Topic: BC.game asking me to lose intentionally, then confiscating funds - page 5. (Read 2096 times)

I was not limited in both BC.game and 500.casino before I placed the bets. Therefore I was able to place both bets. Then the next day I noticed I was limited. But the difference is that 500.casino were acting profesionally an honest by settling the bet as winner as it should be, and letting me withdraw my funds (not even KYC needed), while BC.game asked for KYC and confiscated the winnings.

And yes, I am limited in Stake as well, but this happened years ago already and it took several months before I was limited there. Stake plays no role in this case.

THEN FUCK OFF AND DIE, ASSHOLE

I believe yours is the one with a lot of posts in all caps and profanities? Sorry, I couldn't force myself to finish reading that thread and, thus, didn't have an understanding of that thread. I rarely PM representatives for cases that I didn't oversee, and I didn't oversee cases that I didn't have an understanding on.

You should do the same to me and earlypaco because they clearly also LOST their case against us on casino guru and got demanded to pay us our winnings
but are not doing so, so far....

Not just on this case here !

But if you are limited by the game provider, and everyone is saying that BC Game and 500 Casino are using the same game provider, how was your bet accepted at 500 Casino? Were you limited after you placed and won your bet on BC Game? What's your status on 500 Casino now, are you heavily limited there as well? You also mentioned being limited on Stake as well.

I am guessing that sportsbooks and betting providers cooperate in cases where it's in their interest to keep winning and/or cheating players away from their platforms. That could explain the quick limit you got on BC Game perhaps.

I dont know if u are a regular gambler or not, but that difference is certainly possible , especially in live betting.

Regardless , 500 casino and bcgame have same odds provider so if odds provider were the ones who cancelled it then it would be cancelled on both sites.

BC rep here looked at this and never came back with an update, its such a bad look on them lol.

@OP sorry for asking but are u on really good profit on bc? To me it looks like they saw u were winning too much and went through your history to single out a bet to cancel it.

I wouldnt be surprised if bc disappears anyday
[/quote]



This void bet was my first and only bet. So based on this sample of 1 bet they determine me as a value bettor.
Oh and btw there is nothing about value betting in their terms listed, Pmalek.

It's very simple: BC.game know damn well they are wrong here, but they just don't give a fuck. As soon as they saw I was labelled as a value bettor and my stakes are limited to a few cents max, they knew I would not be of any use for them anymore. And therefore they decided to simply not even pay me.
This careless attitude is filthy and can happen to any other player. So therefore this thread serves as a warning for other people and I hope as many as possible will support my flag so that a warning will be above the official BC.game thread on here.

There isn't much of a history to go through based on what OP said. In his own words, he registered and made only one bet on sports when this incident happened. He had some success on casino games as well. He has also been limited by the game provider to making minimum bets because, as he says, he is a successful sport bettor.

---

I am going to PM the BC Game forum representative and ask them why they have not replied in this thread yet!

Won 88mbtc from sportsbetting from 150mbtc deposit when his issue came up. I don't think it can be considered as a good profit, no?

---

OP, has BC's representative got in touch with you? They were online yesterday and today, and they're yet to address any of the open accusation against them. Kindly update us from your side.

[/QUOTE]

I dont know if u are a regular gambler or not, but that difference is certainly possible , especially in live betting.

Regardless , 500 casino and bcgame have same odds provider so if odds provider were the ones who cancelled it then it would be cancelled on both sites.

BC rep here looked at this and never came back with an update, its such a bad look on them lol.

@OP sorry for asking but are u on really good profit on bc? To me it looks like they saw u were winning too much and went through your history to single out a bet to cancel it.

I wouldnt be surprised if bc disappears anyday

Off the top of my head, that's like 10-15%. That's quite the difference because most bookies offer similar lines.

I am guessing that's because the bookies on that website didn't have those markets for live betting. Bet365 has loads of markets on all sports, it might be different for smaller companies. Betsson also accepted live bets on handicaps, but not on the +-5.5 line.

I don't see it as cheating either, but the stats are showing the odds were higher compared to Bet365. I wish I had a way to check more bookies.

It would be great if you could contact the odds provider and ask them directly. But still, if BC Game has a rule in their TOS for what they consider value betting (which is a bullshit rule to have if you ask me), I don't think it looks good for you because by signing up you agreed to those rules. We might view it as (morally) wrong, but that's the way it is. Your next option is to take this case to the license provider. Will you be doing that?   

Whatever the outcome and their findings, they should have responded to you long time ago. This wasn't professionally handled by their forum representative. 

It's a bit too easy for me to conclude that if Bet365 offered odds of 1.87 vs 1.87 on the +/- 5,5 handicap line, that the 2.10 odds must have been wrong. I checked your link and the only bookie with this handicap offered on there was Bet365 but I remember other bookies like Pinnacle, Betonline, Betcris etc. offering much higher than 1.87 (for example ranging from 1.95 to 2.10).
And as I said, Stake/Winz and all bookies using their odds engine by default always have 5% higher odds than BC.game/500.casino and other bookies using their odds engine. So they would have had 2.15 guaranteed here.
But, even if you stick to just the Bet365 odds then you can see they had 1.87 vs 1,87 meaning they considered it a pure 50/50 bet on that line. So when I got 2,10 for a 50/50 bet is that really so far off? It's just me placing a smart bet, but nothing manipulating/cheating or whatever.

