[SBR Lou]

WagerWeb correlated parlay confiscation update
report contributed to by Justin7

On 12/14, SBR reported on WagerWeb (SBR rating C-) confiscating $9578.60 from a player that had wagered multiple correlated parlays. The player is a long-time bettor with WagerWeb and placed numerous correlated parlays dating from August 29th to October 24th. On October 29th the player inquired about initiating a withdrawal via wire. At this point WagerWeb began a five week auditing process which culminated in deducting $9578.60 in winnings citing correlated parlay play.



WagerWeb has a rule which outlaws correlated bets. The rule states WagerWeb does not accept any bet that is considered a correlated multiple, or parlay. WagerWeb uses ASI software, which has the ability to limit the correlation percentage of same-game pointspread to total parlays. WagerWeb chose not to exercise this software function and instead accepted the players parlay wagers.

The player disputes his net amount won by placing these correlated wagers. WagerWeb has not yet justified how it obtained the $9578.60 figure. SBR will update this report as discussion continues. | View initial WagerWeb complaint

[Chuck Sims]

The player was robbed of his money. Wagerweb is a SHIT book.

[Mudcat]

They have loosely worded rules and casual software so they can accept bets and decide later, depending on the outcome, if they should be illegal or not.

A long-term pattern with WagerWeb.

[1st and Ten]

If they don't side with the player...request they reimburse all losers along similar percentages

[ElCapitan]

Wow. We're already playing a game where the odds are against us most of the time anyway but now, not only do we have to beat the lines, we have to beat the book's loosely worded rules.

It goes without saying that I doubt there would have been a "5 week audit" if the guy had been losing betting these same plays.

Free shot at the players, IMO. If they don't want to book the bet, then have the software put a stop to it.

[trixtrix]

WagerWeb correlated parlay confiscation update
report contributed to by Justin7

WagerWeb uses ASI software, which has the ability to limit the correlation percentage of same-game pointspread to total parlays. WagerWeb chose not to exercise this software function and instead accepted the players parlay wagers.

actually this part is NOT correct, wagerweb DID EXERCISE this restriction on highly correlated parlays, for example any parlay that has a spread/total ratio >50% was REJECTED by the software.

try to place any parlays such as fav -20/ over 28, the software will REFUSE to take it.

[HedgeHog]

Wow. We're already playing a game where the odds are against us most of the time anyway but now, not only do we have to beat the lines, we have to beat the book's loosely worded rules.

It goes without saying that I doubt there would have been a "5 week audit" if the guy had been losing betting these same plays.

Free shot at the players, IMO. If they don't want to book the bet, then have the software put a stop to it.

Your post is spot-on. Books that use correlated bets as an excuse to steal have only themselves to blame. Obviously Sportsbook.com comes to mind as well.

[HeeeHAWWWW]

The player was robbed of his money. Wagerweb is a SHIT book.

You're being too kind to them.

[dogcity]

Gotta be suspicious about payouts if a book allows correlated parlays...neither of the the 2 A+ rated books I use will allow them, and for good reason.

How many of the A/A+ books allow correlated plays?

[Justin7]

actually this part is NOT correct, wagerweb DID EXERCISE this restriction on highly correlated parlays, for example any parlay that has a spread/total ratio >50% was REJECTED by the software.

try to place any parlays such as fav -20/ over 28, the software will REFUSE to take it.

This was referring to the wagers you made, that they chose to permit.

[Mudcat]

I just hope no one reads this and thinks, 'I don't do correlated parlays so this doesn't apply to me and WW should be okay.'

No. Obviously correlated parlays are the issue of the moment but there have been many other examples of how they will mold rules to avoid making payouts. They have loosely written rules against professionals taking bonuses - so if you take a bonus and happen to win, they can turn it into a reason to start confiscating. They are creative in how they take their free shots.

Once upon a time WW was a reasonably okay book but that was years ago.

[HedgeHog]

Gotta be suspicious about payouts if a book allows correlated parlays...neither of the the 2 A+ rated books I use will allow them, and for good reason.

How many of the A/A+ books allow correlated plays?

A Books have the software in place to disallow bets that are overly correlated. It's up to each Book to decide the correlation % that they are comfortable in accepting.

[SBR Lou]

actually this part is NOT correct, wagerweb DID EXERCISE this restriction on highly correlated parlays, for example any parlay that has a spread/total ratio >50% was REJECTED by the software.

try to place any parlays such as fav -20/ over 28, the software will REFUSE to take it.

It's immaterial, what I'm trying to convey is that the correlated parlays in question were not blocked via that software function. Bets were booked and not cancelled.

[donjuan]

It's immaterial, what I'm trying to convey is that the correlated parlays in question were not blocked via that software function. Bets were booked and not cancelled.

His point though is that it wasn't a simple oversight on their part. They specifically chose the degree of correlation allowed.

[patswin]

Based on this and other cases I've seen here over the last few months this book should be a D rated book. They do not derserve a C rating

[Chuck Sims]

I am amazed at SBR's tame response. Wagerweb should be downgraded immediately. This is pure theft.

[Justin7]

I am amazed at SBR's tame response. Wagerweb should be downgraded immediately. This is pure theft.

This is ongoing; there has not been a final response from WagerWeb, nor has there been a final re-evaluation from SBR. Extraordinary circumstances unrelated to the player are making this one take longer.

[Mudcat]

I am amazed at SBR's tame response. Wagerweb should be downgraded immediately. This is pure theft.

I feel the opposite. With all the comparable stuff from WW that SBR has shrugged off over the last few years, I am amazed at vigor of this response. Which is a sad statement.

But based on those same historical (in)actions, I would be amazed if there is a downgrade.

[SBR Lou]

I feel the opposite. With all the comparable stuff from WW that SBR has shrugged off over the last few years, I would be amazed if there is a downgrade.

WagerWeb was downgraded to C- on 12/14 - the day this report was confirmed.

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/sbr/wagerweb/

[robmpink]

WagerWeb was downgraded to C- on 12/14 - the day this report was confirmed.

http://www.sportsbookreview.com/sbr/wagerweb/

I guess Mudcat missed that one even though my dog who is blind in one eye noticed it plastered on the home page. At the very least let him enjoy his amazement of the downgrade.