[Art]

I'm really confused. For years I have read that SBR is the fairest place to go when a Sportsbook was being unfair to a player - big or small.

That was especially true with an A rated book, with whom SBR claims they can resolve most disputes (check their rating guide).

More than 2 months ago, I had a dispute with Pinnacle re their grading of a wager and how it was unfairly graded as a loss according to THEIR OWN WRITTEN RULES. I tried to resolve it with them for 3 weeks back and forth, and their bottom line (and I have written confirmation of this) was that they would stand behind their rules, and they would reverse the wager if the rule was even "gray" or "unclear."

Well, I wrote to SBR and explained the situation. Justin responded and asked for the details, which I gave him.
He then wrote back to me and copied Pinnacle, saying that their rule as written was unclear. He therefore recommended that they CHANGE their rule so that it properly reflects the way this situation would be graded in the future. Everything fine and dandy, right?

Well, I thought so. But then Justin added his two cents saying that in a case like this, if he was forced to read the rule one way only, then he would try to use tiebreakers Justin uses to read rules that were unclear suggest that the book's grading was fair.

Now I completely disagree and - even according to Justin's own tiebreakers - clearly weigh in favor of grading this as a win, not a loss. But it makes no difference at this point. The book -- Pinnancle -- has told me IN WRITING that all I need to show is that their rule is "gray," and they would correct this grading. Justin said not only that it was gray, but that he recommended IT BE CHANGED. And Pinnacle has done nothing in response!

I have written to Pinnacle now almost 4 times without getting a response. I have written to SBR asking them to step in, and haven't heard back. I wanted to know what help I could get, and if someone could recommend a site that will actually care enough to follow through here.

Thanks.

[Justin7]

For those that don't remember this dispute, here are the facts:

The Yankees were losing after 6 innings. They took the lead in the top of the 7th inning, but the game was suspended in the middle of the 7th. A month later, the game was finished, and the Yankees won.

Pinnacle graded the game based on the result at the end of the 6th inning (the Yankees wager lost, even though they lost the game).

Every book's rule on this situation is poorly written - I checked out 5 different books. Desipte the ambiguity, the most reasonable reading was consistent with how all books grade it: use the score at the end of the last finished inning before the suspension.

[Mudcat]

I think you'd have to get into the specifics of your case for anyone to judge that.

As for the general question:

Is SBR Still Impartial and Fair to Players Who Go Them For Dispute Help?

My answer based on my observations is yes. If anything, they lean the players way.

[durito]

Originally Posted by Justin7

Every book's rule on this situation is poorly written - I checked out 5 different books. Desipte the ambiguity, the most reasonable reading was consistent with how all books grade it: use the score at the end of the last finished inning before the suspension.

Exactly. This is how it's always scored.

I don't see your case here Art, nor do I see Justin suggesting you are right.

The rule may not be well written, I haven't seen it. But every sportsbook in the world would have graded this bet the same way.

[Mudcat]

And now having read Justin's explanation, I am stumped.

I would really need to see exactly what the rule says.

I can understand why they would revert to the last complete inning. That way, people who were on the other side would not be punished due to their team not having an equal number of at-bats at the time of the suspension.

Tough situation. It is something that would not arise often but, in an ideal world, it really should be spelled out clearly in the rules.

[Art]

Mudcat,

I think you hit the nail on the head.

Pinnacle's rule stated that when rain affects a game, the shortened or suspended game would be graded after the last full inning. In the case of a shortened game, that is the last inning that was last played. In the case of a suspended game, MLB is saying that the last inning of the game will be played upon continuation. Under MLB Rules, the last inning of this game ended with NYY leading (and winning) the game.

Now others read this another way, which would mirror the rules in Las Vegas. I am not a pro bettor and told that to Pinnacle. They said no problem - you only need to follow our rules as written. If our rule is not clear as written, we will regrade your ticket. Now they are backing off that promise and ignoring my emails. I think everyone has said (including SBR) that the rule is unclear. In fact Justin wrote to Pinnacle saying it should be changed.

So if Pinnacle tells me (in writing) that if it's unclear, they would regrade, they need to regrade. And yet they are not keeping their promise!

