Topic: FORTUNEJACK.COM |Deposit 777 play with 1777 mBTC |Live Casino, Slots, Betting - page 155. (Read 466638 times)

They are good when it comes to promos, giveaways and no strict KYC rules, agreed. Also, no taxes helps a lot in increasing our chances to win.
I had good experiences on all crypto betting/gambling sites and never had any complaints myself. They are probably more lenient sometimes because we're people with nametags and posting histories here, it's more of a 'family' feeling than when you bet on a fiat bookie with whom you're not connected in any way.

What I can assure you though is that a FIAT bookie would pay out the bet EpicChamp is mentioning. They would pay it out in full, not just return his stake, because they are obligated by law. There were numerous occasions where people won lawsuits, because the law is clear. Bookies are responsible for their odds - end of. It's not my opinion, it's the law. Agreed it's a lot easier to sue a Croatian bookie in Croatia than it is to sue FJ from Croatia - they are not a legal entity here and don't answer to Croatian laws. That's why their TOC's allow them more room to wiggle.

I can give you many examples of a fiat bookie making a mistake and having to swallow the loss. Once they offered a handball over/under for a brother of a player which is a great scorer - but the brother plays only defence. We bet heavily on him scoring less than 4,5 goals, when the bookie realized the mistake they blocked the pair - but they had to pay out the bets that were made before the pair was blocked. Also, recently they offered a bet on eSports game in a best to 5, the offer was over/under 2,5. All bets on over 2,5 were accepted and paid out.
They do pay because they are afraid. Some don't, but are then sued and their licences taken away.
Fiat bookies deal with winners in a different way though - they just limit their bets to pennies. So, if you are winning constantly, your max bet becomes like 5 euro. Also not legal, also scammy AF and there were also lawsuits forcing bookies to accept these bets. That's however the fastest and most efficient way for them to limit good players and it's working great for them so far. I did not hear of a crypto bookie doing that yet and fair play to them there.

I know it looks like a bit of an off-topic, but it is relevant to a recent case here so I just wanted to answer.

Books in the space are some of the most accomodating an lenient at times.  Fiat books won’t give an inch.  I don’t know why this is..  Prolly cos being a bookie is still a small niche in crypto.

I have just replied on that thread, feel free to check what I wrote on there.

They gave me the option to 100% have this stake if I wanted to as a full cashout for not even 0.238 BTC, but rather for ~0.268 BTC. And the moment I cash it out after they themselves give me the option to do so, it is 100% officially MINE, and taking it away is complete theft & robbery.

In fact, I could have cashed everything out for 0.268 BTC, and now with MY BTC, placed a seperate bet either in full or a bit lower at De Jong to win around 1.3 odds, and if it was in full I would have earned ~0.3484 BTC if the odds indeed were 1.3, which is around the same equivalent as having 0.14 BTC at 2.6 odds to win 0.364 BTC.

The point is, once they give me the option to cash out and I cash out whatever amount I want, it is 100% mine and no longer theirs. I can then choose if I want to keep betting with this amount, or just keep it to myself. That is 100% up to me to decide, but they offered me this opportunity themselves, so now they cannot just take it back and take it away from me.

Beyond that, my point is that they also should have never canceled this bet to begin with for all the reasons I explained earlier, and I should win my bet in full for 0.1747 BTC fair & square.

It was house money, not his money... It's not "his stake", he took out his entire balance on a faulty bet which was later canceled.

I have the same thought like  this reply.

If what you are saying is true then I agree that you deserve to claim your remaining stake but this needs more proof than a wall of text.

Also I am waiting to see  your reply on this:

It was not a technical error you dummy. Read what I wrote above multiple times.

It was rather a simple case of a change of odds. It is not that uncommon for a match to drop from 2.6 to 1.7. Never do bets get canceled because of that (even if it dropped lower, it doesn't matter). If you do any gambling online you should be experienced enough to know this.

