Topic: #1 RATINGS and REVIEWS of SPORTS BOOKS thread. Poster input appreciated. - page 24. (Read 89556 times)

Ok youre better then anoni. But you cant be A rated because youre a startup as per rules in the OP which all books are subject to. Deal with it.

You say peeps is paid by anoni, he and anoni deny that. He wont admit to it even if its true. Deal with it.

Also if you aim to be best by comparing yourself to a A rated book in a thread that you believe is having paid for ratings you loose all credibility.

I have a proposal for the criteria by which the books are rated. I think that the books that void valid bets should be no better than A-. 

We explained in previous posts why we believe that we are better than Anonibet, the top rated Bitcoin sportsbook in this list.

We beat them in every category, including the odds. If you'd like to read our reasoning, the discussion starts here :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6137493

If you disagree, we certainly respect that.

A few hours after we claimed that we are better than Anonibet and questioned the rating, Peeps punished us and reduced our rating to C.

Peeps has the right to get paid for his work.

What we are asking is that Peeps disclose in the opening post which Bitcoin Sportbooks are paying him to promote them in forums so that the readers of this thread will have the relevant information to decide if and where the ratings are biased.

Directbet , youre a sportsbook with terrible odds. Sportsbook are parasites by nature. You dont even extend the curtesy to punters by offering decent odds for the right to suck on them, thats considering your promo you still take too much juice.

You dont want to pay for advertisement so dont complain.


You shouldnt talk about ethics and play the victim. Do it like cloudbet who despite their rating stay classy and do their best to offer a decent service. At least they understand public image and how to build a repuation.

In the end if peeps gets paid then its his right and its not less unethical then beeing a bookie.

I have seen more then 1 rating thread and somehow this got to be most popular so I suggest you deal with it. Everyone has the right to make a rating thread and its up to the community to accept it.

If you were smart you would do your best to be the best and point out why youre good and proof yourself instead of playing the victim.

Peeps, so how about you put a disclosure in the opening post, stating that :

"We are getting paid by the following Bitcoin Sportbooks to advertise them on our web site and in forums (just not this forum)"

You keep spreading false information here on DirectBet.

You did successfully placed several bets on DirectBet during April and they were confirmed.

A few days after your most recent confirmed bet you come here and say that we are useless, instead of crediting us for offering bets that were not available by your top rated sponsored books.

The bet you had rejected was not our fault. I have already explained it to you in this post :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6454587

Again and again I am proving that you post false information here on DirectBet to hurt our business.

You do it because we did not want to pay you to advertise us and because we dared to question your ratings.

Yes, of course. I agree.

I meant what did DirectBet say that's unethical. But never mind, the thread has moved on.

Speaking of lines.. we have among the best lines online. Running 2 cent lines on many events. Bet with GoBetGo!

Premiership:



Primera Division:


Serie A:



Champions League:




NBA:

thanks for the feedback. Keep it coming guys.

I try to stay unbias and Directbet has seen my feedback. They are C-level book in my opinion. Just wanted to state that yesterday did place 2 nba wagers and the juice was not extreme for live betting. Line was 1.9/1.9 at some times. Good you lowered your hold.

I tried to play. Me bets were getting rejected. Some said pending and then 5 seconds later said rejected. That's why I'm saying that your book has become useless. You were good months ago but changes have been made.

Took another payout from coindrafts that took about 3 hours.

It's unethical to rate the books for pay at bitcointalk since the ratings are for this community.

We are offering odds on the Derby, as well as some promotions for the Mayweather fight tomorrow.

Feel free to check us out, as well as our blog for up to date promotions.

https://www.casinobitco.in

http://www.gambleonlinewithbitcoin.com

I've looked through quite a few books and I haven't been able to find a book offering exotics for the Kentucky Derby. Any suggestions for abook with a lot of horse betting options?

This is not a coincidence. The ratings criteria were changed AFTER the books started paying him to promote them in forums.

At the beginning, when this ratings thread started, there was a long list of 11 criteria that was used to determine the rating of each sportsbook. Book opening date was # 4 in importance, as you can see here :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.4979844

After the advertisement deal, Peeps figured it would be best for his books if he removes all criteria and leave just one - the book opening date.


