Betjamaica Dispute

dirty

EOG Master
#41
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I have Full confidence that ScottyJ will do what is right here. He is always more than fair in every situation I have ever been involved in. He has went above and beyond in Most cases
 
#42
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I didn't read the whole thread over there so it may have been mentioned. Rumor has it that 2 of the races at Hollywood were rigged that day. One paid 27-1 and the other 5-2. I have no idea if there's any truth to it.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#44
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

PIONEER, AGAIN SOME OF THE POINTS YOU MADE WERE VALID......THE ONES THAT WERE BLACK AND WHITE.........THE ONES WHERE YOU MADE ASSUMPTIONS......SUCH AS SCOTTY WOULD HAVE TAKEN THE DIME BETS AND THE BIDED THEIR TIME UNTIL HE GAVE THE MONEY BACK....SHOW EXACTLY HOW LITTLE YOU KNOW ABOUT BEING A BOOKMAKER.......
Thanks Devil, of course all of my points were valid including my point that Scotty should, not would, have taken the dime bets and bided his, not their, time until this player gave the money back. That's exactly what bookmakers do...they book bets. But sure, it's a lot easier to just steal money from the players like Scotty is doing in this case.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#45
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I have Full confidence that ScottyJ will do what is right here. He is always more than fair in every situation I have ever been involved in. He has went above and beyond in Most cases
dirty,
I too HAD full confidence that Scotty J would do the right thing; he has gone above and beyond doing what is right in every case I've seen before this. Scotty seems to be taking this case personally and acting irrationally, for instance, see this post from the original thread at LVA Sports(Fezziksplace)...

Originally posted by: oscark
Just so you guys know who you are dealing with:

XXXX,

I personally reviewed your account and refunded your other circumvented wagers. ($3000 adj. for six other circumvented over limit wagers) I had no idea you had violated your STRICT NICKLE LIMITS. What is it you don?t understand about your limits? You can post or call whomever you chose, just make sure to tell them you are were circumventing your strict nickel limits. As far as a scam, who is the one circumventing the limits, you or us?


Please ask SBR to get on a conference call, I?m sure they will be happy to mediate your case. I will guarantee you the minute you tell them you circumvented the limits then it will be a very short discussion. (I?ve cc?d them for you already)


XXXX call me as I?d really prefer to speak to you personally.


Scotty

...I'll be interested to see just what SBR does with this mediation case.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#46
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I also found this little tidbit in the original thread...

I would certainly be happy with your fair result. Maybe I should have known better. I honestly didn't think the limit would apply to horses. Also, their software does limit me to only $500 on sportsbets and no duplicates. I would really love to know if they have the ability to do so in their horse software as well.

Oscar

....so BetJm limits this player to $500 bets, and their software does not allow the player to make more than a $500 sports bet. But they still allow him to make the $1000 maximum horse bet(there is the answer to the question I asked you, Devil), until he wins a big bet then they take their shot, ie. take his money away.
 
#47
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I personally reviewed your account and refunded your other circumvented wagers. ($3000 adj. for six other circumvented over limit wagers) I had no idea you had violated your STRICT NICKLE LIMITS. What is it you don’t understand about your limits? You can post or call whomever you chose, just make sure to tell them you are were circumventing your strict nickel limits. As far as a scam, who is the one circumventing the limits, you or us?

THAT SAYS IT ALL..........MAYBE YOU HAVE TROUBLE READING.......A NICKLE LIMIT THAT YOU ARE TOLD IN AN EMAIL, MEANS EXACTLY THAT.....A NICKLE LIMIT WITH NO DUPES.............

DOESN'T MATTER IF IT IS HORSES, PING PONG, SPORTS, ACADEMY AWARDS.......$500 LIMIT.......NO DUPES.......READ IT TO YOURSELF SLOWLY AND REPEAT IT OUT LOUD.......$500 LIMITS, NO DUPES.......SAY IT AGAIN....$500 LIMIT NO DUPES........GOT IT YET??????
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#48
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I personally reviewed your account and refunded your other circumvented wagers. ($3000 adj. for six other circumvented over limit wagers) I had no idea you had violated your STRICT NICKLE LIMITS. What is it you don?t understand about your limits? You can post or call whomever you chose, just make sure to tell them you are were circumventing your strict nickel limits. As far as a scam, who is the one circumventing the limits, you or us?

THAT SAYS IT ALL..........MAYBE YOU HAVE TROUBLE READING.......A NICKLE LIMIT THAT YOU ARE TOLD IN AN EMAIL, MEANS EXACTLY THAT.....A NICKLE LIMIT WITH NO DUPES.............

