[STEAMA]

I Deposited there before seeing all there negative reviews. I requested a payout i know some people that have had a problem with them has anyone had good reviews on there payouts lately?

[RonPaul2008]

WagerWeb....thats a blast from the past. I remember when they had the free half point....was a good book at the time.

[nikosgr]

Be carefull with the bonuses there.
http://www.greenbook.gr/index2.php?d...171&sitelang=2

[robmpink]

Just to clarify are you saying you just read negative reviews, but know some people (personally) who had trouble w/ payouts? Or you know some people (people you don't know and the ones who you read about here) who had trouble w/ payouts?

If you deposited, met your rollover, you shouldn't have a problem.

Go to different forums and they are graded A. Would that make you feel better?

[trixtrix]

i have a payout problem, wagerweb danny personally promised 4k partial payment, which was never sent in 3months, i have email documented proof of this. does that qualify as a legit problem?


i'd be highly wary of any payout promises offered by wagerweb, considering they have failed on their own word

[robmpink]

Bud, I guess you will know in a few days. Move on if you are such a nervous wreck over this.

With the exception of a few issues with some advantage or scamming players, I haven't read posts about people not being paid. If there was, it would be posted all over here the second sbr caught wind. They would come up with a snappy title, "Wagerweb Tangles Player in Web of Deception" on the front page in BOLD fonts.

[Raven66]

Wagerweb is a D...what did you expect?

[eyeball]

I don't think they are as bad as SBR makes them out to be. There has been some issueswith some players here at SBR taking shots at them. I know other players that have had zero issues with getting paid.Not everything you read here is the truth, as far as WWEb is concerned.

I have used them a little and have had no problems

[frankthetank]

I have heard both ends of the spectrum about WW. ABout how they are tighta$$es and dont like to pay winners. But I also have heard that they pay easy and are very fair. The truth is probably somewhere right in the middle..

[trixtrix]

I don't think they are as bad as SBR makes them out to be. There has been some issueswith some players here at SBR taking shots at them. I know other players that have had zero issues with getting paid.Not everything you read here is the truth, as far as WWEb is concerned.

I have used them a little and have had no problems

lmao, or it could be that you are a shill for them, and try to blame players when wagerweb is clearly at fault.

when in doubt which of those choices are correct, i suggest you resort to baye's theorem

[Eagle1958]

Whenever anyone of us who likes Wagerweb comes to their defense, we are immediately labeled a shill by TrixTrix. Must be one of the few words he/she knows.

[trixtrix]

Whenever anyone of us who likes Wagerweb comes to their defense, we are immediately labeled a shill by TrixTrix. Must be one of the few words he/she knows.

lol, nice try sir, yea it's only me labeling you a shill according to this thread right? or maybe it's ONLY you who voted against you being a shill Is Eagle1958 a Wagerweb shill? ... jolly good tomfollery

by the way, there's 3 defenders of wagerweb (no one else): you (shill), eyeball (shill), rob (not so sure) what's hilarious is you think people can't see through your pathetic attempts.

notice also you're not addressing the issue anymore, which is dan from wagerweb promised a partial payment of 4k+ and DID NOT DELIVER as he promised, so go back your millionare philly shilling business lolol

[Mudcat]

I have personally known players that had big problems with payouts from Wagerweb (and also other scammish problems). But they don't scam absolutely everybody. It's a flip-a-coin type of proposition.

[robmpink]

lol, nice try sir, yea it's only me labeling you a shill according to this thread right? or maybe it's ONLY you who voted against you being a shill Is Eagle1958 a Wagerweb shill? ... jolly good tomfollery

by the way, there's 3 defenders of wagerweb (no one else): you (shill), eyeball (shill), rob (not so sure) what's hilarious is you think people can't see through your pathetic attempts.

notice also you're not addressing the issue anymore, which is dan from wagerweb promised a partial payment of 4k+ and DID NOT DELIVER as he promised, so go back your millionare philly shilling business lolol

Trix, c'mon, that survey was just silly and was about you blowing some steam off. Who really cares if he voted for himself? I may have read the post he made or whoever made, but can't remember it. I maybe even made a reply in there.