[MrX]

I think you should probably just accept this one. I know it's unfortunate that the rules were poorly written, but this is not a case of Pinny selectively interpreting a poorly written rule to their advantage, they followed the industry standard.

[isetcap]

Originally Posted by Mudcat

And now having read Justin's explanation, I am stumped.

I would really need to see exactly what the rule says.

I can understand why they would revert to the last complete inning. That way, people who were on the other side would not be punished due to their team not having an equal number of at-bats at the time of the suspension.

Tough situation. It is something that would not arise often but, in an ideal world, it really should be spelled out clearly in the rules.

I carefully evaluated the exact language of the rule as presented by Pinnacle and here is my post.

Based on the evaluation I would be forced to conclude that Art does in fact have valid grounds for compensation. Wagers are not supposed to be graded based on suppositions and intent when very specific rules are written to avoid these particular situations.

As for the impartiality of SBR in handling player disputes, I think their record remains unblemished. It is blatantly obvious that a great deal of consideration was given to Art's case even when others in the industry would have ignored the complaint completely.

[isetcap]

Originally Posted by Art

Mudcat,

I think you hit the nail on the head.

Pinnacle's rule stated that when rain affects a game, the shortened or suspended game would be graded after the last full inning. In the case of a shortened game, that is the last inning that was last played. In the case of a suspended game, MLB is saying that the last inning of the game will be played upon continuation. Under MLB Rules, the last inning of this game ended with NYY leading (and winning) the game.

Now others read this another way, which would mirror the rules in Las Vegas. I am not a pro bettor and told that to Pinnacle. They said no problem - you only need to follow our rules as written. If our rule is not clear as written, we will regrade your ticket. Now they are backing off that promise and ignoring my emails. I think everyone has said (including SBR) that the rule is unclear. In fact Justin wrote to Pinnacle saying it should be changed.

So if Pinnacle tells me (in writing) that if it's unclear, they would regrade, they need to regrade. And yet they are not keeping their promise!

The rule is not unclear. It CLEARLY states the exact situation under which you should be paid. Your bet should have been graded a winner based on the specific interpretation of the rule's language. The only thing that makes this situation UNCLEAR is the "industry standard". In the very specific situation that occurred in that particular game, the rule goes against the industry standard. If Pinnacle has stated they will adhere to their rule, then they should be held to that promise.

[jolub]

I hope there is no problem with SBR. I'll be opening complaints with them concerning withdrawal issues at three Futurebet networks sites, TheNutz, Poker_Eon, and Oddsmaker.

I didn't know about SBR or Futurebet when I made my deposits.

[20Four7]

I bet that game at pinny and didn't get into what exactly their rules state, but I didn't feel the game got graded unfairly. I have had minor issues with pinny and their customer service has always handled it quickly and professionally.

I think SBR is still the players best bet if they need help against a book.

[Mudcat]

Originally Posted by isetcap

The rule is not unclear. It CLEARLY states the exact situation under which you should be paid. Your bet should have been graded a winner based on the specific interpretation of the rule's language. The only thing that makes this situation UNCLEAR is the "industry standard". In the very specific situation that occurred in that particular game, the rule goes against the industry standard. If Pinnacle has stated they will adhere to their rule, then they should be held to that promise.

You're right. According to the words they have chosen for their rule, this player's bet should be graded a win. There is no ambiguity.

I think we agree that the intended spirit of the rule would dictate that this player's wager was graded correctly, but with the words they have used, not the case.

[MrX]

Originally Posted by Mudcat

You're right. According to the words they have chosen for their rule, this player's bet should be graded a win. There is no ambiguity.

I think we agree that the intended spirit of the rule would dictate that this player's wager was graded correctly, but with the words they have used, not the case.

I don't understand how you can both say there is no ambiguity. Here's the rule again:

"If a game is called or suspended, the winner is determined by the score after the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning, in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called."

I underlined "the inning" because there's the ambiguity. If "the inning" refers to the current inning (which I think everyone agrees was their intention) then the player's wager was graded correctly. If it refers to the last full inning, then the wager was graded incorrectly.