DOESN'T MATTER IF IT IS HORSES, PING PONG, SPORTS, ACADEMY AWARDS.......$500 LIMIT.......NO DUPES.......READ IT TO YOURSELF SLOWLY AND REPEAT IT OUT LOUD.......$500 LIMITS, NO DUPES.......SAY IT AGAIN....$500 LIMIT NO DUPES........GOT IT YET??????
Then why did BetJm restrict him to making just $500 bets in the sportsbook and not in the racebook?
 
#49
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

Then why did BetJm restrict him to making just $500 bets in the sportsbook and not in the racebook?

PROBABLY JUST AN OVERSIGHT........HE WAS TOLD $500 LIMITS........HE BROKE THE RULES THAT WERE GIVEN TO HIM......PERIOD......

WAS HE BETTING WITH BETJAMAICA?? DID HE GET THE EMAIL FROM THE CHIEF AT BETJAMAICA????? WHAT PART DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND ABOUT $500 LIMITS.......

BEFORE YOU RANT IN ANOTHER DIRECTION....DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT A $500 LIMIT IS????? LOOK IN THE DICTIONARY UNDER LIMIT....SEE WHAT IT SAYS........
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#50
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

PROBABLY JUST AN OVERSIGHT........HE WAS TOLD $500 LIMITS........HE BROKE THE RULES THAT WERE GIVEN TO HIM......PERIOD......

WAS HE BETTING WITH BETJAMAICA?? DID HE GET THE EMAIL FROM THE CHIEF AT BETJAMAICA????? WHAT PART DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND ABOUT $500 LIMITS.......

BEFORE YOU RANT IN ANOTHER DIRECTION....DO YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT A $500 LIMIT IS????? LOOK IN THE DICTIONARY UNDER LIMIT....SEE WHAT IT SAYS........
probably just an oversight...LOLOL. sounds like something you hear right before someone takes a free shot!

now to your questions....I don't understand this part....the limits for horsebetting are posted as being $1000 for certain tracks. Now when BetJm comes in and lowers his limits to $500, and their software prevents him from betting more than $500 on sports, then why doesn't that same software restrict him from betting more than $500 in the racebook? And furthermore, it is not an oversight because BetJm paid a winning $1000 wager along with taking the full $1000 on 5 other losing bets. This was no oversight, this was a shot, plain and simple!
 
#51
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

If he had 20 thousand worth of wagers they had to give back to him and he never won this race, do you think they would have paid if they caught him betting more?
 
#52
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I would like to see the language used in the email which informed the player of the $500 limit. If it is clear and unambiguous regarding a blanket limit, no matter what the play is, Betjam is correct. However, if the email doesn't clearly inform that the $500 limit is for any and all wagers, Betjam should pay, for the following reasons: 1) because the software automatically limited his sports plays, but not his horse plays, player could reasonably assume his horse wagers were acceptable to Betjam; and, 2) Betjam apparently had no problem with the $1000 house limit wagers until player won a longshot. There is a good argument for both sides here, but we are all merely speculating until we see the email informing of the limitations on bets.
 
Last edited:

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#53
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I would like to see the language used in the email which informed the player of the $500 limit. If it is clear and unambiguous regarding a blanket limit, no matter what the play is, Betjam is correct. However, if the email doesn't clearly inform that the $500 limit is for any and all wagers, Betjam should pay, for the following reasons: 1) because the software automatically limited his sports plays, but not his horse plays, player could reasonably assume his horse wagers were acceptable to Betjam; and, 2) Betjam apparently had no problem with the $1000 house limit wagers until player won a longshot. There is a good argument for both sides here, but we are all merely speculating until we see the email informing of the limitations on bets.
I am not oscark who started the thread at LVA but from his first post it doesn't sound like there was an email, just a message in his BetJm account. Here is his initial post...
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=ftstatuscell vAlign=top width="1%" wrap><CENTER>[FONT=Arial,Verdana,Helvetica]
Joined: Mar 2007[/FONT]
</CENTER></TD><TD class=ftalternatingbaron vAlign=top align=right width="99%"><TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top noWrap align=left width="20%">
12/8/07 11:18 AM (NEW!) </TD><TD vAlign=top align=right width="80%"><TABLE class=fttoolbarback height="1%" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="2%" align=right border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top noWrap width="2%">
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR><TR><TD vAlign=top colSpan=2>

I think I am getting completely screwed by BetJamaica, but want to confirm so with you guys. I opened my BJ account to bet sports at least 5 months ago. I rather quickly received the following message from BetJamaica when I logged in:

"Nickel Limits, no dupes. Scotty 800 329 2640"

Fine. I stuck with those limits.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
 
#55
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

think I am getting completely screwed by BetJamaica, but want to confirm so with you guys. I opened my BJ account to bet sports at least 5 months ago. I rather quickly received the following message from BetJamaica when I logged in:

"Nickel Limits, no dupes. Scotty 800 329 2640"


I THINK THAT IS CLEAR.......NICKLE LIMITS NO DUPES......

