If a book boots you for winning, is it unethical to come back under an alias?

[Journeyman]

It never ceases to amaze me that all these gamblers/bookmakers are all so righteous...

I ONLY ASKED THE QUESTION....I feel the book in question is pulling a fast one IMO...

As I said they told me 'they never boot winners'...I will drop the question, I don`t think its fair Slim, but I do respect you ..

Just another hoop to jump thru...

 

[DickyW]

Jman
Your awfully emotional these days. you asked the question..

If a book boots you for winning, is it unethical to come back under an alias?

The answer is YES

 

[ChuckSims]

journeyman, name the book. These books should be outed. Do you think its fair for this book to accept money from the losers that will never win? Would you not want people who are basically donating money off-shore to send money to the books that you are playing at now? Name the book!

 

[ethan]

If a casino boots you for card counting, would you go back with a disguise?

 

[maxdemo]

I agree the book should be named...JMO

 

[Journeyman]

I like to call it passion though, it sounds better lol...

I`m just intense is all, if you don`t have a little fire you may as well forget it....or maybe I just need a good women lol!

 

[-Slim-]

Jay, no disrespect intended, dont even know what your current situation is. It is my thinking thought that if you are kicked out of a book, you should respect that and move on.

 

[RIOSHILL]

We like playing Cat and Mouse with Beards.

 

[dimeplayersonly]

unethical to assume another name after being booted, barred or banned?????

i guess if books BOOTED ALL WINNERS they would have a problem with WINNERS assuming different names/and or accounts....

part of the business though...

 

[ChuckSims]

If one is using beards to wager above the max limits that would be grounds for banning. Maybe Journeyman does'nt want to name the book because they may post as to what the real reason he got booted. He says the book boots him and then lies about booting winners. This is a place to share info isn't it? Name the book!

 

[Marco]

I'm not even about to grab the high moral ground on this issue, as some of the posters have by treating this matter as being "unethical" or "wrong"......

What book ever banned one of it's bettors because that bettor LOST too much at a book?

Somebody name me one and when it happened.

If you bust out they are more than happy to accept a re-up to the account....

If I ever fell into the situation where I won money at a book and they booted me, hell yes I'd come back at them with an alias or ficticious identity and try to burn them some more.

When they place a limit on losing then they can call it ethical to limit winnings, until that happens it is nothing more than hypocritical.

 

[The Guesser]

Not only is it unethical, but the book is wholly within their rights to seize "bearded" winnings and bonuses, IMO. But this is the place where the majority of people absolved Sick Scammer of using multiple accounts, so I'm not suprised so many see nothing wrong with it.

 

[JohnnyDeMarco]

Journey
if a book books the action they should pay on it. However most players dont know who owns a book so what difference should itreally make? Unfortunately it does.
Most stores have rules regrading wise guys. If you sign up under a fake name they should pay you minus any bonus and send you on your way. Caller ID catches most fake name users. Maybe not the first time but eventually.

 

[peskypup]

As I said, provided a book on its title page - or at the very least the page where new accounts sign up - puts a clear disclaimer:

"New account holders should be aware that the policy of this book is to restict consistently successful customers to a $50 bet."

then I am fine with the book for limiting me and will not play the beard game.

But they don't do that, do they? Instead the general tone of the marketing of ALL the books that have cut me is that ALL new accounts are welcome - "try and beat our expert linesmakers" - and general drivel along those lines.

In these cases it is clearly the BOOK who are behaving fraudulently in suggesting to new customers that they are prepared to accept their bets, whether winning or losing.

I have never been in a syndicate, bet steam or any of the other stuff that books supposedly don't like. I just happen to be pretty good at spotting when a team or player at even money really has a 55% chance of winning, and so on.

Since these books are fraudulently enticing new accounts, I have no ethical problem in persuading my friends to set them up - for a monthly fee - and letting me use them.

Legally this is not fraud under UK law at least. The bets made are all on the standard lines under the standard terms of the book's business. It's not as if I have some sort of fraudulent software program that gets me +120 when the true price is -110 or anything.

No court in this country at any rate would even entertain a fraud case in this situation.

 

[HerzvanRentle]

Bookmakers wouldn't get any beards at all if the username/password box were in the ethical place; on the confirm slip.

 

[Java]

Guesser-
What about the case of a book (Alpha) using a beard at another book (Beta) to lay off action? Should the Beta book confiscate any winnings or bonuses, as you suggest?

My point is that there are scammers and also books that are themselves scammers. Sadly, there is more discussion about ethics than actual practice of ethics.

 

[postaldoug]

Yes, it's unethical ! Gamblers aren't known for their ethical behaviour ! Books, either !

I've never done that, for fear of funds being confiscated. I wouldn't know how to process the dual account ! I'd move on !

Those that want "money for nothing (gambling), chicks for free ! (aren't at the tops of the ethics tree, to start with !

This business is dirty !

The less said the better, it's scary ! I can't elaborate, but a recent post influenced me .

 

[Illini]

J-Man....is it Bowman's? I've heard they boot winners. C'mon, we all want to know who the book is.

 

[jwunderdog]

In my opinion it is unethical to come back under an alias once you have been booted. Not sure what this argument is about the books are just as unethical: that may be true but that is not the question. Your ethics have nothing to do with what other do, they are based on your principles not someone elses. Good luck with what ever you do but I don't think it is worth compromising my ethics to play at a certian book. Plus, if you get caught don't be surprised if they take all your funds.

 

[Java]

jwunderdog-
The point about the books being unethical has to do with the consistency of the rules ("What's good for the goose is good for the gander."). If a book confiscates your money for violating a particular rule, what should be the book's penalty if caught violating the same rule at another book?

This forum has plenty of stories about a book claiming a line was bad (after the game was graded a win for the player) and then taking back the player's winnings. Then there is always the research into the lines at other books, timing of bets, collaboration with other players, etc. However, what if the book in question was laying off some extra action, at that same supposedly bad line? Should they really be allowed to claim it was a bad line?

Also, what about a book that knows a player has multiple accounts (in violation of the rules) but allows the person to play only because the player keeps losing big bucks. Would it be right to confiscate the player's winnings if he hit a winning streak, even though you let him violate the rules when he was losing?

Maybe the rules need to be set up so that the players and books can't have room to interpret them. Maybe they should include examples of potential scamming situations like I've described, and provide clearly stated policies.