Casinos and sports books do not like advantaged players

Scammer's profile link: Hahanerd

Amount scammed: $2,200

Discord ID + Unique Discord ID: hahanerd 224351757424132106
Proof that it's their Discord: N/A

Explanation of the trade:
I have been taking sports bet for Hahanerd and his friends for a few months. A few days ago, I let him know that his and his friend’s betting accounts were to be closed and their bets to be cancelled.

How they scammed:
Hahanerd is now refusing to pay a balance owed of $2,200 due to the fact that he “would have been up” had his bets not been cancelled.

The reality is that his bets were cancelled before they went live.

The platform rules clearly state: “PLATFORM reserves the right to refuse, restrict, cancel or limit any wager.”

Where we are at a major impasse is that Hahanerd thinks that this rule does not apply to him. If he were to had lost more on those bets, I would not be asking him for the extra money as the bets were obviously void.

Other relevant trade screenshots:
I will provide a link to the betting platform rules in a deleted post.

 

One important thing to keep in mind in sports betting is that line movement is going to be everything. As an example, if you bet Packers -2 and they are now -4, I now have an edge as I have fairly beat the market and given myself value. When a book cancels the -2 wager and tells you to go now bet the -4, they're essentially wiping out any legitimate edge you have locked in. Cancelling wagers after a line movement means the book is unfairly protecting itself by voiding wagers. Typically wagers are to be cancelled due to technical issues or erroneous lines (showing +3000 instead of +300 etc). This is like a casino saying you must pay your losing blackjack hands, but they’re voiding your winning ones. That’s not how gambling works.

There is a few details left out of this report that I will fill in here as well as my counter argument. The issue is that going into the weekend, I had roughly $5000 in pending bets. For argument's sake, I'm not including the amounts my friends had - just my own account. These bets were placed ahead of game time and were accepted. After these lines had moved in my favor, the bets were retroactively cancelled by the book. The only reasoning I got is that "the system flagged the bets." In other words, due to getting favorable market movement/CLV, the book flagged me and cancelled all wagers.

This is problematic and isn't a valid basis for voiding wagers. Books cannot pick and choose in this way by selectively enforcing their rules and still demanding losses from me. All I'm asking is that those bets are reinstated and are properly settled or any previous loss is not enforceable. Even if your rules claim the right to cancel any wager, that cannot be applied selectively to void only bets that would have resulted in a loss for you. Either all unsettled wagers are void, or none are. By cancelling only my winning bets while still demanding I pay prior losses, you are acting in bad faith. This is neither fair nor enforceable.

Now at the time of our conversation, I couldn't even recall what bets were pending because the account had closed down and I couldn't see. It's not about the money but rather the principle. If they all lost, I would gladly pay without question. I have since written down some of the wagers I had made and to my surprise, I had won them. He keeps repeating “the rules say we can cancel any wager” but only after seeing the market move against him. They want you to pay on past losing bets but deny you the chance to collect on winning ones. Licensed sportsbooks honor wagers even when lines move. Cancellation is only justified for clear palpable errors (typo listing +3000 instead of +300 etc).

Feels like a ramble session, but my point is that I'm not refusing to settle - I'm only asking that the cancelled bets be included in the results whether that's a win or a loss to me. If the graded result is negative for me, I will pay any owed balance immediately no questions asked. If it's positive, he must now honor my winnings and pay me. Prior to the report, I was okay with him acknowledging no balance owed but because we got here, I'm asking for the winnings. I have no issue settling what is fairly owed but I will not accept selective voiding of wagers. This is not consistent with industry standards, nor with the principles of fair dealing. There is precedent in these type of report here - Runehall scam practices

Forgive me, I don't get these reports against me often so if there's something I'm missing, please let me know. If additional proof is needed, y'all know where to reach me.

 

Please see the deleted post below. The bets were not cancelled by myself directly.

 

Your analogy is incorrect. The book did not cancel your -2 and tell you to bet the -4. The book told you that they did not want to have a betting relationship with you.

This is like a casino stating "hey, we don't want to take your action anymore". Your bets were cancelled BEFORE they went live. The book reserves the right to do so and you knew that.

Once your accounts were flagged, the Book no longer wanted your action. Not wanting your action includes cancelling pending bets that are not yet live. If the bet event had started, the bet would obviously not have been cancelled...

It's not like the Book cancelled 2 of your bets and left 5. NO. Everything was cancelled and you were told goodbye.

This is not problematic whatsoever. This is the first instance of this occurring over the months of us dealing together. Not once has the provider ever voided a bet. You are making it seem like this is something normal and customary.

The Book is simply picking who they would like to allow to bet on their platform. That is their right.

I am glad we have finally found some common ground and that you have acknowledged that the rules give the Book the right to cancel any wager. I would like to point out that up until this point, the Book had NEVER cancelled even one of Hahanerd's or his friend's bets.

There was no nitpicking or selecting between your bets or even between you or your friends accounts. THE BOOK DOES NOT WANT YOURS OR YOUR FRIENDS ACTION. All your unsettled wagers were void. You are saying that we cancelled only your winning bets but that is COMPLETELY NOT TRUE. This is a complete misstatement of the facts and I would like to really highlight that @staff.

