TA,
I agree somewhat that the bad line rule is debateable here but what about:
A) Post event cancellation
B) Changing an obvious bet to a prop (thereby lowering the bet by $800 after it was not only accepted but the event was over)
Bad line rule aside, the book seem to take a page out of Watergate...
I agree somewhat that the bad line rule is debateable here but what about:
A) Post event cancellation
B) Changing an obvious bet to a prop (thereby lowering the bet by $800 after it was not only accepted but the event was over)
Bad line rule aside, the book seem to take a page out of Watergate...
I've been enjoying this thread all week. Getting caught like this couldn't have happened to a nicer book.
I doesn't matter what the line was: they posted the line, people bet the limit allowed by the software, Casablanca kept the line and graded the game. Dave Johnson made a big deal when he switched software that his new software was the best out there.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>WAGERWEB wrote:
We would not have made this switch unless we were sure it was the best product on the market. We are extremely excited and know that all of our customers will be extremely happy with the results.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Areef didn't sound too happy.
Well, the claim that the players account was set wrong is bogus. This is an OBVIOUS lie, since Dave Johnson blamed it on Areef's player setting.
1) If the tennis match was indeed a prop bet, the settings should have applied to the entire event as a prop with a $200 limit.
2) If it was a mistake that Areef's wager limit was set wrong, then: Gee, how come all those other players got in bets as well?
3) What is more likely: that all the players with an incorrect setting bet that game or that the limit was really $1000 as Areef bet?
4) Casablanca's limits page states the limit on Tennis to be $1000 (which happens to be exactly the max Areef was able to bet). Gosh, what a coincidence.
Casablanca used to be a book that I believed would always pay a legit customer and stand by a bet they took. In the past, I've recommended them as a stand-up book. I can no longer recommend them for anything that relies upon their word (verbal or written).
I doesn't matter what the line was: they posted the line, people bet the limit allowed by the software, Casablanca kept the line and graded the game. Dave Johnson made a big deal when he switched software that his new software was the best out there.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>WAGERWEB wrote:
We would not have made this switch unless we were sure it was the best product on the market. We are extremely excited and know that all of our customers will be extremely happy with the results.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Areef didn't sound too happy.
Well, the claim that the players account was set wrong is bogus. This is an OBVIOUS lie, since Dave Johnson blamed it on Areef's player setting.
1) If the tennis match was indeed a prop bet, the settings should have applied to the entire event as a prop with a $200 limit.
2) If it was a mistake that Areef's wager limit was set wrong, then: Gee, how come all those other players got in bets as well?
3) What is more likely: that all the players with an incorrect setting bet that game or that the limit was really $1000 as Areef bet?
4) Casablanca's limits page states the limit on Tennis to be $1000 (which happens to be exactly the max Areef was able to bet). Gosh, what a coincidence.
Casablanca used to be a book that I believed would always pay a legit customer and stand by a bet they took. In the past, I've recommended them as a stand-up book. I can no longer recommend them for anything that relies upon their word (verbal or written).
Here is rule betcbs's rule 18
"Casablanca reserves the right to cancel any wager placed on an incorrect line."
Question - how is anyone suppose to knwo if your line is correct. Most of the books I use don'y have tennis matchups. But Suupose I compared gameday to casablanca. And i saw a scalping oppurtunity. I don't have nay idea who tis nadal person is. Betting $1000 on a +605 and hedging it with a -550, would yeild a total of $84. Thats not toatlly out of the realm of possibility. And not having followed the line movements, I would have no idea who had the "right" line and who had the "wrong" line. SOme shops have thier software set up so that every time someone hits the line, the line autmatically moves, to rptoect form situations like this. So its quite psosible for the scalp to set up, becuase one place got a lot of action and the other shop didn't.
What I find outrageous, is that a lot of these books hate line shoppers, and wiseguys, and stam players, and supposedly just want the "recreational player". But they expect all their players to know what the consensus line is.
