Robert from SDS
Freddie from GA
Robbie from Apex
I know you guys are in a difficult situation to post, i have no problem on this...If i,m in your shose, i will also do that. But if Patrick call you guys, please justify on "are we two individual"...."each of us have how many account with your book" or any other questions from Patrick.
Thanks in advance.
Freddie from GA
Robbie from Apex
I know you guys are in a difficult situation to post, i have no problem on this...If i,m in your shose, i will also do that. But if Patrick call you guys, please justify on "are we two individual"...."each of us have how many account with your book" or any other questions from Patrick.
Thanks in advance.
Don't worry guys I'm here and trying to get this resolved. I told BSKiller and I will tell you also to calm down some, relax. These things take time and since you came to the forums with them first it makes it even harder to resolve. There also has to be coordination between different individuals and time to discuss things. I can see the IP#'s are different from where you two are posting and will pass that on.
If I need more information I will let you know. Thanks guys.
If I need more information I will let you know. Thanks guys.
Seems absurd to me that the book would have any right to keep the player(s) money.
Real courts routinely throw out unrelated evidence from unrelated incidents so as not to prejudice a jury against a defendant. The same would apply here -- the fact that BSkiller may or may not have a checkered past with games played or not played with other books is irrelevant to the case here.
The fact is, the book has ZERO evidence to accuse the player(s) of anything. No same IPs (although even that would not be an incriminating piece of evidence on its own: I have a friend who often uses my computer to bet into his own account, and vice versa because we are often in each other's homes/offices), and no extended history of 'middling', just one lousy game. It's absurd that the book would think they have even the slightest bit of right to keep anything.
It's also amazing that the book suddenly 'wisens up' to alleged ploys and 'scams' only when the player requests a payout. They didn't suddenly discover that there may be something fishy going on with both accounts when BSkiller tried to cash out -- you can bet that they knew it all along and kept their mouths shut in the hopes that he/they would lose all their money. And why not? If they make a stink before he requests a payout, they risk having their name dragged through the mud via a debate on the Rx and elsewhere. And if they wait and keep their mouths shut, the likelihood is that the player loses his money. On the off-chance that he wins more (as happened here) they can always rely on 'suddenly discovering that he was middling/taking advantage of two accounts'. Can't lose either way.
It's a dirty trick played by an unscrupulous book. Just as books have statutes of limitations delineating how long a player has a right to complain about a misgraded wager, so too should they have a maximum amount of time to void what they perceive to be an invalid bet. Paying off the winnings, deluding the player into thinking he has X number of dollars, and then pulling the rug out from under him when he requests a payout is a dirty trick.
Although I see nothing wrong with middling (what's the difference if you decide to play the other side or some other player does...the book WANTS action on the other side, that's why they made the line attractive!), and I have never opened two accounts with phony names, nor have I ever taken advantage of bonuses (prefer not to get em at all..less headache), I for one would never ever post up with Blockbuster Bets because of this debate. This thread demonstrates without a doubt that they're a dirty, cheating, low, devious book. Even if they end up paying off this BSkiller fellow and his supposed brother, the fact that they've tried to hold on to ALL of his money (!!!!) proves what kind of sham operation they run.
Shame on you. You've already lost my potential business, and probably many other people's as well.
Real courts routinely throw out unrelated evidence from unrelated incidents so as not to prejudice a jury against a defendant. The same would apply here -- the fact that BSkiller may or may not have a checkered past with games played or not played with other books is irrelevant to the case here.
The fact is, the book has ZERO evidence to accuse the player(s) of anything. No same IPs (although even that would not be an incriminating piece of evidence on its own: I have a friend who often uses my computer to bet into his own account, and vice versa because we are often in each other's homes/offices), and no extended history of 'middling', just one lousy game. It's absurd that the book would think they have even the slightest bit of right to keep anything.
It's also amazing that the book suddenly 'wisens up' to alleged ploys and 'scams' only when the player requests a payout. They didn't suddenly discover that there may be something fishy going on with both accounts when BSkiller tried to cash out -- you can bet that they knew it all along and kept their mouths shut in the hopes that he/they would lose all their money. And why not? If they make a stink before he requests a payout, they risk having their name dragged through the mud via a debate on the Rx and elsewhere. And if they wait and keep their mouths shut, the likelihood is that the player loses his money. On the off-chance that he wins more (as happened here) they can always rely on 'suddenly discovering that he was middling/taking advantage of two accounts'. Can't lose either way.
