I think there is an important lesson to be learned from all of this. A deal is not always a deal, especially when a sportsbook can go into one's account and seize their funds.
Jake got more than he asked for, plain and simple. He should have researched this player's history before he offered him a bonus, plain and simple. Now because of his screw up, and because he can, he is taking away that player's bonus, because he is not considered a "square."
Jake, you screwed up. We all make mistakes, it's part of business. If you are a man of integrity, you will pay the man his bonus, providing he meets the rollover requirements. If not, you and SportsBet are no better than any other nickel and dime fly by night sportsbook operation.
Chalk
Jake got more than he asked for, plain and simple. He should have researched this player's history before he offered him a bonus, plain and simple. Now because of his screw up, and because he can, he is taking away that player's bonus, because he is not considered a "square."
Jake, you screwed up. We all make mistakes, it's part of business. If you are a man of integrity, you will pay the man his bonus, providing he meets the rollover requirements. If not, you and SportsBet are no better than any other nickel and dime fly by night sportsbook operation.
Chalk
Pokerking said:
Well it may not "technically" be called a bailout, however u got an offer, that was not available to the rest of us, because you had "lost" your money at a
up book.....Obviously they dont give 100% bonuses out every day to every depositor....
bucsfan67 said:
bucs,
How is this a bailout? Player posted up $5000, recieved $5000 bonus with 20x rollover. Offered and accepted. Player did not lose $5000 postup as hoped by Jake, so new conditions were imposed. Seems really simple to me. The fact that Jake changed the original conditions on four different occasions simply means that Jake reneged four times on his original arrangement.
Whatever happened to honorable gentlemen doing the honorable thing? Has the onset of offshore bookmaking really reduced us to this point? It is very troubling to me to think that the future of sports gambling rests in the hands of folks that seemingly believe that they have a God-given right to always win.
VVV
What gets me is how could any player (and I don't mean Jake's butt buddies on the forum or potential/current business associates but actually players) could side with Jake on this matter. It's just flat out wrong period! Any player who would have agreed to this deal and had this happened would have been pissed the hell off, anyone saying they wouldn't is flat out lying. This isn't the first time Jake and Sportbet has pulled these shady tactic and certainly won't be the last, imagine the crap they pull that doesn't make the forums :nono5:
I certainly wouldn't post up with an operation like Sportsbet. There are far too many good books, that welcome square and sharp action, but more importantly, honor their word. I have a lot of friends in this industry, and Sportsbet will not be a book I recommend.
Pinnacle, Hollywood, BetGrande, Cascade, BetCRIS, Jazz Sportsbook and Bowmans are just a few good books that come to mind.
Chalk
Pinnacle, Hollywood, BetGrande, Cascade, BetCRIS, Jazz Sportsbook and Bowmans are just a few good books that come to mind.
Chalk
A book steals back the bonus after the player has made $70,000 in wagers and Jake realizes the player is not going to lose his dep + bonus. The player has a miniscule $250 max limit. Remember this is the same Jake that refused to pay a winning ticket at Fingerlakes racetrack saying the race was fixed, horse was drugged, ongoing investigation by the stewards. All lies. Then Jake went on "vacation". Only until the player found these forums did Jake rollover and pay. We got stooges and phonies that actually agree with this thievery. I agree with SHRINK, give the guy $3500 of the bonus or let him continue to fulfill his obligation.
My suggestion would be give him the 5000 back again, and start over a fresh rollover and give him until years end to wager 50000 dollars to meet the requirement. It would sort of be starting from scratch with your "lots of action quickly" method clearly defined. I tend to agree with Jakes point of view a lot more, especially if this has gone on for a year and 4 warnings have been given. I can understand not wanting to only get the occassional steam play. I still wonder often what in the hell a "steam" play is exactly. Is looking at pinnacles line and finding a different one somewhere else considered "steam"? Sorry to ramble and good luck to both of you in whatever you decide.
Chuck, you may as well keep your comments to yourself on this issue. I would imagine even some that agree with you would say that. It is clear what you will post on any issue regarding Sportbet whether you agree with them or not so you don't have a lot of credibility on any subjects regarding them. All you are doing is bogging down the forum with the same thing every post. Look forward to seeing you in other threads.
I don't have time to read this whole fvcing thread.
But I will say this...a deal is a deal and I call bullshit here
now you are going to dictate how often he has to play? If he meets his damn rollover give him the money
Your word is your bond in this industry, and if you don't know how to handle sharp action, you probably should not be in it.
Maybe now you should decide that only NFL dogs of 11 or more count towards his rollover? Or maybe only props with 30 cent lines should qualify?
You offered a deal, terms were decided, now live with it
But I will say this...a deal is a deal and I call bullshit here
now you are going to dictate how often he has to play? If he meets his damn rollover give him the money
Your word is your bond in this industry, and if you don't know how to handle sharp action, you probably should not be in it.
Maybe now you should decide that only NFL dogs of 11 or more count towards his rollover? Or maybe only props with 30 cent lines should qualify?
You offered a deal, terms were decided, now live with it
Tie goes to the runner ( punter). I'd have handled it differently were I Pokerking. I'd have bet out quick, got my money, and left. The betting steam doesn't hold water, book can move on air, customer gets a number that has moved and lost value. The $250 limit can be bet on many games in a short period of time and equal 100k before long.
If SB carries a dime baseball line then PK could have bet lines there with near equal lines on opposite side elsewhere. Stuff like +135/ -125 at SB and -143/ +135 at Pinny, or even a cent or 2 negative.
The bad publicity for Sportbet isn't worth it, but too late now !
I think PK was within the letter of the law here, but just barely.
Book should have eaten this, and thrown the guy out.
Most players would lose a 100% bonus with 10X rollover. I would, but intentionally, or roll it quick.
If SB carries a dime baseball line then PK could have bet lines there with near equal lines on opposite side elsewhere. Stuff like +135/ -125 at SB and -143/ +135 at Pinny, or even a cent or 2 negative.
The bad publicity for Sportbet isn't worth it, but too late now !
I think PK was within the letter of the law here, but just barely.
Book should have eaten this, and thrown the guy out.
Most players would lose a 100% bonus with 10X rollover. I would, but intentionally, or roll it quick.
Run along Baby HueyChuck: I doubt it's that many folks. I'll be honest about this. I grabbed a bonus from Sportbet, and left. I'm a HO. No reason to go back. Any book with issues ain't for me !Chuck Sims said:
If I was a woman, I'd sell my body for sure ! I have no morals, no redeeming qualities, nothing !
I'm a degenerate gambler. I dont believe in Jesus ( Hay-suss). Send me to Hell ( not Norway), I like it warm !
I'm on a winning streak like J-man, better than cocaine !
