a job well done.
But I still need to add one more :nono5: to The Major for rationalizing and accepting a book's right to cancel wagers at their whim. Once again: it's not acceptable.
First off, I want to thank everyone involved with this whole issue. Whether you believed everything I said or not, it was all true. Just a few posts ago, fishhead summed up the whole wagering process of this particular event. It is also true that even though I mentioned to the general that I would go to the forums with this, that it is not what I would have ultimately wanted to do. I guarantee I have alot more patience than most people, but what did I need to wait for when the person that the general told me to talk to had already felt like he was backed into a corner with my threat to go to the forums with this (even though I never told anyone at BCN of this) and he stated that if it wasnt for that comment then BCN would have most likely worked with me on this issue.
As I type right now the Shrink just called me and among other things, he said that he felt that the +240 line should be honored and reflected in my bcn account shortly. The 2200 was already in the account when I woke up this morning and I have no doubt the other 200 will be there as someone from BCN, the shrink and I have all hung up from a 3way call.
The question of did I agree that it was a bad line on one of my phone calls to BCN is not that black and white. I dont think the question came out directly like that, "did you know you bet into a bad line??" I recall it being more of a discussion of what normal money lines are for this type of event at other sportsbooks. And I said a +220 to a -260 is normal but I used pinnacle as an example of how there can be close to 20cent moneylines on occasion. Like someone earlier stated and like one of my friends later stated to me, how do I know BCN didnt mean to put a -280 on the other side? Also I said in the 3way call that this particular issue could be debated further but the right thing has already been done by honoring this wager. I will continue to fulfill my obligation to BCN per my deposit and they have allowed me to continue on with them as I wagered last night and did check my email before the event went off the board to make sure everything was ok. (not being a smart ass there)
Thanks again to the general,the shrink,roberto,even russ apparently,and anyone else who was influencial in getting this issue resolved.
Special thanks to D2bets for taking the gamblers perspective on this issue and really hammering it from all angles.
As I type right now the Shrink just called me and among other things, he said that he felt that the +240 line should be honored and reflected in my bcn account shortly. The 2200 was already in the account when I woke up this morning and I have no doubt the other 200 will be there as someone from BCN, the shrink and I have all hung up from a 3way call.
The question of did I agree that it was a bad line on one of my phone calls to BCN is not that black and white. I dont think the question came out directly like that, "did you know you bet into a bad line??" I recall it being more of a discussion of what normal money lines are for this type of event at other sportsbooks. And I said a +220 to a -260 is normal but I used pinnacle as an example of how there can be close to 20cent moneylines on occasion. Like someone earlier stated and like one of my friends later stated to me, how do I know BCN didnt mean to put a -280 on the other side? Also I said in the 3way call that this particular issue could be debated further but the right thing has already been done by honoring this wager. I will continue to fulfill my obligation to BCN per my deposit and they have allowed me to continue on with them as I wagered last night and did check my email before the event went off the board to make sure everything was ok. (not being a smart ass there)
Thanks again to the general,the shrink,roberto,even russ apparently,and anyone else who was influencial in getting this issue resolved.
Special thanks to D2bets for taking the gamblers perspective on this issue and really hammering it from all angles.
I'm glad to hear that the player got paid, but I'd still like to hear BCN's rationale for why they cancelled the wager in the first place.
I'd be very weary of playing there until they establish a real policy regarding the cancelling of wagers. Its great to know that they are willing to discuss issues with people like Roberto, Russ and the Shrink. But even better is a book that doesn't have all these issues.
I'd be very weary of playing there until they establish a real policy regarding the cancelling of wagers. Its great to know that they are willing to discuss issues with people like Roberto, Russ and the Shrink. But even better is a book that doesn't have all these issues.
I do not have an account there and wont be getting one and if I did I would ask for my balance.
Here's why. Lets suppose Raiders at Tampa this weekened. The line is
Raiders +5 just about everywhere. I look around and see BCN at +5.5. I want to bet the Raiders. Do I dare bet this at BCN after reading this thread? No. It could be cancelled, " Bad line". BCN might call it a clerical error.
So my option then is to bet the game +5 and know I'm not betting a " bad line". So then why keep a balance at a new book like BCN if they dont offer something you can't get at a sure-fire your balance is safe and accepted wagers will be paid outfit like Skybook or Pinnacle.
Besides, you could get a free half point at Skybook or reduced juice at pinnacle on +5.
Point is, we have all seen troubles develop at new books, so why bother with the insecurity of one if you have to wonder every time you enter a bet at a slightly better line if its gonna be paid. Youd have to sweat the game, whether the wager will be cancelled and whether your money is safe. Not worth it. Play at skybook and your money is safe as can be offshore, they wont cancell lines which are a trifle off or at BCN and wonder. EZ choice.
Here's why. Lets suppose Raiders at Tampa this weekened. The line is
Raiders +5 just about everywhere. I look around and see BCN at +5.5. I want to bet the Raiders. Do I dare bet this at BCN after reading this thread? No. It could be cancelled, " Bad line". BCN might call it a clerical error.
So my option then is to bet the game +5 and know I'm not betting a " bad line". So then why keep a balance at a new book like BCN if they dont offer something you can't get at a sure-fire your balance is safe and accepted wagers will be paid outfit like Skybook or Pinnacle.
Besides, you could get a free half point at Skybook or reduced juice at pinnacle on +5.
