Wagerweb - Proven Trustworthy

[Justin7]

I'll lay -10000 that Roboto's posts are written or ghost written by an employee or somebody with a financial interest in Wagerweb.

To be fair, I did check his IP. It's not duplicated or from Costa Rica.

[Justin7]

On a side note, we concluded the set of disputes regarding the bonuses.

Going forward, Wager Web will no longer convert losing freeplays into cash for professionals. I thought this was egregious, and they agreed to stop doing this.

Wager Web makes it clear that they don't want professionals. If you know what steam is, or how to maximize a bonus, they don't want you, and you can expect to be shown the door in short order.

The other change in their bonus policy: if you are shown the door before your rollover is met, your freeplay is canceled, win or lose. I don't particularly like this rule - my preference would be to honor it in full when you kick a player out (or reduce his limits to $1 which is the same thing). However... If the rules clearly and conspicuously state this (and this doesn't mean burying them under rule 47B - 2a), I won't penalize them for that. If you're bonus hunting, buyer beware.

I'll expect people to bitch when they get freeplays canceled. I've talked long and hard with WW on this issue (including 3 hours this week alone)... And if you're a winning player, don't be surprised if your winning free play is canceled as they toss you. If you're a recreational player, you're fine.

If a recreational player has a winning freeplay canceled and can convince me (via their wager log) that they're not sharp, I'll be very surprised. WW is becoming much better at player profiling, and I don't expect them to piss off losing players by jerking around with a bonus.

If you're sharp however, spend your time elsewhere.

[durito]

Knowing what steam is or how to maximize a bonus hardly qualifies one as a sharp.


As to the original poster. People all too often experience something and then decided that what happened to them is fact. So, wager web didn't stiff me, they are trustworthy.

Or, I crossed the darian gap without getting killed, it is safe (there are posts on the lonely planet board about this right now, someone did and thus claims it is in fact safe ---- but really, it's not)

how many times have we heard "i've played with sportsbook.com for years and they've never stiffed me"

[robmpink]

On a side note, we concluded the set of disputes regarding the bonuses.

Going forward, Wager Web will no longer convert losing freeplays into cash for professionals. I thought this was egregious, and they agreed to stop doing this.

Wager Web makes it clear that they don't want professionals. If you know what steam is, or how to maximize a bonus, they don't want you, and you can expect to be shown the door in short order.

The other change in their bonus policy: if you are shown the door before your rollover is met, your freeplay is canceled, win or lose. I don't particularly like this rule - my preference would be to honor it in full when you kick a player out (or reduce his limits to $1 which is the same thing). However... If the rules clearly and conspicuously state this (and this doesn't mean burying them under rule 47B - 2a), I won't penalize them for that. If you're bonus hunting, buyer beware.

I'll expect people to bitch when they get freeplays canceled. I've talked long and hard with WW on this issue (including 3 hours this week alone)... And if you're a winning player, don't be surprised if your winning free play is canceled as they toss you. If you're a recreational player, you're fine.

If a recreational player has a winning freeplay canceled and can convince me (via their wager log) that they're not sharp, I'll be very surprised. WW is becoming much better at player profiling, and I don't expect them to piss off losing players by jerking around with a bonus.

If you're sharp however, spend your time elsewhere.

Great job Justin!

[slsmagic]

**** and all the guys at Wagerweb are the WORST. Do not do business with them.

There are many other established sportsbook's out there.

DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THEM

[Rand790]

Wow! Interesting to see how many people out their have a bad taste in their mouth about Wagerweb. What it sounds like from Justin's post is that if you want action and lose - WagerWeb is happy to do business with you. However, if you win - they are showing you the door. That's what I read. This shows you what kind of sportsbook you are dealing with here. I am just thrilled they are getting such negative publicity.

[robmpink]

Wow! Interesting to see how many people out their have a bad taste in their mouth about Wagerweb. What it sounds like from Justin's post is that if you want action and lose - WagerWeb is happy to do business with you. However, if you win - they are showing you the door. That's what I read. This shows you what kind of sportsbook you are dealing with here. I am just thrilled they are getting such negative publicity.

How thrilled are you? Is it just like the thrill of winning a 2nd half bet that you past posted? Wow reading these threads must be euphoric. I can't imagine a better feeling. Wooo hoooooo!