Lest face it, if someone had asked wethaer a +605/-800 line on nadal vs the other guy was a fair line, how many of us would even have had a clue, unless we compared it to pinnacle. or another top tier book. And if the majority of us would not have reconzed this as an incorect line, without comparing it to another book, then what is casablanca definition of an "incorrect line." Is every one who plays at casablanca required to have a second sportsbook account, to make sue that casablanca is NOT giving them the best line. Because if they are then it might be wrong?
"Casablanca reserves the right to cancel any wager placed on an incorrect line."
Question - how is anyone suppose to knwo if your line is correct. Most of the books I use don'y have tennis matchups. But Suupose I compared gameday to casablanca. And i saw a scalping oppurtunity. I don't have nay idea who tis nadal person is. Betting $1000 on a +605 and hedging it with a -550, would yeild a total of $84. Thats not toatlly out of the realm of possibility. And not having followed the line movements, I would have no idea who had the "right" line and who had the "wrong" line. SOme shops have thier software set up so that every time someone hits the line, the line autmatically moves, to rptoect form situations like this. So its quite psosible for the scalp to set up, becuase one place got a lot of action and the other shop didn't.
What I find outrageous, is that a lot of these books hate line shoppers, and wiseguys, and stam players, and supposedly just want the "recreational player". But they expect all their players to know what the consensus line is.
Lest face it, if someone had asked wethaer a +605/-800 line on nadal vs the other guy was a fair line, how many of us would even have had a clue, unless we compared it to pinnacle. or another top tier book. And if the majority of us would not have reconzed this as an incorect line, without comparing it to another book, then what is casablanca definition of an "incorrect line." Is every one who plays at casablanca required to have a second sportsbook account, to make sue that casablanca is NOT giving them the best line. Because if they are then it might be wrong?
how is anyone suppose to knwo if your line is correct
Easy one here, they use high juice middle of the road numbers on tennis all the time.
OK simple enough, certainly a group of guys sharing information would know this, afterall are they betting tennis without a clue, didn't the guy quote every other line out there? Be real, it's stealing,
his name should be shared with every other book on earth.
they are lying if they claim they didn't know it was a bad line, it's that simple, it is too obvious, and the group that bet it is too perceptive.
Easy one here, they use high juice middle of the road numbers on tennis all the time.
OK simple enough, certainly a group of guys sharing information would know this, afterall are they betting tennis without a clue, didn't the guy quote every other line out there? Be real, it's stealing,
his name should be shared with every other book on earth.
they are lying if they claim they didn't know it was a bad line, it's that simple, it is too obvious, and the group that bet it is too perceptive.
The best point anybody has made so far (by Marc):
________________________________________________
What I find outrageous, is that a lot of these books hate line shoppers, and wiseguys, and steam players, and supposedly just want the "recreational player". But they expect all their players to know what the consensus line is.
Let's face it, if someone had asked wethaer a +605/-800 line on nadal vs the other guy was a fair line, how many of us would even have had a clue, unless we compared it to Pinnacle. or another top tier book. And if the majority of us would not have recognized this as an incorrect line, without comparing it to another book, then what is casablanca's definition of an "incorrect line." Is every one who plays at casablanca required to have a second sportsbook account, to make sure that casablanca is NOT giving them the best line. Because if they are then it might be wrong?
_______________________________________________
Couldn't have said it any better myself.
________________________________________________
What I find outrageous, is that a lot of these books hate line shoppers, and wiseguys, and steam players, and supposedly just want the "recreational player". But they expect all their players to know what the consensus line is.
Let's face it, if someone had asked wethaer a +605/-800 line on nadal vs the other guy was a fair line, how many of us would even have had a clue, unless we compared it to Pinnacle. or another top tier book. And if the majority of us would not have recognized this as an incorrect line, without comparing it to another book, then what is casablanca's definition of an "incorrect line." Is every one who plays at casablanca required to have a second sportsbook account, to make sure that casablanca is NOT giving them the best line. Because if they are then it might be wrong?
_______________________________________________
Couldn't have said it any better myself.
