JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Takes guts to make this call, Kenny!

I know you spent hours on it and wasnt easy to make.

:thumbsup
I spent almost 5 days working around the clock to come up with what I believe is the right decision.

Despite ruling in favor of Oddsmaker, I was in the midst of getting "something" back for the player, even though I believe Oddsmaker has a rule giving them permission not to pay out in this situation...

Once another site began piling on after asking me for help, I had very little leverage...

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

Shrink and Oddsmaker = Con men, who knew? Nice team right there
Oddsmaker has my complete support and confidence and I, The Shrink, personally guarantee Oddsmaker when it comes to game fairness, player support, customer service. And cashing out too!

So go ahead, sit back, put your feet up, relax and feel comfortable in taking Oddsmaker.com up on one of their generous offers. I, The Shrink, personally guarantee you will not be dissapointed.

Thanks, The Shrink, EOG.COM[/b]
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Oddsmaker has my complete support and confidence and I, The Shrink, personally guarantee Oddsmaker when it comes to game fairness, player support, customer service. And cashing out too!

So go ahead, sit back, put your feet up, relax and feel comfortable in taking Oddsmaker.com up on one of their generous offers. I, The Shrink, personally guarantee you will not be dissapointed.

Thanks, The Shrink, EOG.COM[/b]
:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I spent almost 5 days working around the clock to come up with what I believe is the right decision.

Despite ruling in favor of Oddsmaker, I was in the midst of getting "something" back for the player, even though I believe Oddsmaker has a rule giving them permission not to pay out in this situation...

Once another site began piling on after asking me for help, I had very little leverage...

THE SHRINK
You keep going back to "the rule" defense. You say it was "their rule" which saves the book from having to pay the player (also known as arbitrarily taking players' money as they see fit).

You also note that you prefer to not play at books that have such arbitrary and ambiguous "steal players money"-type rules.

But at the same time you recommend, with enthusiasm and boldness, the very same book to new players that you yourself prefer not to play at..

Do you see how that is bullshit?
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Bad decision, but not surprising. Whats interesting is that shrink automatically believes everything odssmaker said when they are proven wrong in the first e-mail they sent him( they assumed because his father had the same name it was in fact the same person). When it was shown that his father was a different person, all of sudden it became a different kind of bonus abuse.
Then shrink says "he tried to steal money" from the book and trying to steal is the same as stealing. Asking for a bonus is hardly stealing and one would think referring friends and family would be welcomed by most books.
The lesson of this is that people need to very careful about choosing your outfits - oddsmaker is clearly not a stand up book and just cause they're listed on that banner means nothing. My god, Bodog is still on that banner(did they ever get a processor?).
 

TonyMar

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

shrink cited 'paragraph four & second sentence'...

the rest of that paragraph is the key for me...regarding how oddsmaker 'defines' bonus abuse...

Professional players or players considered to be abusing the bonus system by any means may have bonuses revoked and be subject to further sanctions, at the discretion of OddsMaker.com management. Bonus abuse may be defined as (but not restricted to) clients cashing out for the purpose of redepositing, or referring new accounts that they are using themselves. Sanctions may be in the form of increased rollover requirements or loss of bonus privileges altogether for the offending account as well as any linked accounts.

jimmy referred his dad...

oddsmaker did give jimmy specific information...

*Bonus has a 5 times rollover requirement, can?t be played in the Poker Room, and cannot be withdrawn for 30 days.
*THIS OFFER IS NOT VALID FOR ANYONE WHO ALREADY HAS AN ACTIVE ACCOUNT WITH ODDSMAKER.COM



his dad was not a customer...

there is no proof that jimmy was using his father's account...i do not believe it even got that far...

&

if 'bonus abuse' at oddsmaker is 'not restricted' to those two specific situations...

then oddsmaker should have added 'em to the email they sent jimmy...

this is some real terrible horseshit here...

:+peeing-2
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

According to their definition of "abuse", if you are new to a book, win money having used a bonus and then cash out to test out their payout system, when they're satisfied and subsequently redeposit, you would be guilty of bonus abuse.
Bonus abuse may be defined as (but not restricted to) clients cashing out for the purpose of redepositing

but then, I guess the poor bastard should have read the rules!
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

This is evidence of the low opinion that sportsbooks have of player forums these days. 5 years ago, the shrink's opinion carried more weight. Back then, books actually feared the power of the voices of the players, which the shrink was a centerpiece of. But times have changed. Now days, it is the shrink who fears the books will take their money away. the tables have been turned..
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Reading this thread is laughable. To make the player out to be the loan victim in this case is just not accurate. This is someone who clearly tried to cheat the book and got caught. Oddsmaker has their rules, as I have heard many people in this thread say on a number of topics, don't break the rules and you have no worries. 8K is a joke to oddsmaker and, knowing this player a bit, they fully expected to make that money back 3 times over if they had allowed him to continue playing there.