I'm getting sick of you. At least switch it up and log in under the Eric Dye screen name. That way more people will think WagerWeb really sucks since more people say so. It is like a cult that can't be stopped. The thrills! There are so many of them! Do you get goosebumps?

[Rand790]

You are so sad..............I love watching your sportsbook get destroyed - and so well deserved.........I am sure you have plenty of time, due to lack of customers, to play on the Internet - bet your entire management team has time, as well.

[robmpink]

I'd say you are a sick ticket and it wouldn't suprise me if you commited suicide one day. The sooner the better.

[Rand790]

Wow! You are really twisted - you have now crossed the line.

[sergfro]

Wow! Interesting to see how many people out their have a bad taste in their mouth about Wagerweb. What it sounds like from Justin's post is that if you want action and lose - WagerWeb is happy to do business with you. However, if you win - they are showing you the door. That's what I read. This shows you what kind of sportsbook you are dealing with here. I am just thrilled they are getting such negative publicity.

Am I missing something here? Majority of sportsbooks will show you the door if you win.

Only a select few accept all action

Now stop wasting peoples time

[acw]

To be fair, I did check his IP. It's not duplicated or from Costa Rica.

Unbelievable!

[Justin7]

Wow! Interesting to see how many people out their have a bad taste in their mouth about Wagerweb. What it sounds like from Justin's post is that if you want action and lose - WagerWeb is happy to do business with you. However, if you win - they are showing you the door. That's what I read. This shows you what kind of sportsbook you are dealing with here. I am just thrilled they are getting such negative publicity.

WWS,

I don't think Wagerweb minds winners. If a losing player goes on a winning streak, he almost ALWAYS gives it back.

Now if you're sharp and get the best of them, you're right - they don't want you.

[Justin7]

Unbelievable!

Sorry ACW, but we do a lot of checks on posters. No one needs two accounts, and sportsbooks don't need to post anonymously. Information is only as good as its source.

[cobra_king]

Wager Web makes it clear that they don't want professionals. If you know what steam is, or how to maximize a bonus, they don't want you, and you can expect to be shown the door in short order.

The other change in their bonus policy: if you are shown the door before your rollover is met, your freeplay is canceled, win or lose. I don't particularly like this rule - my preference would be to honor it in full when you kick a player out (or reduce his limits to $1 which is the same thing).

This is ridiculous. Anyone who frequents a forum knows what steam is or how to maximize a bonus and lord knows you need at least 100 octopi to count the number of squares on this forum alone, yet some of them under this rule could be considered pros.

As for their bonus policy, this allows the book to take a shot at a player. Even squares get on a run sometimes and this rule just allows them to cancel free plays that win indiscriminately by invoking this rule. Thankfully they will no longer steal your money from your existing balance, but if someone wins their free play fair and square they shouldn't have to worry about going on any type of wagering run where they have to worry one bit that WW will dip into their account and take a legitimately earned free play win.

I'm glad to see that Justin personally disagrees with this policy but i wish it was with stronger emphasis.

I'm happy with the books i'm in now and have no plans on adding any in the forseeable future so finding a bonus isn't anything i care about. But for some players getting a bonus is important as you can see from some of the threads here. These people shouldn't be afraid of winning after taking this bonus.

[diogee]

Your signature cracks me up every time Cobra King

[acw]

Sorry ACW, but we do a lot of checks on posters. No one needs two accounts, and sportsbooks don't need to post anonymously. Information is only as good as its source.

So basically what you are telling me is that if I have 10 different people working for me world wide all with different IP addresses and with whom I communicate on a messenger giving them random instructions to bet at a 100 so books on their personal accounts (and do not forget the parlays), then if there is ever a dispute and you start looking into it, I have nothing to worry, since it will all look genuine?!

[Justin7]

So basically what you are telling me is that if I have 10 different people working for me world wide all with different IP addresses and with whom I communicate on a messenger giving them random instructions to bet at a 100 so books on their personal accounts (and do not forget the parlays), then if there is ever a dispute and you start looking into it, I have nothing to worry, since it will all look genuine?!

That's not quite it. There are other ways to identify "master/servant" accounts, but none that will work against someone who is very well organized, and executes flawlessly.