NOW THE GUY SAID LATER HE NEVER BET HORSES, BUT HE ALSO FAILED TO SAY WHAT SPORT(S) HE BET.......

FOR ARGUMENTS SAKE, LET US SAY HE HAD UP TO THAT POINT JUST BET FOOTBALL.......SOME OF YOU GUYS SAY...WELL HE NEVER BET HORSES BEFORE SO IT'S A DIFFERENT ANIMAL...........I SAY SCOTTY SAID NICKLE LIMITS....HE DIDN'T SAY NICKLE LIMITS ON BASES OR NICKLE LIMITS ON FOOTBALL......HE DIDN'T ITEMIZE ALL THE SPORTS...HE SAID NICKLE LIMITS, PERIOD.........
 
#56
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

"Nickel Limits, no dupes. Scotty 800 329 2640"


SCOTTY SAID NICKLE LIMITS....HE DIDN'T SAY NICKLE LIMITS ON BASES OR NICKLE LIMITS ON FOOTBALL......HE DIDN'T ITEMIZE ALL THE SPORTS...HE SAID NICKLE LIMITS, PERIOD.........




crystal fcuking clear!! what part of that is difficult for people to understand? fairly clear to me and i'm not nearly as smart as the people that post here or at fezzik's.
 

dirty

EOG Master
#57
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I have not read the thread, but it seems to me either the Conference call did not happen, Oscar did not call scotty, or He did Call and did not like the explanation that clearly showed he is wrong so he is spinning things on the forums to try and gain support against the book
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#58
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

dirty,
Perhaps then you should read the thread before you make a statement like this..."the explanation that clearly showed he is wrong"?

It is not clear that he is wrong. I have read the thread so let me try to clear things up for you. Oscark was betting sports only, and evidently winning so BetJm lowered his limits to $500. No one has any problem with that! BetJm made it impossible for Oscark to bet more than $500 on any sports bet. Note that well because it is important!
Now several months later, Oscark says he decided to bet horses. The posted limit at BetJm for major tracks is $1000 but you can not bet $1000 all at once, you have to bet $500 twice, which is exactly what Oscark did 6 times, losing 5 and winning one $1000 bet for $2200(total inclusive with the $1000 bet). Note well, BetJm did not stop Oscark from making these 6 $1000 bets or did not object to paying him when he won and taking his money when he lost. Now on the 7th $1000 bet, Oscark got lucky and won over $26,000, which again was credited to his account. It was only at this time that BetJm chose to "take their shot" and decide that Oscark could not bet the posted $1000 limit in their racebook.

Now dirty, you've been around the block a few times....what do you think of "ERBtheGREAT's question, (which is not real clear so let me clarify)?
What if Oscark had not won this $26,000 race but instead continued to rack up losing $1000 horse wagers to the tune of say $20,000 to $40,000? Do you think BetJm would have given Oscark half of his money back when they found out that he was, in their words, "circumventing their limits"?
 

dirty

EOG Master
#59
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

dirty,
Perhaps then you should read the thread before you make a statement like this..."the explanation that clearly showed he is wrong"?

It is not clear that he is wrong. I have read the thread so let me try to clear things up for you. Oscark was betting sports only, and evidently winning so BetJm lowered his limits to $500. No one has any problem with that! BetJm made it impossible for Oscark to bet more than $500 on any sports bet. Note that well because it is important!
Now several months later, Oscark says he decided to bet horses. The posted limit at BetJm for major tracks is $1000 but you can not bet $1000 all at once, you have to bet $500 twice, which is exactly what Oscark did 6 times, losing 5 and winning one $1000 bet for $2200(total inclusive with the $1000 bet). Note well, BetJm did not stop Oscark from making these 6 $1000 bets or did not object to paying him when he won and taking his money when he lost. Now on the 7th $1000 bet, Oscark got lucky and won over $26,000, which again was credited to his account. It was only at this time that BetJm chose to "take their shot" and decide that Oscark could not bet the posted $1000 limit in their racebook.