Point is, we have all seen troubles develop at new books, so why bother with the insecurity of one if you have to wonder every time you enter a bet at a slightly better line if its gonna be paid. Youd have to sweat the game, whether the wager will be cancelled and whether your money is safe. Not worth it. Play at skybook and your money is safe as can be offshore, they wont cancell lines which are a trifle off or at BCN and wonder. EZ choice.
pokerface i am glad this got resolved in a timely manner
now the question i have. BCN why should i deposit monies to your sportsbook. i believe you did the right thing,but i also believe this should of never happened in the first place.
will future wagers stand at your sportsbook or do i have to wait by my computer for an email..
do you feel you made a mistake in this situation, or overreacted
do you also feel you were being PRESSURED into this situation because it was poster here at the RX..
DO YOU FEEL IN THE FUTURE poster will come to the rx to complain feeling that you will have to give in ,in certain situations.
i would like bcn to respond to this, or any questions in this thread.
also do you feel you now have a black eye in this situation
and last how can we all make this a postive situation..
thankyou
kidslick..
now the question i have. BCN why should i deposit monies to your sportsbook. i believe you did the right thing,but i also believe this should of never happened in the first place.
will future wagers stand at your sportsbook or do i have to wait by my computer for an email..
do you feel you made a mistake in this situation, or overreacted
do you also feel you were being PRESSURED into this situation because it was poster here at the RX..
DO YOU FEEL IN THE FUTURE poster will come to the rx to complain feeling that you will have to give in ,in certain situations.
i would like bcn to respond to this, or any questions in this thread.
also do you feel you now have a black eye in this situation
and last how can we all make this a postive situation..
thankyou
kidslick..
Rules shmules. Having those words on the website doesn't hurt anybody or mean anything, using them in an abusive unreasonable manner does. Unless Pinnacle in fact abuses that "rule" by cancelling wagers that are not "bad lines", then it is of no consequence. The minute they, or anyone else, does then we have a right to raise holy hell and have the right to challenge the "rule" on its face. It's a little like some wacky laws that may be on the books that nobody ever uses or would consider using. Until it is used it matters not and in fact cannot be challenged in court. If it is in fact used, then it is challenged in court and defeated that way. Unfortunately, offshores don't have court per se, but we do have the court of public opinion.THE SHRINK said:
It's a blanket statement rule that's been around for as long as I can remember in the offshore world. BCN didn't do anything out of line by cancelling this wager if they believed they put up a bad line. The fact that the rule is there isn't the problem because just about all books have it to protect themselves. The problem is there is a wide variety of discretion as to what constitutes a bad line. The rule is there and it is up to them to enforce the rule the way they see fit.
You can say oh the humanity of cancelling this wager and personally I agree there wasn't a major error. However, if BCN dubs it an error they reserve the right to do with the wager as they wish. It's in black and white. They could've cancelled the wager and told Poker to go fly a kite and it would've been within the rules as printed on their website. The fact that they were open to mediation and were willing to not only compromise but fully honor the wager IMO shows they aren't totally out for the screw job.
Any publicity of this type is bad for any book even with a positive solution because players will say to themselves "it took going to the forums to get this ironed out and I can play somewhere else where there haven't been problems of this nature". That's true you can play anywhere but no book is exempt from this situation happening to them. You know how BCN responds to the situation when it happens so I would say think about the fact that they are open and responsive to mediation because there are quite a few out there that aren't going to be as open.
Just my opinion...I still agree with Russ on this.
Marc,
sb
You can say oh the humanity of cancelling this wager and personally I agree there wasn't a major error. However, if BCN dubs it an error they reserve the right to do with the wager as they wish. It's in black and white. They could've cancelled the wager and told Poker to go fly a kite and it would've been within the rules as printed on their website. The fact that they were open to mediation and were willing to not only compromise but fully honor the wager IMO shows they aren't totally out for the screw job.
Any publicity of this type is bad for any book even with a positive solution because players will say to themselves "it took going to the forums to get this ironed out and I can play somewhere else where there haven't been problems of this nature". That's true you can play anywhere but no book is exempt from this situation happening to them. You know how BCN responds to the situation when it happens so I would say think about the fact that they are open and responsive to mediation because there are quite a few out there that aren't going to be as open.
Just my opinion...I still agree with Russ on this.
Marc,
They reserve the right to cancel it. If they made a habit of cancelling wagers then you can make a more solid case to not play with them but this is an isolated incident. The rule is on the books for the books to use at their discretion. Maybe BCN jumped the gun on 20 cents but I don't think they acted out of line. Now if it was -9 vs +9 or something like that would they have the right to cancel it? Not without that rule in place. It's all a matter of perception. They have a different perception of what is a bad line. But it doesn't matter because they have the RIGHT (like Pinny and anyone else with this rule) to cancel the wager. It may be the wrong play (I believed it to be wrong to cancel a 20 cent variance as well) but it's not up to us to decide that. It's up to them...and if they act out of whack there are sites out there to work out the problems. Failing that I would then stay away from them but I applaud the efforts of this book not closing their doors on this one.
sb
MAJOR, :WTF: difference does this make? it is none of your business or the book's business WHY he places the bet, wether it is a SCALP or not....
You should be ashamed of yourself as a proverbial 'WATCHDOG' to come here & defend the book with this idiotic reasoning....
If you want to represent this industry do it with some class.... sheesh....
Remind me never to come for you for help if I ever need any....