So Salt V thinks it's OK to welch on a wager AFTER THE EVENT. (Actually I think he's just taking their side because he has Railbird Disease and likes being an asshole) If the "bad line" was caught BEFORE the event (which they would've done if they weren't ewither sleeping at the wheel or taking a shot) then everyone here would be on the book's side. But Salt V has a history of siding with shit books. Like when NAB did the same thing to someone (cancelled a so-called bad line AFTER the game) and Salt defended the welching book... and ONE WEEK later NAB closed their doors. But he's a welcher himself, being that he owes $1000 to Pancho. And it's too bad the Belmont track super couldn't "fix" the track good enough to make Funny Cide win the triple crown.
Salt V didn't just decide to run his truck driver mouth here about CBS for the hell of it. We all know he loves to run his big mouth here (and to be wrong 100% of the time) but there is a reason for this one. He's been posting over at Bettorspub and never starts fights or curses over there, which just shows his anti-Rx bias (and the fact that if he pulled the shit there that he does here they would boot his ass in a new york second). But here's where it gets interesting... CBS advertises over at BP, and Peep posted a message about this situation on their forum. Now they'll take any shit book who comes waving a checkbook and they're desperate for advertisers so they don't want to lose this one. So they sent their new butt-buddy over here to defend these WELCHERS (and to stir up some shit here at the same time) but it ain't gonna work. People here are too smart for this agenda-driven bullshit.
Let me begin by saying that the enclosed response is for the purpose of clearing up some untruths that have been posted here and is for the benefit of the readers and the many concerned players who have held betCBS in high regard for many years. I am not going to come back in and argue this item further. My final decision has already been made on the customer 'Areef' along with the other players affected. I will not use this forum to argue my policies. I will not attempt to try to fight posters who may not agree with the decision. After reading my decision each player can make his own opinion about how the situation was handled and can decide if they want to play at betCBS in the future.
This post was not made sooner because I have been out of town for the last couple days and there has been an impending investigation made on the accounts in question. I apologize for not clearing the air the last couple days but I did not want to respond to a complant without having the facts of every detail. I appreciate being given the opportunity to explain and I hope the forum will keep an open mind when reading how I dealt with the problem. There are a few things that have not been said and I think you will find them very interesting. Other books deal with this same problem everyday. Many times you do not hear about the situation because it is normally silenced before it becomes public knowledge. I did not give into the threats made and that is why you have had the pleasure of reading the one-sided version of the situation the last few days from the player 'Areef'.
I guess Ill start by giving a run down of EXACTLY what transpired on the tennis bet in question. All times that I list below are Eastern time.
The line on the tennis match in question was posted at 6:00 PM on Sunday June 22nd. The line was opened at +400. Other books who were using that same Matchup at the time:
William Hill Nadal +300
Victor Chandler Nadal +250
Ladbrokes Nadal +350
As you can see even the +400 we were using at betCBS was a little high.
Wagers were taken on both sides of the match up until 9:45 that evening. At that point we had taken bets on both players but we were heavy on the dog. The line manager on staff (who does work the entire evening) moved the line incorrectly. Instead of moving the match to +350 he moved it istead to +605. We are not sure why this happened but it can be assumed it was a simple case of human error.
We took many bets on the Matchup throughout the evening and right up until it went off the board. The line manager did not realize the mistake until three bets came in minutes apart on Nadal for the maximum limit(total of $3000).
The Matchup was immediately closed and we started to investigate the situation.
The first thing we do in a situation like this one is profile each account. When a 'bad line' is posted the book forces itself into a lose-lose situation. If we cancell the bet completely we look like thieves in the eyes of everyone involved. If we pay the player knowing full well that he only made the wager because of the discrepancy then we are encouraging this type of 'cherry picking' and put ourselves and the future success of the business at the mercy of these type of players. At betCBS we try to find the right middle ground to treat all players fairly.
We have it written very clearly on our website under the Sportsbook Rules #18:
" Casablanca reserves the right to cancel any wager placed on an incorrect line. "
Keep in mind this rule is not written in order to to give betCBS free reign to cancell wager at will. The rule is in place so we can use it in situations where it is discovered the player purposely acted in a dishonest way to take advantage of an obvious error.
