1xbet cricket settlement issue

[frenchbettor]

Hello,

I have an issue with the settlement of multiple cricket bets by 1xbet


I placed my bets on the same games and all on the over/under run when the second wicket fall.

All my bets was on the under (76, 96 and 112)

In this game the team scored 152/1 and the second wicket never fall.

Please note that it was a simple over/under bet with no option for the case the second wicket does not fall.

1xbet settled the bet as a loss and I don’t understand to me the bets should all have been refunded.

can you please advise and help me?

many thanks

[Optional]

Would you have a screenshot of the ticket?

And have you seen this same market at any other bookmakers?

I have not bet cricket for quite a while personally, but being able to bet on a total after the next wicket falls is not something I have ever seen.

[frenchbettor]

Maybe i was not clear enough because this kind of bet is available on pretty every book

see here a copy of one of the tickets

[frenchbettor]

https://ibb.co/z5XQhhW

[frenchbettor]

Of course the terms and conditions are totally silents on this case

[Optional]

Oh I see, I did misunderstand.

What would total runs be AT the fall of next wicket







Honestly, I would assume if the total passes your Under bet mark it doesn't matter if the wicket fell, intuitively.

Can you find a major book with published rules to suggest they would void these bets if no 2nd wicket fell?

[frenchbettor]

To be honest I find mostly book that settle the bet in such case and don’t consider it as void but I find it unblock

[frenchbettor]

I understand that bet365 voie bets in such case

https://help.bet365.com/product-help/sports/Rules/Cricket

[Optional]

I understand that bet365 voie bets in such case

https://help.bet365.com/product-help.../Rules/Cricket

It looks like Bet365 would also grade these a loss to me


Runs at Fall of 1st Wicket

At least one delivery must be bowled, if no wickets fall bets will be void unless settlement is already determined.


I can't see runs at fall of next wicket there, but surely it would be the same.

[frenchbettor]

I accepted the settlement of those bet, I find it unfair but it appears to be the rule.

However, the contrary happened this morning I bet on over 50.5 1st SF wicket of the 2nd inning, this inning was over at 67/0 https://www.flashscore.com/match/tvS...#match-summary
according to the rule the bet should be won but here it was a refund!

It seems that 1xbet applies the rule only when favorable to them.

Please Opti can you intervene here?

Thanks mate!

[Optional]

I accepted the settlement of those bet, I find it unfair but it appears to be the rule.

However, the contrary happened this morning I bet on over 50.5 1st SF wicket of the 2nd inning, this inning was over at 67/0 https://www.flashscore.com/match/tvS...#match-summary
according to the rule the bet should be won but here it was a refund!

It seems that 1xbet applies the rule only when favorable to them.

Please Opti can you intervene here?

Thanks mate!

Yes I sure can ask about that.

Can you please post or send me the bet ID# ?

[frenchbettor]

Thanks just sent you a PM

[frenchbettor]

it is just crazy how pitty they are

[ouzoun]

This bookmakers should be avoided. I think they only pay Russians. All others are not getting paid.

[frenchbettor]

The worst here is that they refuse to listen despite making crazy settlement

[frenchbettor]

Asd agreed with opti please find here copy of the betslip:



If the target total is exedeed but the wicket has not fall:- If you bet on the under the bet is lost- If you bet on the over the bet is refundedOf course there is no such thing in their T&Cs.

It is just crazy

[Nickkkk112]

1xbet bad bookmaker ((
1xbet bad bookmaker ((

[Optional]

Asd agreed with opti please find here copy of the betslip:



If the target total is exedeed but the wicket has not fall:- If you bet on the under the bet is lost- If you bet on the over the bet is refundedOf course there is no such thing in their T&Cs.

It is just crazy

SBR contacted them and pointed out that it is ridiculous to tell the OP his UNDER bet was settled as a loss as it had already been decided despite no wicket falling.

And then 2 days later telling him his OVER bet is void as no wicket fell, despite being already decided in the same way his under bet had been two days earlier.



ZERO RESPONSE FROM 1XBET.

I guess what can they say anyway?

[frenchbettor]

It is insane being noted that we talk here about less than 100 € when i am a long time loosing player.

They are a mess

[frenchbettor]

Please note that the settlement is so silly that when I contacted them on the live chat an operator told me the bet should be won for the over even if the wicket did not fall

[frenchbettor]

Crazy talk with an operator:

Indeed I ask them out of the wood whats happens if a wicket does not fall.

They told me that all bets are refunded.

I ask to confirm if it is the case even for an under bettor shall the total be exceeded the answer is yes.

