Churchill sues DRF

[JustRalph]

http://www.wdrb.com/story/29102266/churchill-downs-claims-in-lawsuit-daily-racing-form-took-illegal-bets-on-kentucky-derby#.VVtge4U2DJI.twitter

[JimG]

http://www.wdrb.com/story/29102266/churchill-downs-claims-in-lawsuit-daily-racing-form-took-illegal-bets-on-kentucky-derby#.VVtge4U2DJI.twitter

Two companies that do not care about the gambler. Let them have at it. Hope they cost each other a fortune.

[RXB]

I'll cheer for anybody over CDI. Go DRF.

[JustRalph]

Didn't see the other thread....

Mods: tie em up

[menifee]

Churchill management is clueless. The Derby is a disaster every year in terms of how the fans and the owners are treated. Manage Fairgrounds into the ground. Before that they destroyed Calder. Raised takeout consistently.

Now, they want to discourage horse racing fans from betting on the race by restricting their signal to their ADW. Why encourage new fans to the sport? Continue the boycott - hopefully they will exit the business. They really don't want to be in the business. They just want to pull revenue from the slots.

[cj]

Didn't see the other thread....

Mods: tie em up

Actually fits better here.

[thespaah]

Question....Does DRF Bets have permission to take wagers from any CDI property?...If so, then why is CDI whining here?.Why did CDI not perform due diligence and place restrictions on DRFbets?
This looks like sour grapes to me.
If CDI allows DRFbets users to bet CDI tracks through the DRF platform any other days of the year, but bans them on Oaks and Derby Days and it is in a contract, then DRF has some 'splainin to do....If not, then CDI can go pound sand.

[Robert Goren]

I believe DRF Bets is a skin of Xpressbet. If Xpressbet had permission to take wagers on the derby, DRF Bets may have thought it did too. CDI might not have the same opinion. It could be a messy situation.

[Flysofree]

I root for both to lose as long as TwinSpires remains as a betting option. I got real upset wih Churchill Downs years ago when they would not find a handicapped parking spot for Ron Turcott. The DRF has always turned me off except for the Beyer figs.

[OTM Al]

Question....Does DRF Bets have permission to take wagers from any CDI property?...If so, then why is CDI whining here?.Why did CDI not perform due diligence and place restrictions on DRFbets?
This looks like sour grapes to me.
If CDI allows DRFbets users to bet CDI tracks through the DRF platform any other days of the year, but bans them on Oaks and Derby Days and it is in a contract, then DRF has some 'splainin to do....If not, then CDI can go pound sand.

DRFbets does not carry CDI tracks at all. Xpressbet does. On the days in question, the platform said Xpressbet, not DRFbets. Thus, though I am a DRFbets member and use that exclusively these days (wasn't going to bet the Derby because they don't carry Churchill) those two days I assume I was betting through Xpressbet as they are authorized to carry the signal and that is what it said when I logged on.

If CDI says I was betting illegally, do I get my money back then from CDI? They did take it. They can have the crappy P3 I won back.

[Unome]

DRFbets does not carry CDI tracks at all. Xpressbet does. On the days in question, the platform said Xpressbet, not DRFbets. Thus, though I am a DRFbets member and use that exclusively these days (wasn't going to bet the Derby because they don't carry Churchill) those two days I assume I was betting through Xpressbet as they are authorized to carry the signal and that is what it said when I logged on.

Someone at Xpressbet had to make the decision to redirect DRF players to it's site so why were they not sued as well. I am no fan of CDI but like evrything CDI does this makes zero sense.

Both DRFBets and Xpressbet will have a lot of explaining to do when the Oregon Racing Commission comes a calling.

[cj]

DRFbets does not carry CDI tracks at all. Xpressbet does. On the days in question, the platform said Xpressbet, not DRFbets. Thus, though I am a DRFbets member and use that exclusively these days (wasn't going to bet the Derby because they don't carry Churchill) those two days I assume I was betting through Xpressbet as they are authorized to carry the signal and that is what it said when I logged on.

If CDI says I was betting illegally, do I get my money back then from CDI? They did take it. They can have the crappy P3 I won back.

So had you hit a big superfecta and wanted to cash out, who would have paid you, DRF or Xpressbet? Who would have withheld the taxes?

I really don't think it is legal for one company to just assign your account to another for a couple days, but I guess we'll find out.

[PaceAdvantage]

Considering Xpressbet is the back-end for DRFbets, and DRFbets is basically a white label for Xpressbet, if XB was allowed to take bets on CD, and anyone betting on the DRF link was switched to Xpress for CD-only, I don't really see where this suit has a leg to stand on...

Lot of "ifs" up there, but really...DRFbets is essentially XB with a different label, when you get right down to it...so if CD was allowing Xpressbet, and the bets were actually made through Xpressbet, what legs does this lawsuit stand on?

[cj]

Considering Xpressbet is the back-end for DRFbets, and DRFbets is basically a white label for Xpressbet, if XB was allowed to take bets on CD, and anyone betting on the DRF link was switched to Xpress for CD-only, I don't really see where this suit has a leg to stand on...

Lot of "ifs" up there, but really...DRFbets is essentially XB with a different label, when you get right down to it...so if CD was allowing Xpressbet, and the bets were actually made through Xpressbet, what legs does this lawsuit stand on?

The problem I see is that they did switch the label, which makes it seem like, to me, they know it was an issue.

[Unome]

Considering Xpressbet is the back-end for DRFbets, and DRFbets is basically a white label for Xpressbet, if XB was allowed to take bets on CD, and anyone betting on the DRF link was switched to Xpress for CD-only, I don't really see where this suit has a leg to stand on...