The first step I took was to look at each wager as well as each account that placed the wager. The wagers that were taken at +400 the previous night were all obviously honored. Every wager placed before the line was moved incorrectly was paid out in full. The wagers that were taken during the night after the error by the line manager were all investigated. The only wagers that were cancelled by us at betCBS were from 4 seperate accounts and I will explain below why they were cancelled. Please keep in mind that there were 5 other accounts that made wagers that night and morning @ +605 on this Matchup and they were paid in full at the incorrect line:
Here is the criteria I used to decide which players were allowed to keep the wagers:
1st Wager Type
Do these players normally wager on Tennis or any other Matchup sports?
2nd Wager Amount
Was the amount wagered representative of the normal wager amount for that player or was the Amount exagerrated in order to take advantage of the bad line?
3rd Wager History
Is the player and everyday player or simply someone who comes in and only makes a wager on an obvious mistake?
4th Past Offenses
Has this player ever been warned previously about the ' bad line' policy?
5th IP Information
Is there anything strange in regards to the information the player registered and the IP address being used? Can it be assumed that multple players colluded to bypass wager limits or maximize the mistake to their benefit?
As I mentioned before there were 5 Accounts who wagered on the incorrect line and I still honored their wager and paid them in full. Each of those 5 accounts had previously wagered on a Matchup Sport. Each of those 5 players wagered an amount on this Matchup that was representative of their average wager. Each of those accounts plays consistently on any number of sports and wager types. None of those 5 players had ever been warned in the past in regards to betting into a 'bad line'. Every account had an IP address that was representative of the account information they registered when opening the account and no collusion could be assumed.
Here is why the other Four Accounts were flagged including 'Areef':
All four accounts were very sporadic players. Every wager made up until that point was only made on lines that were weak or there was considerable value. These players were 'shoppers' who used betCBS only when a line had value. Between the four Accounts they did not even have twenty total wagers and the average wager amount was much less than the $1000 that each account bet on this single Matchup. Although all four players never had bet an incorrect line previously so they never received warning. Two of the accounts including 'Areef' were from the very same state and had similar IP's.
(Important to note here inregards to these 4 players. We never closed their accounts even though they were 'shoppers' because I do not discourage that type of action. betCBS does not mind if players use us to scalp or middle. If a player has an acount and I am using +250 on a game and the player can lay -240 at another shop than I welcome that type of action. The problem only arises when those same players come in and blatantly take advantage of an error as is the case in question.)
As we followed up further on the four accounts in question we decided to focus mainly on the two Accounts that were from the same state. The other two accounts including the one from Italy wagered at different times and the IP addresses were completely different. Investigating the two accounts in question further we realized from Internet Traffic Reports that 'Areef' and the account he colluded with were using what is called a 'spider program' in order to find discrepancies in the lines. The system runs automatically and pulls lines from many different books to pinpoint scalps or major differences in the lines. I do not throw out players who use these types of programs but it does lend support to the fact that the line was off and that is the reason why 'Areef' was betting into the line. Another important thing to mention that both bets made by 'Areef' and his other account were made minutes apart and both were made for $1000.
So here is what we have in summary:
Nine Wagers made on an incorrect Tennis Line all on the dog @ +605.
Five of the Nine Accounts were paid in full by betCBS. These accounts were all Paid in Full because none of the accounts colluded and none of the accounts exceeded their wager limit.
Two of the Four remaining accounts were deemed seperate cases and the remaining two colluded together using a 'spider program' to further take advantage of an obvious bad line.
Of the Four Accounts in question we credited each account for a $500 wager @ +300 and sent emails to all warning them that in the future betting into an obvious bad line would result in a no action bet and a cancellation of their account.
After further review I feel the two seperate cases may have been handled to severly. I will send emails to both tomorrow and credit each one of them with the +605 bet at their average wager amount.
