Gentlemen I need your opinion in this matter regarding betbg

[lander]

Pete,
The play circumvented the rules. Let's drop the theoretically bs and ask ourselves this - "it is just a coincidence that the player jumped through hoops to circumvent limits instead of simply calling"?

If you think that this is a probable scenario for somebody that has a history of cheating then so be it - reward a scammer.

On the other hand, if you feel that this player with a history of cheating is most likely pulling another fast one to circulvent the rules then so be it - protect people from scammers.

I will take the probable choice -- #2.

And for the people going on and on about bugs ... what is so hard to understand that errors in software happen? They happen in the vast majority of applications -- they are not planned, so get of your high horses and join the rest of us back here in reality.

 

[TheGeneral+]

lander, you are a BG fan and I like them, but the difference here is you cannot separate friendship from business. BG is wrong. PERIOD!

 

[lander]

My reasons have been clearly outlined, and furthermore I have a strong history of being anti-scammer.

If you think that alterior motives are behind my opinion then you simply do not know what I stand for Pete.

It's one thing to read between the lines, but it's another to write your own conclusions there.

 

[ChuckSims]

If the ticket is legit, I can no longer support majbrit.

 

[TheGeneral+]

Stand for what you like lander, but when you are backing a book that awaited a final result on a 10k soccer bet to decide what to do, then you should re-think your stance IMO.

 

[lander]

Stand for what you like lander, but when you are backing a book that awaited a final result on a 10k soccer bet to decide what to do, then you should re-think your stance IMO.

Helping scammers hurts every honest guy in the industry.

IMO you should consider the big picture before questioning my character
1. Brit has a history of cheating
2. Brit circumvented the RULES
3. He made no attempt to call

If RULES and LIMITS mean nothing to you, then what the heck is the point of having them? Do you endorse violating the rules?

Simply put, a policy such as yours is an invitation for scammers everywhere to destroy the Offshore industry.

 

[TheGeneral+]

Yeah, my history here shows that I endorse scammers. You are right.

Sleep well.

 

[lander]

Yeah, my history here shows that I endorse scammers. You are right.

Sleep well.

You are the only one mentioning history regarding you and I -

lander, you are a BG fan and I like them, but the difference here is you cannot separate friendship from business

.. that along with a subtle attack. Now, I could have stooped to that level and made equally inappropriate accusation, such as - you can't detract yourself from a grievence with an ex-advertiser, but I didn't.
I didn't because it's not true .. the point is there's a fine line between being clever and being deceptive.

I take more offense to your tactics than your stance, although both are clearly wrong this time around.

Have a fine evening.
Happy Veterans Day, and thank you for your brave service to America.

 

[TheGeneral+]

"I didn't because it's not true "

Thanks. My opinion has nothing to do with any past grievence. I am aware of this situation that you refer, but that had nothing to do with me lander. Nothing at all. My opinion is 100% neutral to two parties with a dispute. The past history of BG and The Rx has ZERO affect on my opinion. The guys at BG and I have always got along well.

 

[lurkerforages2]

I think The General is right.
Lander you are clearly blinded by some loyalty.

You fail to admit once that the book is in the wrong for taking a shot.

So if the player takes a shot he is a thief and scammer.

If the book takes a shot thats all fine and dandy.

Huge double standard.

 

[majbrit]

areeff,

BG software does not allow it, the bug and its related workaround does. QUOTE]

This is plain wrong and can clearly be seen from several of betbg's own post. I went back almost two hours later and placed others bets at the same price that were accepted alright.

 

[majbrit]

Helping scammers hurts every honest guy in the industry.

IMO you should consider the big picture before questioning my character
1. Brit has a history of cheating
2. Brit circumvented the RULES
3. He made no attempt to call

If RULES and LIMITS mean nothing to you, then what the heck is the point of having them? Do you endorse violating the rules?

Simply put, a policy such as yours is an invitation for scammers everywhere to destroy the Offshore industry.

Number 3 is true.
1 and 2 is nonsense posted by bg.

 

[majbrit]

Helping scammers hurts every honest guy in the industry.

