I think this shit book is robbing her and it shouldnt be tolerated. Sickem SBR
| Poster's Sportsbook Poll: 2011View Poll Results | ||
| # 1 5Dimes | 450 total points | 5Dimes Review |
| # 2 Pinnacle | 408 total points | Pinnacle Review |
| # 3 Heritage | 227 total points | Heritage Review |
| # 4 Bookmaker | 138 total points | Bookmaker Review |
| # 5 BetIslands | 129 total points | BetIslands Review |
| SBR Top-Rated SportsbooksRecommended List | ||
| Pinnacle Sports | SBR Rating A+ | Pinnacle Sports Review |
| 5Dimes | SBR Rating A+ | 5Dimes Review |
| BookMaker | SBR Rating A+ | BookMaker Review |
| Legends | SBR Rating A+ | Legends Review |
| Bodog | SBR Rating A | Bodog Review |
I suppose it depends on your definition of fraud.
Enron was fraud.
The sexygamblerchick scenario is not fraud. The account was created in CR. This was a mistake. When he realized this, the player should then have created a new account from the US, but he apparently thought it was enough to have his bets placed from the US. If this is fraud, then any US player currently playing at Pinnacle is also committing fraud. But I doubt the pros that play at Pinny will see it that way. It's simply a way to get around certain legalities that come and go with shifting political winds.
The other case is similar. Again, the player made a mistake by signing up, under a friend's name, from the same computer or household. That would be fraud, if it was done for the purpose of bonus scamming. But that was not the case (the tiny Beted bonus is only added after rollover is completed). It was done for the sole purpose of circumventing limits. Not a crime, not cheating, just a way to get a bet down. Of course you can create an account under someone else's name. It's widely practiced. How do you think Billy Walters gets his bets down? Circumventing limits is not fraud, and certainly not when the limit is $25. lol
Both players could have played it smarter. But they didn't. And Beted stole their money because it could disguise this lack of attention to detail, in otherwise innocent mistakes, as 'fraud'. The only fraud these players committed is that they won.
Both players were too nonchalant. But their intent never was to steal. They just wanted to get their bets down. Compare this to Beted. This book only cited the rule when payouts were requested. Until then, there was no 'fraud'. They were watching these accounts all the way. Their intent was always to steal. It ads up to two careless players, and one fraudulent book.
It will happen again. At this very moment, how many players in similar situations are being preyed upon by Beted? I don't care if I stand alone in this criticism, but not standing up to this type of fraud is a black eye for SBR.
(typically lost in this type of argument is the fact that it shouldn't make any difference to a book who accepts their bet offers. Why would they offer the same bet to Johnny but not to Jacky? It makes no sense at all.)
Last edited by Dark Horse; 04-16-10 at 12:41 PM.
SBR Founder Join Date: 12/14/2005
wow not this thread again, although it is classic
3-QUESTION
SBR TRIVIA WINNER 05/24/2012
Don't know how long I just spent on this entire thread but it was worth every second.......EPIC!
SBR POKER TOURNEY10th Place 5/30/2012
SBR POKER TOURNEY1st Place 5/26/2012
SBR POKER TOURNEY2nd Place 5/16/2012
SBR POKER TOURNEY13th Place 5/31/2012
SBR POKER TOURNEY4th Place 5/17/2012
SBR POKER TOURNEY17th Place 5/31/2012
SBR POKER TOP 100
9th Place 11/1/2011
SBR POKER TOURNEY4th Place 5/17/2012
SBR POKER TOURNEY17th Place 5/31/2012
SBR POKER TOP 100
9th Place 11/1/2011
Took awhile but good read....
SBR POKER TOURNEY14th Place 5/29/2012