Areef and the account he colluded with will recieve nothing more than the $1500 I have already credited them in their accounts. If they wish to remain players they are more than welcome. They may use their 'spider program' to continue to use betCBS as a scalp. However, if they do bet into an incorrect line in the future their wagers will be cancelled. I think they are professional enough to understand what is the difference between a correct and incorrect line.
I am sure Areef will continue to argue this point and in the future will bring other books to the forefront in order to attempt to extort them into giving away money. I hope other books will stand against this type of behavior and any book interested in information on Areef and his 'spider program' can email me dave@betcbs.com
In conclusion to this whole fiasco I hope that the members of the Prescription will keep an open mind when deciding how you think this situation was handled.
As I mentioned before it is a lose-lose situation. Each account has to be handled seperately and the best possible decision has to be made after reviewing all the circumstances. We paid out a considerable amount of money on a mistake. I take responsibility for the mistake but understand it is a cost of doing business.
The main reason I came in today to defend the arguement is because we do have a large number of good players including Krackman and other Prescription members who have always praised us in the past. I appreciate that praise and hope they will continue to do so in the future.
These players who have been with us a long time undertsand that we do not chase wiseguys. We do not chase scalpers. We do not chase professional players. We may not be the ideal out for a professional player but we respect our pro's and they know they always get paid.
Areef is not a line mover or even a recreational player. He is someone who bets an incorrect line and then feels he can use the forum as his tool to try to extort a god book into changing their policies.
Just to be clear:
If you have an account at betCBS and you play the moves you will always be PAID.
If you have an account at betCBS and you scalp you will always be PAID.
If you have an account at betCBS and you play for recreation you will always be PAID.
If you have an account at betCBS and you sit online and wait for incorrect lines you will be warned the first time and then your account will be closed.
I work too hard to create great bonus promotions like our 5% back weekly to give away the store to a guy who uses a 'spider program' to bet an incorrect line and then cries about it on the forums.
I am sorry I could not come in sooner to explain why I made the decision but I wanted to be sure of all the facts before posting. I hope I did not come off too strong.
For some reason I have developed a reputation as being a 'hot head' with a few people. If this is the case I apologize. I enjoy talking to players and I enjoy working hard to stay compettitve with the bigger books.
After all this is said and done I hope the players will still respect betCBS. We worked hard and will continue to work hard in the future to be fair and honest.
As always I will take all emails and respond individually to either moderators or players.
Thanks for your time
Dave Johnson
betCBS.com
This post was not made sooner because I have been out of town for the last couple days and there has been an impending investigation made on the accounts in question. I apologize for not clearing the air the last couple days but I did not want to respond to a complant without having the facts of every detail. I appreciate being given the opportunity to explain and I hope the forum will keep an open mind when reading how I dealt with the problem. There are a few things that have not been said and I think you will find them very interesting. Other books deal with this same problem everyday. Many times you do not hear about the situation because it is normally silenced before it becomes public knowledge. I did not give into the threats made and that is why you have had the pleasure of reading the one-sided version of the situation the last few days from the player 'Areef'.
I guess Ill start by giving a run down of EXACTLY what transpired on the tennis bet in question. All times that I list below are Eastern time.
The line on the tennis match in question was posted at 6:00 PM on Sunday June 22nd. The line was opened at +400. Other books who were using that same Matchup at the time:
William Hill Nadal +300
Victor Chandler Nadal +250
Ladbrokes Nadal +350
As you can see even the +400 we were using at betCBS was a little high.
Wagers were taken on both sides of the match up until 9:45 that evening. At that point we had taken bets on both players but we were heavy on the dog. The line manager on staff (who does work the entire evening) moved the line incorrectly. Instead of moving the match to +350 he moved it istead to +605. We are not sure why this happened but it can be assumed it was a simple case of human error.
We took many bets on the Matchup throughout the evening and right up until it went off the board. The line manager did not realize the mistake until three bets came in minutes apart on Nadal for the maximum limit(total of $3000).
The Matchup was immediately closed and we started to investigate the situation.
