<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TTinCO:
Java, I wasn't able to find your proposed ideas
(yet).
Swami--The problem here is that IP ananomizers are way to easy to access, and it's easier than that.
I could go on and on about what the books could do to prevent it, but it's not worth the effort-or cost.
There will be a consolidation to the books that are large enough to balance this action out. The little guys will get crushed or jump ship since the norm is leaning towards reduced juice.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I didn't mean that it is easy to incorporate a solution to the problem. My only point is that once a book takes this type of action it is difficult to PROVE that it came from the same person unless the perpetrator is unsophisticated. Therefore, you either pay it or stiff. As Patrick pointed out, this situation seems to be common. If a book has a problem it must institute rules and regs to stop it and offer cures in situations where the scammers get through.
Java, I wasn't able to find your proposed ideas
(yet).
Swami--The problem here is that IP ananomizers are way to easy to access, and it's easier than that.
I could go on and on about what the books could do to prevent it, but it's not worth the effort-or cost.
There will be a consolidation to the books that are large enough to balance this action out. The little guys will get crushed or jump ship since the norm is leaning towards reduced juice.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I didn't mean that it is easy to incorporate a solution to the problem. My only point is that once a book takes this type of action it is difficult to PROVE that it came from the same person unless the perpetrator is unsophisticated. Therefore, you either pay it or stiff. As Patrick pointed out, this situation seems to be common. If a book has a problem it must institute rules and regs to stop it and offer cures in situations where the scammers get through.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TTinCO:
Java, I wasn't able to find your proposed ideas
(yet).
The problem here is that IP ananomizers are way to easy to access, and it's easier than that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
TTinCo-
Look in middle of second page of this post, a few above where I asked for your opinion.
As for the anonymizer, most players don't use them. Use of anonymizer is suspicious. Two players using the SAME anonymizer is REALLY suspicious. Combine that with times of players, deposit patterns, etc. it gets tougher for the multiple account players.
Another way to work against this is: all bets over a certain limit must occur over the phone (phone number and voice recorded for 800 calls). For a big enough bet, it IS worth it to have a clerk pick up the phone. It costs the player more to have multiple callers (and keep the lies straight) than for book to have a clerk.
Java, I wasn't able to find your proposed ideas
(yet).
The problem here is that IP ananomizers are way to easy to access, and it's easier than that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
TTinCo-
Look in middle of second page of this post, a few above where I asked for your opinion.
As for the anonymizer, most players don't use them. Use of anonymizer is suspicious. Two players using the SAME anonymizer is REALLY suspicious. Combine that with times of players, deposit patterns, etc. it gets tougher for the multiple account players.
Another way to work against this is: all bets over a certain limit must occur over the phone (phone number and voice recorded for 800 calls). For a big enough bet, it IS worth it to have a clerk pick up the phone. It costs the player more to have multiple callers (and keep the lies straight) than for book to have a clerk.
Swami, my point exactly.
Despite the fact that the written rules explicity forbid it, it's being allowed to happen-quite possibly to the point where it's a known and expected practice.
Rewrite the rules to reflect the way that it's going to be enforced if you are going to allow this to become an accepted practice.
Despite the fact that the written rules explicity forbid it, it's being allowed to happen-quite possibly to the point where it's a known and expected practice.
Rewrite the rules to reflect the way that it's going to be enforced if you are going to allow this to become an accepted practice.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by BSkiller:
Why book discover scam only when player requesting a payout
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
There may not have been enough of a pattern to call attention to it earlier. If you get five 5-dime payout requests within 10 minutes, you might think to check the players history to look for collusion.
Why book discover scam only when player requesting a payout
There may not have been enough of a pattern to call attention to it earlier. If you get five 5-dime payout requests within 10 minutes, you might think to check the players history to look for collusion.
I don't like scammers anymore than the next guy...
But the book never has the right to keep post up winnings...
I would always like if they reached a middle ground somehow..
Player can't keep bonus...
Player gets original post up and half the winnings...
I just worry that if we always side with the books on scammer issues the not so good books will be able to find a fault in legit players and find a reason to treat them the same..
who knows maybe I am rambling
But the book never has the right to keep post up winnings...
I would always like if they reached a middle ground somehow..
Player can't keep bonus...
Player gets original post up and half the winnings...
I just worry that if we always side with the books on scammer issues the not so good books will be able to find a fault in legit players and find a reason to treat them the same..
who knows maybe I am rambling
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Angelle:
I don't like scammers anymore than the next guy...
But the book never has the right to keep post up winnings...
I would always like if they reached a middle ground somehow..
Player can't keep bonus...
Player gets original post up and half the winnings...
I just worry that if we always side with the books on scammer issues the not so good books will be able to find a fault in legit players and find a reason to treat them the same..
who knows maybe I am rambling<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
On the contrary, this is probably one of your best posts.
----------------
I would always like if they reached a middle ground somehow..Player can't keep bonus...
Player gets original post up and half the winnings...
As simplistic as this may seem, it's probably very close to the "right" thing to do.
At a minimum, a book should return the amount that was deposited by the multi-account scammer (minus bonuses and fees).
At the other end of the spectrum, if all the book did was confiscate the bonus, and allowed the player to keep all winnings, there would be zero incentive for the scammer to stop scamming.
Something in between would be appropriate.
I don't like scammers anymore than the next guy...
But the book never has the right to keep post up winnings...
I would always like if they reached a middle ground somehow..
Player can't keep bonus...
Player gets original post up and half the winnings...
I just worry that if we always side with the books on scammer issues the not so good books will be able to find a fault in legit players and find a reason to treat them the same..
who knows maybe I am rambling<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
On the contrary, this is probably one of your best posts.
----------------
I would always like if they reached a middle ground somehow..Player can't keep bonus...
