[Multiply]

I had a complaint about a book that tried to confiscate my funds. I tried to work it out by talking to the rep from the book but he became increasingly irrational and obnoxious, so I finally contacted SBR for help.

Josh acted as go-between, arbitrator, calming influence - and just this morning my funds have been returned to me.

I'm not sure if I should name the book. It's a B- book. I don't know how much detail to get into.

My main purpose is to thank SBR and Josh.

If there is anything to be learned it is for females to be careful. This all started because I am female. They took my deposit and booked all my bets without a problem, but when the time came that I requested a withdrawal and they saw a female name and I had won money, that's when they decided I must be a "beard."

There was no actual evidence of that. There were no IP address issues, no accusations of past posting, playing steam, using multiple accounts. The only issue was a female name. There was no rule they were pointing to that had been broken.

Maybe it makes sense for females to send a note at the time of deposits saying, "I want to make sure you know I am female. I do sometimes win my bets. Please confirm you really want this deposit and my bets. I don't mind at all if you say no." The note could mention the usual dollar amount of bets I place.


But thanks once again to Josh and SBR.

[Bill Dozer]

Nice work Josh. Sometimes an unbiased person can cut the fat away, present the facts, and get things moving.

Multiply brings up a valid concern for female bettors. The high percentage of female account holders that are actually a second account for a male bettor make things harder for legitmate female players. Books are always going to take a harder look at a winning female account.

One tip is not to test a book that doesn't have clear rules on multiple account per household. SIA was a good example before, Justin7 helped them rewrite theirs. They didn't prohibit multiple accounts but there is a good chance Multiply would never have made it out.

[bigboydan]

I'm glad to hear Lakerfan resolved your dispute Multiply.

As wrong as it is for offshore books to naturally assuming a women player is automatically a beard, it's never going to in a books eyes. The one case that stands out the most to me on this type of situation was the BetEd dispute back on 11/1/07.

[Sapri]

See how fast you get your money when you FINALLY send the photo ID that was asked for. Considering that you knew nothing about the account or any wagers that were placed into the account, yes we had some questions. Irrational and obnoxious?????? It was as easy as that and nobody should be taken credit here....just send what we ask for plain and simple. Once that was done you had your money in minutes. You chose to drag it out for a couple months, not us. Get your facts straight.

[Stumpage]

Can't speak to the dispute itself, but I can only agree that Josh is tremendous when it comes to providing aid. Helped me out last year in a dispute that dragged on for many weeks and had thousands of dollars in limbo for me. All for a total stranger as well. Makes me just shake my head when posters bitch and complain about this site, a free site at that.....

[CrazyLou]

Originally Posted by Sapri

See how fast you get your money when you FINALLY send the photo ID that was asked for. Considering that you knew nothing about the account or any wagers that were placed into the account, yes we had some questions.

Wow. If that's true, this guy has a point.

Let me guess this book was Youwager or Betpop...

[Multiply]

Sapri sounds like he could be the person I spoke to at the book in question. The response is irrational and misleading. It willfully disregards or sidesteps every answer he has been given that is inconvenient to the conclusion he was determined to reach.

It reminds me very much of why I felt it necessary to stop speaking to him and ask SBR for help. Once again, I'm glad SBR is here.

[Multiply]

Originally Posted by crazyl

Let me guess this book was Youwager or Betpop...

I was convinced by someone I respect not to name the book. The full reasons were very interesting and insightful but would also take a lot of typing and I have reached my limit for forum participation for now.

I'm here now because I felt it was right to publicly thank Josh for his help and maybe female bettors could get something from it.

I know many people who bet offshore. Several people from this forum have been to my house. Most of them were very angry about this and wanted to start a campaign all over the forums to discredit the book.

I asked them not to while the complaint was pending. I still feel that is right.

Good luck with your bets everyone!

[frostno98]

I can guarantee you it's from the first fidelity family. Recognize that sapri name from an e-mail I got, I think. They're a good book, surprised you had problems with your payout

[CrazyLou]

Let's be honest this Multiply person is clearly a dude. I can almost picture what happened.

Female goes to request cashout. They take a cursory look at account activity. They ask for ID. She, (not having ever legitimately bet sports in her life and doing this for a friend), FLIPS, "oh my god. WHY DO YOU NEED MY ID. I PAID YOU. WHY DO YOU NEED MY ID, I WANT MY MONEY, HELLO I WANT MY MONEY RIGHT NOW, WHY DO YOU NEED MY F*CKING ID, I WANT MY MONEY!!!"

"mam, what's the last wager you made...?"

"why does that matter, why are you questioning me, why are you calling me mam, WHY DO YOU NEED MY ID I WANT MY F*CKING MONEY!!!"



silly beard

[frostno98]

Originally Posted by crazyl

Let's be honest this Multiply person is clearly a dude. I can almost picture what happened.

Female goes to request cashout. They take a cursory look at account activity. They ask for ID. She, (not having ever legitimately bet sports in her life and doing this for a friend), FLIPS, "oh my god. WHY DO YOU NEED MY ID. I PAID YOU. WHY DO YOU NEED MY ID, I WANT MY MONEY, HELLO I WANT MY MONEY RIGHT NOW, WHY DO YOU NEED MY F*CKING ID, I WANT MY MONEY!!!"

