Everyone seems to be making this a very complicated issue. It looks simple and clear cut to me. If Revere has been allowed to play over $500 in the past- his entire bet should stand.
Wsex accepted all the wagers and lost. Steve was honest enough to come in and say they were cancelled AFTER the match. IMO, WSEX made an error, I hope they will correct it.
Their software seems to work fine when I'm playing there.
I bet a MLB game ... the line moved .05
I bought <golf IA's> ... the line moved 3 then 7 more
If you don't want wagers that size, from soccer leagues, pay the bet and remedy the problem. You have the lines up on the internet, unable to take call-ins because of the odd starting times. The player in no way, shape or form did anything but play a side in a major league. If he had lost, (lets be realistic)I think we all know the decision would have been easy.
If you truly wanted to cancel the wagers BEFORE the event and were unable to contact the player, why not email Patrick & Ken @ therx, The Major and John @ SBR ? This would be a non-issue. Simply say we are cancelling $39,000 in bets on a side (Manchester) to avoid any issue we are informing 3rd parties.
I think the right decision is obvious.
Wsex accepted all the wagers and lost. Steve was honest enough to come in and say they were cancelled AFTER the match. IMO, WSEX made an error, I hope they will correct it.
Their software seems to work fine when I'm playing there.
I bet a MLB game ... the line moved .05
I bought <golf IA's> ... the line moved 3 then 7 more
If you don't want wagers that size, from soccer leagues, pay the bet and remedy the problem. You have the lines up on the internet, unable to take call-ins because of the odd starting times. The player in no way, shape or form did anything but play a side in a major league. If he had lost, (lets be realistic)I think we all know the decision would have been easy.
If you truly wanted to cancel the wagers BEFORE the event and were unable to contact the player, why not email Patrick & Ken @ therx, The Major and John @ SBR ? This would be a non-issue. Simply say we are cancelling $39,000 in bets on a side (Manchester) to avoid any issue we are informing 3rd parties.
I think the right decision is obvious.
The more I think about this the worse it looks for WSEX.
As drunk guy mentioned, Antigua is very small. No way Steve could not have driven to the shop in 10 minutes at 6AM. I went from tip to tip to go fishing and it took 20 min. And knowing where WSEX is located it couldnt be more than 10 min.
As Wil and many others from Steve's side of the counter have somewhat grudgingly agreed that the wagers should have been cancelled FIRST. And in no way allowed to stand unless they were to be honored.
Was the player a saint? no...doesn't matter
My Judgement is for the player to be paid in full.
As drunk guy mentioned, Antigua is very small. No way Steve could not have driven to the shop in 10 minutes at 6AM. I went from tip to tip to go fishing and it took 20 min. And knowing where WSEX is located it couldnt be more than 10 min.
As Wil and many others from Steve's side of the counter have somewhat grudgingly agreed that the wagers should have been cancelled FIRST. And in no way allowed to stand unless they were to be honored.
Was the player a saint? no...doesn't matter
My Judgement is for the player to be paid in full.
kongen,
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
26' [1 - 0] Alan Shearer
51' [1 - 1] Ruud van Nistelrooy
59' [1 - 2] Paul Scholes
Anyone claiming +120 on Utd was a weak line doesn't know what the hell they're talking about. One can always contact Betbrain and ask for a line development. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Please, pay attention to the time the bets were placed on, on that hours it was a WEAK line indeed.
Putting myself in the place of Revere, I would have done the same thing, because the value is the only thing that matters in this business. Should the line adjust I'm sure he would go anywhere else to shop the better line.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>
26' [1 - 0] Alan Shearer
51' [1 - 1] Ruud van Nistelrooy
59' [1 - 2] Paul Scholes
Anyone claiming +120 on Utd was a weak line doesn't know what the hell they're talking about. One can always contact Betbrain and ask for a line development. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Please, pay attention to the time the bets were placed on, on that hours it was a WEAK line indeed.
Putting myself in the place of Revere, I would have done the same thing, because the value is the only thing that matters in this business. Should the line adjust I'm sure he would go anywhere else to shop the better line.
Patrick, dunkguy and buzzsaw...all GREAT posts.
