Opinion on what happened at Betnow with the posters parlay ?

[flyingillini]

Read across the street what happened. What’s your take !? Curious to hear posters view.

 

[Diggers77]

Are you talking about the thread at SBR titled Betnow Freerolled Me? I don’t think it was a parlay but If Win Only bets. Somebody else chimed in about parlays from Covid or something. It’s hard to tell what is going on and when the matches started or ended. I used to like if win only bets but I always placed them online. No idea why you’d have to call it in for a hand ticket. Never used betnow so I have no opinion.

 

[flyingillini]

Are you talking about the thread at SBR titled Betnow Freerolled Me? I don’t think it was a parlay but If Win Only bets. Somebody else chimed in about parlays from Covid or something. It’s hard to tell what is going on and when the matches started or ended. I used to like if win only bets but I always placed them online. No idea why you’d have to call it in for a hand ticket. Never used betnow so I have no opinion.

Yes, I’m talking about that thread. It is hard to tell what is going on there.

 

[djefferis]

If I read correctly - player was making phone wagers and adding of wins for events taking place on differing days.

Phone wagering is already uncommon - we no longer live in 1998 - no one heads to a pay phone to call in wagers - everyone has a smart phone these days and can do it online.

Generally the widely applied rule on “if wagering” is events must take place within 24 hours of settlement of the original wager. Unless there is something written in the books rules stating otherwise - this would be the generally accepted standard.

Now - as to doing what’s right by the player - IF a clerk were accidentally allowing a wager that violated this rule - the book should both realize their error after the initial error - and honor the result/notify the player. If multiple mistakes occurred before the book could catch the error (in example - player gets away with initial mistake - then repeats this multiple times in 24 hours before the book can catch the errors being made and void the if bet - return to straight wager only) - the book is justified in canceling the added wager and notifying player as it has the potential to be a situation where the player was exploiting a known mistake.

Think of it this way - let’s says game A takes place on Monday and today is Saturday. I place a bet on Mondays match - then call in after and add an “if bet” to todays match (potentially knowingly violating the generally accepted rule - maybe I’m ignorant of the rule too) - my bet Monday wins - but Saturday loses - what do you think the chances are that I remember my “mistake” and appeal to have that added wager canceled are ?

There are very good reasons for this rule - both for accounting/record keeping purposes. Books cannot make a rule for every possible scenario so rely on vague language to allow some leadway in these cases. Not uncommon to see “Las Vegas or Atlantic City sportsbook rules apply if not specifically addressed” added in a books rules.

To me - it smells of a player taking advantage of the book - and the book getting lazy. The player gets the benefit of the doubt the first time in my opinion. The book on the other hand has the duty to be cognizant of what’s going on and if there employees are doing something wrong - to catch it in a REASONABLE period of time and correct the issue and alert the player(s) involved. Reasonable is 24 hours - possibly up to 72 hours at most.

The fact this happened more than once I a short period of time though gives me pause to support the player - in fairness - I’d likely say pay them - and then make it clear - no more phone wagering privileges. If the player then wants to complain - fine - but they cannot say they weren’t paid and it’s common knowledge books can deny any players action they like for any reason.

It is customer resolution 101 - stay ahead of the complaint and act in utmost good faith - even if your customer isn’t always. Your the book - you have more to lose here - you spend tens of thousands building a brand - don’t lose it over a single player complaint - unless you can prove intent (I/e evidence this was done elsewhere and player was warned).

 

[BigJay]

 

[flyingillini]

If I read correctly - player was making phone wagers and adding of wins for events taking place on differing days.

Phone wagering is already uncommon - we no longer live in 1998 - no one heads to a pay phone to call in wagers - everyone has a smart phone these days and can do it online.

Generally the widely applied rule on “if wagering” is events must take place within 24 hours of settlement of the original wager. Unless there is something written in the books rules stating otherwise - this would be the generally accepted standard.

Now - as to doing what’s right by the player - IF a clerk were accidentally allowing a wager that violated this rule - the book should both realize their error after the initial error - and honor the result/notify the player. If multiple mistakes occurred before the book could catch the error (in example - player gets away with initial mistake - then repeats this multiple times in 24 hours before the book can catch the errors being made and void the if bet - return to straight wager only) - the book is justified in canceling the added wager and notifying player as it has the potential to be a situation where the player was exploiting a known mistake.