The whole point of what I'm trying to say is that this bet should have never been canceled to begin with. Even if I didn't do any partial cashouts, they should have never canceled this bet to begin with, especially since every other site didn't either for their users and rewarded those who bet on De Jong their full win at 2.6+ odds.

As I pointed out, going in, this was a very even match that could have gone either way, so to me there was no clear favorite - but because De Jong was posted at better odds, then I decided to go with him.

Maybe if his opponent was given those odds at the time I would have bet on him instead, I don't know at this point and it doesn't matter.

The point is this was a hard match to predict and I can give you 10 different reasons why his opponent was initially the favorite and overall why there was no clear or "obvious" favorite in this match.

So this bet should have never been canceled in the 1st place and I 100% deserve to win the full amount for 0.174 BTC.

But at the bare minimum, they need to return to me the stake I had left on this bet at 0.067 BTC. This is a complete non-negotiable.

And even if they made a simple mistake and misjudged De Jong's potential of winning, why should I have to pay for THEIR mistake and lose thousands of dollars because of that? It is not my fault they came up with those odds at the time and didn't do anything about it for 2-3 hours. Because if they had, I wouldn't have been able to place my bet at 2.6 odds on that day.

Are you saying that what I have shared, explained and stated on here is false or inaccurate?

Because if that's the case, I would LOVE to see what kind of records FortuneJack has to show to claim anything else. I can 100% guarantee you that everything I've said so far is true and is a pure fact (the only exception may be the initial amount I have cashed out, I said it was 139.4 mBTC but it could have been 139.7 or 139.8 or something like that - the exact amount I did not remember off the top of my head and quite frankly doesn't make any difference, everything else that I said is 100% true)

And if what I am saying is true, then would you agree that I deserve to win this bet in full (or at least be returned my 0.067 BTC stake back)?

Indeed that is what I am trying to say,  if the record of FJ tallies EpicChamp's story,  he then will have no problem claiming those BTC for refunds.  I have been FJ user for years and I always see FJ being just and keen on their records.

What he is failing to tell you is that he got his entire deposit out in that cashout which was ultimately an error.. Had he cashed out the entire bet his withdraw would, in 99.99% of cases, be going through security checks and eventually he'd end up exactly where he is now. He fails to see this, he believes he is entitled to something which is not his.

I think EpicChamp already accepted that the bet was cancelled, so since it was cancelled he is asking for the refund of the remaining stake he left after withdrawing some amount of his initial bet on that game.


If we followed the story EpicChamp indeed has some BTC to refund on that canceled bet, I don't know why FJ can't see this stuff, possibly there is a technical error on their side (possibly on record).  I won't accuse FJ of wanting not to pay since FJ had paid way more than this amount to players .  Besides, in an investigation, the company relies on their system record, not on the statement of the complainant. So I guess the problem lies on the records on FJ's record system that don't tally on the story of EpicChamp.

Oh man, the amount of inaccurate statements you made is just crazy, let me address it to you:

1. They have literally broken their own rules by canceling this bet & not counting this as a win; and even worse, not returning the stake of my bet like it's always the case whenever a bet gets canceled for any reason.

Speaking of other sportsbooks, every single sportsbook who featured this match on that day has rewarded all their users who bet on De Jong their full win (whether they got him at 2.6+ odds or lower), and not a single site canceled this bet for their users on that day, only FortuneJack did and they did it only for me and no one else on their site (because I guess I had slightly better odds?).

You think this is right or fair? It is literally going against their own + universal gambling rules amongst all other sportbooks. I even have a friend who bet on De Jong at better odds than me (2.8-3.0) and the site he used never canceled this bet (super late) and rewarded him his winning amount, just as it always should be. I also know for a fact Stake.com did not cancel this bet in advance either because I believe I had a bet on it too.

