<TABLE class=tborder id=post4622410 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=thead style="BORDER-RIGHT: #fdde82 0px solid; BORDER-TOP: #fdde82 1px solid; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; BORDER-LEFT: #fdde82 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #fdde82 1px solid">
10-20-2007, 09:53 AM <!-- / status icon and date --></TD><TD class=thead style="BORDER-RIGHT: #fdde82 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #fdde82 1px solid; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; BORDER-LEFT: #fdde82 0px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #fdde82 1px solid" align=right> #13 </TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #fdde82 1px solid; BORDER-TOP: #fdde82 0px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #fdde82 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #fdde82 0px solid" width=175>wilheim<SCRIPT type=text/javascript> vbmenu_register("postmenu_4622410", true); </SCRIPT>
wilheim@therx.com or person19481950@yahoo.com
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Rx. dot com..
Posts: 44,863
</TD><TD class=alt1 id=td_post_4622410 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #fdde82 1px solid"><!-- icon and title -->
<HR style="COLOR: #fdde82" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->The ironic part of Sportsbetting.com's involvement is they were made sacraficial lambs by EOG when they were not at all part of the group of books that experienced the correleted parlay problem.
I am certain the management at Sportsbetting.com is not very pleased with what happened to their banner at EOG just so that site could appear to be making a statement that would impress poters and nothng else.
They never was a dispute lodged anywhere that I know of from any player at Sportsbetting.com involving the confiscating of funds for placing correleted parlays. Their only sin was to be listed amoung the long list of books owened in part by Janzette Enterprises (now called Jassy I guess)
Instead EOG burnt a bridge with an old and loyal sponser that has supported TheRx.com going as far back as I can remember and EOG from it's inception.
Personally I feel they are owed an apology by EOG's management.
I know this sounds like I am making this an issue about mismanagement by EOG but the truth is I am simply pointing out that sometimes things are not always what they appear to be. The management and employess at Sportsbetting.com were paying to advertise at EOG and conducting business as usual when suddenly they wee thrown uder the proverbial bus by EOG just so that site could say see we won't tolerate this kind of thing. I will bet anyone a dollar to a donut they would never have done the same thing with BetUS.
Sportsbetting.com were merely innocent victims of more of this ridiculous interforum one-upmanship that only hurts the forums and their sponsors but more importantly the players at Sportsbetting.com who one minute felt comfortable trusting their funds at that book and all of a sudden Sportsbetting.com becomes pesona non grata while a book like BetUS continues to be supported by that site.
Say what you want about the Rx.com but we absolutely refused to accept BetUS when they applied for sponsorship in 2006.
Getting back to Sportsbetting.com:
Sportsbetting.com along with BetUSA have the following criteria regarding correleted parlays:
Correlated parlay betting: The results of certain events can be considered to be correlated. For example, in college football betting on a heavy underdog (eg 35 point underdog) and the under in the game is statistically correlated. If players consistently bet correlated parlays then management reserves the right to regrade wagers. Wagers will be split so that half the stake will go on the pointspread and half on the under in the game. This rule applies from 19 October 2007. This will only apply to those regularly staking $50 or more on parlays and is intended only to limit professional bettors who consistently bet correlated parlays.
The goal here at The Rx.com is to see tihs criteria posted at Sportsbook.com as well as soon as possible.
In the meantime the 31 players effected by the previous ruling now have the opportunity to have their funds restored simply be contacting expidite@sportsbook.com and pleading their case.
I know I am going to get criticised for posting this and be accused of creating interforum drama myself (something I try to avoid whenever possible) but at this point what difference does it make. There is not much more negative things that can be said about me..
Regarding Sportsbook.com and charges that players cannot recover losses prior to Sept. 1st. That charge is actually meaningless because the correlated parlay is predominately a college football and to some extent college basketball phenomena. Pro football for example will never have a line such as the one qouted above where there is a 35 point underdog and baseball is also an entirely different animal when it comes to correlated parlays.
So basically except for a few college football games that were played in August any player who was penalised for playing correlated parlays now has recourse to get re-imbursed if they are one of the few (31 out of thousands) of Sportsbook.com players that had funds confiscated. Please remember many were warned beforehand.
Sure I know why have software that allows the parlays to be played in the first place, good question and now thanks to this incident one that has been resolved.
I have already been on the phone today at around 7:15AM RMT with Sportsbook.com regarding the single case I have in mediation that was submitted before the expidite@sportsbook.com re-course was created. I hope to have good news for that player later today.
Thanks, wil..
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________
Head Moderator
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
This post was just made at the TheRx.com and once again, wilheim is attacking EOG and yours truly for taking down a sports book that falls under the umbrella of the Sportsbook.com family...
wil,
I don't have the luxury to replying to you over there, so I will do so here...
First of all, you haven't a clue about what has been transpiring since we took down Sportsbetting.com, so let me fill you in...
Bill Dozer from SBR, as well as The General and Yours Truly have been in daily communications with Sportsbetting.com.
In fact, I also learned during this process that SBR Bill has some pending cases that need to be resolved with Sportsbetting.com and I am waiting for a very important question to be answered by them to decide whether or not we will even consider putting Sportsbetting.com back on EOG...
1-Does Sportsbetting.com pay Sportsbook.com a nominal amount for software or does Sportsbetting.com pay Sportsbook.com a % of players losses?
Without knowing the answer , the SAFE course of action after <b>talking with and working with SBR thoroughly</b> was and still is to take down Sportsbetting.com until this question and other pending cases we weren't aware of are resolved...