People get caught when the make mistakes - e.g. forget to use their proxy ID, or use the wrong account from the wrong IP... Or if they get greedy. If you have two people beating the hell out of you and their "method of betting" is almost identical, it's not hard to relate those two. Fortunately, I've never had to decide a case on a "method of betting" - players always made other mistakes.

[Ortho]

I'm glad to see that Justin personally disagrees with this policy but i wish it was with stronger emphasis.

And if Justin was just some guy and not moderator of a watchdog site, this would be fine. Otherwise, the book is stealing money and the watchdog site is limiting itself to saying "gosh, we don't like that but if won't affect your grade."

[Justin7]

And if Justin was just some guy and not moderator of a watchdog site, this would be fine. Otherwise, the book is stealing money and the watchdog site is limiting itself to saying "gosh, we don't like that but if won't affect your grade."

Sportsbooks and players are free to enter any fair agreement, as long as both sides understand what happens.

If the player 1. promises he is recreational, and 2. knows his bonus could be canceled, he is free to enter that agreement. I don't like it much - same as when a casino offers 6:5 Blackjack. Both are player unfriendly and I don't like it, but I would not call it stealing.

[Ortho]

You know as well as I do that the term "recreational" is completely, totally meaningless. I totally understand why the book would want to engage in this kind of doublespeak, but I have no idea why you want to endorse it.

It's the same as when a casino offers 3:2 blackjack, unless they deem you a "professional" (which, gosh, correlates with when I win money!), and then all your blackjacks pay nothing.

The very act of "being a player who understands what happens" in this case makes you sharp and gives the book a license to steal your money. Only players who don't understand what happens get to keep their money, and the book gets to decide, after they see if you win or not.

[Justin7]

You know as well as I do that the term "recreational" is completely, totally meaningless.

Anytime you have a contractual obligation determined by something subjective, it can make a mess. That is why I think it will be hard to explain clearly who will not get the bonus.

Despite player objections, I think it is easy to distinguish recreational from professional players. If a player deposits 3k and picks off a number, he's a pro.

[Ortho]

Anytime you have a contractual obligation determined by something subjective, it can make a mess.

Of course it can't make a mess--the book is just not going to pay the player if he wins.

But if you are saying "it can make a mess for the player, because he's getting freerolled", then I totally agree.

I'm sure that SBR would be happy to help out any recreational players that get accidentally caught out by this. Oh, whoops, forgot-if they manage to find their way here to complain--they're professionals!

[acw]

If you have two people beating the hell out of you and their "method of betting" is almost identical,

Simply two friends that each want to have their own share of the action!

Justin7,
You really have a lot to learn!

[chemist]

Knowing what steam is or how to maximize a bonus hardly qualifies one as a sharp.

Anyone who reads the SBR forums would meet that test. I thought a professional whatever was someone for whom whatever was their principal source of income and main occupation.

[TLD]

If the player 1. promises he is recreational, and 2. knows his bonus could be canceled, he is free to enter that agreement. I don't like it much - same as when a casino offers 6:5 Blackjack. Both are player unfriendly and I don't like it, but I would not call it stealing.

Disagree that the cases are analogous.

Disappointed that SBR and its rating system would treat them as analogous.

[Rand790]

When is SBR going to just come out and say that this sportsbook is managed by unprofessionals who are just looking to cheat people.......here is their philosophy...if you lose - we love you and if you win - you are a professional and are not going to get paid.

EVERYONE NEEDS TO AVOID WAGERWEB - it will be tough to run a business with no customers - the day is coming.

[magnavox]

Disagree that the cases are analogous.

Disappointed that SBR and its rating system would treat them as analogous.

I just read this. I'm really out of words. Cash bonus can be easily and fairly pro-rated, it is virtually impossible to do the same with free plays. Once accepted it stands as a fair wager, it cannot be canceled retroactively. Justin has always been on the books' side in ambiguous cases out of all SBR people, but this is too much, BY FAR.

I need Bill Dozer and/or SBR John to address this.

FWIW I was recently profiled by WW and shown the door, however no free play winnings were canceled. They let me continue finish my rollover with $500 limits. That's what I can call a fair deal!