Now dirty, you've been around the block a few times....what do you think of "ERBtheGREAT's question, (which is not real clear so let me clarify)?
What if Oscark had not won this $26,000 race but instead continued to rack up losing $1000 horse wagers to the tune of say $20,000 to $40,000? Do you think BetJm would have given Oscark half of his money back when they found out that he was, in their words, "circumventing their limits"?


You can ramble all you want pioneer.... this Statement right here is all that matters


"Nickel Limits, no dupes. Scotty 800 329 2640"



He did not take a $1k shot from what I have read here...he took 2 $500 shots....that is a guy circumventing Limits.... no matter how you slice it.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#60
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

You can ramble all you want pioneer.... this Statement right here is all that matters







He did not take a $1k shot from what I have read here...he took 2 $500 shots....that is a guy circumventing Limits.... no matter how you slice it.
Why bother to quote my post and then not read it? Don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion, dirty.
 

trytrytry

All I do is trytrytry
#62
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

dirty you are wrong on this one. BET JAM is stealing that money he won fair and square. there was no 500 limit set on the horses.
 

dirty

EOG Master
#63
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

Why bother to quote my post and then not read it? Don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion, dirty.

I did read your posts... after the Message Scotty had on the screen it was Crystal clear. The player should have called and talked to him to see if he could bet $1k on Horses. ScottyJ's message could not have been more clear. That is the only Facts that matter....and Bet Jam did refund Money.
 

trytrytry

All I do is trytrytry
#64
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

Dirty the only thing crystal clear is that this guy had every right to wager on horses at the posted limits at BETJAM. he did so several times and lost, he hits one fluke wager and BETJAM trytrytryies to pull this crap. unreal. pay the wager off.
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#65
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I did read your posts... after the Message Scotty had on the screen it was Crystal clear. The player should have called and talked to him to see if he could bet $1k on Horses. ScottyJ's message could not have been more clear. That is the only Facts that matter....and Bet Jam did refund Money.
dirty,
I agree with you that oscark should have called, as I said in post #24 of this thread...
"He then went to the racebook where the posted limit is $1000 but you have to bet 2 $500 bets, their software will not take $1000 bets. So he logically assumes that he is only limited to $500 in the sportsbook, although it sure would have been nice if he had asked first. By the way, what do you think the answer would have been from BetJm if he had asked? I'll bet you anything that they would have allowed him to bet $1000 on a horse bet to win, maybe not to show."

...perhaps you'd answer my question..." By the way, what do you think the answer would have been from BetJm if he had asked?"

...Scotty J's message could have been more clear. Scotty lowered oscark's limits to $500, no one disputes that. But the facts are that when Scotty lowered oscark's limits, oscark had only placed sports bets. And Scotty didn't just say he was lowering oscark's limits, he made it impossible for oscark to bet more than $500 in the sportsbook. Now this is important and you can ignore it as much as you want, dirty, but that doesn't change the fact.

THE FACT IS THAT BETJAMAICA RESTRICTED OSCARK FROM BETTING MORE THAN $500 IN THE SPORTSBOOK BUT DID NOT RESTRICT HIM FROM BETTING THE POSTED LIMIT IN THE RACEBOOK WHICH WAS $1000.

And furthermore, it is also a fact that BetJm took at least 6 $1000 horse bets from this player without imposing the $500 limit on him. That is a fact, dirty, that you need to address. I have probably been BetJm and Scotty J's biggest supporter, but they are needlessly wrong in this case. They took a shot. I would support BetJm if they had imposed the $500 limit on the first horse bet, but it is a fact that they did not!

And finally dirty, since you claim to have read my posts, how about answering my question....

"Now dirty, you've been around the block a few times....what do you think of "ERBtheGREAT's question, (which is not real clear so let me clarify)?
What if Oscark had not won this $26,000 race but instead continued to rack up losing $1000 horse wagers to the tune of say $20,000 to $40,000? Do you think BetJm would have given Oscark half of his money back when they found out that he was, in their words, "circumventing their limits"?"
 
#66
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

PIONEER.....OF COURSE SCOTTY WOULD HAVE REFUNDED THE MONEY, IF OSCARK NEVER WON A HORSE BET.....AS SOON AS HE FOUND OUT ABOUT IT.......SAME AS I WOULD HAVE........

IT IS SOMETHING THAT ALL PEOPLES WITH MORALS WOULD DO.......NEXT QUESTION!!!!
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#67
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

PIONEER.....OF COURSE SCOTTY WOULD HAVE REFUNDED THE MONEY, IF OSCARK NEVER WON A HORSE BET.....AS SOON AS HE FOUND OUT ABOUT IT.......SAME AS I WOULD HAVE........