The bottomline is that if you are going to cancel already accepted wagers then there are certain steps that must be taken. Simply put, one of the necessary steps is timeliness from the time of discovery (actual or implied, in this case actual). One could quibble about 30 minutes, 45 minutes or an hour or maybe, maybe even 2 hours. But not 5 hours. It should NEVER take 5 hours once you know you have a line that requires cancelling (with the exception of natural disasters, maybe). What's worse is the discovery occurred before the event but the cancellation wasn't until the match wa fully completed. Notifying is fine, that needs to be done as well. But if you have a line that is legit to cancel, then you cancel right then and there and send an e-mail and/or call. You do them simultaenously. And you do them as soon as reasonably possible. You cannot discover a cancellable line before an event, wait 5 hours and then cancel after the event. Period. It doesn't matter what the player did. When a book cancels the onus is on them to justify it both in terms of the reason for cancelling AND the procedure used to cancel. If either test fails then the book loses. The procedure here was totally unreasonable and unacceptable.
Again, pay the man in full, boot him (if you wish), upgrade the damn software and learn from this experience. Well, that's my opinion anyway.
The bottomline is that if you are going to cancel already accepted wagers then there are certain steps that must be taken. Simply put, one of the necessary steps is timeliness from the time of discovery (actual or implied, in this case actual). One could quibble about 30 minutes, 45 minutes or an hour or maybe, maybe even 2 hours. But not 5 hours. It should NEVER take 5 hours once you know you have a line that requires cancelling (with the exception of natural disasters, maybe). What's worse is the discovery occurred before the event but the cancellation wasn't until the match wa fully completed. Notifying is fine, that needs to be done as well. But if you have a line that is legit to cancel, then you cancel right then and there and send an e-mail and/or call. You do them simultaenously. And you do them as soon as reasonably possible. You cannot discover a cancellable line before an event, wait 5 hours and then cancel after the event. Period. It doesn't matter what the player did. When a book cancels the onus is on them to justify it both in terms of the reason for cancelling AND the procedure used to cancel. If either test fails then the book loses. The procedure here was totally unreasonable and unacceptable.
Again, pay the man in full, boot him (if you wish), upgrade the damn software and learn from this experience. Well, that's my opinion anyway.
D2-
Right on the money. Cancel it before the game starts. Hell, even cancel it halfway through and you still have a case. Cancel 5 hours past and you have no case whatsoever.
I'll stick to my original assertion that WSEX is "in the right" here, but it was handled so poorly as to cast doubt on their integrity
Right on the money. Cancel it before the game starts. Hell, even cancel it halfway through and you still have a case. Cancel 5 hours past and you have no case whatsoever.
I'll stick to my original assertion that WSEX is "in the right" here, but it was handled so poorly as to cast doubt on their integrity
Sounds to me like WSEX is pulling a Casablanca (BetCBS) if they cancelled the wagers after the game finished.
In this case, Revere was lucky enough to have an output of the timestamps to backup his case.
WSEX accepted the wagers. They need to pay. What if the line had moved significantly (due to a player injury) and Revere had to lay action on the other side with another book? If the line had gone from +120 to +200 before the match, would WSEX have cancelled the +120 bets or taken the shot? (My guess: take the shot)
"miamiman" made a good point that WSEX had plenty of time to lay off the wager with another book if they didn't want that much action.
While Revere's betting pattern may look suspicious to some, it may be WSEX software blocks something simple like two $10 bets in a row. If this is the case, then it may be a safety feature to prevent an accidental double-bet. (When I programmed Casablanca's original system, one early problem was players double-clicking and making two bets when only one was intended.) The $500 limit makes sense to slow down a wiseguy on a line move and give themselves PLENTY of time to change the lines, without having to worry about player wager limits.
No one in the office between 4 am and 6 am is not a valid excuse. If you post lines and take bets at this hour then you are open for business. Period. Limiting the amounts or shutting software during non-office hours is one of the first things you program. WSEX claims that a half hour before the game he made the decision to cancel the bets, but no supervisor was there to perform the operation (until 5 hours later). Gee, those clerks must be rich if they can't be persuaded out of bed to cancel a $40,000 bet. Gringo, I agree that they could have posted a thread on RX about the situation and used the RX for their timestamp.
After the Casablanca fiasco with Areef, you would think the major sportsbooks would have adopted a formal procedure for this or addressed it specifically in their rules pages. The idea to post something with RX if you can't reach a player is pretty obvious solution (the post could contain the ticket numbers rather than player info).
WSEX's defense has only made the case for Revere stronger. This is going to cost them a lot more than BetCBS's blunder, because WSEX is a book that is actually on the map.
As for WSEX's software, it's been around for years. I considered it the gold standard 5 years ago when I was researching for my own software. Restricting online wager limits was always a top priority, since a human being is out of the loop. In particular, my system had a 'Night Mode' to restrict action during non-office hours. For Steve to claim 'glitch' is pretty weak when the software clearly behaved as intended and has done so before (which is how Revere knew how to bet more than $500).
