Timeline of events
Player number one opened his account in December 2011. He deposited $5,290 across six transactions and received $3,870 in cash bonuses, made 874 wagers, and was successfully paid $8,220. With his balance remaining at $22,908, his account was frozen. BetRevolution claimed that his account was under investigation. He was then accused of being the ringleader of a group of other sportsbook users.
Player two created his account in September 2012. He deposited $900 and received a 50% cash bonus, made 76 wagers, and has not received payment. A $800 payout was requested on January 23; but this request was stalled, and he continued to add to his balance and ultimately increased it to $4,000. BetRevolution requested that he provide ID on February 21, before ultimately accusing him of irregular betting patterns and inquiring if he knew any other customers. Fearing that knowing a friend also played with the sportsbook, he denied knowing others with BetRevolution accounts.
A third player was also alleged to have his funds confiscated, but this player opted not to file an SBR complaint.
SBR contacts BetRevolution to discuss the complaints
After SBR contacted BetRevolution to discuss the complaints, BetRevolution provided an attachment showing the players Facebook profiles and that they appeared to be tagged as friends. BetRevolution then reiterated that the players denied knowing others with accounts at their shop, and that they had a number of common wagers as well as a number of unique bets. Essentially, the two friends shared picks on some occasions.
BetRevolution decided that because the players knew each other and occasionally had common wagers, that this constituted a betting syndicate and as these players were betting in a sophisticated manner, i.e. not throwing up hailmary parlays, that they could get away with confiscating the funds and citing their rule outlawing syndicate betting.
Syndicate betting is the act of a group of players conspiring to bet together to circumvent limits, usually when one or more parties have been banned from the bookmaker. Neither of the players who filed SBR complaints were alleged to have operated multiple accounts. Their only crime was knowing one another, being Facebook friends, and occasionally having action on the same American sporting events.
BetRevolution refuses to budge; gets blacklisted
Following BetRevolution’s outright refusal to revisit the cases, Sportsbook Review was forced to blacklist the sportsbook. BetRevolution has also not shown a willingness to discuss payout complaints as they have been submitted by users. SBR advises users to avoid the sportsbook.
source : www.sportsbookreview.com
