JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Enfuego, I am so much brighter than you are that its silly. You're nothing but another online tough guy. Stop making this about your obsession with me. Time for you to go. You're a waste of time.
mo, you are going to have really stay up all night long to face this onslaught of new enemies you made.. I hate to see it happen to too.. But you are too headstrong!
 

TonyMar

EOG Dedicated
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

A free $500 is pretty outrageous, I've seen many bonus offers, and that may be the most liberal ever. They offered me $100 I think, a while back. Only problem with U.S. online books is that the taxes and regulations imposed would make -110 with your local seem like Christmas morning.
munson...

sorry...but there are sportsbooks...far better than oddsmaker...

that DO NOT advertise...

&

keep a low profile...

that will toss players nickel's on their birthdays...

without this kind of horseshit drama.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I've tried to read the whole thread in an attempt at some objectivity, but it seems there's disagreement on some of the dialogue between the book and the player. If he did indeed lie to Shrink or Oddsmaker then I would suppose his position is weakened for sure. One thing I do know is that you and Shrink have oftentimes gone the extra mile for the player in the past. On the other hand, I don't know Jimmy, but he seems like a player that a book would want for a customer.

since the DOJ is involved in this industry there is naturally going to be some less than completely honest discussions between the player who wants to release as few details as possible about a few things. sportsbooks are on a need to know basis, I don't see conversations taking place after the bets were placed affecting the bottom line here.

the bottom line is this: player was sent an unsolicited email advertising a bonus. book has yet to show evidence stating that forwarding the email to a friend or family member would jeopardize the promotion or the player's account or balance. even if the same player called in from his own phone to open an account for his father using the same bonus promotion...it doesn't change anything. check the player at the door and don't get mad if you have to kick him out with your (previous) girlfriend. books will continue to use the excuse of trickeration until the players stop letting them. a book that doesn't have the resources to handle their own business doesn't have the resources to handle mine either.

I don't think we should be questioning the morals or motives of the player in this case because we have seen such a questionable history from Oddsmaker. burden of proof is clearly on the sportsbook's shoulders, no character validation necessary from the player, especially from people who don't know him.
 

MadCapper

Head <in> Moderation
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I don't hate anyone MadCapper, the world has too much hate already. I just DISLIKE the owner and MoBo. I've never even met them but dislike them and I'm not the only one. If it was just me then so be it but there's a line.

You, on the other hand, seem to be a good dude. This thread serves as the perfect example of why nobody should ever trust this site or its management.
Who got you the job at EOG. Why'd you leave?
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

mo, you are going to have really stay up all night long to face this onslaught of new enemies you made.. I hate to see it happen to too.. But you are too headstrong!

You can be strange at times. That is your right and I respect that. Don't be sad, I'll be ok.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

You have information that someone else has posted, I have first hand information. I don't know what your trying to prove, but im sorry that you've made this something that it is not. You don't have anything on me, this isn't about you and me, just relax there buddy. This isn't about the contest or you and me.

:+clueless
What could you possibly know that's relevant? JimmyMac was given a $500 free play. It is impossible to abuse that type of bonus.

You may not understand how bonuses work which is why you don't get it.
 

TonyMar

EOG Dedicated
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

If you ever meet Oddsmaker in person, you need to know the secret handshake.
yes indeed...

you 1st have to undu your shorts/pants...

bend over...

then take the 'oddsmaker bonus program':doggie:doggie:doggie:doggie:doggie:doggie

for a loooooooong while...

then its 'miller time'
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

They lied to you just like Shrink lied to me about getting paid for the contest. I got told that over and over again that I was getting something and fell for it. I guarantee you got fed a lot better bullshit because it was for $8400 instead of peanuts.

You have no RELEVANT or TRUE information that we don't have.
Munson,

just keep your wits about you, that is all.
 

munson15

I want winners...
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

munson...

sorry...but there are sportsbooks...far better than oddsmaker...

that DO NOT advertise...

&

keep a low profile...

that will toss players nickel's on their birthdays...

without this kind of horseshit drama.
Are these books in the U.S.?
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

What could you possibly know that's relevant? JimmyMac was given a $500 free play. It is impossible to abuse that type of bonus.