Think of it this way - let’s says game A takes place on Monday and today is Saturday. I place a bet on Mondays match - then call in after and add an “if bet” to todays match (potentially knowingly violating the generally accepted rule - maybe I’m ignorant of the rule too) - my bet Monday wins - but Saturday loses - what do you think the chances are that I remember my “mistake” and appeal to have that added wager canceled are ?

There are very good reasons for this rule - both for accounting/record keeping purposes. Books cannot make a rule for every possible scenario so rely on vague language to allow some leadway in these cases. Not uncommon to see “Las Vegas or Atlantic City sportsbook rules apply if not specifically addressed” added in a books rules.

To me - it smells of a player taking advantage of the book - and the book getting lazy. The player gets the benefit of the doubt the first time in my opinion. The book on the other hand has the duty to be cognizant of what’s going on and if there employees are doing something wrong - to catch it in a REASONABLE period of time and correct the issue and alert the player(s) involved. Reasonable is 24 hours - possibly up to 72 hours at most.

The fact this happened more than once I a short period of time though gives me pause to support the player - in fairness - I’d likely say pay them - and then make it clear - no more phone wagering privileges. If the player then wants to complain - fine - but they cannot say they weren’t paid and it’s common knowledge books can deny any players action they like for any reason.

It is customer resolution 101 - stay ahead of the complaint and act in utmost good faith - even if your customer isn’t always. Your the book - you have more to lose here - you spend tens of thousands building a brand - don’t lose it over a single player complaint - unless you can prove intent (I/e evidence this was done elsewhere and player was warned).

Amazing response, thanks for taking the time to write this. I couldn't agree more with you.

 

[Ace7550]

Maybe the guy should try posting about betnow at the forum that actually supports the use of offshore books...

 

[djefferis]

But you don’t have the ghost choir supporting you here.

You say anything there in support of a book - you’re a shill. You talk bullshit against them and you’re a hero…go figure.

Oh wait - if offshore is “bad” - that must mean US based operators with 20 cent lines are good - and whose flags do they fly over there?

Same as it’s always been it seems - sponsors do no wrong - competitors are crooks - never gonna change.

 

[flyingillini]

But you don’t have the ghost choir supporting you here.

You say anything there in support of a book - you’re a shill. You talk bullshit against them and you’re a hero…go figure.

Oh wait - if offshore is “bad” - that must mean US based operators with 20 cent lines are good - and whose flags do they fly over there?

Same as it’s always been it seems - sponsors do no wrong - competitors are crooks - never gonna change.

Agreed.

 

[Ace7550]

But you don’t have the ghost choir supporting you here.

You say anything there in support of a book - you’re a shill. You talk bullshit against them and you’re a hero…go figure.

Oh wait - if offshore is “bad” - that must mean US based operators with 20 cent lines are good - and whose flags do they fly over there?

Same as it’s always been it seems - sponsors do no wrong - competitors are crooks - never gonna change.

Yup,
and good luck getting 20 cent lines. Many US books have 40 cent lines.

 

[DiggityDaggityDo]

Amazing response, thanks for taking the time to write this. I couldn't agree more with you.

The guy is sharp as fuk.

no chance in hell he came out of this guy’s sack.

 

[Diggers77]

So betnow clearly accepts If Win bets but it’s not clear if they accept them online or only accept them by calling in for a hand ticket. If they accept them online and OP was calling them in to circumvent the rules I can see where the problem is. But some blame has to go on the phone operator too.

 

[djefferis]

And I will say it again - I have no issues with SBR or (or any forum/news source) that only presents one side of the story - provided they disclose their bias.

Not to get too far into the weeds - but I wouldn’t expect to go to the NRA for fun control laws and not see a bias in their view points - which again fine, they disclose who they are and what they do.

It’s when you call yourself a “neutral” rating site - and then carry that bias that’s a problem with me. Wanna be neutral / but blindly support a position or turn a blind eye to certain posters spewing ignorance - but attack others who don’t share the company line - that’s a problem to me.