"mam, what's the last wager you made...?"

"why does that matter, why are you questioning me, why are you calling me mam, WHY DO YOU NEED MY ID I WANT MY F*CKING MONEY!!!"



silly beard

What your saying is more likely if it's a trend of bets, but it is possible for a female to drop large on a square public play like a super bowl game or something. Look at J LO, she drop a couple million on the buccaneers in the super bowl against the raiders.

[betbetter]

Originally Posted by Bill Dozer

One tip is not to test a book that doesn't have clear rules on multiple account per household. SIA was a good example before, Justin7 helped them rewrite theirs. They didn't prohibit multiple accounts but there is a good chance Multiply would never have made it out.

" Any bets placed in an attempt in any way to defraud Sports Interaction or to violate Sports Interaction's betting rules or limits shall be voided and the balances in such accounts held by Sports Interaction. "

I believe that's been there for years?

Pretty clear to me, unless you have 4-5 accts making max bets on line moves and need Justin's help when you get booted.

[Thremp]

Originally Posted by betbetter

Pretty clear to me, unless you have 4-5 accts making max bets on line moves and need Justin's help when you get booted.

And how would they tell they're "your" accounts as opposed to the hundreds of other people doing this as well?

[The HG]

I don't want to comment on this case, but I highly doubt the person who wrote the initial post in this thread is a female.

[CrazyLou]

Originally Posted by The HG

I don't want to comment on this case, but I highly doubt the person who wrote the initial post in this thread is a female.

I'm happy that you're capable of adding 2+2.

Can you divide too..?

[Bill Dozer]

Originally Posted by betbetter

" Any bets placed in an attempt in any way to defraud Sports Interaction or to violate Sports Interaction's betting rules or limits shall be voided and the balances in such accounts held by Sports Interaction. "

I believe that's been there for years?

Pretty clear to me, unless you have 4-5 accts making max bets on line moves and need Justin's help when you get booted.

I would have to disagree that the rule is clear or even says anything at all. They could have said "This rule says you will not break our other rules and if you do the account balance will be held."

However, SIA now has rules regarding more than one account per household/PC. Previously they did not publicly prohibit multiple accounts from the same home but took actions against account holders.

[betbetter]

Originally Posted by Thremp

And how would they tell they're "your" accounts as opposed to the hundreds of other people doing this as well?

Dust for fingerprints.

[betbetter]

Originally Posted by Bill Dozer

I would have to disagree that the rule is clear or even says anything at all. They could have said "This rule says you will not break our other rules and if you do the account balance will be held."

However, SIA now has rules regarding more than one account per household/PC. Previously they did not publicly prohibit multiple accounts from the same home but took actions against account holders.

Bill,

Keyword in the original rule is "limits". C'mon...whats the cliche? "Hand in the candy jar"........

[Bill Dozer]

Originally Posted by betbetter

Bill,

Keyword in the original rule is "limits". C'mon...whats the cliche? "Hand in the candy jar"........

That is similar to what SIA said when they kept the winnings. Then... they added the rules SBR suggested.

[betbetter]

Originally Posted by Bill Dozer

That is similar to what SIA said when they kept the winnings. Then... they added the rules SBR suggested.

Ok, I guess we are splitting hairs then.

If I read the original rule regarding circumventing limits, then operated a half dozen accts from the same environment, making all max bets on all the same moves, can I claim ignorance with a straight face

I don't buy it, sorry.

Rec books have limits for a reason. I'd also hazard a guess that the "A" pro books here don't tolerate the same action all the time.

[Bill Dozer]

Originally Posted by betbetter

Ok, I guess we are splitting hairs then.

If I read the original rule regarding circumventing limits, then operated a half dozen accts from the same environment, making all max bets on all the same moves, can I claim ignorance with a straight face

I don't buy it, sorry.

Rec books have limits for a reason. I'd also hazard a guess that the "A" pro books here don't tolerate the same action all the time.

Betbetter,
I agree but if the cases were like that SBR could cut its staff in half. SIA decides whether to confiscate based on its perception of a player's intent. The new rules help a lot but they came at the cost of some players. SIA would likely be upgraded if they took responsibility for their part in those disputes.

[betbetter]

Originally Posted by Bill Dozer

Betbetter,
I agree but if the cases were like that SBR could cut its staff in half. SIA decides whether to confiscate based on its perception of a player's intent. The new rules help a lot but they came at the cost of some players. SIA would likely be upgraded if they took responsibility for their part in those disputes.

Perception in this industry is easily backed up by fact.
For every 1 wayward soul that inadvertently gets screwed over there is 9 that knew exactly what they were doing and got burned. And another 10 that get away with it.
I'll leave it there but if you try to get around a books limits and you get nabbed, you have no recourse.
I would'nt know, but I don't think any of your "D" books would really be too forthcoming to give in to mini-syndicate scammers so they could then become "C" books.

[JoshW]

Multiply, I am glad this situation worked out for you. Let us know if you need assistance in the future.

lakerfan / josh