I just got off the phone with Dave Johnson...
I am happy to report we had a very nice conversation...
He told me he would sleep on any final decision and get back to me on what it was...
Thank you Dave for being a gentleman on the phone...
I still feel you should pay the players in full and I hope that you do..
Had you won the bet, I doubt that you would have refunded ANY LOSERS back their money...
P.S.
Since you had a bad line, did you adjust the price for the losers who laid minus 7.05???
THE SHRINK
I am happy to report we had a very nice conversation...
He told me he would sleep on any final decision and get back to me on what it was...
Thank you Dave for being a gentleman on the phone...
I still feel you should pay the players in full and I hope that you do..
Had you won the bet, I doubt that you would have refunded ANY LOSERS back their money...
P.S.
Since you had a bad line, did you adjust the price for the losers who laid minus 7.05???
THE SHRINK
Looks like This is about to be resolved and everyone deserves credit for sticking with the issue, The player, Jj and the posters, Ken especially and Clearly Dave Johnson appears to be about to do the right thing, I would have no problem posting with these guys now once they announce there Final Decision.
Good work to all
Good work to all
Shrink,
As you know, we are on the same side most of the time. Apology not necessary but thanks and accepted.
I am always hesitant to do anything that might cause a run on the bank as we both know there is nothing good that comes from that. I respect you as I have stated in this thread. Just thought the baby was being thrown out with the bathwater in this case.
As you know, we are on the same side most of the time. Apology not necessary but thanks and accepted.
I am always hesitant to do anything that might cause a run on the bank as we both know there is nothing good that comes from that. I respect you as I have stated in this thread. Just thought the baby was being thrown out with the bathwater in this case.
Beenthere-
I'm happy to accept Shrink's verification of you as not-a-shill.
The creation of your account on the day after this mess started made me (and apparently others) suspicious. I guess a person with a hunter's duck call can sound like a duck, too.
This areeff-betcbs situation has brought a lot of posters, so the appearance of new posters always raises a "shill" flag, especially when you are one of the few in support of the book.
I'm happy to accept Shrink's verification of you as not-a-shill.
The creation of your account on the day after this mess started made me (and apparently others) suspicious. I guess a person with a hunter's duck call can sound like a duck, too.
This areeff-betcbs situation has brought a lot of posters, so the appearance of new posters always raises a "shill" flag, especially when you are one of the few in support of the book.
Java,
A little search would have shown that I only posted in the baseball forum for several days. My post were mostly limited to one thread starter. I was not even reading the main forum. When I changed my usual sign-in name here to go undercover in the baseball forum, I did not have my old password to sign back in to voice my opinion on this thread. Since I seldom post anymore, it did and does not matter that I could not sign in under my old name.
With this, I bid you all the best of luck.
Shrink, over a 1000 views in a few hours on my thread -- hell, they may be calling me a shill accross the street --- good luck to most of you, JJ and Beantown, God Bless you and I hope you will figure out how to get off my worst poster list in next years competition.
A little search would have shown that I only posted in the baseball forum for several days. My post were mostly limited to one thread starter. I was not even reading the main forum. When I changed my usual sign-in name here to go undercover in the baseball forum, I did not have my old password to sign back in to voice my opinion on this thread. Since I seldom post anymore, it did and does not matter that I could not sign in under my old name.
With this, I bid you all the best of luck.
Shrink, over a 1000 views in a few hours on my thread -- hell, they may be calling me a shill accross the street --- good luck to most of you, JJ and Beantown, God Bless you and I hope you will figure out how to get off my worst poster list in next years competition.
Been-
I did check and did see your posts in the baseball forum. However, they were brief and looked like they could be a diversion, since you made 7 non-betcbs posts followed by 20 posts directly about this whole betcbs situation.
You said that 'beenthere' was initially created for you to go 'undercover'. Unfortunately, going undercover can cause confusion as it made your posting pattern look more like that of a shill. I hope you understand why it smelled funny, even though you were on the up-and-up.
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.
I did check and did see your posts in the baseball forum. However, they were brief and looked like they could be a diversion, since you made 7 non-betcbs posts followed by 20 posts directly about this whole betcbs situation.
You said that 'beenthere' was initially created for you to go 'undercover'. Unfortunately, going undercover can cause confusion as it made your posting pattern look more like that of a shill. I hope you understand why it smelled funny, even though you were on the up-and-up.
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.
To all Concerned Members of the Forum
I spent the last two days reviewing everything regarding this situation. I spent yesterday speaking with a few respected bookmakers as well as many customers and posters who I have come to respect over the years.
I recieved many different viewpoints so it took a little time to come up with a viable solution to appease all parties. The last conversation this morning was with Areef who very calmly discussed his side of the situation.
First, I would like to say that besides the constant ramblings of some posters like JJGold I feel that this forum has provided a valuable service to both Areef and myself in this situation. Personally, I am thankful because the help from the Shrink as well as the members of the forum forced me to look harder at some of the rules that I have listed on my website. The situation caused me to realize that in order to prevent bad publicity situations like this in the future certain things need to be better spelled out.
I decided this afternoon after taking into consideration all viewpoints to pay Areef his full wager of $2000 @ +435. This suggestion was made by a few members of the forum and specifically by Areef during our discussion.
I have taken alot of bad publicity in this situation. Many books would have given in immediately at the fear of losing so many players and just paid the money.