What your claiming is just literally untrue. You are claiming:
"that cannot be applied selectively to void only bets that would have resulted in a loss for you. Either all unsettled wagers are void, or none are. By cancelling only my winning bets while still demanding I pay prior losses, you are acting in bad faith. This is neither fair nor enforceable."

But it's clear that ALL your bets were cancelled. Could you please explain to me how we voided "only bets that would have resulted in a loss for me"?

I keep having to repeat the rules because you are blatantly ignoring them and are making up your own rules. Your bets were cancelled prior to starting. No one knew the outcome of the bets before the event started, that's why they were cancelled. What I keep restating is that the Book did not want your action.

You have years of experience as a sports bettor. Yesterday you told me you have 10 years of experience. You are on Sythe and Discord constantly looking for people to take bets for you. It's obvious you are an advantage bettor.

There is nothing wrong with that, but you must realize that businesses have the right to do business with whom they please. Your bets were cancelled because the Book would no longer like to have a working relationship with you. That is their right.

The Books actions clearly align with the principles of fair dealing. There is no bad faith here. This is the first interaction of this type between us. There was no picking and choosing regarding the cancellation of your bets.

Regarding that precedent you cited, that is clearly NOT precedent. You like to compare apples to oranges. You need to compare apples to apples.

Could you please clarify on the points I touched on before. I would love to know how you came to the conclusion that bets were "selectively voided" as that is not the case at all.

 

Hahanerd's and friends accounts were closed due to being flagged. When your account is closed, all pending bets are cancelled. ALL bets were cancelled. Not some, not 1 or 2, ALL of them. Hahanerd claims that we selectively cancelled bets. That is not the case.

The amount owed by Hahanerd is the cumulative sum of losses by him and his friends for the week of August 24 - August 31. That is how we have been doing things for weeks, I am sure he won't disagree.

The rules to the platform are on the website where @Hahanerd has to login to bet.

The amount is owed to me as regardless I have a duty to him and had things gone sour he would have been indemnified straight out of my pocket just as I will be left on the hook to pay what he has failed to pay.

 

Refusing future bets is fair — but voiding existing and pending bets that were already accepted and only cancelled after market movement is not. Your text in the above screenshot says, “if they are up they won’t get paid out,” which proves this was outcome-based, not neutral. That is selective enforcement: keeping losses, voiding winners. Licensed books limit future action but honor pending wagers. I’ve also made clear that if the cancelled bets had lost, I’d pay more without hesitation. I only ask that all action be graded fairly.

The wagers were flagged as sharp and then voided - that's still selective in your approach and applied to me as the bettor instead of individually. Has nothing to do with refusing business either, you're simply not paying out winners because I the sports bettor, beat the line and your book was unhappy that they don't have the edge they normally have here. You have every right to refuse but there's no right to retroactively void if I'm getting a good line on a bet that the market already moved. That's just retroactively erasing action you already accepted.

 

The AI reply is obvious. What's fair is the rules... You can't just decide what's fair.

I would not have asked you to pay out on bets that were void. That would not make any sense. The bets were void and you knew they were void before they were live. Why would I unfairly take your money?

That text in the screenshot is one that my "manager" received and sent to me, not originating from me. There was some disconnection between them. I talked to him and had it all straightened out. I even though you were rational enough to understand and pay the amount owed without issue.

Nothing was "outcome-based". Had you been up for the week, I would have paid you or risked being banned on Sythe. That's all there it to it.

 

Not really as this is done via cash as it's an IRL sportsbook. Regardless, Hahanerd's obligation is to me as my obligation is to him.

 

I do not have a list,
I am waiting to hear back on if there is any history of the voided bets.

Until now, it has been undisputed that they had not begun so I do not believe that to be a material issue.

 

I have confirmed with the platform that there is no way to access the voided bets.

 

This is 100% false. You have access to all accounts to deactivate/activate and view them through the admin portal. I have also confirmed this with another agent as well that what you deem impossible is actually doable. This should be telling that you are withholding the wagers that went against you.

 

It’s so funny to me that you claim that it’s 100% false according to some mystery agent who you now happen to have.

The betting platform is not a mainstream one which makes your claim even more unlikely. It doesn’t even matter as what I said is the reality.

If I said there is no access that means there is no access. I have no reason to lie to you as the bets are void regardless.

Please let me know the other agents information if they does so happen to exist. This is a tight-knit company and I would love to verify your claim.

 

Not that it matters but if it confirms that you’re lying, I have posted proof in a deleted post so staff can view and I’m not jeopardizing that agent.

 

Well to me you’re literally lying about having another agent on the platform.

If I had access to the bets I would post them. The fact that they exist is not disputed. What’s disputed is the fact that they’re valid.

I saw the deleted post. That doesn’t seem to be any sort of information from the platform. That seems to your own spreadsheet history of saved bets.

 

What blows my mind to me the most is that you consider yourself a professional sports bettor yet are frustrated for being cut off.

Im sure this is not the first time, nor will it be the last. If you were at the casino and your bet was not active, the casino has the right to cancel the bet.

You could have your chips on the blackjack table but if the cards are not dealt the hand has not begun.

Similar to the platform, which reserves the right to cancel your bets while they have not started.