I do agree that the sentence is written in such a way that "the inning" seems most likely to refer to the last full inning to someone not familiar with industry standards, but by no means would I call it unambiguous.

[SBR_John]

Originally Posted by Mudcat

Is SBR Still Impartial and Fair to Players Who Go Them For Dispute Help?

My answer based on my observations is yes. If anything, they lean the players way.

I think there is a misconception that SBR leans to the side of the player. Many times the rules are written in a way that leaves us no choice. An offer or bonus is made by the Book with rules written by the book. Players are crafty and at times exploit a weakness without breaking any rules. Many sites will call these players “shot takers” and “bonus whores”. Indeed, quite often they are angle shooters. It’s still the Books job to write the rules and the players job to follow them.

[Mudcat]

Originally Posted by MrX

I don't understand how you can both say there is no ambiguity. Here's the rule again:

"If a game is called or suspended, the winner is determined by the score after the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning, in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called."

I underlined "the inning" because there's the ambiguity. If "the inning" refers to the current inning (which I think everyone agrees was their intention) then the player's wager was graded correctly. If it refers to the last full inning, then the wager was graded incorrectly.

I do agree that the sentence is written in such a way that "the inning" seems most likely to refer to the last full inning to someone not familiar with industry standards, but by no means would I call it unambiguous.

Oh boy. You're making me go back to my 1st year University English Composition class. That was a long time ago.

In simplest terms, "the inning" (which you underlined) refers back to "the last full inning." There are no other words to connect it to.

We all want to plug in our assumptions but in terms of English composition, the only thing there it can refer to is, "the last full inning."

You're right that it should mean the subsequent inning-in-progress. But it simply doesn't say that anywhere. They would have to change the language to actually make it mean that.

For the record I'm just picking at nits here. I basically feel that the bet was graded correctly. But if I look at in lawyer-ese, the guy should get off on a technicality.

[Mudcat]

Originally Posted by SBR_John

I think there is a misconception that SBR leans to the side of the player. Many times the rules are written in a way that leaves us no choice. An offer or bonus is made by the Book with rules written by the book. Players are crafty and at times exploit a weakness without breaking any rules. Many sites will call these players “shot takers” and “bonus whores”. Indeed, quite often they are angle shooters. It’s still the Books job to write the rules and the players job to follow them.

Yep, I can see that. I'm trying to think back of examples to illustrate what I was thinking and am not really coming up with anything that isn't covered by your explanation here.

Perhaps my comment was off-base.

[Mudcat]

Making the next question, should SBR go back to bat for this player? This seems the exact situation of a book not doing a good job of writing their rules.

[Dark Horse]

I remember the game and the reactions here on the forum (especially Ganch doing his rain dance). There seemed to be universal agreement then that the last complete inning was the correct way to grade wagers.

On a sidenote, players did disagree about the fact that total wagers were ruled no-action. In the last complete inning the game had already gone over, and where this point in the game was good enough to grade sides, it wasn't for totals...

If Pinnacle didn't write the rule clearly, that's their problem.

[SBR_John]

Originally Posted by Mudcat

Making the next question, should SBR go back to bat for this player? This seems the exact situation of a book not doing a good job of writing their rules.

I think we have gone to bat for this player as Justin explained.

[bigboydan]

Were still talking about this dispute.

[jjgold]

SBR is fair

[vanman]

Art if you`re not happy with SBR then you could try bookmakersreview,don`t know if they could help or not.But if SBR have done all they can then it`s doubtful if any one else can.

[LT Profits]

We have been down this road a thousand times, yet it is incomprehensible to me how many guys don't understand a rule that is not as difficult as you are making it out to be.

Let me put this in my own words:

If a game is postponed or suspended after five innings (or 4.5 if home team is ahead), the final score for moneyline wagers shall be based on the score at the end of the last completed inning, UNLESS the HOME team either tied of took the lead in the current inning, in which case the current score is used.

In this case, the Orioles were the home team and led after the last completed inning. The VISITING Yankeed took the lead in the current inning and were still batting at the time of the suspension, so the exception clause does not apply. Thus, the last competed inning (O's win) applies.