To suggest that Ken is in some deal with oddsmaker is also a joke. Ken has gotten players paid when he thought they were in the wrong before, but this time he deemed that the player was wrong. I spoke with him for over an hour about this and after hearing everything that I did, I was surprised that the player would do what he did.

I, personally, am a player and what I make has nothing to do with oddsmaker nor any other book. I simply talked with Ken and after hearing the facts, didn't like what I heard about this players actions. I have disagreed with Ken on some matters, but certainly not this one. Sometimes players try to cheat books, we have to arbitrate with an open mind. Hell, even when trying to have an open mind I still want to side with the player typically, but this time I just couldn't. I'm not rich person, but I have personally given thousands of dollars to people on eog for a variety of reasons, I care about the people here more than anyone, but I also despite lying and cheating. If lying or cheating was ok with me, I would have 10000 times more money than I do now, but trying to cheat someone is inexcusable to me.

The player took a shot at the book and hoped that they'd be a bit more incompetent than they were; he lost that bet. Oddsmaker has me bashed on the forums, losing them money. Oddsmaker figured they would make money on this player alone, but they'll lose that. All because of what? They aren't willing to give in to someone who broke their rules and that they cant trust. You don't try to give a private promo code for a bonus to someone else, you just don't. It was a VIP code and they tried to abuse it; thats unfortunate.

If Ken was scamming someone, or bullshitting, he wouldn't have spent countless hours on this starting the moment he walked in the door. The fact is, many people have done what they claim Ken is doing. People had their mind up before they even heard the ruling. They knew they'd bash Ken if he sided with a book. They know Ken has done some things they may not agree with in the past, so they'll hold it against him in anything they dont agree with in the future. The Shrink has been as honest as a man can be over the last year with everyone here, and he certainly doesn't need oddsmakers money to get by, I think we all know that. The fact is, oddsmaker has their rules set, those were rules were broken, and thats not on anyone but the player. You make your own bed at times.

No one benefits from this player trying to get the best of the book nor making this decision, its simply the only decision that can be made and dealing with people bashing is just a part of life. Ken could have spent zero minutes on this if he knew what he was going to rule, but instead he called Pete, Dozer, oddsmaker, talked with the player and worked for well over 25 hours on this alone. He did that, not to fool anyone, not to cheat anyone, but simply to get as much information as possible so that he could make a fair ruling.

And he did.

Joe
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

This is evidence of the low opinion that sportsbooks have of player forums these days. 5 years ago, the shrink's opinion carried more weight. Back then, books actually feared the power of the voices of the players, which the shrink was a centerpiece of. But times have changed. Now days, it is the shrink who fears the books will take their money away. the tables have been turned..
:newsmile055:

You don't really know me at all. I am far from perfect and I have made many mistakes along the way, but I do always try and do the right thing when asked to arbitrate...

I probably have been asked to arbitrate more disputes than almost anyone in this industry and there is a reason for that...

I don't know the exact score, but I have always been fair whether u agree with my decision or not...

The last time I was involved arbitating an oddsmaker dispute, I ruled in favor of the player and Oddsmaker paid out.

Had I ruled in favor of the player this time, I am quite confident Oddsmaker would have paid out again as 8400 dollars is peanuts to them!

It would also be fair to state that I agonized over this decision because this was one of the toughest cases I have ever been asked to rule on...

There are some other factors I know that I am not at liberty to talk about as well...

I am really sorry that the majority of you don't seem to be as open minded about this case as i had hoped...

It's certainly understandable to be pro-player on here, but if some of you only knew how many times these books are sitting ducks for bonus abuse, you might not be so sympathetic towards players who try and pass on bonuses that weren't meant to be passed on..

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

JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT


If a robber gets caught trying to rob a bank but gets caught in the act, he is still guilty of ROBBERY...



THE SHRINK
Better example if a bank offers you a free $100 to open a checking account with them and you do and add deposits to it.
Then you try to open another one to get another $100 free and they catch you do they take all the money from the first account???

No!!

Nice try though shrink
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

this is NOT the only player this has happened to at Oddsmaker.

