First, abaout the discrepancies between 375,000 and 330,000 [i'll do a rounding here as we all understand the numbers being talked about]. I've inquired to them and they informed me that the losing leg is this bet,
and I didn't take their words at face value and check, of which, it was a losing bet,
and I didn't take their words at face value and check, of which, it was a losing bet,
I don't know at which point on that day they canceled my bets, and until I proposed I be paid according to the "Cashout" value it didn't matter. But sure, let's say that they are right and the number is 330k.
Moving further, I'll lay it out in the open and publicly admit there might be an oversight from me. I raked upon their ToS to find clause that justifies them to cancel your multi bets, and they do don't have a clause in their tos where they can cancel multi-bets unilaterally, the ToS they have about multi-legged bets was talking about a cancellation due to match didn't finish. I've read them word by word, letter by letter, all in their point 4 of "Placing a Stake".
However, apparently, they do have a clause on point 6, that say,
and I regret to inform you that based from the information they provided, not only they have that right, from 6.1., but also further emphasized with an enough reason to void [so the call was not done baselessly or out of grudge or other malicious intent] as per 6.4.3., unfair practice, which was flagged by their provider.
First of all, 6.1 refers to rejecting a bet which is not the same as canceling.
Regarding the part of the ToS where they claim they can cancel any bet - if they decide to stick by it then no one informed with half a brain would ever play there. That's not how sportsbooks are run, that's rogue. That's why we're talking here on the forum now so that the gambling community gets an insight of their practices.
As for 6.4.3 - they've yet to provide info of any wrongdoing. Just saying "player high risk" doesn't mean anything.
They have their eyes on you for so long for the technique you're utilizing, and I'll do the courtesy of not divulging to the public of your betting strategy that they and their provider deemed as a violation. But given they've set their eyes on you for so long, that the provider flag you as a very high risk bettor, I believe you've repeat this more than plenty and fully know what you're doing.
Personally, upon hearing their rebuttal, I think that's a clever strategy and there's nothing wrong about it. But unfortunately, upon doing my own DD of raking their ToS amongst several other things, it does match the point they prohibit on 6.4.3.
Bottomline: they do have the right to cancel your bet. Unilaterally.
Personally, upon hearing their rebuttal, I think that's a clever strategy and there's nothing wrong about it. But unfortunately, upon doing my own DD of raking their ToS amongst several other things, it does match the point they prohibit on 6.4.3.
Bottomline: they do have the right to cancel your bet. Unilaterally.
Feel free to expose my betting strategy to the public. I give you full permission.
Even further, suppose someone who [we're talking imaginative person here] said they have arbitraging cases longer than me [well, I'll take their words at face value as I never arbitrage, I'm simply bridging] suggested "go to ADR, got to AG, got CG, go to their licensor, sue them," I personally think those third party will rule in favor of the casino following their explanation and the evidence they also shared with me and the ToS you breached.
Yes, arbitrage services are hit and miss, they do tend to side with the casino as they are funded by their affiliate schemes. But again, you speak of the evidence yet not you nor the casino is willing to post it here.
Please post evidence.
Plus [not posting this to brag, but rather to emphasize that I don't think you can get similar discussion on AG or CG or whatever else others whispered to you], this:
I deliberately cropped it that way to show that it is not me typing it. As you can see, it's on the left side of the chat, not right side, it's their bubbles. And no, I did not violate the privacy I guaranteed to those who reach and share through personal means of communication with me. My oath of silence was not broken, because that is part of their final standing that they'll publish.
Now you're posting their baseless accusations of me. What numbers did I "invent"?
40,000 USD is the offer they have in hand. You can take it and we can each go to our separate way, or you can continue your battle and I'll stick to my earlier statement of removing myself as I don't have any interest in gulping any more ergotamine for this case.
Why are they offering anything if they have evidence that I have defrauded them?
p.s.: suppose someone somehow managed to try to twist this is me "thratening" the player or "forcing" him, no. I am not. I am simply laying everything in the open. I couldn't care less what his decision is. He take the offer? Good. I'll convey and get the fund delivered. He refuses the offer and pursue another path? Also good, I'll take my leave and will be waiting for an update of the case from spectator seat. I'll still get my inner peace regardless of the choice.
For what it's worth I don't think you're siding with the casino. I'm appreciative of your involvement as ever.
I do feel that we made the case much more complicated than it needs to be. It'd be much simpler if the sporsbook (who has a rep on this forum) just replied with their evidence. If they don't they're gonna suffer reputational damage.