Even DarkStar_ said this himself and wrote that "there's a reason sportsbooks don't cancel all bets that have had line movement against them."
That was a generalized statement about cancelling bets. My current stance based on the information I have is that FJ are justified in cancelling your bet. Quote this
And this is a general/regular situation and is no different from any other swings of odds that happens every day in all sports either, so what you said is true and applies to this case as well.
Kinda funny that you're trying to take it back now lol
Anyways, I'm not going to be saying anything more about this case unless someone has a question about what happened and needs clarification on something.
I've said this to you before: 2.6 instantly dropping to 1.3 is not normal line movement. Had it slowly dropped from 2.6 to 1.3, I would definitely side with you. One shows a likely odds error, the other shows natural line movement.
I stand behind my statement for natural line movement. I disagree that sportsbooks should be forced to pay odds errors, as this would likely end up hurting legitimate players through increased vig across the board.
Here is the full context behind my post:
FJ as a sportsbook has every right to cancel any match for any reason so long as they do it before it starts. You are not entitled to something because of it - had they done it when the game started or afterwards then you'd have a case here but as of now there is nothing. Bet was canceled BEFORE it was being played, what happened after matters not.
They might have the right to do it, but that doesn't make them not shady if they unjustifiably cancelled a bet. There's a reason sportsbooks don't cancel all bets that have had line movement against them.
I was disagreeing with Hhampuz's statement that they have every right to cancel any match for any reason.
According to their own reasoning, they canceled my bet because odds dropped from 2.6 to
1.7 - this was literally their
official statement & reasoning on that day (no mention of a technical error at all either). That is 100% not that uncommon and I've seen it happen countless of times. Using any other reason at this point goes against the only piece of evidence I have on my end, according to their official statement, for why they decided to cancel my bet right before the match was about to start.
But even if let's say he did drop below 1.7 at the time or they used a lower number in their email, I've still seen this happen many times from around the 2.5 mark, yet bets
never got canceled because of that for me or anyone I know. And specifically for this match, other major betting sites did not cancel this bet for their users when he dropped to 1.7 or lower from 2.6+. Anything between 1.3 to 3.0 is within the "competitive" range where its hard to predict an exact result and upsets happen all the time. Therefore, to me that makes perfect sense because there was no clear favorite going into this match, and I still don't get why De Jong dropped to 1.7 or below - but it's not up to me to decide. But even with the new drop, he was still within the "competitive range" of 1.3-3.0 odds.
Not to mention how there have been
far more extreme cases, where odds dropped from 5.0+ to less than 1.5 (due to a clear technical error), and yet reputable bookies with the good morals & ethics
still awarded those who bet on 5.0+ their full win due to a mistake that was made on their end, despite that kind of
humongeous difference - much like LEVSKI7 shared on here many times. (Although they could have easily said no and had a much stronger reasoning for not doing so considering the obvious technical error).
Meanwhile my situation is nothing like that or nearly as bad, yet FJ isn't willing to honor my bet as a win (at least as of right now, I hope that changes soon, esp if most people agree with me as well)
Anyway, I'm done arguing about this case - everything that I had to say I already said previously, or was said by fellow community members.
You can read a summary of what everyone had to say about this on page 463 if you want a TLDR and not read through everything.
Let's just wait a bit and see the results of the poll.
***BTW, I just went through our email exchange from the end of November, and the
only thing FJ was saying is that
just because I partially cashed out ~50% of my bet for 0.1397 BTC, that they thought it was
reasonable or acceptable to cancel the remainder 50% of my bet simply because of that alone -
NO mention about
any technical errors in any of their follow-up emails whatsoever.
In other words, they claimed that they decided to cancel my bet
only because I partially cashed out a similar amount as my initial bet and
that's it - no actual/real reasoning behind it other than this vague explanation.
*** - I don't know about you, but to me this sounds like a complete joke of a reason.
Basically, it looks like their
"ACTUAL" reason + intention was to cancel my bet because I got ~0.1397 BTC back from the partial cashout
(aka why they actually canceled the bet) - but their
OFFICIAL reason was the "drop of odds from 2.6. to 1.7"
(aka what they want me to believe for why they canceled it) - which even then is not allowed nor is a valid reason to cancel a bet. But to claim that they canceled my bet
only because I did a partial cashout (regardless of the amount) is a complete joke and
unacceptable. And once again, there was absolutely no mention of any technical reason for this cancellation during our email exchange.
as I'm failed to complete the wagering requirement. Thanks FJ for giving free bonuses regularly although I'm not really active playing since long time ago. 