So if the rules are so universal and go for just about any sportsbook, why is FortuneJack the only betting site in the world that decided to cancel the bet for me on that day when no one else did? The worse thing is as I said, that they only canceled it for me while keeping the lines of this match open for everyone else to bet on, before and during the match. This is completely unacceptable.

2. For the 100th time, this was NOT a technical error by any means. I can give you 10+ different reasons why it would make perfect sense for De Jong's opponent to be the favorite to win this match on that given day. It definitely was not an "accidental" situation where you put 17 instead of 1.7, and there was no clear favorite in this match. I wouldn't have been surprised if they were given equal odds of winning either.

Also, the fact that they kept De Jong above 2.6 odds for 2-3 hours without freezing & changing the odds right away within the first 30mins, PROVES this was not a technical error. It was a simple misjudgment on their end and a regular case of a change of odds that happens all the time, that's what they even claimed in the initial email too. Because if it really was a technical error, they would have noticed it right away and changed the odds right away as it always happens in sports gambling, not 2-3 hours later when they were clearly aware of this at the time cuz they kept slowly dropping his odds by 0.2 units every 30mins.

Even according to their email, they claim that they canceled it because odds dropped from 2.6 to 1.7, and that in itself is not a significant difference, and bets never get canceled because of that in advance on any site, EVER. Why? Because it is literally against the rules. You cannot cancel the betting match for 1 person and then not cancel it for everyone else. It has to be universal - either cancel it for everyone or for no one.

Not to mention that even in most scenarios WITH technical errors, bookies in the past have paid out in full to people who took advantage of that even if it was a complete accident. And when they haven't and it was taken to court, they bettor always won and got their full winning amount. But once again, I can 100% assure you that this was far from that kind of case here and definitely not such an extreme technical error or "accident".

Otherwise, I'm the type of person who would personally not feel good about purposely taking advantage of such a terrible mistake myself because I would know it was completely unintentional. But in my case there was still a lot of risk involved because quite frankly this match could have gone either way, especially given how close the 2nd set was.

3. They did NOT cancel it as soon as they saw it! That is the biggest proof of why it was not a technical error. They saw it right away and instead of freezing + changing odds then & there, they decided instead to slowly drop his odds by 0.2 units every 30 mins for 2-3 hours. I really hope you understand now that this was far from a technical error or an "accident".

Alos, they did not even cancel it for me right away, they did it 12-13 hours after I placed the bet from the evening before (the match started in the morning the next day), and 1-2 hours before the match was about to start. It was a super late cancelation without any valid reason for it.

So please don't make it seem like they made such a terrible mistake and are so innocent when everything they did against me was 100% intentional and goes against their own rules, let alone the ethics & morality of it.

It is not about dropping our expectations, it is about the rules and this has been like this on sportsbooks for years as well, long before fortunejack was created, even before bitcoin was invented. Online sportsbooks are one of the most cutting edge gambling you can ever find, there are tens of billions of dollars gambled on them every year, and this means there are small mistakes that can cost tens of millions of dollars as well, hence they came up with some rules to back out when they have to if it is a technical problem. You could have some sort of developer who writes 17.00 instead of 1.70 and you expect the house to pay that?

Obviously it will get cancelled. Same goes for every single mistake you can think of, because if there is a technical problem, they can remove it. They will not wait until last second of the game and cancel neither, they cancel it as soon as they see it. That's just how things work.

I use Stake.com and FJ regularly and I’ve never had issues with both.

And FJ, yes some player props, esp for the UFC and for all match ups across the board would be nice...  And some live betting.  That way I wouldn’t keep sending coins back and forth between books.  

Now I see there's a whole thread about it elsewhere. I will try to find some time, go through it and leave my comment there.

The only thing misleading the community is your BS reasoning/explanations that don't make any sense and your purely fraudulent activities.

Everyone here except the 1 idiot Hammzos agrees that this bet should have never been canceled and that I deserve to win my full amount.