This is just like the Casablanca situation in that the book clearly took a shot and the spokeman is making up weak excuses. Much of what I (and others) said about the Casablanca situation applies here as well.
In this case, Revere was lucky enough to have an output of the timestamps to backup his case.
WSEX accepted the wagers. They need to pay. What if the line had moved significantly (due to a player injury) and Revere had to lay action on the other side with another book? If the line had gone from +120 to +200 before the match, would WSEX have cancelled the +120 bets or taken the shot? (My guess: take the shot)
"miamiman" made a good point that WSEX had plenty of time to lay off the wager with another book if they didn't want that much action.
While Revere's betting pattern may look suspicious to some, it may be WSEX software blocks something simple like two $10 bets in a row. If this is the case, then it may be a safety feature to prevent an accidental double-bet. (When I programmed Casablanca's original system, one early problem was players double-clicking and making two bets when only one was intended.) The $500 limit makes sense to slow down a wiseguy on a line move and give themselves PLENTY of time to change the lines, without having to worry about player wager limits.
No one in the office between 4 am and 6 am is not a valid excuse. If you post lines and take bets at this hour then you are open for business. Period. Limiting the amounts or shutting software during non-office hours is one of the first things you program. WSEX claims that a half hour before the game he made the decision to cancel the bets, but no supervisor was there to perform the operation (until 5 hours later). Gee, those clerks must be rich if they can't be persuaded out of bed to cancel a $40,000 bet. Gringo, I agree that they could have posted a thread on RX about the situation and used the RX for their timestamp.
After the Casablanca fiasco with Areef, you would think the major sportsbooks would have adopted a formal procedure for this or addressed it specifically in their rules pages. The idea to post something with RX if you can't reach a player is pretty obvious solution (the post could contain the ticket numbers rather than player info).
WSEX's defense has only made the case for Revere stronger. This is going to cost them a lot more than BetCBS's blunder, because WSEX is a book that is actually on the map.
As for WSEX's software, it's been around for years. I considered it the gold standard 5 years ago when I was researching for my own software. Restricting online wager limits was always a top priority, since a human being is out of the loop. In particular, my system had a 'Night Mode' to restrict action during non-office hours. For Steve to claim 'glitch' is pretty weak when the software clearly behaved as intended and has done so before (which is how Revere knew how to bet more than $500).
This is just like the Casablanca situation in that the book clearly took a shot and the spokeman is making up weak excuses. Much of what I (and others) said about the Casablanca situation applies here as well.
McIrish
I totally understand your logic. Like I said at the beginning, I think WSEX is on the right side here. HOWEVER, they (the books) are the ones that are able to make the rules here. They can set limits, they post the lines, they can cancel wagers, etc, etc. They need to set lines and limits they can live with, or get out of this business.
As a player, I can't set the lines that I want to play. The book has the advantage of the vig, the player has the advanage of choosing his spots. If we allow the book to start choosing their spots (as in this case), we are doing all the players a disservice.
As I said (so eloquently
) above:
"Why do you employ linesmakers and book managers? If you can't trust them to make the right call, then do it yourself. Or better yet, don't put a line up until you are ready to take action on it. If you post a line, be prepared to take action on it and honor all wagers. If your software allows people to keep making wagers, then deal with it or modify your software."
IF YOU POST A LINE, BE PREPARED TO HONOR IT. This is the mantra that all books should live by. If you put a line up (and leave it up) then honor any wagers that come in.
It's only fair and reasonable to the player.
And if a player takes shots (as in this case), pay him off and ban him. You don't need to keep him as a customer, but pay him his fair win.
My only concern here is that the player had a "false" email and phone number. Is this another case of multiple accounts? If not, pay him, ban him, and get on with your business.
I totally understand your logic. Like I said at the beginning, I think WSEX is on the right side here. HOWEVER, they (the books) are the ones that are able to make the rules here. They can set limits, they post the lines, they can cancel wagers, etc, etc. They need to set lines and limits they can live with, or get out of this business.
As a player, I can't set the lines that I want to play. The book has the advantage of the vig, the player has the advanage of choosing his spots. If we allow the book to start choosing their spots (as in this case), we are doing all the players a disservice.
As I said (so eloquently
"Why do you employ linesmakers and book managers? If you can't trust them to make the right call, then do it yourself. Or better yet, don't put a line up until you are ready to take action on it. If you post a line, be prepared to take action on it and honor all wagers. If your software allows people to keep making wagers, then deal with it or modify your software."
