Problems with Nine.com. Can anybody here help?

[The Meatman]

Nine.com is trying to steal $4216 from my client and he wants his money back.

Nine.com is trying to steal $4216 from my client and he wants his money back.

Bill Dozer says:
"We all probably agree that the sportsbook should process phone bets the same way they are online. If you give your password and confirm it, it's in. If there are technical difficulties online the bet wouldn't somehow confirm itself. The rule may be a liability for Nine."

You are correct Bill. Phone bets should be processed the same way they are online where you must give your password and confirm the bet at the very end. To allow Nine.com to get away with this is BS. To state that the ticket writer who makes $3 per hour(if he is lucky) decides if the bet counts or not on a disconnected call is absurd. Nine.com is trying to steal $4216 from my client and he wants his money back.

Still no word from The General on this topic?


Dave Scandaliato

 

[Caliente]

I knew it was large amount.

 

[muskatel]

Pretty Obvious Answer...

Pretty Obvious Answer...

The rule in question:

5. Wager Confirmations

A. Phone Customers

Read back is final. The ticket writer will read back the wagers. If the read back or confirmation is correct, client must reconfirm wagers by stating their PIN number thus making wagers final.

If a customer confirms a read back where the ticket writer made a mistake, the wager is final. It is the responsibility of the customer to correct any errors during the read back.

In the event a customer does not hear the read back due to technical difficulties (disconnections, etc.) it is the customer's responsibility to call 1-800-213-3370 immediately to confirm the wager or the wager will be entered as understood by the ticket writer. In a case of a discrepancy, the archived recording of said transaction will determine the wager type and wager amount.

The nine.com rules explicitly state that the player has a losing bet. Who has ever put $4k on a wager, had the phone call disconnected, and not called back to confirm the bet?

Dave MeatandPotatoes appears to be using eog's thread to gain traction to his website.

This deserves to be in the garbage forum...

:+signs8-7

 

[THE SHRINK]

MeatandPotatoes,

It shouldn't have been too difficult for you to discern that both the General and I were in Costa Rica for the past 7 days and we just returned tonight...

I personally would have to hear from both sides before I rendered any final decision, but based purely on the facts as presented by you, I'd have to side with the sports book here.

The rules are indeed very clear as some of our sharper posters have pointed out and the player should have called back...

I know I certainly would have and this scenario has happened to me before...

By the way, when it did happen to me, the sports book had already considered it a bet...

And, I was relieved to know that, too...

THE SHRINK

 

[roach23]

The nine.com rules explicitly state that the player has a losing bet. Who has ever put $4k on a wager, had the phone call disconnected, and not called back to confirm the bet?

Dave MeatandPotatoes appears to be using eog's thread to gain traction to his website.

This deserves to be in the garbage forum...

:+signs8-7

This is what i was thinking.

 

[Caliente]

This has happened to me many times and I always freak out and call right back. I mean if you put the bet in, you want the bet, the action. You have to call back so you know if you win, youll get paid. I mean whats the point of checking the score or watching the game if you dont even know if your bet got in? Anyone who sincerely wanted the bet when they called, would call right back. I mean you bet on a game because you like the bet. You want to make sure the bet is in therefore.
This is not saying the rule is kosher though! i played at Nine and it was really bad all around!

 

[The Meatman]

Hello Shrink. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post.

What do you think about this rule Nine.com has regarding disconnected phone wagers? I always thought if there was no read back and password conformation then the play was considered no action. It seems to me that the rule Nine.com has allows them to play both sides on the fence in a situation like this. If the play wins then there is no action because the person did not call back to confirm the wager. If the play loses then it counts because the ticket writer says it does.

You Shrink are one of the few people out there that know more about this business then I do. That's why I was asking your opinion on this matter.

Have you ever heard of this phone rule Nine.com has?

PS I don't think your "Quick Reply" is working(or at least I could not get it to work). You might want to check it out.


Dave Scandaliato

 

[THE SHRINK]

David,

I remember you from way back and I hope you are doing well. NINE .COM was one of the books we turned down for advertising here when we opened becaue they were brand new and we wanted some time to watch them before endorsing this book to our players...

Although I agree with you that many other sports books require a read back before a bet is "official," their rules are quite clear and players need to read ALL the RULES before sending money offshore and gambling with sports books, especially newer ones...

In this case, NINE.COM'S rule regarding this incident is quite clear, so as I stated earlier, they are clearly in the RIGHT, according to what you shared here...

THE SHRINK

 

[pioneer]

The rule in question:

5. Wager Confirmations

A. Phone Customers

Read back is final. The ticket writer will read back the wagers. If the read back or confirmation is correct, client must reconfirm wagers by stating their PIN number thus making wagers final.

If a customer confirms a read back where the ticket writer made a mistake, the wager is final. It is the responsibility of the customer to correct any errors during the read back.

