BETCBS/CASABLANCA STEALING Thousands of dollars AFTER AN EVENT HAS HAPPENED/POST HERE IF YOU HAVE TROUBLE.

areeff · Jun 23, 2003

Here i am ... waiting for late movement to see how a lines are going to go checking betbrain and some others on my wimbledone picks and i notice betcbs at +605 on NADAL over ANCIC.

Now this line wasn't too off. I found +500 and +550 at several places but +605 with the 5% if i win or i lose seems great. There's no question this is just a high price as this dog varied from +300 to +605 just as hewitt varied from +600 to +1100 with steps all the way in the middle.

The match is played and nadal wins.. I had a dime on it... 6050 win right? ... Yup it's graded as a win. Then 2 hours later they deduct all but 1500 and they inform me after my winner won that it was a BAD LINE.

I said i only bet at your book because it was slightly better than other books. I would've takent he next best +550 but the +605 was nice. I even offer to take the graded bet at +550 if they truely felt that was a bad line and they said no and they f'ed me.

He said on the phone that the "kid moved the line the wrong way" but this was clearly not an erroneous line. He said it was supposed to be +300/-500 then and i said well then why dont' you grade them at +500 then. He refused.

He told me that about 10-20 other people bet on this line as well and thats why he's pissed off. Please post here if you got screwed.

Shrink says they were good here

http://therxforum.com/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=100090022&f=988094022&m=15210221

He says "I honored the wager for $500 at the correct line.[+300] I did not have to do this"

Slash · Jun 23, 2003

20 people betting to win $6,050 equals around $120,000

D2bets · Jun 23, 2003

That is totally unacceptable. I would suggest reporting this to www.sportsbookreview.com. They may already be on their black list but it doesn't hurt to add pressure. Sometimes they are able to deal with the book to settle the matter in your favor. Good luck. You've been screwed. Thanks for informing us, I will be sure to avoid that book.

altice · Jun 23, 2003

This is really weak in my opinion regarding Casablanca. Stories like these make me want to find a local sometimes.

assassin · Jun 23, 2003

I guess I'm missing the point why the graded it for only $500 wager. If the line was wrong, but they want to make good on it, they should at least pay you on your 1M wager at +300. I could see their point more if you had bet on the favorite, but in this case you were still going with a longshot.

I doubt they would have refunded if you lost, but I did have a book do that once (their point was win or lose all were refunded).

I personally have never had a problem with them. But that is no solace to you or your situation.

Did you talk with Dave?

Slash · Jun 23, 2003

As I recall it, CBS don't change lines overnight, so they probably got hit on +605 by all the players

cecil+ · Jun 23, 2003

This doesn't surprise me, coming from that group...

D2bets · Jun 23, 2003

assassin, sounds to me like they did that because they were acting like they were doing him a favor by crediting anything. Unless this gets resolved 100% and quickly, I would RUN, not walk, from this book immediately. Unless there is some strange unknown fact here, this is totally beyond the pale behavior by Casablanca. +605 when the range elsewhere is +300 to +550 is not even close to being a bad line, it's not even debatable.

A cynic would figure they were probably heavy on the favorite and wanted a little action on the dog. Well, they got heavy action before they were able to move it. Afetr the match, they realized they were on the hook for like 100K and figured the hassle was worth 100K and they would act like they were doing the player a favor by giving them anything. They probably hoped players would figure they were getting a good deal and not complain. Kudos to 'areef' for not buying the BS. Take CBS to task for this unnaceptable garbage.

assassin · Jun 23, 2003

Thqanks D2.
You learn something new everyday.
Heck, I never even heard of these players.

Slash · Jun 23, 2003

Most probably haven't. I would only use such lines for scalping....

assassin · Jun 23, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Slash:
Most probably haven't. I would only use such lines for scalping....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aaaahhh, now I get it. So the win was actually a loss to his portfolio.

Slash · Jun 23, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by assassin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Slash:
Most probably haven't. I would only use such lines for scalping....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aaaahhh, now I get it. So the win was actually a loss to his portfolio.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If he scalped, yes.

Halifax · Jun 23, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by assassin:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Slash:
Most probably haven't. I would only use such lines for scalping....<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aaaahhh, now I get it. So the win was actually a loss to his portfolio.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

assassin / Slash:

Exactly ... 98% chance that this is what happened ... makes it even that much more painful.

Buzzsaw · Jun 23, 2003

I would like to hear Judge's or some other BM's opinion. I think it's safe to assume that the line was .80 off.

The fact that it was cancelled after the event of course looks bad for CBS. But maybe we should try to first get a consensus on whether .80 is far enough off on a 550 line to warrant canceling.

Slash · Jun 23, 2003

Which book does Judge work for (/own)?

areeff · Jun 23, 2003

Yesterday i bet on

childs
black
sostur
baccanelo and several others.

Have you heard of them?

Exactly.. Betting nonames you can find great value.

Dave won't talk to me on the phone but he gave me his underling who seemed to be somewhat patient but a patient "FU"

I emailed sportsbook review and await what they say.

If it means anything i bet on this about 15-20 minutes before the match started and late money moves alot of lines. Its only reasonable to assume that is the right line.

D2bets · Jun 23, 2003

First of all, it looks like it was 55 cents (+550 to +605). But in any case, 80 cents off +605 is nowhere near enough to warrant cancelling. Come on! For NBA games I recall routinely seeing, for example, Pinnacle beating the next best by 200-300 points. Others might have +550 and Pinnacle could have +750. Not a bad line. If +605 compared to +550 was bad then +500 was bad in the other direction, right? Just think of the fact that others ranged all the way from +300 to +550. Does that make +550 bad? And then maybe +500 is bad because some had +300. Ridiculous. Is this some sort of rule that whoever has the high and low line on an event is 'bad'. Absurd. I wouldn't consider this anywhere near a bad line until AT LEAST +800. And even at that I'd consider it shady to cancel.

This doesn't look bad to CBS, this IS bad. No ifs and or buts.

areeff · Jun 23, 2003

oh let me further point out that betbrain actually had a couple of those sorry books like futurebet, expekt, victorchandler(NON US) with this 7.0 and 7.5 which is the same or better but those books are shady and or NON-US

Buzzsaw · Jun 23, 2003

I think it borders on a close call as to if its too far off to justify cancelling. CBS is going to take a beating here no matter what. The line is 15% off plus or minus. This is probably too close to get a consesnus. If a football team is -20, is -23 a bad line?

D2bets · Jun 23, 2003

Buzzsaw, you gotta be kidding. First of all, +550 to +605 is 10%. That's like +100 as opposed to -110. Peanuts.

You cannot compare this this to a % difference in spread. Apples and oranges. Like he said, he saw +300 to +550 elsewhere. That's what, 80%? So I guess that would be +30 vs. +55?

This is NOT borderline. Even if it was borderline, the mere fact that it is borderline means that it should not be cancelled. Once the books have the right to cancel something like this that someone might call borderline, we are all screwed. We have no certainty.

The standard to cancel a ML should be a clearly erroneous standard, such that when you look at it a reasonably informed bettor would or should know it was wrong. This was simply a slightly shaded line on aan event with a large range.

Let's saw the +605 wasn't there and the next highest was +550 and then +500. I guess the +550 is then a cancellable bad line, right? And then let's say the next best after +500 was +450...then +500 is bad. Keep doing this and we all end up with one lousy line.