Yes, it's true that when I place a bet I have around 5 different bookies open on my laptop, and obviously I pick the best odds among those 5. I would be crazy not to. Sometimes it's Pinnacle, sometimes it's Betonline, sometimes Betcris, sometimes BC.game. And yes, I am an above average good bettor. But I don't cheat. I have been limited in my max. stakes in several sportsbooks and then they ask for KYC and make sure I won't come back, but at least they always paid me. That is how you handle it like a big boy. But BC.game were the only one who not only limited me, asked me to complete KYC, but also then confiscated my winnings. After 1 (!!!!) bet in the lifetime of my account.
So, they want to outsmart the stupid gamblers (the sportsbook always wins in the long run against them due to the bookie margin ofcourse), but when for once they get outsmarted by a player (in a fair way without using software or bots etc) then they don't pay. Also, I am 99,99999% sure that if I lost this same bet, it would not have been void. When actually it would have been just as much a smart value bet.

Let's summarize the facts here:
- BC.game have confirmed it were not wrong odds, they just don't like that I spotted a value bet
- I offered 500.casino a chance to void my bet retrospectively if they thought there really was something wrong with the odds, upon which they contaced their odds provider (same one as BC.game) and got the response that nothing was wrong with the bet. I have that on a screenshot in the OP.
- the bet was NOT void right after the game finished, but settled as winner for 5 days, until it got voided. This suggests that it was in fact BC.game staff who voided it, NOT their odds provider.
- and last but not least: the representative of BC.game on this forum told me 2 months ago "If everything you posted, including the screenshots are real then I assure you that we will make this right" after which he never posted anything in this topic anymore. So what is his assurance worth now?

OK, so the timestamps on those screenshots show the time the bets were accepted. Between 3:34 and 3:35.

According to the live odds on bet365, the odds at around that time were 1.869 at 03:33 and 1.833 at 03:36. I think I am looking at the correct ones.
https://betsapi.com/rs/bet365/6804801/WAS-Nationals-vs-NY-Mets
Based on that, there is a clear difference in the size of the odds you got (2.10) compared to what bet365 had.

Additionally, if you click on all the other bookmakers, like Ladbrokes, Bwin, Betsson, etc., they all mention the same notification at the top: "Matched as "Reversed". Winner/Handicap should be exchanged." I am not sure what it means exactly, but it looks like there were issues with the money line and handicap markets in some way. Your bet was a handicap bet.

Yes Holydarkness, that is correct. I placed the same bet in 500.casino right after the BC.game bet. It was probably like 20-30 seconds later (for sure during the same break in between innings at least), but due to rounding it showed as a full minute in the time stamp. The reason why I placed this same bet also in 500.casino is simply that the stake in BC.game was not high enough to my liking.

To be painfully precise, it's not even one minute. I think OP placed the bet rather simultaneously, went directly from BC to 500 after he placed the bet. The time difference shown was due to it got rounded up. I believe I read that somewhere, because I have that info in my head, but I was too lazy to re-dig the entire posts on this thread and AG.

Edit: sometimes... I forgot there is this genius innovation called "find in page", it's there on the opening post,

Hello,

Obviously I do not have the time stamps up to the seconds. I only have minutes and those you can see on the attached screenshots in my opening post.

For sure is that I only place bets during breaks in between innings, that is why odds will have stayed the same for about 2 minutes and that is why both bets were placed at the same line and same odds.

Also noteworthy is that for example Stake.com and Winz.io (and some others) use the same base line on MLB (not the exact same provider though) but have a lower winnings margin and therefore always have around 5% higher odds....and odds move at exactly the same time always (that is why I know the same base line)...for example when BC.game has 2.10 then Stake/Winz have 2.15 etc.

So how off can the odds have been when for a fact at several other bookies the same bet was available with 5% higher odds structurally? In fact BC.game is a poor rip-off in terms on MLB odds compared to those other books, but sadly I am limited to pennies at Stake and Winz and therefore had to move to BC.game and 500.casino etc.

OP already shared the screenshot of his bets in the main post. He had placed his bets on BC.game at 3:34 on the 30th July, and he placed the bet at 3:35 on the 30th July on 500Casino. Basically, he placed his bet earlier on BCgame, and he also mentioned that the bets have been placed during the break. In my opinion, there was nothing wrong in his bets. Although the betting site and odds provider makes the judgement based on the terms.

I was asked by OP to take a look at this case. I have just read the whole thread and the accusation and will post my thoughts later.

In the meantime, @GekkeBelg can you tell me the exact time you placed your bets on BC Game and later on 50Casino? If possible, post screenshots as confirmation as well. Exact minutes please. I want to compare the odds that competitor sportsbooks had at the time that your bets were accepted. Based on that information, we might get a clearer picture if the odds on BC Game can be considered wrong or in any way unfair that they could be taken advantage of.

I think it might be wise to make a public record: I've send a PM to BC's representative earlier today, and shortly before I made this post, I had a chance to have a chat with High Priest on telegram. I've ask him to please inform his coworker who handle the forum to come back online. Let's wait a little and see [and hope] if things will get clearer.

Yes, go ahead. Thanks.
Sent you a PM.

I'll try to reach them once more through PM and probably TG-ing "High Priest", the representative recommended to you by Efialtis so he can tell the forum representative to come back online and give explanation about their change of findings. Let's see if we can re-deescalate this issue.

Do you mind to shot me a PM with High Priest's TG handler?

And, by the way, your link to your flag is wrong. It's this one: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3236