I'm checking the details, but I got a call from someone I've known for years...

if you have money there I would pull it out ASAP.

I'm not saying Oddsmaker is a FREE ROLLING STIFF BOOK just yet...
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

:newsmile055:

You don't really know me at all. I am far from perfect and I have made many mistakes along the way, but I do always try and do the right thing when asked to arbitrate...

I probably have been asked to arbitrate more disputes than almost anyone in this industry and there is a reason for that...

I don't know the exact score, but I have always been fair whether u agree with my decision or not...

The last time I was involved arbitating an oddsmaker dispute, I ruled in favor of the player and Oddsmaker paid out.

Had I ruled in favor of the player this time, I am quite confident Oddsmaker would have paid out again as 8400 dollars is peanuts to them!

THE SHRINK
Shrink, the comment you quoted in your response is my (who is just another player) own observation about the state of the offshore industry for US players and is less directed toward what you have done, or want to do. The state of the industry itself is fucked at this time, as you well know!
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

The player took a shot at the book and hoped that they'd be a bit more incompetent than they were; he lost that bet. Oddsmaker has me bashed on the forums, losing them money. Oddsmaker figured they would make money on this player alone, but they'll lose that. All because of what? They aren't willing to give in to someone who broke their rules and that they cant trust. You don't try to give a private promo code for a bonus to someone else, you just don't. It was a VIP code and they tried to abuse it; thats unfortunate


Mofome,

You dont have all the facts right and until you do I can not respect your opinion. There was NO promo code on my bonus. Look at the email i sent out on these threads. there is no code at all. I had to email them several times to put the bonus in my account. So i NEVER gave a promo code to my dad. You guys keep twisting the facts to justify things. its just wrong.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

The player took a shot at the book and hoped that they'd be a bit more incompetent than they were; he lost that bet. Oddsmaker has me bashed on the forums, losing them money. Oddsmaker figured they would make money on this player alone, but they'll lose that. All because of what? They aren't willing to give in to someone who broke their rules and that they cant trust. You don't try to give a private promo code for a bonus to someone else, you just don't. It was a VIP code and they tried to abuse it; thats unfortunate


Mofome,

You dont have all the facts right and until you do I can not respect your opinion. There was NO promo code on my bonus. Look at the email i sent out on these threads. there is no code at all. I had to email them several times to put the bonus in my account. So i NEVER gave a promo code to my dad. You guys keep twisting the facts to justify things. its just wrong.
Jimmy, I have tried to contact you personally and you have not made that possible. I had to base my opinion on the things that I was told by those who actually replied to me.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Mofome,

You have tried to contact me personally? I have received no calls or emails from anyone but Ken and Pete and Jim at the osga on this. if you wanted to get a hold of me ask ken. He called me today and we spoke so I am available.

I am so aggravated cuz I and only I know what my intentions were in forwarding that email to my dad. It was never to scam the book into giving him the same bonus. If you were right and i gave him a promo code i would understand you thinking that but i never gave him a code and oddsmaker knows that. My dad emailed them asking for a bonus of some sort and they ignored him.

this has been blown up way too far. its getting laughable if not for fact i am out 8400 that i would have one somewhere else had i not gotten that email offer.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Jimmy,

Did you not tell me at first that a clerk from Oddsmaker said it was OK for you to have your Father call in and request the same 500 dollar free play that was offered to you ? :+clueless
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Mofome,

I can respect you trying to defend your friend but I'm reading another e-mail on here where someone is saying what Jimmy Mac's "intentions" were when they really have no proof one way or another.

I can respect you coming in and defending the Shrink but I don't think you have anything to stand on attacking JimmyMac.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Reading this thread is laughable. To make the player out to be the loan victim in this case is just not accurate. This is someone who clearly tried to cheat the book and got caught. Oddsmaker has their rules, as I have heard many people in this thread say on a number of topics, don't break the rules and you have no worries. 8K is a joke to oddsmaker and, knowing this player a bit, they fully expected to make that money back 3 times over if they had allowed him to continue playing there.

To suggest that Ken is in some deal with oddsmaker is also a joke. Ken has gotten players paid when he thought they were in the wrong before, but this time he deemed that the player was wrong. I spoke with him for over an hour about this and after hearing everything that I did, I was surprised that the player would do what he did.