Player gets original post up and half the winnings...
As simplistic as this may seem, it's probably very close to the "right" thing to do.
At a minimum, a book should return the amount that was deposited by the multi-account scammer (minus bonuses and fees).
At the other end of the spectrum, if all the book did was confiscate the bonus, and allowed the player to keep all winnings, there would be zero incentive for the scammer to stop scamming.
Something in between would be appropriate.
[/QUOTE]
There may not have been enough of a pattern to call attention to it earlier. If you get five 5-dime payout requests within 10 minutes, you might think to check the players history to look for collusion.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you. But they still a possibility that book keep silent when the player is in the lossing streak, and take action when they win. If the player was telling the truth that he did inform Ewinner they are using the same computer to place bet, then ewinner have no case on this issue. Further more they refuse to let the players to prove they are seperate person with valid ID.
There may not have been enough of a pattern to call attention to it earlier. If you get five 5-dime payout requests within 10 minutes, you might think to check the players history to look for collusion.[/QUOTE]
I agree with you. But they still a possibility that book keep silent when the player is in the lossing streak, and take action when they win. If the player was telling the truth that he did inform Ewinner they are using the same computer to place bet, then ewinner have no case on this issue. Further more they refuse to let the players to prove they are seperate person with valid ID.
Bskiller-
You are right about a book keeping silent. I know of at least one instance where a book detected a multiple account situation, but decided NOT to ban the players immediately (as the players had just begun a losing streak).
BTW, anybody betting more than a dime a game has no real excuse for needing someone elses computer.
You are right about a book keeping silent. I know of at least one instance where a book detected a multiple account situation, but decided NOT to ban the players immediately (as the players had just begun a losing streak).
BTW, anybody betting more than a dime a game has no real excuse for needing someone elses computer.
When my brother was in UK for his U, he and his room mates share and buy on second hand computer. They all using that computer to place bets. At that time they are new to offshore betting and do not know that might create problem. Luckily for them is they did not uncounter this problem. Now my brother back to his homeland, he and myself still betting offshore. At first he don't know what games i bet, so do i. But after an incident, we start to inform each other what games and which team we bet, we try not to bet on the same game, either on the same side or oppersite. Just to prevent bookie accuse us and confiscate our money.
Although we are not betting sydicate. We will be a idiot to use our real name and place bets on the same games(same side to get over the book
limitmit....Oppersite side to scalp the bonus) with the same book.
Our name almost the same, even some book mistaken on both of us. I start wondering should i use a different name to register with book and place bet.
Although we are not betting sydicate. We will be a idiot to use our real name and place bets on the same games(same side to get over the book
limitmit....Oppersite side to scalp the bonus) with the same book.
Our name almost the same, even some book mistaken on both of us. I start wondering should i use a different name to register with book and place bet.
Bskiller-
One of the EWinner players (bettor1) is a notorious multiple account player (according to some of the recent investigation and his own older posts). This is the kind of guy that ruins it for the casual players sharing an occasional play.
If you and your brother currently are in two different countries, I wouldn't worry about being linked too much.
The books should go after the biggest offenders first. Get the guys with 5 accounts... then get the guys with 4 accounts, etc. You can't stop it completely, but the books need to make it harder for the scammers.
Considering how much it can cost a book, the book can spend a little coin to dedicate an employee one day per week to look for these patterns. These are are VERY easy to find if you spend the time looking (and start with the big players). The software systems record a lot of crap and the programmers can generate reports to help.
One of the EWinner players (bettor1) is a notorious multiple account player (according to some of the recent investigation and his own older posts). This is the kind of guy that ruins it for the casual players sharing an occasional play.
If you and your brother currently are in two different countries, I wouldn't worry about being linked too much.
The books should go after the biggest offenders first. Get the guys with 5 accounts... then get the guys with 4 accounts, etc. You can't stop it completely, but the books need to make it harder for the scammers.
Considering how much it can cost a book, the book can spend a little coin to dedicate an employee one day per week to look for these patterns. These are are VERY easy to find if you spend the time looking (and start with the big players). The software systems record a lot of crap and the programmers can generate reports to help.
Java
my brother and myself is in the same country now, but living in different state. I can understand the view of a book, If both of us betting on the same game either same or oppersite side. As i mention in my early post, we have problem because we use our real name which is almost alike. Anyway now we start to inform each other on what we bet on...which book we just make a withdrawal, so that the other will not re-up with this book. This is very important, because book might think that we send back the same money to get bonus. Maybe one of this day i should move to the state to cease off all this problem we are facing now...LOL
I agree on most of your views, but the book have no right to confiscate all his money. Halifax made a good post as well, i have to admit it, although he like to blash me most of the time.
[This message was edited by BSkiller on October 01, 2003 at 02:51 AM.]
my brother and myself is in the same country now, but living in different state. I can understand the view of a book, If both of us betting on the same game either same or oppersite side. As i mention in my early post, we have problem because we use our real name which is almost alike. Anyway now we start to inform each other on what we bet on...which book we just make a withdrawal, so that the other will not re-up with this book. This is very important, because book might think that we send back the same money to get bonus. Maybe one of this day i should move to the state to cease off all this problem we are facing now...LOL
I agree on most of your views, but the book have no right to confiscate all his money. Halifax made a good post as well, i have to admit it, although he like to blash me most of the time.
[This message was edited by BSkiller on October 01, 2003 at 02:51 AM.]
It's interesting how in the betcbs situation a guy in my state who i know(have no problem admitting it either) you guys all came down on me like i was some bad guy for sharing an arb. Here is a guy who is an outright moron obviously duping on the same machine (same IP) and people defend him. Don't seize his money but don't defend him at all. He's a piece of Sh*T