Even you know there are a lot of happy players there who don't have any problems. You bring up that only 3 people stick up for them here. It could be, which the other guy mentioned, it isn't worth it for others to chime in because you will call them a shill. Some people are sensative and don't even want to get caught up in this.

Lets say I never gambled and was paid to examine data in this forum to see who I thought are Wagerweb "shills" I sure as heck wouldn't put eyeball in there. This Eages guy seems passionate about the book like I get at times when he gives experiences, then get called "shill". You seem like a smart guy, but anyone who says something positive must be getting something out of it, right? Wrong.

You have your situation and this is how your dealing with it, warnings etc. Fair enough. I would do the same thing most likely. I will venture to say though, you most likely had WW in your sights when you noticed or were told the software allowed pseudo cor parlays and tried to use it as an advantage. This sounds queer, but maybe you could have asked if they are aware of this and if it was fine if you played them in the degree you did. Probably when you were playing with them, they were already considered risky by sbr, so why take the chance?

[tomcowley]

Even you know there are a lot of happy players there

There are still happy players at Cascade.

[robmpink]

There are still happy players at Cascade.

Bad analogy. Geez, weren't they highly regarded by sbr? Hmmm.

[trixtrix]

Trix, c'mon, that survey was just silly and was about you blowing some steam off. Who really cares if he voted for himself? I may have read the post he made or whoever made, but can't remember it. I maybe even made a reply in there.

Even you know there are a lot of happy players there who don't have any problems. You bring up that only 3 people stick up for them here. It could be, which the other guy mentioned, it isn't worth it for others to chime in because you will call them a shill. Some people are sensative and don't even want to get caught up in this.

Lets say I never gambled and was paid to examine data in this forum to see who I thought are Wagerweb "shills" I sure as heck wouldn't put eyeball in there. This Eages guy seems passionate about the book like I get at times when he gives experiences, then get called "shill". You seem like a smart guy, but anyone who says something positive must be getting something out of it, right? Wrong.

You have your situation and this is how your dealing with it, warnings etc. Fair enough. I would do the same thing most likely. I will venture to say though, you most likely had WW in your sights when you noticed or were told the software allowed pseudo cor parlays and tried to use it as an advantage. This sounds queer, but maybe you could have asked if they are aware of this and if it was fine if you played them in the degree you did. Probably when you were playing with them, they were already considered risky by sbr, so why take the chance?

uh, i did not make up the survey, J7 did, or are you going to wagerweb route and calling me the same as J7. if it was only me blowing off steam, then how come it was 7-1 at the conclusion? i certainly cannot vote seven times, but i know eagle the millionaire can vote at least once lol

when i played my parlays, other people played those same parlays and was paid out. which is a cardinal sin when establishing a rule, that's it must be reasonable and fair. a definition of a unreasonable rule is if you put your website that if you don't log in to your acct 3 days out of the week, your balance were taken. that's a UNREASONABLE rule.

an UNFAIR rule is when they are not uniformly applied towards all bettors, you cannot use a parlay system that will TAKE money from losers but NOT pay winners. actually WAGERWEB's correlated parlay rule is both UNREASONABLE and UNFAIR, UNREASONABLE in that they did not define out the % of correlation so this rule can be applicable across ALL same game bets. UNFAIR b/c players have played them in the past and lost, which was fine, but confiscation comes when a player plays them and WINS.

the irony is that this is old story that most people know, the new wagerweb supporters never addressed is the fact that how can you ever trust wagerweb to payout, when they BREAK PAYOUT PROMISES. Wagerweb dan promised me a partial payment of 4k+ over 3 months ago and it never arrived. I have entire documentation on this matter so why do you think if wagerweb is trying to be a decent company at all, and have so much cashflow that they can pay everyone, default on a "small" debt of 4k+ that wagerweb dan PERSONALLY PROMISED me?