I, personally, am a player and what I make has nothing to do with oddsmaker nor any other book. I simply talked with Ken and after hearing the facts, didn't like what I heard about this players actions. I have disagreed with Ken on some matters, but certainly not this one. Sometimes players try to cheat books, we have to arbitrate with an open mind. Hell, even when trying to have an open mind I still want to side with the player typically, but this time I just couldn't. I'm not rich person, but I have personally given thousands of dollars to people on eog for a variety of reasons, I care about the people here more than anyone, but I also despite lying and cheating. If lying or cheating was ok with me, I would have 10000 times more money than I do now, but trying to cheat someone is inexcusable to me.

The player took a shot at the book and hoped that they'd be a bit more incompetent than they were; he lost that bet. Oddsmaker has me bashed on the forums, losing them money. Oddsmaker figured they would make money on this player alone, but they'll lose that. All because of what? They aren't willing to give in to someone who broke their rules and that they cant trust. You don't try to give a private promo code for a bonus to someone else, you just don't. It was a VIP code and they tried to abuse it; thats unfortunate.

If Ken was scamming someone, or bullshitting, he wouldn't have spent countless hours on this starting the moment he walked in the door. The fact is, many people have done what they claim Ken is doing. People had their mind up before they even heard the ruling. They knew they'd bash Ken if he sided with a book. They know Ken has done some things they may not agree with in the past, so they'll hold it against him in anything they dont agree with in the future. The Shrink has been as honest as a man can be over the last year with everyone here, and he certainly doesn't need oddsmakers money to get by, I think we all know that. The fact is, oddsmaker has their rules set, those were rules were broken, and thats not on anyone but the player. You make your own bed at times.

No one benefits from this player trying to get the best of the book nor making this decision, its simply the only decision that can be made and dealing with people bashing is just a part of life. Ken could have spent zero minutes on this if he knew what he was going to rule, but instead he called Pete, Dozer, oddsmaker, talked with the player and worked for well over 25 hours on this alone. He did that, not to fool anyone, not to cheat anyone, but simply to get as much information as possible so that he could make a fair ruling.

And he did.

Joe
We get it, u know how to write LONG paragraphs to get ur point accross - How can you side with the site, they didn't even issue the free play for Jimmy's father! Its all a freaking joke, u know how many people belong to lil clubs where they get coupons and discounts at restaurants, grocery stores, department stores, etc..... (i.e. 20% of next purchase) All these people are forwarding them SAME promotions to their friends, u prolly have done it too, these places want you to get their name out there and bring more customers - U think if the store found out that the 20% off or the free $50 GC with purchase of $150 or more was actually sent to someone else, they wouldn't let the customer use the coupons????? The fact of the matter is all these companies want the business, they want their name out there just like ODDSMAKERS does, they want Jimmy to tell his friends about this promotion, not necessarily give them the 500 free but atleast know there is someone out there offering this(this is obv what Jimmy was doing, not to scam a measely $500 from a site) - The only conclusion here is that OM's found some bs excuse not to pay Jimmy so they acted on it and they got some pissed off sales rep saying he was "SNEAKY" - All this is just LAUGHABLE - U know why a company like OM's has to promote themselves so much and beg for business, bc they are NOT loyal to their CURRENT customers, they need to find new ones!
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

shrink,

I told you that i told the clerk in the middle of a conversation about how good the bonus offer was that i was gonna have my dad call them and see if he can get a bonus offer as well.

The clerk DID NOT say no you cant do that because it is a bonus offer only for you and that would be breaking a rule.....

We are playing semantics with all of this.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

and shrink i know i made myself very clear to you that the clerk never said anything was ok. he also never said it was not NOT ok. It was a passing comment in a long conversation. You even said to me so this clerk didnt do anything wrong and I said No he did nothing wrong. it was not a big deal. Not at least until my account got up to 8400. then the emails came accusing me of cheating and calling multiple times about withdrawals. I called one time asking about withdrawals. that was my first sign that these guys were gonna screw me. the first email saying i called multiple times was so inaccurate.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Long term this sure seems like a horrendous business decision by Oddsmaker.com.
I'm certain that their judgement on this matter will now cost them substantially more than $8400 over the long run.
Not only are they crossed off of my list of potential books to use for the upcoming football season, I will definitely pass this information on to all my friends to make sure that they steer clear of these crooks. I imagine many others will do the same.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