Lot of "ifs" up there, but really...DRFbets is essentially XB with a different label, when you get right down to it...so if CD was allowing Xpressbet, and the bets were actually made through Xpressbet, what legs does this lawsuit stand on?

DRFBets is a white label but they still needed a contract with CDI to accept bets on any of it's tracks which they didn't have, when you sign up with DRFBets you sign up with them not Xpressbet. If it wasn't a big deal why weren't they accepting bets from CDI tracks before Oaks/Derby day.

Numerous states are in the process of changing how so called white label sites operate in their states, the two biggest are Oregon where the majority of ADW's are licensed and New York which will require white labels to be licensed and not just operate under another license.

The cost for a Oregon license isn't cheap, the cost for a New York license is off the charts and I'm sure California which is the most expensive license of any state would be next, when you factor in what it would cost to operate in these states they will quit accepting customers/bets from those states. Another thing is these license fee's are yearly not a one time cost.

[PaceAdvantage]

DRFBets is a white label but they still needed a contract with CDI to accept bets on any of it's tracks which they didn't have, when you sign up with DRFBets you sign up with them not Xpressbet. If it wasn't a big deal why weren't they accepting bets from CDI tracks before Oaks/Derby day.I'm not sure the law would be that discerning. The fact of the matter is, the bets themselves were placed with Xpressbet, whom I assume did have a contract in place with Churchill to accept bets on Derby day.

They could have easily set up a mechanism that would have technically switched the user from a Drfbets member to an Xpressbet member during the time they were actually accessing the CD feed. Then transfer them back to a DRFbets member when they went to another track. All this could have been done seamlessly. I know that when I wanted my Xpressbet account switched to a DRF account, all the account rep had to do was "flick a switch" and bang, I was switched.

So, I would think this is what DRF did...I have no clue in reality what they did, but I'm going to assume they did something like this to cover themselves.

And if they did, there really is no case.

I guess the devil is in the details, and the courtroom (if it gets that far) will reveal the details...

[Unome]

I'm not sure the law would be that discerning.

I think the law is pretty clear cut, the Oregon Racing Commission says DRF must have a contract in place before they can accept bets from any track which DRF knows since they have a contract for every track they carry but didn't have one for Chuchill or any of the tracks CDI owns.

According to the suit CDI had warned DRF that it can't accept bets on Churchill races without it's permission which it didn't have so they tried to do a end around so it's customers could bet on Oaks/Derby days and were caught.

CDI could pull someone from it's mail room and win this lawsuit.

I hate CDI and everything they do but they have DRF dead to rights.

[Flysofree]

Look for DRF to raise rates again on printed copies and probably online forms. As I understand it , that's the only place you can find Beyer figures.

[PaceAdvantage]

I think the law is pretty clear cut, the Oregon Racing Commission says DRF must have a contract in place before they can accept bets from any track which DRF knows since they have a contract for every track they carry but didn't have one for Chuchill or any of the tracks CDI owns.

According to the suit CDI had warned DRF that it can't accept bets on Churchill races without it's permission which it didn't have so they tried to do a end around so it's customers could bet on Oaks/Derby days and were caught.

CDI could pull someone from it's mail room and win this lawsuit.

I hate CDI and everything they do but they have DRF dead to rights.Technically though, they didn't take the bet...Xpressbet did...did Xpressbet have permission?

If DRF were smart and actually had it so that the system temporarily made the user a customer of Xpressbet for those few minutes, and Xpressbet was authorized to take wagering on CD, then I don't see how CDI wins this lawsuit.

[cj]

Technically though, they didn't take the bet...Xpressbet did...did Xpressbet have permission?

If DRF were smart and actually had it so that the system temporarily made the user a customer of Xpressbet for those few minutes, and Xpressbet was authorized to take wagering on CD, then I don't see how CDI wins this lawsuit.

Doesn't it matter that the customer never agreed to do business with Xpressbet? I have no idea, just asking, be curious to see how this all plays out. Did DRF profit from taking bets on Churchill races? If so, and I'm sure they did, seems they leased their customers to Xpressbet for the day(s). Legal?

[tucker6]

So had you hit a big superfecta and wanted to cash out, who would have paid you, DRF or Xpressbet? Who would have withheld the taxes?

I really don't think it is legal for one company to just assign your account to another for a couple days, but I guess we'll find out.
If your terms and conditions with DRF says they can do it, then you agreed to it. No?

[OTM Al]

Had a little trouble locating terms and conditions for DRFbets so ended up Googling. Here they are. They don't say DRFbets once. Care to venture who I made my agreement with when I signed up?

https://www1.drf.com/drfbets/terms-and-conditions.html

[JustRalph]

Had a little trouble locating terms and conditions for DRFbets so ended up Googling. Here they are. They don't say DRFbets once. Care to venture who I made my agreement with when I signed up?

https://www1.drf.com/drfbets/terms-and-conditions.html

That's a great find........... XpressBet appears 66 times in that document. :lol:

[OTM Al]

That's a great find........... XpressBet appears 66 times in that document. :lol:

In the end I think the only thing that really matters is where the money went. If Xpressbet got the money for CD those days (let alone the money from all other tracks taken as all were Xpressbet those 2 days) then there is no case and DRF should be applauded for what they did to give players something they wanted.

[infrontby1]

Silly Question:

If Churchill didn't want DRF or Xpressbet to take action on the Derbies, why didn't they just block any wagers coming in to commingle with the rest of the pools in North America?

Or is it possible, that DRF/Xpressbet were taking in the wagers themselves, acting as a host (i.e. offshore accounts) and without paying the ADW host fees to Churchill and acting as private bookie in this sense (as well as pocketing any and all takeouts)?