You may not understand how bonuses work which is why you don't get it.

I get it completely. You're lost, somehow. I don't know how, but it has happened.
 

Bagiant

EOG Dedicated
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I assume that oddsmaker caught the player trying to open an account for his father right away. If this was a problem for them, why didn't they notify Jimmie and close his account? Instead they let him keep playing. That's the only way he could have built up that much money in his account.

If they felt he was a "professional", or would abuse the bonus, WHY did they offer him a bonus to start with? Supposedly, these players that were offered the bonus were "profiled" to start with, right?

Somewhere between the $500 he started with and the $8400 he finished with, they must have been suspicious of something! Yet they never did anything to either close the account, or notify the player that his account was under review. This apparently came when he asked for a cashout. Do I have this right so far?

I don't understand why this player is not getting paid!
 

TonyMar

EOG Dedicated
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

What could you possibly know that's relevant? JimmyMac was given a $500 free play. It is impossible to abuse that type of bonus.

You may not understand how bonuses work which is why you don't get it.
oddsmaker sent him two stip's for that freeplay...

jimmy did not break either one...

then you move forward to oddsmaker's rules & reg's...

they invented a way to fuck this player.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

A free $500 is pretty outrageous, I've seen many bonus offers, and that may be the most liberal ever. They offered me $100 I think, a while back. Only problem with U.S. online books is that the taxes and regulations imposed would make -110 with your local seem like Christmas morning.
player stated he's betting 200k a year. I would imagine Oddsmaker offers this type of bonus to players betting dimes or more on average. five hundred dollars sounds like a lot until you think of it in terms of it only being a free play worth half (or less) of an average bet. Oddsmaker was looking for fish in a barrel. most people betting these amounts don't care about bonuses, reduced vig recoups the bonus within a week or two. Oddsmaker is saying they profiled the player, and I would imagine that to be true. obviously he checked out to receive the offer. that lends itself to player credibility. I think one of two things happened or maybe a combination of both. 1. player slipped through the cracks with the bonus, they found out he was sharp and in their minds didn't "intentionally" mean to give him the bonus. the reports from other sportsbooks were wrong or he went through a rough patch somewhere else. or most likely someone somewhere at the book made a mistake the player is now paying for. 2. the player pissed off someone at Oddsmaker, told them to close his account etc...and/or Oddsmaker is free rolling players frequently and is gambling on which customers know about the forums and which do not. Oddsmaker has an extremely checkered past and owners, management, etc have a history of scamming.
 

Flamingo kid

Everybody's hands go UP!
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Lyrics to Paper Planes :
I fly like paper, get high like planes
If you catch me at the border I got visas in my name
If you come around here, I make 'em all day
I get one down in a second if you wait

I fly like paper, get high like planes
If you catch me at the border I got visas in my name
If you come around here, I make 'em all day
I get one down in a second if you wait

Sometimes I feel sitting on trains
Every stop I get to I'm clocking that game
Everyone's a winner now we're making that fame
Bonafide hustler making my name

Sometimes I feel sitting on trains
Every stop I get to I'm clocking that game
Everyone's a winner now we're making that fame
Bonafide hustler making my name

All I wanna do is (BANG BANG BANG BANG!)
And (KKKAAAA CHING!)
And take Jimmy's money

All I wanna do is (BANG BANG BANG BANG!)
And (KKKAAAA CHING!)
And take Jimmy's money

All I wanna do is (BANG BANG BANG BANG!)
And (KKKAAAA CHING!)
And take jimmy's money

Pirate skulls and bones
Sticks and stones and weed and bombs
Running when we hit 'em
Lethal poison through their system

Pirate skulls and bones
Sticks and stones and weed and bombs
Running when we hit 'em
Lethal poison through their system

No one on the corner has swag like us
Hit me on my banner prepaid wireless
We pack and deliver like UPS trucks
A radio in hell just pumping that gas

No one on the corner has swag like us
Hit me on my banner prepaid wireless
We pack and deliver like UPS trucks
A radio in hell just pumping that gas