IF YOU POST A LINE, BE PREPARED TO HONOR IT. This is the mantra that all books should live by. If you put a line up (and leave it up) then honor any wagers that come in.
It's only fair and reasonable to the player.
And if a player takes shots (as in this case), pay him off and ban him. You don't need to keep him as a customer, but pay him his fair win.
My only concern here is that the player had a "false" email and phone number. Is this another case of multiple accounts? If not, pay him, ban him, and get on with your business.
One thing about this that no one is talking about is why in the world would anyone ever want to place another bet at this book! Most people seem to be real pissed at the book and want the book to pay the player.
Well NEWSFLASH!!!! You are a dumbass in my opinion FOR ANYONE to ever place another bet at this book!
The player obviously tried to take advantage of the book! But then the book pulled the same shit 1000 times over! The player basically took an underdog near pickem to win the same amount of money. The book was risking $600 or so to win $40,000!!!
Why ANYONE would play with this book in the future after they did this shit is BEYOND ME!!!
Even if they do the right thing and pay this player, then they are not to be trusted if you ask me! We ALL KNOW that they would not have refunded even 1 penny if the game loses!
Likewise, had the player lost and they didnt refund the bets, then the player has NO OPTIONS as well! But when the book doesnt cancel the bet within AT LEAST the first 5 minutes of a game, then they should NOT BE ABLE TO CANCEL THE BET AT A LATER TIME!
They are basically just RAPING THE PLAYER!!!! I am sure that these guys were drinking beer and partying while checking out the score for they really had nothing to lose!
I will NEVER play at the book, and can NEVER recommend anyone ever touch it again!
Well NEWSFLASH!!!! You are a dumbass in my opinion FOR ANYONE to ever place another bet at this book!
The player obviously tried to take advantage of the book! But then the book pulled the same shit 1000 times over! The player basically took an underdog near pickem to win the same amount of money. The book was risking $600 or so to win $40,000!!!
Why ANYONE would play with this book in the future after they did this shit is BEYOND ME!!!
Even if they do the right thing and pay this player, then they are not to be trusted if you ask me! We ALL KNOW that they would not have refunded even 1 penny if the game loses!
Likewise, had the player lost and they didnt refund the bets, then the player has NO OPTIONS as well! But when the book doesnt cancel the bet within AT LEAST the first 5 minutes of a game, then they should NOT BE ABLE TO CANCEL THE BET AT A LATER TIME!
They are basically just RAPING THE PLAYER!!!! I am sure that these guys were drinking beer and partying while checking out the score for they really had nothing to lose!
I will NEVER play at the book, and can NEVER recommend anyone ever touch it again!
WSEX is not a new book. Their software is not new. Im sure Steve knew about this so called "software glitch" long long time ago and has had YEARS to fix it and hasnt done it.
Im sure this is not the first time he had to deal with something like this.
He ****ed up, he should have fixed the software along time ago. He has not posted the maximum limits on his site and like I said this book has been in this business for a long long long time!
How come you havent posted the maximum limits for diff events.
Steve is responsible for this mess. He has to pay the player!
STOP bullshiting about noone was there when the player was placing his wagers. If thats the case its not the players fault, its your fault!
You ****ed up, you should have tried to hedge the wager!
Like i said you guys have been in this biz for a long time. Its your fault! FIX your damn software!
Im sure this is not the first time he had to deal with something like this.
He ****ed up, he should have fixed the software along time ago. He has not posted the maximum limits on his site and like I said this book has been in this business for a long long long time!
How come you havent posted the maximum limits for diff events.
Steve is responsible for this mess. He has to pay the player!
STOP bullshiting about noone was there when the player was placing his wagers. If thats the case its not the players fault, its your fault!
You ****ed up, you should have tried to hedge the wager!
Like i said you guys have been in this biz for a long time. Its your fault! FIX your damn software!
I forgot to add one factor that will help WSEX a bit if I were the JUDGE or mediator here. The player calims wins of around $47,000 at +120.
Well any JUDGE in America wouldnt give him that figure! But he is due at least $5,000 at +120, then maybe $5,000 at +110 and $5000 at even and $5000 at -110 and $5000 at -120 and so forth.
I didnt figure all of this out using a calculator, but I would give him a VERY FAIR settlement of $34,500 and everything is OK.
Well any JUDGE in America wouldnt give him that figure! But he is due at least $5,000 at +120, then maybe $5,000 at +110 and $5000 at even and $5000 at -110 and $5000 at -120 and so forth.