It's a dirty trick played by an unscrupulous book. Just as books have statutes of limitations delineating how long a player has a right to complain about a misgraded wager, so too should they have a maximum amount of time to void what they perceive to be an invalid bet. Paying off the winnings, deluding the player into thinking he has X number of dollars, and then pulling the rug out from under him when he requests a payout is a dirty trick.
Although I see nothing wrong with middling (what's the difference if you decide to play the other side or some other player does...the book WANTS action on the other side, that's why they made the line attractive!), and I have never opened two accounts with phony names, nor have I ever taken advantage of bonuses (prefer not to get em at all..less headache), I for one would never ever post up with Blockbuster Bets because of this debate. This thread demonstrates without a doubt that they're a dirty, cheating, low, devious book. Even if they end up paying off this BSkiller fellow and his supposed brother, the fact that they've tried to hold on to ALL of his money (!!!!) proves what kind of sham operation they run.
Shame on you. You've already lost my potential business, and probably many other people's as well.
Although I see nothing wrong with middling (what's the difference if you decide to play the other side or some other player does...the book WANTS action on the other side, that's why they made the line attractive!), and I have never opened two accounts with phony names, nor have I ever taken advantage of bonuses
same is true of me and i agree absolutely with dogs24. the book has no case.
same is true of me and i agree absolutely with dogs24. the book has no case.
Pat,
Thanks, if u need any further info, please contact me. I can be reached at control38@hotmail.com.
dogs24, I was not owed any money by Blockbusterbets, got a payout of 5000 from them and never went back cos their neteller withdrawal fees suck, $80 charge per 2500.
Thanks, if u need any further info, please contact me. I can be reached at control38@hotmail.com.
dogs24, I was not owed any money by Blockbusterbets, got a payout of 5000 from them and never went back cos their neteller withdrawal fees suck, $80 charge per 2500.
Thanks for the feedback everyone. Mike at Blockbusters, if you read this please drop me a line when we can talk more on this. I will give you a call. Thank you.
patrickmcirish@hotmail.com
patrickmcirish@hotmail.com
Questions: Does it state anywhere at the book that middling is forbidden? if it does not then no reason to go any further. Pay the man.
2. QUestion for this book, If I bet a game and then decide I don't like it are you going to let me cancel it if the line has moved away from me? probably not but you would let me buy it back at an automatic loss would you?Or are you such a shitty book you wouldn't allow that either?
More bullshit one way street.
One bet that is middled?,assuming they are working together? Give me a break I know people that fade my picks does that mean we are trying to middle and split the bonus? More bullshit.
You don't like a players action? Send him his $ and tell him to take his action someplace else.
2. QUestion for this book, If I bet a game and then decide I don't like it are you going to let me cancel it if the line has moved away from me? probably not but you would let me buy it back at an automatic loss would you?Or are you such a shitty book you wouldn't allow that either?
More bullshit one way street.
One bet that is middled?,assuming they are working together? Give me a break I know people that fade my picks does that mean we are trying to middle and split the bonus? More bullshit.
You don't like a players action? Send him his $ and tell him to take his action someplace else.
Pat,
I was only given $375 bonus for my second deposit made on 18/Auguest. I lost my initial deposit and bonus made on 16/Auguest. I,m much willing to return the bonus($375) + fees to them.....but once thing borther me....do i need to return the bonus of $1000 Free-Play bonus, since i lost all(deposit + $1000 Free-Play)??
Other players view also welcome...Thank you.
I was only given $375 bonus for my second deposit made on 18/Auguest. I lost my initial deposit and bonus made on 16/Auguest. I,m much willing to return the bonus($375) + fees to them.....but once thing borther me....do i need to return the bonus of $1000 Free-Play bonus, since i lost all(deposit + $1000 Free-Play)??
Other players view also welcome...Thank you.
BSKiller - I passed on to them exactly what you told me, do you remember? You said $5600 on your end would cover it, all fees and your bonuses withdrawn from your balance. I had no way of checking so I took your word for it. Hope if the ruling goes in your favor you can live with that.
They were waiting on some information from me (I sent last night) so no decision has been made yet. Just letting you know what I told them. Drop me a line if you want me to change it, it may be too late though but I'll see what I can do. For now let's leave this thread alone until they come to their decision BSKiller. I think they got what they needed. Thanks.
They were waiting on some information from me (I sent last night) so no decision has been made yet. Just letting you know what I told them. Drop me a line if you want me to change it, it may be too late though but I'll see what I can do. For now let's leave this thread alone until they come to their decision BSKiller. I think they got what they needed. Thanks.