IT IS SOMETHING THAT ALL PEOPLES WITH MORALS WOULD DO.......NEXT QUESTION!!!!
I'd like to believe that is true, about both you and Scotty, and since I would too, then I have to accept your word also. I would not fault anyone, least of all, oscark, if they weren't so naive.
 
#69
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I am waiting on a return phone call from Scotty before rendering my opinion...

Like always, there are 2 sides to every story, and then there's the truth...

THE SHRINK
 
#70
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

As for someone who has played with Betjm since the first day they opened i am shocked by this.
I have dealt with Scotty numerous times personally over the years and he always came off as straight up.
Wtf Scotty???? You took a free shot at this guy.... I was going to reup a nice deposit for Bowl season but screw that now. As soon as my futures are graded they can close my account. Absolute horseshit (pardon the pun). Ironic thing is the only book i ever reffered friends to was Betjm and they were 2 pretty big horseplayers. Gonna have to let them know about this shit..
I thought Spiro's racing fiasco was borderline theft but this is just theft period...
 

dirty

EOG Master
#71
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

I agree with Devil here...I believe he would have refunded the money.... sorry for just now getting to answer pioneer... been caught up
 

dirty

EOG Master
#73
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

It is common knowledge that Most Forum Posters will take the side of the player... it always happens and always will....they take the posters side by default most times no matter what.


Most Posters don't want to look at it objectively from both sides, and even the ones that do are blinded by wanting to side with the poster.
 
#74
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

It is common knowledge that Most Forum Posters will take the side of the player... it always happens and always will....they take the posters side by default most times no matter what.


Most Posters don't want to look at it objectively from both sides, and even the ones that do are blinded by wanting to side with the poster.
Totally disagree... I have seen many posters (players) who are ripped to shreds by others when they are in the wrong or trying to pull something..
 

pioneer

EOG Dedicated
#77
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

MORE POSTS LIKE THAT PIONEER AND I WILL HAVE TO EDIT MY IRRITATING POSTER PICK...............
Never fear then...to eliminate the need for you to edit, let's continue this discussion...

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=3 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by pioneer

Then why did BetJm restrict him to making just $500 bets in the sportsbook and not in the racebook?
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

PROBABLY JUST AN OVERSIGHT........HE WAS TOLD $500 LIMITS........HE BROKE THE RULES THAT WERE GIVEN TO HIM......PERIOD......

...so we agree that BetJm not only told oscark that he could not bet more than $500 in the sportsbook, but they also insured by their software, that oscark was physically unable to bet more than $500 in their sportsbook.

But BetJm did not insure by their software, that oscark was physically unable to bet more than $500 in their racebook. In fact, they posted that the limits at certain major tracks was $1000 and allowed oscark to make 2 $500 bets in the racebook, as opposed to not letting him make 2 $500 bets in the sportsbook. Therefore, it could be logically argued that BetJm was profferring oscark implicit consent to bet the posted limits in the racebook($1000), as opposed to his $500 limit in the sportsbook.

Now even as you say, Devil, this may have been just an oversight on the part of BetJm, shouldn't BetJm be responsible for their oversights? I certainly agree, as I said in post #24, that it would have been better for oscark to call BetJm and confirm what his racebook limits before making any limit bets. As anal as I am, I sure would have! And I would be willing to side with BetJm if they had made their claim on one of the first six $1000 bets which they had no trouble accepting and paying oscark.

But this appears to be BetJm taking a NEEDLESS shot at the player. Needless is all caps, not to try to emulate the Devil, but to make the point that BetJm is cutting their nose to spite their face! BetJm should have congratulated the player on his win and let him keep betting...chances are he would give all the money back in the long run if not the short run. If anything, BetJm should reconsider allowing horseplayers to bet $1000 if BetJm is not laying off those bets. Obviously, $1000 bet on a longshot and not put into the parimutuel pool, makes a huge difference in the payout.

That should be enough to get you irritated again!
 
#78
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

The should pay the guy and boot him if they want. They collected on his multiple $1000 losing bets and have to honor his winning bet. The other solution(not as fair, imo) is to go back and make all his $1000(winning or losing bets) be $500 bets and calculate the net result.
 

Santo

EOG Veteran
#79
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

It may be an oversight, it's more likely that their horse software is made by different people than their sports software, and doesn't have a no duplicates feature.
 

Santo

EOG Veteran
#80
Re: Betjamaica Dispute

The should pay the guy and boot him if they want. They collected on his multiple $1000 losing bets and have to honor his winning bet. The other solution(not as fair, imo) is to go back and make all his $1000(winning or losing bets) be $500 bets and calculate the net result.
They already did the latter.
 
Top