SBR proposal for WATCHDOG MEETING

THE SHRINK · Jul 20, 2004

I love the idea of having some kind of "alliance" with various Watchdog Sites who are willing to forego the advertising dollars in cases where they KNOW a sports book is SLOW PAYING...

Unfortunately, egos are getting in the way with some of the more established sites, and in my opinion, this self-serving behavior is not going to help anyone out...

In order to get to the NEXT LEVEL and be RESPECTED by ALL, it is most important not to take shots at others...

While I have made that mistake in the past, I ignore the childness that goes on elsewhere.

To learn the best way to behave, one needs to look and see how sports books such as Pinnacle and WWTS behave and compare them to others like NAB and CAMELOT, who made it their business to put down others...

Where are they all now?

THE SHRINK

Fishhead · Jul 20, 2004

As an informed player, you should know all the sites that monitor the offshore world is some way or another be it through ratings, forums, etc,etc, etc.

Not saying this call for an "alliance" is not being made in good faith, but as a player I really do not see it helping myself or other players much better than what we have in place now.

gambler1 · Jul 20, 2004

How about top 20 and in business at least 5 years, oh i forget more sponsors more $$.

Banned4Life · Jul 20, 2004

Count me as being against such an alliance. While a good idea in theory, there is always the possibility that such an alliance could turn into a cartel, monopolizing the free flow of information at the expense of the player. I think that each watchdog should maintain its independence because a diversity of opinions is in our best interests.

How about a detailed list of each book, which would tell the reader how long they've been in business, any complaints in the past (and how they were resolved), stuff like that. Give the player information and let him/her make the decisions. One other thing to consider: if you give a book a good rating and they go bust, you will end up being blamed for steering the stiffed bettors to this outfit. But if you merely provide information then it is all on the player and he can't blame you. Just give us the facts, because most of us are smart enough to use this information wisely. Good information is better than blanket endorsements.

Buzzsaw · Jul 20, 2004

Fish,
If this was implemented 3 years ago instead of the 12 sportsbook failures on the Rx there would of been 1.

That's 11 less books running off with posters hard earned money. I hope you will continue to keep an open mind.

THE SHRINK · Jul 20, 2004

I can guarantee you that in order to be an "alliance" approved sports book, there will be a lot stricter criteria used than what is currently being done on the vast majority of sites that accept advertising from bookmakers abroad...

The reason I say this is because we would VOTE a SPORTS BOOK INTO THIS ELITE GROUP BASED ON MERIT, AND NOT DOLLARS...

In fact, I would like to see particpating venues have a separate section on its site that indicates to all whether or not a sports book is an "ALLIANCE" book, and we'd also list the criteria used to distinguish these books from the others...

It's much better than what we have now, for sure!

Unless of course, you'd prefer to have "insurance" on penny stocks...

Ken

BuzzRavanaugh · Jul 20, 2004

I think this is a great start.

I have harped for years about financials being available of books, well that will never happen. However you "watchdog" types are in a position to know how the book is capitalized. That would be helpful to know if a book operated profitably, partners have money and pay.

Fish is probably right maybe 40 books with a "watch list" of another 20 that can be monitored and eventually graduate to the recommended list.

All you guys should be commended for trying to do something to help the players. Its the only way things are going to get better.

drunkguy · Jul 20, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by BuzzRavanaugh:
However you "watchdog" types are in a position to know how the book is capitalized. That would be helpful to know if a book operated profitably, partners have money and pay.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No one is in any position to accurately obtain this information. PanAm? Hell, they had everyone fooled with the bond, the backers, etc, etc.

And personally I don't see how "voting" on books is doing anyone any good. You need hard and fast criteria which either qualify or don't. Is there any doubt PanAm would have been voted into a top books list? (and yes I am ignoring the 2 year thing for the moment)

lakerfan · Jul 20, 2004

Shrink,

I think the players could care less that "some sites" are critical of the RX. What they care about is getting paid when a book goes south. That is the bottom line.

I feel good about the books you have at the top, but when/if you start taking of more new books like worldsportscenter or others, you offer nothing now to protect players as other sites do. You are not obligated to provide more protection, but to make fun of "insurance on penny stocks" makes no sense. Hell yes, I will take insurance on any book I can find. And if this insurance lets me keep a bigger balance with a book than I otherwise would, or get a bonus I wouldn't have gotten, or get lines I otherwise would have thought were a little to off, then I it is a good deal for me. Not hard to follow.

Fishhead · Jul 20, 2004

I have an open mind........open enough where I have been stiffed only once in my life and having been with 120+ books!!

Yes, I have been just as lucky as maybe as well informed ........and I have a genuine sick feeling for those that got stiffed.

.....and get off the shitter if you think I have ANY kind of agenda.

If I have such a *oddamn NON-open mind then why do I at this time strongly admit to playing at books such as Bowmans, OLY, ABC Islands, and 5dimes which are NON-ADVERTISERS here???............and on the other hand OPENLY admit I will be NOT be playing at WSC until they are around longer, at DSI until they are further along with CRIS, or with V-Wager until they raise my limits higher than $100.

Please, this alliance BS has AGENDA written all over it in my mind............ I am sorry.

drunkguy · Jul 20, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by THE SHRINK:

Unless of course, you'd prefer to have "insurance" on penny stocks...

Ken<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I imagine there are some PanAm players out there that were damn sure happy about "insurance" on penny stocks, since they were all paid months ago.

Unlike here where people are forking money over to collection agents and have yet to see their money.

No list, voting, judging criteria, etc will ever be able to top having any kind of insurance program. MW, OGD, SGA are all offering some form of protection. When RX finally realizes that this is the only way to legitimiately move forward, all this pointless talk can cease and the players will be much better off.