Not to mention that not a single other betting site cancled this bet for ANY of their users prior to the match. You are literally the only 1 who did this - you think this is ok or acceptable?

And why did you only cancel it for me and not for anyone else huh? I'm sure you're aware that this is not allowed, right?
Either cancel it for everyone and completely remove this match from your site (which you haven't done), or do not cancel it at all for ANYONE.  

And it's funny how you happen to have time to crack jokes and give basic responses, yet still haven't provided me a legitimate answer or explanation for why you decided to cancel my bet to begin with.

You are a complete joke of a betting site and should be 100% ashamed of yourself and the way you conduct & run your business.

You think it's ok to steal thousands of dollars from people for winning a bet, and canceling bets for no reason?

You're a complete embarrassment to online bitcoin gambling, and I hope everyone here realizes how shitty your practices are and joins more trustworthy sites that actually respect fair play, play by the rules, and show some respect to their users.

-
All the mandatory actions, data and proofs can be accessed here along with the thread you made.

Don't chop the information we provided into pieces as it misleads the community.

Haha I see you also got jokes now is that right?

Why don't you explain to him the full story of what ACTUALLY happened instead of trying to crack around jokes like an innocent fool?

Oh wait, no need - I already did the heavy lifting for you.

I love how you just ignore all my messages that prove how you're clearly in the wrong, but look for any opportunity to pretend like you're such an innocent angel trying to do the right thing!

And what do you know? You can reply right away too? Wow, what a surprise!

-
Got it right. 

No, what they are saying is complete BS and they are trying to twist things in their favor/defense. They are basically using my initial deposit as a lame excuse for not giving me back my stake because I did a partial cashout for around that amount the evening before the match, but that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the 0.067 BTC stake I had remaining on this bet at 2.6 odds, and these are 2 completely different cases that have nothing to do with each other. (I could have deposited that amount from a few weeks ago or bet less than the full amount, it is completely irrelevent)
 
To summarize, I deposited 140 mBTC that day, then used the full amount to be on my player (De Jong) to win the match at 2.6 odds, and about an hour later odds changed and they voluntarily gave me the option to either do a full cashout for 238 mBTC (nearly 100 mBTC profit), or a partial cashout for whatever % I wanted.

So I chose to partially cashout for 50% of the bet, and keep the other 50% open for the next day to potentially win 0.174 BTC if my player would have won. That partial cashout just happened to be around 139 mBTC, but I still had 67 mBTC left on the bet as the stake at 2.6 odds.

So my actual loss is ~100 mBTC because that's how much I could have instantly profited had I cashed out in full the day before. Which looking back now I would have 100000% done if I knew this mess was about to occur.

And their reason is that just cuz I happened to withdraw ~50% for 139 mBTC, that now they don't owe me anything. But what about the 67 mBTC that was at stake? Is that just gonna get ignored & magically disappear out of thin air for no reason? Remember, they themselves voluntarily (aka according to their own damn rules) gave me the option to cash out both partially AND in full for 238 mBTC which I could have done then & there with a click of a button (in other words, they were willing to instantly lose 238 mBTC instead of risking losing 364 mBTC if I hadn't cashed anything out. Why? Cuz I'm "assume" they prob feared that they were going to lose the bet, so they wanted to minimize their loss by giving me this option instead).

Otherwise, what was the point of voluntarily giving me that option the night before to begin with if they were going to cancel it the next day and keep everything else to themselves?

They are acting in an extremely deceiving & manipulative manner by trying to make it look like I didn't lose anything, when in fact I lost out on 67-100 mBTC (depending on how you look at it, but either way it's a huge loss in the thousands) that I could have easily cashed out the day before when they themselves gave me the option to do so.

But ultimately, my biggest loss is the 174 mBTC I would have received as the reward for choosing the right player to win the match.

And trust me that if the player I bet on lost it, I would have NEVER complained or brought this up and just peacefully moved on like I always do anytime I lose a bet.