Here is what comes next:

well in this case there was no wicket and my bets has been settled lost14:39

16185489059 / 16185556517 i 16185395093
14:39

can you please correct this misake
14:39

There are different markets.
14:40

Your bet slip was settled correctly
14:41

it was the same market
14:43

run at fall of next wicket
14:43

exact same market
14:43

there was no wicket
14:43

the bet should be refunded
14:43

The bets are different.
14:44

no it was the exact same
14:45

run at fall of wicket XX
14:45

it's exact same market
14:45

They are different. Look again.
14:45

same bet
14:45

same betn
14:45

no they are the same
14:45

You have been provided with all information.
14:45

its clearly the samze
14:46

you are making a fool out of yourself
14:46

it the same bet
14:46

please correct and refund bet 16185489059 / 16185556517 i 16185395093
14:46

it was bet on the second wicket
14:46

there was not second wicket all bet should be refunded
14:47

Your bet slip was settled correctly.
14:47

no because you told me that for thoise market bets are refunded if there is no wicket even if the total is exeded
14:47

you told me that
14:49

it is the exact same market act in good faith please
14:49

You have been provided with all information.
14:49

no i am sorry you gave me an information please take responsibility
14:50

this conversation is recorded you are a fool of yourself
14:50

again please apply the rule you told me
14:55

You have been provided with all information.
14:57

no i have not you have provide me an information and refuse to review a bet settled incorrectly with NO EXPLANATION
14:58

why thos bet have not been refunded
14:58

16185489059 / 16185556517 i 16185395093
14:58

These bets are completely different.
14:59

how they are different
14:59

?
14:59

its both time "run at fall of wicket XX"
14:59

it's the exact same name
15:00

come on act in good faith
15:01

The Wicket 3 and the Wicket 2 have the difference.
15:01

so the rule is different for wicket 3 than it is for wicket 2?
15:02

explain to me please

15:02

[Optional]

I ask to confirm if it is the case even for an under bettor shall the total be exceeded the answer is yes.

Why would you leave out this most important part of you chat from what you posted?

Why does the partial chat you posted look edited?

Are you embellishing?

[frenchbettor]

This is the exact quote the first part is not on the live chat because it vanished after certain time

but i took a screeshot










[COLOR=unset !important]
[/COLOR]

[frenchbettor]

[frenchbettor]

Hey Opti, do you have any update?

[frenchbettor]

Hi everyone!

To provide you with update, 1xbet still argue that they can grade my Under bet differently to my Over bet when no wicket falls.

Basically according to the customer service (there is just nothing in their terms and conditions) in such case the bet can be settle as lost or push but not winning

How convinient for them!

This is making me JUST CRAZY!

I want to thanks however SBR and Opti who are fighting for 1XBET to make the right settlement

[Optional]

Here is the basics of what we put to 1xbet;


For UNDERS you say that once the total is passed the bet cannot win so it is a loss even if no wicket actually falls.

For OVERS you say that once the total is passed, and even though the bet cannot lose same as the Under, it will be graded a void if no wicket actually falls.

This is the two versions of rules you are trying to apply.

You can either grade both types of bet void if no wicket falls, or grade them action based on if the bet cannot lose/win once the total is exceeded. Not one way for unders the other way for overs.


They have come back 3 or 4 times with long example filled explanations claiming I am wrong and why they are correct. But also ask not to share their explanation.

I cannot paraphrase what they say as I dont agree and think it does not even make sense, so have requested they supply an official answer that they are willing to stand by being given to the OP and/or posted here in public.

So far they have not done this.

[Optional]

1xbet say that I misunderstood about them not wanting an explanation shared.

Here is what they offer;


"The bets are settled according to the Terms and Conditions of the Company: 9.16.9. "Runs at fall of wicket". The bet will be settled as a win if the specified conditions are guessed: taking the wicket and total runs. If the wicket is not taken, and the total has exceeded the specified minimum, the bet is settled as a loss. If the wicket is not taken, and the total runs exceeded the specified maximum, the bet is refunded. It is important to remember that those kinds of bets (with the combined markets in one bet) are being settled according to mathematical formulas (i.e. the "true" or "false" conditions). The combinatory bet (like, in our issue, the wicket fall AND the total of runs) will be settled as a win only if both conditions are "true". If one of the conditions is "false", then the bet is automatically settled as a loss. If one of the conditions remains unknown, then the Company will always settle the bet as a 100% refund."


I do not think arguing any further would be fruitful.

[frenchbettor]

Please note however that this terms of conditions has been modified as there was no specific provisions in that respect which they confirmed to me.

under those conditions i ask them to refund bets made prior the implementation of this crazy rule.


opti can you please confront them on that aspect ?

[Optional]

Please note however that this terms of conditions has been modified as there was no specific provisions in that respect which they confirmed to me.

under those conditions i ask them to refund bets made prior the implementation of this crazy rule.


opti can you please confront them on that aspect ?

They have read your thread and can send a comment if they wish to dispute what you say about them changing the relevant terms after your bets and complaint were made.

The terms should not be trying to justify grading Overs differently to Unders to start with. So are moot anyway imho.

[frenchbettor]

I agree with you but this is insane how they act

[weeminer]

..,