Where exactly is the ambiguity in that? If Pinnacle had some poor phrasing, that is the purpuse of having the "when in doubt, revert to Vegas rules clause." Bottom line, Pinnacle graded the play correctly and anyone that bet the Yankees has absolutely no case.

[LT Profits]

Art,

You have to realize that MLB rules and betting rules are not the same in regards to suspended games. MLB obviously contines the game at a later date if the visiting team takes the lead in the current inning, whereas for betting purposes, books revert to the last completed inning.

That is an industry standard, so if you bet the Yankees, you lost. I do not blame Pinnacle for starting to ignore your emails at this late stage, as you are basically asking them to grade a play that is an obvious loser as a winner. How would you react if someone tried to do that to you?

[Mudcat]

Actually LT, you have misunderstood what is being said here, despite the clarity of how it has been said.

The point is if you look at how the rule is written, it says something else. There is no way I can further explain it to you other than to copy what I and isetcap and Halifax have already posted, which you either didn't read or didn't understand. It is completely unambiguous. As written, this player's wager should be a winner.

It is a question of English composition the finer points of which, perhaps, are not your specialty.

I assume that's why you have chosen to re-write it in your own words. I could also re-write it to convey the proper meaning.

That's the point. The rule needs to be re-written if it is going to convey the proper meaning.

We all understand what the rule should be and why. It just doesn't convey that with the words they have chosen. Unless they have fixed it, Pinnacle right now has a rule which says something different than what we mean but hopefully everyone kinda understands what we're thinking.


Oddly, I'm not sure Art understands the real reason this rule, as written, is actually in his favor. I'm not sure the SBR people understand it either.

[LT Profits]

Mudcat,

Their ain't nuttin rong wit my inglish!

This is straight from the Pinnacle site:

The result of a game is official after 5 innings of play unless the home team is leading after 4.5 innings. If a game is called or suspended, the winner is determined by the score after the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning, in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called. Monies will be refunded if the home team ties the game and it is then suspended. Events will not carry over to the following day unless otherwise specified.

That is copied per batum. Now show me where Yankee bettors have a case as the rule is written right now. Seems to me they are saying the exact same thing I said in my words, so I don't really think the rule needs any clarifying here.

[Art]

I appreciate the honest reviews of forum posters. I also don't mean to attack SBR - I am politely asking them to follow through on what has emerged from their own investigation and from their loyal forum posters.

This comes down to 2 simple steps in my case -

1. Pinnalce started this dispute by saying their rule is crystal clear - if I can show it is so much as GRAY, I will get the wager regraded. I have the email in which they told this to me directly - and will again forward to Bill and Justin and whoever else needs it to get them to honor their word.

2. It seems clear that AT A MINIMUM there is ambiguity in this rule. I mean there have been compelling cases as to why my reading is the proper pure reading, and I agree with you guys. But AT A MINIMUM it is ambiguous.



If it they have (1) given their promise and (2) it is clearly ambiguous (at a minimum - or worse yet, clear in my favor) then an honorable sportsbook like Pinnacle needs to honor their word.

As Mudcat and other said, this is all in their control. THEY choose the language of their rule - they could have made it crystal celar, but instead wrote it so that it is more plainly read as a a win for me. THEY decide what to say their policy is - and they told me that they are SO HONORABLE, they would regrade if it was so much as "gray." If they didn't mean that, don't say it (IN WRITING!). So they need to step up here and be the honorable book they claim to be.

I therefore ask SBR to help make them honor their written word. I have no power over them - that's why I came to you.

Thanks again for your concern and help.

[Justin7]

Art,

Rules must be used to grade all games in the same manner. Either all Yankees bets win, or they all lose. They can't be expected to grade both sides as a winner. They way they graded it is the most reasonable given all the facts.

The phrase of the rule "last completed inning" taken alone is ambiguous. Is it the last inning on the day it was suspended, or last inning when resumed? Take as a whole, it is clear - their rules also state "Events will not carry over to the following day unless otherwise specified." If you read the rules as a whole, you can understand what they are trying to say. Given that their rules are consistent with the industry standard, they graded this fairly.

