Quote:
Originally Posted by moneyandland
FALSE, The ADW offered the wager as it was on its menu, NYRA Bets routinely eliminates the option to make a show wager on potential minus pools. TVG chooses to put the onus on the bettor to determine if the pool has the potential to be negative. That's my issue with this. IF A WAGER is available on the board it's not my responsibility to determine if it will effect the bottom line of the bet taker. The problem is it's not my wager making the pool negative so how is it my responsibility to have to determine that and then say oh sorry I don't want the good people at TVG running a business to take a loss so I better forgo my own winnings for the sake of Big Business.
If they don't want me to bet it, be proactive and turn off that wager like NYRA Bets does. Don't have bean counters scan bets 2 weeks after there made and say oh you know what we didn't profit on every bet made we made 14% of 3700 but twice we had to pay $30 and that means our profits weren't as high as they could be the whole while neglecting the fact that I wouldn't of bet the 3700 in other bets if I don't make all the plays
I would totally understand if the only bets I was making on the platform were large minus pool wagers.
|
You don't understand what you're (writing) about - still.
The
track "offered the wager". Your ADW does nothing but facilitate
parimutuel wagering. This isn't like Vegas of old where the casino was merely booking bets.
There remains no "onus on the bettor to determine if (any parimutuel wagering) pool has the potential to be negative". Any bettor with a remote amount of understanding of parimutuel wagering knows that
all parimutuel pools have the potential to be negative.
Nobody "routinely" "eliminates the option to make a show wager on potential minus pools".
Every single pool out there is a "potential minus pool".
If you have no understanding yet as to how parimutuel wagering works, just ask somebody.
And please tell the crowd how one random person on an internet message board
effects the bottom line of a bet-taker? What the heck does that gibberish even mean?
At the end of your time with TVG, you were habitually making wagers that each saw money coming out of your ADW's pocket to pay them off. The only negotiating point beyond that is amount.
For the same reason that the person betting $30 at the track should be afforded nearly all of the same courtesies known to a $300 bettor, the guy who is hitting his ADW for the negative pool on a $30,000 wager should be treated in the same way as the guy
habitually hitting his ADW for the cost of the negative pool on his $30 wagers. You're both just as guilty - beyond that
you are just the
bean counter in your equation.
Nice try though!