The first thing we do in a situation like this one is profile each account. When a 'bad line' is posted the book forces itself into a lose-lose situation. If we cancell the bet completely we look like thieves in the eyes of everyone involved. If we pay the player knowing full well that he only made the wager because of the discrepancy then we are encouraging this type of 'cherry picking' and put ourselves and the future success of the business at the mercy of these type of players. At betCBS we try to find the right middle ground to treat all players fairly.
We have it written very clearly on our website under the Sportsbook Rules #18:
" Casablanca reserves the right to cancel any wager placed on an incorrect line. "
Keep in mind this rule is not written in order to to give betCBS free reign to cancell wager at will. The rule is in place so we can use it in situations where it is discovered the player purposely acted in a dishonest way to take advantage of an obvious error.
The first step I took was to look at each wager as well as each account that placed the wager. The wagers that were taken at +400 the previous night were all obviously honored. Every wager placed before the line was moved incorrectly was paid out in full. The wagers that were taken during the night after the error by the line manager were all investigated. The only wagers that were cancelled by us at betCBS were from 4 seperate accounts and I will explain below why they were cancelled. Please keep in mind that there were 5 other accounts that made wagers that night and morning @ +605 on this Matchup and they were paid in full at the incorrect line:
Here is the criteria I used to decide which players were allowed to keep the wagers:
1st Wager Type
Do these players normally wager on Tennis or any other Matchup sports?
2nd Wager Amount
Was the amount wagered representative of the normal wager amount for that player or was the Amount exagerrated in order to take advantage of the bad line?
3rd Wager History
Is the player and everyday player or simply someone who comes in and only makes a wager on an obvious mistake?
4th Past Offenses
Has this player ever been warned previously about the ' bad line' policy?
5th IP Information
Is there anything strange in regards to the information the player registered and the IP address being used? Can it be assumed that multple players colluded to bypass wager limits or maximize the mistake to their benefit?
As I mentioned before there were 5 Accounts who wagered on the incorrect line and I still honored their wager and paid them in full. Each of those 5 accounts had previously wagered on a Matchup Sport. Each of those 5 players wagered an amount on this Matchup that was representative of their average wager. Each of those accounts plays consistently on any number of sports and wager types. None of those 5 players had ever been warned in the past in regards to betting into a 'bad line'. Every account had an IP address that was representative of the account information they registered when opening the account and no collusion could be assumed.
Here is why the other Four Accounts were flagged including 'Areef':
All four accounts were very sporadic players. Every wager made up until that point was only made on lines that were weak or there was considerable value. These players were 'shoppers' who used betCBS only when a line had value. Between the four Accounts they did not even have twenty total wagers and the average wager amount was much less than the $1000 that each account bet on this single Matchup. Although all four players never had bet an incorrect line previously so they never received warning. Two of the accounts including 'Areef' were from the very same state and had similar IP's.
(Important to note here inregards to these 4 players. We never closed their accounts even though they were 'shoppers' because I do not discourage that type of action. betCBS does not mind if players use us to scalp or middle. If a player has an acount and I am using +250 on a game and the player can lay -240 at another shop than I welcome that type of action. The problem only arises when those same players come in and blatantly take advantage of an error as is the case in question.)
As we followed up further on the four accounts in question we decided to focus mainly on the two Accounts that were from the same state. The other two accounts including the one from Italy wagered at different times and the IP addresses were completely different. Investigating the two accounts in question further we realized from Internet Traffic Reports that 'Areef' and the account he colluded with were using what is called a 'spider program' in order to find discrepancies in the lines. The system runs automatically and pulls lines from many different books to pinpoint scalps or major differences in the lines. I do not throw out players who use these types of programs but it does lend support to the fact that the line was off and that is the reason why 'Areef' was betting into the line. Another important thing to mention that both bets made by 'Areef' and his other account were made minutes apart and both were made for $1000.
So here is what we have in summary:
Nine Wagers made on an incorrect Tennis Line all on the dog @ +605.