RECOMMENDED LIST

BEST SPORTSBOOKS: AMERICAN SPORTS

<select name="ctl00$ContentPlaceHolder1$ctl00$jumper" onchange="javascript:setTimeout('__doPostBack(\'ctl00$ContentPlaceHolder1$ctl00$jumper\',\'\')', 0)" id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_ctl00_jumper"> <option value="?Show=Name">Sort By: Alphabetically</option> <option value="?Show=Rating">Rating</option> <option value="?Show=Relation">Parent Company /Host</option> <option value="?Show=Software">Software</option> <option value="?Show=Phone">Phone Number</option> <option value="?Show=Chat">Live Chat</option> <option selected="selected" value="List">The Recommended List</option> </select> <input name="ctl00$ContentPlaceHolder1$ctl00$goJump" value="Go" id="ctl00_ContentPlaceHolder1_ctl00_goJump" type="submit">
<table class="listTable" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="1"><tbody><tr class="tableHeader"> <th>SPORTSBOOK</th> <th>REVIEW</th> <th>RATING</th> <th>BEST FOR:*</th> <th>WEB SITE</th> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1">

Pinnacle Sports
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A+</td> <td class="col4">P</td> <td class="col5">PinBet.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1"> The Greek
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A+</td> <td class="col4">P</td> <td class="col5">TheGreek.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1"> BookMaker
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A+</td> <td class="col4">P</td> <td class="col5">BookMaker.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1"> BetJamaica
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A+</td> <td class="col4">R</td> <td class="col5">BetJamaica.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1"> Diamond Sportsbook
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A+</td> <td class="col4">P</td> <td class="col5">2BetDSI.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1"> LegendZ
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A+</td> <td class="col4">R</td> <td class="col5">LegendZ.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1"> 5Dimes
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A</td> <td class="col4">R</td> <td class="col5">5Dimes.com</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="col1"> BetOnline
</td> <td class="col2">Review</td> <td class="col3">A-</td> <td class="col4">R</td> <td class="col5">BetOnline.com</td></tr></tbody></table>


Do these discussions happen with any of the above books?


Play at a D- rated book and these are the things that could happen when they throw out $500 pieces of bait to the big whales.

Forget the bonuses and just win the money yourself.

Which reminds me Blondie, did you get my PM about my Bet Jamaica contest winner BONUS from last night?

:doh1
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Jimmy,

Did you not email your Father the exact same email that was sent to you?

Did your Father not pretend that he got the same email as you did when he called a different customer service to get the 500 dollar free play?

Did you ever change your story around with Anthony when you first told Anthony that someone from VIP said your Father could use your bonus email as well and get the 500 dollar free play?

When did u first start playing with an offshore sports book?

These are important questions that I hope you will answer truthfully...

Thanks,
Ken
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Long term this sure seems like a horrendous business decision by Oddsmaker.com.
I'm certain that their judgement on this matter will now cost them substantially more than $8400 over the long run.
Not only are they crossed off of my list of potential books to use for the upcoming football season, I will definitely pass this information on to all my friends to make sure that they steer clear of these crooks. I imagine many others will do the same.
Agree and what you say will definitely happen, as players who disagree with this situation will make sure of it ten times over.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Lol at this Anthony guy, how can he even be credible when he is emailing CUSTOMERS calling them "Sneaky", what are we 8 years old -
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Really though!

How does passing along the e-mail to a family member to try and get another bonus result in the forfeit of $8400. No bonus was given. The other account was not allowed.

Just because you catch someone trying to steal from you, it does not give you the right to steal from them.

Jimmy deserves to get fucked if and only if he successfully got a second bonus and used it to win this $8400.

Under the vague and open ended rules a book can twist any situation to justify confiscating your winnings.

I read the posted TOS and what jimmy did is not a clear cut case of bonus abuse. His dad is a unique individual who despite jimmy's advise, is responsible for his own actions. Oddsmaker suffered no harm from a failed attempt at a second bonus.

Oddsmaker should have shown Jimmy the door upon disallowing his fathers bonus. They allowed him to continue playing as a suspected bonus abuser, hoping that he would lose and make some deposits.

From what I read, Jimmy was at around $3000 when he referred his dad. At the very least, he should have been paid that.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

We are in a recession folks, books are hurting, forums are hurting(even laying off paid mods). The chances of shrink ruling against his best interests are about the same as the chances that the mods will disagree with his decision.

Yes I,m sure he agonized over the decision, but in the end he had no real choice but to side with oddsmaker and the mods have no real choice but to agree with him.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

We are in a recession folks, books are hurting, forums are hurting(even laying off paid mods). The chances of shrink ruling against his best interests are about the same as the chances that the mods will disagree with his decision.

Yes I,m sure he agonized over the decision, but in the end he had no real choice but to side with oddsmaker and the mods have no real choice but to agree with him.
that is bullshit.

we all have choices:cheers
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Jimmy,

Did you not email your Father the exact same email that was sent to you?