I wouldn't call the rule "crystal clear", but taken as a whole, it is clear enough.

[Art]

I don't get it. Why is SBR doing this? They are defending Pinnacle as if Pinnacle never wrote an email to me saying that if their is ANY unclarity in their rule, they would honor it.

I mean come on. I realize that if you were running a book, Justin, that you wouldn't have written that - but THEY DID. So please stop trying to bend over backwards for them.

This is open and shut - the very fact that so many posters have analyzed this and concluded that the rule is written to read that I should have won - shows at a minimum it is UNCLEAR. That is all I need to show.

Just so that you are aware, my original email to Pinnacle explained how I know nothing about Vegas rules or industry standards - I'm a recreational player and relied only on the rulebook of the site I was playing on.
Pinnacle AGREED. They agreed that I shouldn't have to know any other books or industry practices - this is about what their rules say. So take industry standards and other books out of this story. This is straight up Pinnacle, their word, and their integrity.

Thanks.

[LT Profits]

Art,

OK, so I copied Pinnacle's rules above word for word. All I ask is that you show me where the ambiguity is, because it does appear clear as day to me that the score reverts to the previous inning as it is written now.

[Dark Horse]

Now that LT has posted Pinny's rule, I don't see where Art thinks he has a point. It is the same as with other books. Last completed inning.

[Art]

LT - ambiguous means it can be read in more than 1 way.
Scroll up and see why this is an open and shut case that is simply not written clearly and it is therefore ambiguous.

The basic point as to how I read it is that the game is to be graded based on the score at the end of the last inning of the game. Now if a game is ended early - that is clear. But when a game is suspended, the last inning is too - i.e., it occurs later. The score at the end of the last inning of this game: Yanks won.

Don't tell me about other readings - that's not the issue here. The point is how I read it and Pinnacle saying it will go to bat for me if it was even gray. Pinnacle said the industry standard doesn't make a difference; their rules need to stand on their own. That's why SBR needs to step up.

If you need to know some posts to focus on to prove how reasonable, smart people can read it my way - start with Mudcat, MrX, and read on.



Originally Posted by MrX View Post
I don't understand how you can both say there is no ambiguity. Here's the rule again:

"If a game is called or suspended, the winner is determined by the score after the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning, in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called."

I underlined "the inning" because there's the ambiguity. If "the inning" refers to the current inning (which I think everyone agrees was their intention) then the player's wager was graded correctly. If it refers to the last full inning, then the wager was graded incorrectly.

I do agree that the sentence is written in such a way that "the inning" seems most likely to refer to the last full inning to someone not familiar with industry standards, but by no means would I call it unambiguous.

[isetcap]

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

Now that LT has posted Pinny's rule, I don't see where Art thinks he has a point. It is the same as with other books. Last completed inning.

...last full inning UNLESS THE HOME TEAM SCORES TO TIE, OR TAKES THE LEAD IN THE BOTTOM HALF OF THE INNING...

The Orioles took the lead in the bottom half of THE INNING (the only inning being referenced by the rule), therefore...

...the winner is determined by the score AT THE TIME THE GAME IS CALLED.

Without ambiguity this rule states that NYY should be the graded winner because they were leading at the time the game was called.

[raiders72002]

Every book grades this the same way whether it's in Vegas or offshore. It's a loss, there's no question about it.

[Art]

I just read something in the quotes from the rules that some of the posters have posted. Sorry - I missed it!

PINNACLE HAS CHANGED THEIR RULES. THIS WAS NOT THE WORDING THAT PINNACLE AND I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT. WHEN I PLACED MY WAGER (and for a few weeks after that) THIS NEW LANGUAGE ABOUT THE INNING AT THE TIME THE GAME IS CALLED WAS NOT THERE.

THEY MUST HAVE CHANGED IT!

That was the right thing to do Pinnacle. Now please do the right think for your player and honor YOUR PROMISE.

Maybe this means Pinnacle will honor their word, since by changing it they admit that it was at least not clear. SBR, please follow up on my behalf with Pinnacle, since they have not responded to any of my last 5 emails.