In the event a customer does not hear the read back due to technical difficulties (disconnections, etc.) it is the customer's responsibility to call 1-800-213-3370 immediately to confirm the wager or the wager will be entered as understood by the ticket writer. In a case of a discrepancy, the archived recording of said transaction will determine the wager type and wager amount.

***

It pains me to say this, but I agree with Nine.

The rule sucks ass, but it is crystal clear.

Joe/Shrink;
How is this rule crystal clear? Is this..." client must reconfirm wagers by stating their PIN number thus making wagers final.", not contradictory to this..."In the event a customer does not hear the read back due to technical difficulties (disconnections, etc.) it is the customer's responsibility to call 1-800-213-3370 immediately to confirm the wager or the wager will be entered as understood by the ticket writer."? So to rephrase the question, must the client reconfirm the wager or does the ticket writer have the right to enter the wager as he, the tcket writer, understands it? It can not be both ways; either the client must reconfirm or not.

 

[OldDog]

The player took a shot, that's all there is to it. Can't help occasional technical problems, afterall we are talking about Costa Rica here. If it were me to get it off my back i would count no action and suspend the customers phone wagering rights. Make him play over the net and then see him make a complaint about a play being counted.

The Dog

 

[The Meatman]

Thanks for the response Shrink

Thanks for the response Shrink

to: OldDog
Nine.com does not allow my client to wager over the Internet. He use to do that, but they told him all plays must be phoned in.

to: The Shrink
Thanks for your input Shrink. I hope you do not take Nine.com on as an advertiser as long as they keep their phone disconnect rule that allows them to play both sides of the fence in a situation like my client is in. They really need to change that rule, but that is just my opinion.

Dave Scandaliato

 

[Joe]

Joe/Shrink;
How is this rule crystal clear? Is this..." client must reconfirm wagers by stating their PIN number thus making wagers final.", not contradictory to this..."In the event a customer does not hear the read back due to technical difficulties (disconnections, etc.) it is the customer's responsibility to call 1-800-213-3370 immediately to confirm the wager or the wager will be entered as understood by the ticket writer."? So to rephrase the question, must the client reconfirm the wager or does the ticket writer have the right to enter the wager as he, the tcket writer, understands it? It can not be both ways; either the client must reconfirm or not.

Please keep in mind that I do not agree with the rule.

Logically it works like this:

- Player calls and places bet. Clerk reads back. Player confirms. Wager is official.

- Player calls and places bet. Clerk reads back. Dead air. Clerk repeats readback. Dead air. Now the clerk has to make the decision as to whether there were "technical difficulties". If he (or she) decides that there were "technical difficulties" then the wager is official unless the player calls back and cancels.

Crystal clear.

Again, I do not agree with the rule, but it is clear as to what the players responsibilities are.

The problem is in the last part. How can a clerk tell if there was a disconnection or the player got a better line somewhere else and just hung up the phone?

There is some recourse in the tapes. But they can only be used to verify the bet. Meaning that if you said that you wanted a dime on Team A and the clerk wrote down Team B. Then there was a "technical difficulty" and the readback was not confirmed. So the clerk recorded the bet as Team B. The book would go to the tape to correct the wager. At least by their rules they would.

Looks like the book is giving itself a lot of lee-way here...

But the rule is clear - it is the responsibility of the gambler to confirm or cancel wagers if a readback was not completed.

 

[pioneer]

Joe,
We're on the same side here...we both agree their rules for accepting phone wagers are wrong. But you never answered my question; in fact you posted an example which proves my point, ie. that their rules are contradictory and then you added again your inane claim that their rules are crystal clear. You posted...
"- Player calls and places bet. Clerk reads back. Player confirms. Wager is official.

- Player calls and places bet. Clerk reads back. Dead air. Clerk repeats readback. Dead air. Now the clerk has to make the decision as to whether there were "technical difficulties". If he (or she) decides that there were "technical difficulties" then the wager is official unless the player calls back and cancels.

Crystal clear."

...just because you say it is so, does not make it crystal clear. The only thing crystal clear is that the 2 rules contradict themselves. I admit that either rule taken by itself would be "crystal clear" as you say, but taken together they are mutually contradictory of each other. Let me put it this way...
"The wall in front of me is white."

"The wall in front of me is black."

...now, both statements are "crystal clear" by themselves, but they contradict themselves. Same situation with nine.com's rules.

 

[The Meatman]

Nine.com needs to remove their phone rule .....

Nine.com needs to remove their phone rule .....

Nine.com needs to remove their phone rule that allows them to play both sides of the fence on a disconnected call. Bottom line!

I was also just reading a post on Steve Fezziks web site about a problem someone is having with Nine.com taking $660 out of their account. Too funny!


Dave Scandaliato