All I wanna do is (BANG BANG BANG BANG!)
And (KKKAAAA CHING!)
And take jimmy's money

All I wanna do is (BANG BANG BANG BANG!)
And (KKKAAAA CHING!)
And take Jimmy's money

All I wanna do is (BANG BANG BANG BANG!)
And (KKKAAAA CHING!)
And take jimmy's money

M.I.A.
Third world democracy
Yeah, I got more records than the K.G.B.
So, uh, no funny business

Some some some I some I murder
Some I some I let go
Some some some I some I murder
Some I some I let go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqlY0VOFtyA
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

oddsmaker sent him two stip's for that freeplay...

jimmy did not break either one...

then you move forward to oddsmaker's rules & reg's...

they invented a way to fuck this player.

With those stipulations you still have to play within the rules of the book.
 

munson15

I want winners...
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

since the DOJ is involved in this industry there is naturally going to be some less than completely honest discussions between the player who wants to release as few details as possible about a few things. sportsbooks are on a need to know basis, I don't see conversations taking place after the bets were placed affecting the bottom line here.

the bottom line is this: player was sent an unsolicited email advertising a bonus. book has yet to show evidence stating that forwarding the email to a friend or family member would jeopardize the promotion or the player's account or balance. even if the same player called in from his own phone to open an account for his father using the same bonus promotion...it doesn't change anything. check the player at the door and don't get mad if you have to kick him out with your (previous) girlfriend. books will continue to use the excuse of trickeration until the players stop letting them. a book that doesn't have the resources to handle their own business doesn't have the resources to handle mine either.

I don't think we should be questioning the morals or motives of the player in this case because we have seen such a questionable history from Oddsmaker. burden of proof is clearly on the sportsbook's shoulders, no character validation necessary from the player, especially from people who don't know him.
I agree with almost everything you said, and I didn't mean to question Jimmy's character at all. I simply stated that I don't know him, whereas I've had positive dealings with Mo and Shrink. The one fact that came out of the entire discussion that concerned me on Jimmy's end was that he said he thought Oddsmaker was questionable. That leads me to feel he should have been extra careful when bonusing said book.
 

TonyMar

EOG Dedicated
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

With those stipulations you still have to play within the rules of the book.
read their horseshit rules...

they invented a way to fuck this man...

plain & simple...

the biggest problem i have with oddsmaker is they hide from it all...

this guy loses more than 8 dimes on a regular basis...

&

they decide to fuck him...

please...

any poster or reader of eog that send oddsmaker a dollar, nickel, or dime of their cash is an asinine idiot...

oddsmaker is a fucking joke...

they screwed this man out of his money here...

they are endorsed by eog...

&

that says alot about eog
 

munson15

I want winners...
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

player stated he's betting 200k a year. I would imagine Oddsmaker offers this type of bonus to players betting dimes or more on average. five hundred dollars sounds like a lot until you think of it in terms of it only being a free play worth half (or less) of an average bet. Oddsmaker was looking for fish in a barrel. most people betting these amounts don't care about bonuses, reduced vig recoups the bonus within a week or two. Oddsmaker is saying they profiled the player, and I would imagine that to be true. obviously he checked out to receive the offer. that lends itself to player credibility. I think one of two things happened or maybe a combination of both. 1. player slipped through the cracks with the bonus, they found out he was sharp and in their minds didn't "intentionally" mean to give him the bonus. the reports from other sportsbooks were wrong or he went through a rough patch somewhere else. or most likely someone somewhere at the book made a mistake the player is now paying for. 2. the player pissed off someone at Oddsmaker, told them to close his account etc...and/or Oddsmaker is free rolling players frequently and is gambling on which customers know about the forums and which do not. Oddsmaker has an extremely checkered past and owners, management, etc have a history of scamming.
Given the choice between a bonus and reduced juice, it's not even close for that kind of volume. It would be interesting to know if he was given the option, though.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

lying is never upfront and he definitely lied. he knew, 100%, that he was doing something wrong.
He knew 100% he is doing something wrong?????? Mofome, I swear u are keeping something from us, how in hell after reading this whole thread can you come to a conclusion that he lied and that he knew he was doing something wrong? U a joke and now it just sounds like u'll say anything to make Jimmy look bad and have some kind of vendetta
 

Flamingo kid

Everybody's hands go UP!
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I think that Jimmy stole fizzy lifting drinks from the book in question. He bumped into the ceiling with his father and that caused the book to have to wash and sterliize the ceilings, so, Jimmy got NOTHING.