Like I said - it’s painfully obvious they allow detractors to run stories unchecked against certain shops that they don’t cover - who are likely plants for competing shops. It’s really simple - and f I’m not depositing at bonus shop A - then I’m probably going to bonus shop B offshore. But dare say anything in support of A and your shut down and labeled a shill - with no evidence whatsoever.

I mentioned a shop they didn’t want mentioned - apologized and got a mod meltdown. Their clubhouse - their rules - no worries. Place is now the Sears store of gambling - once the proud example - now just an empty shell whose name people remember from its heyday.

 

[djefferis]

So betnow clearly accepts If Win bets but it’s not clear if they accept them online or only accept them by calling in for a hand ticket. If they accept them online and OP was calling them in to circumvent the rules I can see where the problem is. But some blame has to go on the phone operator too.

Agreed - or at least the book. I don’t blame a clerk on the phone - I blame the manager in duty for not catching/addressing the situation sooner.

Like I said - burn me once shame on you - burn me twice shame on me. If you do something not normally allowed and get away with it - fine. Pay and make it clear future bets like this will be voided and will result in the boot.

I’d doubt they are allowed online - but do not use that shop. It was a hard complaint to read as well - my impression was it was a straight wager made and then added on to converting to an if bet. If that’s the case - I’m not aware of any software that allows for that option - but again I am no expert.

 

[Ace7550]

Place is now the Sears store of gambling - once the proud example - now just an empty shell whose name people remember from its heyday.

That sums it up pretty well

 

[flyingillini]

And I will say it again - I have no issues with SBR or (or any forum/news source) that only presents one side of the story - provided they disclose their bias.

Not to get too far into the weeds - but I wouldn’t expect to go to the NRA for fun control laws and not see a bias in their view points - which again fine, they disclose who they are and what they do.

It’s when you call yourself a “neutral” rating site - and then carry that bias that’s a problem with me. Wanna be neutral / but blindly support a position or turn a blind eye to certain posters spewing ignorance - but attack others who don’t share the company line - that’s a problem to me.

Like I said - it’s painfully obvious they allow detractors to run stories unchecked against certain shops that they don’t cover - who are likely plants for competing shops. It’s really simple - and f I’m not depositing at bonus shop A - then I’m probably going to bonus shop B offshore. But dare say anything in support of A and your shut down and labeled a shill - with no evidence whatsoever.

I mentioned a shop they didn’t want mentioned - apologized and got a mod meltdown. Their clubhouse - their rules - no worries. Place is now the Sears store of gambling - once the proud example - now just an empty shell whose name people remember from its heyday.

It's why BMR is the standard and we are all here. Once again, another amazing post. You are an amazing writer!

 

[DiggityDaggityDo]

It's why BMR is the standard and we are all here. Once again, another amazing post. You are an amazing writer!

Illini, we still need poster MANNY here.

Thanks in advance.

 

[flyingillini]

Illini, we still need poster MANNY here.

Thanks in advance.

I just talked to Ese Manny, he is doing well. As I said previously, if BMR wants to open their wallets and increase their budget, I can get him here. They have a few really bad paid guys now that they should/could replace with better people that put out better content but Lou must feel a certain way about them for him to keep them around. He certainly sees their quality is poor but that is his deal. Manny would bring the heat and be a great addition, but nothing comes for free.

 

[DiggityDaggityDo]

I just talked to Ese Manny, he is doing well. As I said previously, if BMR wants to open their wallets and increase their budget, I can get him here. They have a few really bad paid guys now that they should/could replace with better people that put out better content but Lou must feel a certain way about them for him to keep them around. He certainly sees their quality is poor but that is his deal. Manny would bring the heat and be a great addition, but nothing comes for free.

Illini, when will you release a full list of all paid posters with their salaries?

 

[flyingillini]

Illini, when will you release a full list of all paid posters with their salaries?

I do not know all of them or their salaries. I just know some are good and some are awful. Manny puts out quality and brings viewers is all. Change is a good thing Diggity aka the new Dad, there are paid posters here who are very stale and bring nothing to the table.