I didnt figure all of this out using a calculator, but I would give him a VERY FAIR settlement of $34,500 and everything is OK.
Everyone defending the book is doing one thing - rationalizing. You book the wager, you pay the ticket it or collect it. Gray my ass. This situation is black and white. Intent means SHIT. The law does not judge by intent. If you dont think its wrong to rape and still do so in civilized society you are guilty of rape. Ignorance of laws/rules is irrelevant. Pay the fu(king guy and learn a lesson. This shit makes me sick.
wsexsteve said, <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>"The second reason was I wanted to speak with him and decide how much action we were going to accept at that number." <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This certainly implies that WSEX had no $500 limit on soccer matches.
From the WSEX homepage:
World Sports Exchange is a licensed internet sportsbook regulated by the Gaming Commission of Antigua and Barbuda. Before you enter our site you should be warned we pride ourselves on being the most comprehensive, no frills, action packed sportsbook online. So leave your desire to see bouncing balls and goofy graphics at the door because we ain't got 'em. What we do have is the finest, no nonsense, online sportsbook wagering, in the world.
No other sports book online makes sports betting as easy.
WSEX knows that these soccer matches go off at an odd hour. If they don't want to accept legitimate wagers of Revere's bet-size, why not have someone there that can limit action ?
The homepage clearly states it is their intent to make online wagering as easy as possible. The player had evidently made large wagers prior to this. Is he supposed to be a mind reader on WSEX limits for this match ?
It burns when you get hit for a big bet, albeit a correct a line. It's simply a facet of our vernacular.
Revere is currently winning at WSEX, it seems that irrelevant fact is being taking into consideration. (sharp player, shot references)
He placed a big bet at a BM's shop as he had done on many previous occasions. Why should this one be graded any different ?
This certainly implies that WSEX had no $500 limit on soccer matches.
From the WSEX homepage:
World Sports Exchange is a licensed internet sportsbook regulated by the Gaming Commission of Antigua and Barbuda. Before you enter our site you should be warned we pride ourselves on being the most comprehensive, no frills, action packed sportsbook online. So leave your desire to see bouncing balls and goofy graphics at the door because we ain't got 'em. What we do have is the finest, no nonsense, online sportsbook wagering, in the world.
No other sports book online makes sports betting as easy.
WSEX knows that these soccer matches go off at an odd hour. If they don't want to accept legitimate wagers of Revere's bet-size, why not have someone there that can limit action ?
The homepage clearly states it is their intent to make online wagering as easy as possible. The player had evidently made large wagers prior to this. Is he supposed to be a mind reader on WSEX limits for this match ?
It burns when you get hit for a big bet, albeit a correct a line. It's simply a facet of our vernacular.
Revere is currently winning at WSEX, it seems that irrelevant fact is being taking into consideration. (sharp player, shot references)
He placed a big bet at a BM's shop as he had done on many previous occasions. Why should this one be graded any different ?
And Doc reminds me why he has always been one of my favorite Rx posters.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> docdekay
city slicker
posted August 24, 2003 02:48 AM
Everyone defending the book is doing one thing - rationalizing. You book the wager, you pay the ticket it or collect it. Gray my ass. This situation is black and white. Intent means SHIT. The law does not judge by intent. If you dont think its wrong to rape and still do so in civilized society you are guilty of rape. Ignorance of laws/rules is irrelevant. Pay the fu(king guy and learn a lesson. This shit makes me sick.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Regardless of whether i agree with Docdekay or not, i love the to the point, no bullshit approach the guy always puts on the table.
Doc, it fuking sucks you couldn't make it Vegas..
I swear, i would have cut back if you were going man..
Just think, i would remember meeting FatFrank, and Teddy KGB's wife..
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> docdekay
city slicker
posted August 24, 2003 02:48 AM
Everyone defending the book is doing one thing - rationalizing. You book the wager, you pay the ticket it or collect it. Gray my ass. This situation is black and white. Intent means SHIT. The law does not judge by intent. If you dont think its wrong to rape and still do so in civilized society you are guilty of rape. Ignorance of laws/rules is irrelevant. Pay the fu(king guy and learn a lesson. This shit makes me sick.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Regardless of whether i agree with Docdekay or not, i love the to the point, no bullshit approach the guy always puts on the table.
Doc, it fuking sucks you couldn't make it Vegas..
I swear, i would have cut back if you were going man..
Just think, i would remember meeting FatFrank, and Teddy KGB's wife..