THE SHRINK · Jul 20, 2004

Lakerfan,

Perhaps you misunderstood where I am coming from?

In my opinion, it's a disgrace for this industry when we have to "insure" a sports book because they may not be a SAFE venue for gamblers to send their hard earned money to.

Rather than head in that direction, I'd prefer to list more sites such as PINNACLE, WWTS, WSEX, OLYMPIC, etc, that don't need to be INSURED because they have EARNED a reputation that separates them from the rest of the pack...

I would much rather send a newbie that trusts this site to a place such as the ones I just named rather than an insured penny stock, period...

If another website wished to use this model, then that's ok too. But the whole point of an "alliance" would be to exclude questionable sports books from the list, and only promote the stellar ones...

As a gambler, would u rather have an account at a sports book such as the ones I just listed or an "insured" account at a marginal one?

I guess that is your choice..

Ken

BuzzRavanaugh · Jul 20, 2004

drunkguy-

These guys knew panam. Either they were duped or they chose not to be truthful to the players.

I think they were paid very well to get players and were given some nice perks. I also think that they said they were going to have some things as far as a bond and capital that may have never happened.

Shrink, Major, Buzzsaw they know what is going on offshore, more than we (or at least more than I) do. You just have to know how to read between the lines.

Fishhead · Jul 20, 2004

Excellent points Shrinkwrap.

I still would find it virtually impossible for all the sites to agree on a certain set of sportsbooks.........plus, there are literally dozens of sites monitoring and recommending sportsbooks.

What sets the RX apart as the best site for monitoring sportsbooks is the TALK FORUM!!!!

It is the best in the biz and you can keep up on what is happening in the offshore world from REAL PLAYERS...........HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS of them!!!!

I WOULD MUCH RATHER HEAR topics discussed then reading that one book is a say a B+ and another a B- or one is rated a 9 and another a 7.

MAJORWAGER and THE PRESCRIPTION forums are the best way to stay informed of the offshore situation and enable one to make THEIR OWN DECISIONS.

BuzzRavanaugh · Jul 20, 2004

Fishead-

Great points. Why do you think you have played at 120 some odd books and had one bust out. You stayed on top of the information.

I have had one (two if you count Gary Austins) and feel its a result from reading everything at MW and the Rx and talking to the Major on occasion.

lakerfan · Jul 20, 2004

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> In my opinion, it's a disgrace for this industry when we have to "insure" a sports book because they may not be a SAFE venue for gamblers to send their hard earned money to.

Rather than head in that direction, I'd prefer to list more sites such as PINNACLE, WWTS, WSEX, OLYMPIC, etc, that don't need to be INSURED because they have EARNED a reputation that separates them from the rest of the pack...

I would much rather send a newbie that trusts this site to a place such as the ones I just named rather than an insured penny stock, period...

If another website wished to use this model, then that's ok too. But the whole point of an "alliance" would be to exclude questionable sports books from the list, and only promote the stellar ones...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Shrink that is nice, but two things:

1. You took PanAm on as a client, everyone thought they were great, but most players got screwed. So if they would still be accepted under the current site policty, which I think they would has you took worldsportscenter, the player still gets screwed even when playing at a "quality" book. So newbies can trust you AND still get screwed.

2. Your new approach is not your old approach. You have had lots of small, underfunded books on the RX before. That you don't have that now is great, but if you start allowing them in again, then players have no protection.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> As a gambler, would u rather have an account at a sports book such as the ones I just listed or an "insured" account at a marginal one? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Shrink, as a gambler, I have to think what you really want is the most safe outs that will take your action as possible. That is what I want. So maybe I have an agenda in pushing for insured books. It allows me to play with more books without fear. I like that. I have a better chance at winning.

I am not saying that just pushing a few of the best books to newbies isn't a good idea, but you better stick with just the top 10 books, because when you push WSC or the next PanAm, you whole system shows its flaw.

TheGeneral+ · Jul 20, 2004

Excellent feedback by all. I have just as much concern about being duped by an insurance plan as I do by a rogue book. Keep churning guys. I will remain optimistic until we read the TOD. If that happens, then I can share thoughts on why the project failed. Until then, it is nice to see some professional conversation. Professionalism is key but unforunately some will never see this or understand its meaning. Common courtesy will take you much further than any amount of slander.

THE SHRINK · Jul 20, 2004

Lakerfan,

Books like Pan Am and World Sports Center would NEVER make the list because they lack the years needed to be part of this alliance...

So yes, we all have learned from our mistakes, and we plan to only display the ones who have EARNED it...

Finally, I am not opposed to running it by the posters here and elsewhere before we display them on all the sites who are part of this alliance...

Lastly, be careful sending your name and address to other venues that offer insurance.

Our attornies have infomed us that if Uncle Sam goes after such an entity that is breaking the law, Uncle already has a sealed confession with a paper trail that you are gambling by being on the list of insured gamblers...

Something to think about my friend...

Ken

lakerfan · Jul 20, 2004

Shrink-

I think there are too many agendas for the alliance to work, but the RX could do something similar on its own if this doesn't work out. Nothing wrong with protecting newbies by only pushing quality books.

TheGeneral+ · Jul 20, 2004

Just as one trusts an insurance program, many of us trusted the principles of Betpanam. We were wrong just as anyone can be wrong about some insurance program. None of us are perfect, but for god sakes can people move past elementary school bashing and try to be adults in the way they present themselves in the forums. For once try and bring some respect to the table and leave the mud slinging out of the equation.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Lastly, be careful sending your name and address to other venues that offer insurance.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Be VERY careful. This is the scariest aspect of an ins program to me.