This shit can't go on as it stands now. Every week there are threads about "I got raped at XYZ sports book" and half the time it's the player's fault. I'm sure everyone is tired of reading these threads, and (whichever side is right) they can do much harm to the trust in the entire industry. An independent board (made up of reps from both sides) will instill trust in this industry, so that players KNOW they will get a fair shake in a dispute, rather than a "go screw yourself" that they get from many places now. And any book agreeing to such an arrangement will have the added benefit of their (potential) customers knowing they won't get the shaft.
I`m not so sure you`d need guys with 'that' much experience as
much as you`d need guys who would be logical and fair...Look at most jury`s (okay thats a bad example)
Most cases are pretty obvious once the facts are out there...
My list presided by Ken ;
Joey C
Docdekay
Maxx
Wilheim
G Money
Krackman
DickyW
The one big IF is having this panel or any panel available on short notice...
I think any books that agreed 100% to this would only add to their credibilty.....
much as you`d need guys who would be logical and fair...Look at most jury`s (okay thats a bad example)
Most cases are pretty obvious once the facts are out there...
My list presided by Ken ;
Joey C
Docdekay
Maxx
Wilheim
G Money
Krackman
DickyW
The one big IF is having this panel or any panel available on short notice...
I think any books that agreed 100% to this would only add to their credibilty.....
Hache is absolutely correct - the books with these kind of problems simply don't give a shit as to our opinions - they're only worried about the fatted calves who don't hang out in these forums and who have no idea they have any recourse - and these calves are the kind that probably lose a lot and so will NOT have a bad line bet revoked on them, to avoid losing them to someplace else.
I of course like the idea but where would be the incentive for these books to agree to such a loss of power from their little fiefdoms? Since it's acknowledged that the big majority of online players don't use these forums, and don't respond to boycott threats, what in heck do they have to gain from this? They ALREADY don't care what is said about them, the books that are the problem (not the Canbets and the like) - so unless there is some other major benefit to them for this, I think a Rip Van Winkle nap may be the time required to see them agree to any policing of their decisions.
I of course like the idea but where would be the incentive for these books to agree to such a loss of power from their little fiefdoms? Since it's acknowledged that the big majority of online players don't use these forums, and don't respond to boycott threats, what in heck do they have to gain from this? They ALREADY don't care what is said about them, the books that are the problem (not the Canbets and the like) - so unless there is some other major benefit to them for this, I think a Rip Van Winkle nap may be the time required to see them agree to any policing of their decisions.
Because we accept ad revenue from sports books, I would exclude myself from being on any panel...
The irony though is that without gamblers, I have no website, so my bias lies more in favor of the gambler, if anywhere, lol...
Especially, since I am one at heart....
However, I would love to supervise and direct such a group because I have ben involved in many cases off of these forums and I know how to get quick results, whenever possible...
THE SHRINK
The irony though is that without gamblers, I have no website, so my bias lies more in favor of the gambler, if anywhere, lol...
Especially, since I am one at heart....
However, I would love to supervise and direct such a group because I have ben involved in many cases off of these forums and I know how to get quick results, whenever possible...
THE SHRINK
i honestly dont understand if there is even a NEED for such a panel.
to the best of my knowelege NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON that we have attempted to help, has ever said they felt we didnt try hard enough because the book in question was an advertiser.
as far as i know, its always people who have never even asked for help that are saying we are biased.
to the best of my knowelege NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON that we have attempted to help, has ever said they felt we didnt try hard enough because the book in question was an advertiser.
as far as i know, its always people who have never even asked for help that are saying we are biased.
Interesting - I didn't realize this was a topic about only those books advertising at the Rx, so my prior comments were aimed at a generic solution for all books. So in that sense I'm not referring to the Rx efforts per se - from what I've gathered, a lot is done on behalf of the players. But perhaps the point here is a binding decision made by a panel, rather than the relatively informal efforts on the part of the Rx, to settle these matters. An extra confidence in those books advertising here and agreeing to those terms might mean more people willing to sign up, as long as they knew that EVEN IF THE BOOK DID NOT AGREE on a particular decision, they would abide by it, which I don't think is the case now.
I think The Rx is getting some unjust criticism with this topic. I would like to see examples where there are player disputes and the player has not been assisted by The Rx because the issue involved an advertiser.
This is all a bunch of poppycock.
If there are players out there with examples of why you felt betrayed by the Rx, please post the situation.
This is all a bunch of poppycock.
If there are players out there with examples of why you felt betrayed by the Rx, please post the situation.
Most discrepencies that are brought to the attention of The Rx and its readers are settled properly anyway...However it could enhance confidence and create goodwill to all parties involved , especially the player who in most cases is sending CASH to a third world country..
The Books IMO have everything to gain by agreeing to what will now be known as "The Rx Players Act" and the players who already trust they`re going to be paid and be treated fairly will now have an extra sense of this!
ITS WIN/WIN!
The Books IMO have everything to gain by agreeing to what will now be known as "The Rx Players Act" and the players who already trust they`re going to be paid and be treated fairly will now have an extra sense of this!
ITS WIN/WIN!
General, I don`t think anyone is saying the Rx Mods are not doing the good work of the people here..In fact I don`t see any reason why moderators can`t be on this panel ( certainly you )...But if the players (readers) felt more secure with a panel of their 'equals' maybe it would be the way to go...
My point is to try to push "The Rx Players Act " to the Books.
[This message was edited by Journeyman on June 29, 2003 at 12:10 PM.]
My point is to try to push "The Rx Players Act " to the Books.
[This message was edited by Journeyman on June 29, 2003 at 12:10 PM.]
Journeyman, I actually think that your idea is solid but to exclude mods is sort of a slap in the face. I think you know very well that I have the integrity to work on these issues and care less who is involved. I think you read yesterday where i tried to mediate a case against one of my top rated sportsbooks. I do not play favs in these situations. I like you, but if you are wrong IMO, then im going to tell you. I work for Ken, but if he is wrong IMO, then i am going to tell him. I love my mother, but if she is wrong IMO, then i will tell her so.
General, I know you...You or any other moderator IMO should or could be on the panel...And i will aslo tell you when your wrong, as you know,lol.
I have full confidence that you, RPM, Uncle and Patrick ...I`m not sure if Dante has been involved in disputes...But Dante is prety good at nabbing IP`s....
I have full confidence that you, RPM, Uncle and Patrick ...I`m not sure if Dante has been involved in disputes...But Dante is prety good at nabbing IP`s....
We would be interested in this idea, but we would want to approve the people on the "panel" first. I, personally, would love to be on the panel so as to offer a sportsbooks point of view.
Also, I would say that any poster that has shown a vendetta towards any book or poster should not be allowed to be on the panel if the book/poster in question is involved in the dispute.
Jake
Also, I would say that any poster that has shown a vendetta towards any book or poster should not be allowed to be on the panel if the book/poster in question is involved in the dispute.
Jake