Did your Father not pretend that he got the same email as you did when he called a different customer service to get the 500 dollar free play?

Did you ever change your story around with Anthony when you first told Anthony that someone from VIP said your Father could use your bonus email as well and get the 500 dollar free play?

When did u first start playing with an offshore sports book?

Thanks,
Ken

Yes I forwarded him the exact same email so he would have the information. He was asking me for their phone number,website address,etc and i wanted to get off the phone to watch the games i was betting so i said ill forward you the email.

My father DID NOT pretend he got the same offer. He called the number that was on the website. this where you guys have it all wrong in your conspiracy theory. You think he consciously thought if he calls the other number they may give him the same bonus cuz they think its his?? He was not thinking that deeply into it. he just opened an account and called the number on the sit.

And i never changed my story around with anthony. i mentioned to him that i mentioned to his clerk about my dad trying to get a similiar deal and he took that and ran with it like i was saying the clerk gave the ok for my dad to get that bonus. It was never that detailed a conversation at all. No one gave me the ok cuz i WAS NOT trying to pull a sneaky move.

The funny thing is this is all so avoidable if these books could just put a unique number on each promo and then if someone else calls they ask for the code and if it has been used already say its not your offer.etc... with technology today this should not be so hard. Again, I never had a promo code.

I know you have to justify your decision but i feel it is the wrong one. I am the customer here and its good business sense to give the customer the benefit of the doubt before making assumptions.

I knew from the tone of tony stewarts voice at oddsmaker on the first call that his goal was to discredit my winning by any means possible.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

I applaud that this is being done regardless of the outcome. At some point we need to get to an IBAS type of scenario that acts on the behalf of all parties without bias on this side of the pond. I can imagine Ken knew he was going to get a lot of negativity directed his way for this decision, and I hope this effort can continue and help pave the way to a better and clearer B2C relationship across our entire industry.

It is said there are three sides to every story, and I believe in a voice for 3rd side. Somebody needs to fill that role.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

We are in a recession folks, books are hurting, forums are hurting(even laying off paid mods). The chances of shrink ruling against his best interests are about the same as the chances that the mods will disagree with his decision.

Yes I,m sure he agonized over the decision, but in the end he had no real choice but to side with oddsmaker and the mods have no real choice but to agree with him.
True, but ironically in the long run, the biggest loser in this dispute will be Oddsmaker.com.
 
Re: JIMMYMAC VS. ODDSMAKER DISPUTE: THE VERDICT

Ah back, sorry I misspoke, there was no VIP code, it was a VIP email. A VIP email that you fwd to someone who was not supposed to have it. At that point you called a different line, a line that you hoped would act incompetently, and you lost. You, Jimmy, have changed your story 3 times.

I thought it was ok
I was told it was ok
ok, so maybe I wasn't told it was ok

fact? You lied a couple times there and you knew, all along, what you were doing. This book has a profile on you and they fully expected you to lose, that is not a slight, that is just a fact and why you were contacted with this offer in the first place. You, specifically, were contacted. This was not something you were authorized to pass on; this is nothing more than an issue of you blatantly breaking a rule, knowingly, and then lying about it. I can think of no less sympathetic position. I adore people; honest people. I don't see you as that in the least.

I have talked with Ken who has spent countless hours on this.
I have talked with oddsmaker who has spent countless hours on this.

Each of them has nothing to gain from this and, in fact, are likely to lose from this. If Ken didn't care or had his mind made up, he would have spent 1/10th the time on this that he did. Oddsmaker has guys they have paid out over 100k in the last 9 months. They are certainly not worried about your 8 dimes. What they are worried about is a player who has shown them that he will try and circumvent the rules and a player who has demonstrated an arrogance and ignorance when dealing with the vary people he tried to cheat.

What is your contention now, does it change with the moment? You knew you couldn't do what you did, you knew you called another number to try and redeem this bonus. If you thought it was ok, then why did you not call the person and number in the email you sent on to your father? Give me a break. You aren't going to bullshit me, please. It was it is. You rolled the dice, you lost. You were arrogant and now you want to take down a book with you over your own 8 dime mistake. Your mistake, Jimmy. Your own lapse in judgment. Your own scheme gone wrong. It would be nice if you would own up to it and move on, but that's obviously not going to be the case. People can bash here if they like, but this one isn't even hard for me to decide on. Ken asked me not to post until he did.

What can I say? I can't stomach lying or cheating. Its about as simple as that.

Good day.
 
Top