The money and the lost players was never the issue. Anyone in the industry or familiar with my book knows we are one of the most financially solid offshore.
The real issue was by giving in and going against the policies I created to protect my book I am putting myself and my business in jeopardy. By just paying the player I am not solving the problem. The next time this happens again we end up going through the same thing.
One of the very respected posters of the forums for years wrote me back today and I have taken his advice and developed guidelines of how we will handle this problem in the future.
I will not honor bad lines win or lose. I will have the entire bad line policy clearly stated under the rules section of the website. These rules are active today but are open to further suggestions:
If a player makes a wager on an incorrect line (the incorrect line parameters are still being developed) the players wager will be cancelled immediately and an email will be sent verifying the wager deletion prior to the start of the event.
If the player is inaccessible by email or if the event has already started the player will receive an equal wager at the highest value that can be verified from an established book.
If the player can not be reached and he bet significantly higher than his average wager amount than the player will still receive the bet at that amount at the adjusted price but will receive a warning that the next time he does this his account will be cancelled/closed.
These rules will be completed and detailed to cover all situations. Please remeber this is just a start.
I want players to value betCBS as solid out. Like I said before I dont throw out winners and I have better loyalty bonuses than most books offshore. Most importantly you will never hear a customer being slow paid.
I want to invite any posters who feel they can add to to the 'bad line' rule to email me dave@betcbs.com. I always appreciate all suggestions and I value the viewpoints of the forum posters.
I would also like to apologize for not handling this situation sooner. I feel much of this could have been avoided by addressing the situation immediately.
I want to thank every poster/bookmaker who emailed me the last week with their suggestions.
I would also like to thank Ken for his help last evening in helping me to make my decision.
I encourage all posters to work on a 'bad line' decision that could possibly be adopted by all offshore books.
Sincerely
Dave Johnson
betCBS.com
I spent the last two days reviewing everything regarding this situation. I spent yesterday speaking with a few respected bookmakers as well as many customers and posters who I have come to respect over the years.
I recieved many different viewpoints so it took a little time to come up with a viable solution to appease all parties. The last conversation this morning was with Areef who very calmly discussed his side of the situation.
First, I would like to say that besides the constant ramblings of some posters like JJGold I feel that this forum has provided a valuable service to both Areef and myself in this situation. Personally, I am thankful because the help from the Shrink as well as the members of the forum forced me to look harder at some of the rules that I have listed on my website. The situation caused me to realize that in order to prevent bad publicity situations like this in the future certain things need to be better spelled out.
I decided this afternoon after taking into consideration all viewpoints to pay Areef his full wager of $2000 @ +435. This suggestion was made by a few members of the forum and specifically by Areef during our discussion.
I have taken alot of bad publicity in this situation. Many books would have given in immediately at the fear of losing so many players and just paid the money.
The money and the lost players was never the issue. Anyone in the industry or familiar with my book knows we are one of the most financially solid offshore.
The real issue was by giving in and going against the policies I created to protect my book I am putting myself and my business in jeopardy. By just paying the player I am not solving the problem. The next time this happens again we end up going through the same thing.
One of the very respected posters of the forums for years wrote me back today and I have taken his advice and developed guidelines of how we will handle this problem in the future.
I will not honor bad lines win or lose. I will have the entire bad line policy clearly stated under the rules section of the website. These rules are active today but are open to further suggestions:
If a player makes a wager on an incorrect line (the incorrect line parameters are still being developed) the players wager will be cancelled immediately and an email will be sent verifying the wager deletion prior to the start of the event.
If the player is inaccessible by email or if the event has already started the player will receive an equal wager at the highest value that can be verified from an established book.
If the player can not be reached and he bet significantly higher than his average wager amount than the player will still receive the bet at that amount at the adjusted price but will receive a warning that the next time he does this his account will be cancelled/closed.
These rules will be completed and detailed to cover all situations. Please remeber this is just a start.
I want players to value betCBS as solid out. Like I said before I dont throw out winners and I have better loyalty bonuses than most books offshore. Most importantly you will never hear a customer being slow paid.
I want to invite any posters who feel they can add to to the 'bad line' rule to email me dave@betcbs.com. I always appreciate all suggestions and I value the viewpoints of the forum posters.
I would also like to apologize for not handling this situation sooner. I feel much of this could have been avoided by addressing the situation immediately.
I want to thank every poster/bookmaker who emailed me the last week with their suggestions.
I would also like to thank Ken for his help last evening in helping me to make my decision.
I encourage all posters to work on a 'bad line' decision that could possibly be adopted by all offshore books.
Sincerely
Dave Johnson
betCBS.com
TinCo,
My exact point - the best thing about this situation is the examination of what constitutes a bad line per the rules of the book. The point of this thread was that if the rule exists, it will be used and someone will be pissed off. Hopefully other books will follow this lead and prevent the assasination the the likes of JJnoclass brought forth. The sad thing is that JJ is sitting around combing out his hairpiece patting himself on the back for thinking he did a good job.
My exact point - the best thing about this situation is the examination of what constitutes a bad line per the rules of the book. The point of this thread was that if the rule exists, it will be used and someone will be pissed off. Hopefully other books will follow this lead and prevent the assasination the the likes of JJnoclass brought forth. The sad thing is that JJ is sitting around combing out his hairpiece patting himself on the back for thinking he did a good job.