Initially, it was Peeps who suggested it, then some agreed, but they agreed to cap the max rating, not to automatically award the max rating based on how long the book is in business.

If you follow this thread you will see a constant pattern :

When posters suggest changes that favor Anonibet rating, Peeps implements them.

When posters provide negative feedback on Anonibet or suggest changes that might negatively affect their score, Peeps ignores them.

See this post :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6487920

You say peeps tailored the rating so that only the books who took his deal would be top rated.

So it would have to be coincidence that, the books who took the offer are also the longest operating to fit his criteria. And to add to that the books who took offer are also the most popular?

Peeps also said that it was the users who demanded the ruling be changed, I didnt confirm it but I tend to believe it because I think he would have been called for it hadnt it been so.

There has been a new thread to rate books based on user votes, the ratings there are congruent with the ratings here.

The offer to go around to plug you in forums doesnt mean it has to be this thread because this is not a plugging but a user generated rating thread. If the community didnt agree it would abondon this thread.

I have not seen any plugging for any specific books here , just user generated content. The ratings on the startpage are more or less accepted by users who have used the books. Again I agree anoni is overrated but youre theory that anoni specificlly paid for beeing the only A rated book doesnt hold up under close scrutiny.

You should take an example on cloudbet who have the same rating as you but have recieved good reviews here from me and others , something that cant be said about you.

You keep spreading false information about us.

You were betting in-play on DirectBet several times during April, as recent as April 26th, just 3 days before this story broke out, then you come here and say that we are useless ?

Why instead don't you give us credit for offering bets that were not available by your top rated books ?

Unethical?

Why?

That's an interesting twist.

For days we are having this discussion. At no point did you deny that certain Bitcoin Sportbooks are paying you to advertise them on forums. Neither of the books denied that either.

You kept avoiding the question and downplaying the responsibility to your boss.

Now you suddenly deny it and claim that it wasn't even discussed, so we have no other choice but to reveal what happened :

Several weeks ago Peeps contacted the top Bitcoin sports betting sites and invited them to advertise on his website, http://www.peepsplace.com

The advertisement deal specifically included promoting the books in forums :



We rejected the offer, but Peeps kept nudging several times :



We still refused to take the offer, but apparently others did take it.

Shortly afterwards, Peeps tailored the ratings and criteria on this thread so that the Bitcoin sportbooks that purchased his advertisement deal will also be on top of his ratings list.

Peeps had a lot of good things to say about us, he praised us on e-mails and forums, he was also betting on our website regularly and he even signed up as an affiliate, but after we rejected to purchase his advertisement deal, Peeps suddenly started discrediting us and posting false information, and a few hours after we questioned our rating, it was reduced to C.

I invite you to read more on this matter and see for yourself :

At the beginning, when this ratings thread started, there was a list of criteria that was used to determine the rating of each sportsbook. We were given a rating of B and Anonibet were the top rated sportsbook with a rating of A.

I went over the list of criteria, one by one, and proved that in each and every category we are as good or better than Anonibet. And so I asked Peeps why we are rated lower ?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6137493

Just a few hours later the ratings criteria have suddenly changed !!! so that Anonibet can be the only Bitcoin Sportsbook with a rating of A and they were also granted the max possible rating of A, on top of all other books. Our rating on the other hand was reduced to C.

During the following days, there have been several reports here on Anonibet retroactively canceling bets, delaying withdrawals, limiting bet sizes and bet selections and various other negative feedback. Players were saying they will never bet there again, that they do not deserve to be the top rated, but their rating remains a firm A, on top of all other sportbooks, and Peeps ignored all comments.

As a result, we claim that this ratings guide has turned into a disguised advertising vehicle for Anonibet.

That's when we questioned the rating for the second time :

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6452025

It's time to put a stop to this practice, where hustlers are asking Bitcoin Sportsbooks for payments in order to get a good review and rating, or else they get discredited in forums along with a reduced rating.

Peeps is in a conflict of interests as he is getting paid by some Bitcoin Sportbooks to advertise them on his website and promote them in forums and therefore he does not have the authority or creditability to rate Bitcoin Sportbooks.