Five of the Nine Accounts were paid in full by betCBS. These accounts were all Paid in Full because none of the accounts colluded and none of the accounts exceeded their wager limit.
Two of the Four remaining accounts were deemed seperate cases and the remaining two colluded together using a 'spider program' to further take advantage of an obvious bad line.
Of the Four Accounts in question we credited each account for a $500 wager @ +300 and sent emails to all warning them that in the future betting into an obvious bad line would result in a no action bet and a cancellation of their account.
After further review I feel the two seperate cases may have been handled to severly. I will send emails to both tomorrow and credit each one of them with the +605 bet at their average wager amount.
Areef and the account he colluded with will recieve nothing more than the $1500 I have already credited them in their accounts. If they wish to remain players they are more than welcome. They may use their 'spider program' to continue to use betCBS as a scalp. However, if they do bet into an incorrect line in the future their wagers will be cancelled. I think they are professional enough to understand what is the difference between a correct and incorrect line.
I am sure Areef will continue to argue this point and in the future will bring other books to the forefront in order to attempt to extort them into giving away money. I hope other books will stand against this type of behavior and any book interested in information on Areef and his 'spider program' can email me dave@betcbs.com
In conclusion to this whole fiasco I hope that the members of the Prescription will keep an open mind when deciding how you think this situation was handled.
As I mentioned before it is a lose-lose situation. Each account has to be handled seperately and the best possible decision has to be made after reviewing all the circumstances. We paid out a considerable amount of money on a mistake. I take responsibility for the mistake but understand it is a cost of doing business.
The main reason I came in today to defend the arguement is because we do have a large number of good players including Krackman and other Prescription members who have always praised us in the past. I appreciate that praise and hope they will continue to do so in the future.
These players who have been with us a long time undertsand that we do not chase wiseguys. We do not chase scalpers. We do not chase professional players. We may not be the ideal out for a professional player but we respect our pro's and they know they always get paid.
Areef is not a line mover or even a recreational player. He is someone who bets an incorrect line and then feels he can use the forum as his tool to try to extort a god book into changing their policies.
Just to be clear:
If you have an account at betCBS and you play the moves you will always be PAID.
If you have an account at betCBS and you scalp you will always be PAID.
If you have an account at betCBS and you play for recreation you will always be PAID.
If you have an account at betCBS and you sit online and wait for incorrect lines you will be warned the first time and then your account will be closed.
I work too hard to create great bonus promotions like our 5% back weekly to give away the store to a guy who uses a 'spider program' to bet an incorrect line and then cries about it on the forums.
I am sorry I could not come in sooner to explain why I made the decision but I wanted to be sure of all the facts before posting. I hope I did not come off too strong.
For some reason I have developed a reputation as being a 'hot head' with a few people. If this is the case I apologize. I enjoy talking to players and I enjoy working hard to stay compettitve with the bigger books.
After all this is said and done I hope the players will still respect betCBS. We worked hard and will continue to work hard in the future to be fair and honest.
As always I will take all emails and respond individually to either moderators or players.
Thanks for your time
Dave Johnson
betCBS.com
Great post Dave (even though I have been defending the other side of the argument loudly).
I still wonder (and don't expect a reply since you said it was your only post) if you had it to do over again if you would at least send out an e-mail WHILE the event was in progress to everyone that played the match notifying them that the wagers were under investigation for a bad line and may have to be voided. I think that action alone would have saved you alot of the grief coming from people like me to whom it seems like you had a "free roll" on the wagers in question.
I still wonder (and don't expect a reply since you said it was your only post) if you had it to do over again if you would at least send out an e-mail WHILE the event was in progress to everyone that played the match notifying them that the wagers were under investigation for a bad line and may have to be voided. I think that action alone would have saved you alot of the grief coming from people like me to whom it seems like you had a "free roll" on the wagers in question.
Thanks for (finally) explaining your side. You don't seem to be crooks... you fell asleep in the water and the sharks ate you alive. This will all work out for the best I guess... the book will stay in business through football season by telling the bettors to eat this one, and the players learned that there's no free lunch.