Good Day sir.
 

MadCapper

Head <in> Moderation
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I think that Jimmy stole fizzy lifting drinks from the book in question. He bumped into the ceiling with his father and that caused the book to have to wash and sterliize the ceilings, so, Jimmy got NOTHING.

Good Day sir.
lol. finally
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

He knew 100% he is doing something wrong?????? Mofome, I swear u are keeping something from us, how in hell after reading this whole thread can you come to a conclusion that he lied and that he knew he was doing something wrong? U a joke and now it just sounds like u'll say anything to make Jimmy look bad and have some kind of vendetta
Vendetta? Going in I wanted to side with Jimmy. I wish that I went in without any bias, but I guess I wanted the little guy to be in the right. I didn't need to read this thread to come to any conclusion, bud, I came to this conclusion after speaking with oddsmaker and Ken as well as reading the emails and threads. I knew what took place before this thread started. I didnt come to a decision based on this thread. You are a neat guy.

:cheers
 

Flamingo kid

Everybody's hands go UP!
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Vendetta? Going in I wanted to side with Jimmy. I wish that I went in without any bias, but I guess I wanted the little guy to be in the right. I didn't need to read this thread to come to any conclusion, bud, I came to this conclusion after speaking with oddsmaker and Ken as well as reading the emails and threads. I knew what took place before this thread started. I didnt come to a decision based on this thread. You are a neat guy.

:cheers
You could have saved all the legwork and just agreed with whatever Ken said. Next time something like this comes up, save yourself some time and side with the man who pays your salary.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

You could have saved all the legwork and just agreed with whatever Ken said. Next time something like this comes up, save yourself some time and side with the man who pays your salary.
I had a job on a forum before this one and I have the chance to do other things if something happened here. You're absolutely clueless. I have disagreed with ken before and done more for the player than anyone. Nice post though.

:cheers
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I agree with almost everything you said, and I didn't mean to question Jimmy's character at all. I simply stated that I don't know him, whereas I've had positive dealings with Mo and Shrink. The one fact that came out of the entire discussion that concerned me on Jimmy's end was that he said he thought Oddsmaker was questionable. That leads me to feel he should have been extra careful when bonusing said book.
I think Jimmy got the offer and was like 'what the heck? I'll see if I can't take this bonus, roll it over, and cash it out.' He probably already knew that Oddsmaker is a questionable book, I did (it's had numerous problems before), so I can see things from his perspective. He probably talks about sports gambling with his dad, passed the offer on to his dad, it doesn't say not to. maybe he found it humorous since winning players don't get too many offers like this. I don't think Jimmy is all that surprised about what happened. it is what it is.

I've had pleasant dealings with Mo as well. and just because I say that Shrink is a liar, thief, and con artist doesn't mean I think badly of him...:LMAO
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I thought you said you never talked to Jimmy? he didn't see your pm?

I did not. Hopefully you are not trying to catch me in a lie myself, that will prove to be a difficult catch.

I mean when he lied on tape to oddsmaker and when he lied to Ken. I believe that somewhere on the forum he admitted to misleading someone at some point in this process. He changed his story a couple times.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

this verdict is sickening. oddsmaker is a known scam book, if it wasnt for this they would have made up an excuse for something else.

i have them on tape saying he wasnt getting paid because he was disrespectful. they have no security at their book, just offering up his username they give his full name and balance down to the penny out to me.

when the clerk yelled repeatedly that HE WAS RUDE, AND DISRESPECTFUL. THAT IS WHY WE WILL NOT PAY HIM.

thats how you know this is a D- rated book, rightfully downgraded to F.

this case was rock solid...PAY THE PLAYER.

i know for a fact shrink and mofo do not sleep well about this one..you can say the opposite but I know you do not. :+whipping

oddsmaker :hangt
 
Top