IMO you should consider the big picture before questioning my character
1. Brit has a history of cheating
2. Brit circumvented the RULES
3. He made no attempt to call

If RULES and LIMITS mean nothing to you, then what the heck is the point of having them? Do you endorse violating the rules?

Simply put, a policy such as yours is an invitation for scammers everywhere to destroy the Offshore industry.

Number 3 is true.
1 and 2 is nonsense posted by bg.

 

[majbrit]

I am very happy to see that betbg has now posted proof that I have been speaking the truth and have been right about all three major points in this case:

1) There never were any cancelled losing bets.
Like I said a long time ago they could only be thinking of the bets that were cancelled shortly after game start. These are the bets they claim were put in after the game started.

2) The question about "all in one ticket".
a ) They were not all in one ticket as can be seen.
b ) Some of them were, but as can clearly be seen from betbg's post it doesnt make any ******* difference! Four bets were placed almost two hours later in other tickets at the same price. They accepted multiple bets in one ticket or in several tickets. It doesnt make any difference. Didnt when I placed losing bets, didnt in this case.

3) They had previously accepted losing bets over the limit. In this case they took the bets and waited till the game was finished. Then cancelled winning bets.


A sidenote:
i) Anyone wonder why there is a timestamp on the first bets and not the second part. Why are betbg deleting the timestamp?
ii) Deleting the timestamp but posting confidential info like the IP (now deleted by the moderator, thanks) is just so unbelievable that I will let it speak for itself.

 

[majbrit]

Posted by betbg:

No sir, the game was 0 - 0 when the player bet the under and the draw 21 minutes into game time, when we voided the wagers the game had gone over and the draw was a loser too.

...........................

Two lies in one sentence.
1) The bets were voided very shortly into the game and not when it was over.
2) The game ended a draw.

 

[majbrit]

Another provable lie I just found.
betbg says I made the bets 21 minutes into the game.

Here's from uefa.com about the game:

......................

Match swings
The English champions, who were made to fight hard by the determined hosts, took the lead after 18 minutes with Fredrik Ljungberg.
....................

So I should have made the under bet just three minutes after there was a score.

Do these guys ever tell any truths at all?

 

[majbrit]

So it all ended the way it began:

By lies added to lies added to lies by betbg - about me, about my betting pattern, about the bets, about the cancelled bets, about the outcome of the game.
Most if not all of the statements could be proven wrong.

It's never nice when someone spreads lies about you.
However in this case I can't help to feel a little bit amused about the fact that you are so lousy liers.

So I wont give you the advice not to lie in the future - would be like telling the water not to run down but up - but to improve your lying if you dont want to continue making complete fools of yourselves.

I mean: didnt you even think about the fact that it could be seen that the first score was in the 18th minute and that therefore I would have given you a huge advantage had I put the bet in in the 21th?

Did it never occur to you that it could be checked that the game ended a draw?

Were you stupid enough to think that no one would notice that accepted bets in different, posted tickets clearly shows that I was not circumventing anything by placing some in the same ticket?

You have some IQ-test that your employees have to fail?

 

[majbrit]

General,

100% correct. BG has acted in a very, very, very sloppy way. This said the player has intentionally taken advantage of the situation several times.

In my years at Royal I recall having had to deal with a case similar to this one only once. All the bets but the first were deleted prior to the game going off the board. But it was foots, and we didn't run soccer. I am quiete certain that when a book hangs number on a minor sport a situation like this could occur. If the player had done it once then the bet should be honored. But a player repeatedly taking advantage of it, and placing multiple bets increasing the pops every time well.....you know my opinion.

Nothing to do with the case at all, but surely you'l be offending a lot of europeans by calling champions league soccer a "minor sport".

:WTF:

:biggrinin

No offense though.

:howdy:

 

[TOW]

I understand your point. Most of Offshore books on this side of the planet are primarily catering the north american market, as you well know. 90% to 98% of total volumes, depending on each individual book, are generated by sports other than soccer. This is why I called it "minor". No intent to offend. I'm european too :howdy:

 

[majbrit]

http://forum.therx.com/showthread.php?p=1761985#post1761985