Now as far as Sportsbook.com is concerned, our opinion hasn't wavered...
Posters all over the Internet see you, Rick and TheRx trying to spin this as a forum drama...
EOG NEVER mentioned anything about your fledgling place until you opened up your desperate attack...
Enough said...
THE SHRINK
wilheim@therx.com or person19481950@yahoo.com
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Rx. dot com..
Posts: 44,863
</TD><TD class=alt1 id=td_post_4622410 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #fdde82 1px solid"><!-- icon and title -->
<HR style="COLOR: #fdde82" SIZE=1><!-- / icon and title --><!-- message -->The ironic part of Sportsbetting.com's involvement is they were made sacraficial lambs by EOG when they were not at all part of the group of books that experienced the correleted parlay problem.
I am certain the management at Sportsbetting.com is not very pleased with what happened to their banner at EOG just so that site could appear to be making a statement that would impress poters and nothng else.
They never was a dispute lodged anywhere that I know of from any player at Sportsbetting.com involving the confiscating of funds for placing correleted parlays. Their only sin was to be listed amoung the long list of books owened in part by Janzette Enterprises (now called Jassy I guess)
Instead EOG burnt a bridge with an old and loyal sponser that has supported TheRx.com going as far back as I can remember and EOG from it's inception.
Personally I feel they are owed an apology by EOG's management.
I know this sounds like I am making this an issue about mismanagement by EOG but the truth is I am simply pointing out that sometimes things are not always what they appear to be. The management and employess at Sportsbetting.com were paying to advertise at EOG and conducting business as usual when suddenly they wee thrown uder the proverbial bus by EOG just so that site could say see we won't tolerate this kind of thing. I will bet anyone a dollar to a donut they would never have done the same thing with BetUS.
Sportsbetting.com were merely innocent victims of more of this ridiculous interforum one-upmanship that only hurts the forums and their sponsors but more importantly the players at Sportsbetting.com who one minute felt comfortable trusting their funds at that book and all of a sudden Sportsbetting.com becomes pesona non grata while a book like BetUS continues to be supported by that site.
Say what you want about the Rx.com but we absolutely refused to accept BetUS when they applied for sponsorship in 2006.
Getting back to Sportsbetting.com:
Sportsbetting.com along with BetUSA have the following criteria regarding correleted parlays:
Correlated parlay betting: The results of certain events can be considered to be correlated. For example, in college football betting on a heavy underdog (eg 35 point underdog) and the under in the game is statistically correlated. If players consistently bet correlated parlays then management reserves the right to regrade wagers. Wagers will be split so that half the stake will go on the pointspread and half on the under in the game. This rule applies from 19 October 2007. This will only apply to those regularly staking $50 or more on parlays and is intended only to limit professional bettors who consistently bet correlated parlays.
The goal here at The Rx.com is to see tihs criteria posted at Sportsbook.com as well as soon as possible.
In the meantime the 31 players effected by the previous ruling now have the opportunity to have their funds restored simply be contacting expidite@sportsbook.com and pleading their case.
I know I am going to get criticised for posting this and be accused of creating interforum drama myself (something I try to avoid whenever possible) but at this point what difference does it make. There is not much more negative things that can be said about me..
Regarding Sportsbook.com and charges that players cannot recover losses prior to Sept. 1st. That charge is actually meaningless because the correlated parlay is predominately a college football and to some extent college basketball phenomena. Pro football for example will never have a line such as the one qouted above where there is a 35 point underdog and baseball is also an entirely different animal when it comes to correlated parlays.
So basically except for a few college football games that were played in August any player who was penalised for playing correlated parlays now has recourse to get re-imbursed if they are one of the few (31 out of thousands) of Sportsbook.com players that had funds confiscated. Please remember many were warned beforehand.
Sure I know why have software that allows the parlays to be played in the first place, good question and now thanks to this incident one that has been resolved.
I have already been on the phone today at around 7:15AM RMT with Sportsbook.com regarding the single case I have in mediation that was submitted before the expidite@sportsbook.com re-course was created. I hope to have good news for that player later today.
Thanks, wil..
<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->__________________
Head Moderator
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
This post was just made at the TheRx.com and once again, wilheim is attacking EOG and yours truly for taking down a sports book that falls under the umbrella of the Sportsbook.com family...
wil,
I don't have the luxury to replying to you over there, so I will do so here...
First of all, you haven't a clue about what has been transpiring since we took down Sportsbetting.com, so let me fill you in...
Bill Dozer from SBR, as well as The General and Yours Truly have been in daily communications with Sportsbetting.com.
In fact, I also learned during this process that SBR Bill has some pending cases that need to be resolved with Sportsbetting.com and I am waiting for a very important question to be answered by them to decide whether or not we will even consider putting Sportsbetting.com back on EOG...
1-Does Sportsbetting.com pay Sportsbook.com a nominal amount for software or does Sportsbetting.com pay Sportsbook.com a % of players losses?
Without knowing the answer , the SAFE course of action after <b>talking with and working with SBR thoroughly</b> was and still is to take down Sportsbetting.com until this question and other pending cases we weren't aware of are resolved...
Now as far as Sportsbook.com is concerned, our opinion hasn't wavered...
Posters all over the Internet see you, Rick and TheRx trying to spin this as a forum drama...
EOG NEVER mentioned anything about your fledgling place until you opened up your desperate attack...
Enough said...
THE SHRINK