Bitcoin Forum

I have experienced firsthand the dubious practices of Sportsbet.io, a platform that I can only describe as predatory and deceitful. My journey with them began with high hopes as I engaged in betting on sports like the NBA and Premier League. Initially, after a loss of 500 USDT, I quickly deposited another 600 USDT, and then again, only to lose each time. However, my fortunes changed, and after my final deposit of 600 USDT, I managed to win, bringing my balance to 2400 USDT. The real problems began when I attempted to withdraw my winnings.

Sportsbet.io immediately put a halt to my withdrawal, without any prior warning or justification. Their customer service and security team were unresponsive and unhelpful, leaving me stranded with no access to my funds. It became evident that while the platform had no issues accepting my repeated deposits and witnessing my losses, they were not so accommodating when it came to withdrawals.

Through further research and seeing many similar online reviews, it’s clear that Sportsbet.io routinely rejects withdrawal requests under dubious circumstances—commonly when users have won significant amounts. Accusations range from the need for unnecessary verification to outright allegations of multi-accounting. This is starkly different from other reputable sites like Stake.com, which conducts its verification upfront, ensuring transparency and fairness from the start.

I strongly advise against trusting this platform with your ID documents or your funds. Numerous reports across the internet corroborate the failure of Sportsbet.io to treat its users fairly, often amounting to what can only be termed as stealing. Users looking for a fair and straightforward betting experience should steer clear of Sportsbet.io and consider more reliable alternatives.

would you mind providing any evidence to back up your claims, like screenshots of your conversation with their support, deposits, etc...? doing this would also make it a lot easier for people to understand what exactly is going on with your issue with the casino/sportsbook.

this is news to me, have they changed their ToS? I remember registering at their casino in the past without doing any kind of verification(to this day, I still haven't done any verification on their casino).

When I read the first and second paragraph of your complaint, I thought that the end would be about appealing for help and not accusing them.

They have been present here since 2016 and complaints or accusations like your yours is uncommon.

Did you submit your documents? In the terms and conditions on their website, they wrote that they can request for the document at anytime. If you did, then send a PM to their contact person on the forum with your complaints. Here's his link - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=832366

The prior warning is in their Terms of service if you read carefully. You must be aware that almost all online casino will subject you to KYC verification at any time of their own discretion.

Did you send in your documents for verification?

I didn't mean to be rude or condescending or looking lowly at you or the likes, but the amount disputed on this case is actually quite insignificant for SB, so there is no reason for them to pull a scam attempt. I believe it's just a small misunderstanding or they simply needed to run a check on your account and bets.

It'll be a completely different story if they still refuse your withdrawal although you've completed KYC and other things they requested. But if the situation here is simply they asked for your KYC when you attempted withdrawal, as irritating as it is, that's within the scope of the ToS you agreed to them.

You can rest assured that if you did nothing wrong or fishy, they'll more than happy to process the withdrawal and resume service to you once you passed their KYC.

I am suggesting you to perform it. Meanwhile, I'll try to notify Steve, see if SB found one thing or two that might trigger a flag or push them to perform further investigation. He was online few hours ago. Hopefully I can catch him up before he gets too busy handling other matters.

Edit: I've just learned you're already in contact with Steve 👍

Before reading your post I was about to ask the OP to at least provide some element of evidence to support his allegation because it really does sound ludicrous to believe that Sportsbet would selective scam their customers especially for a miniscule amount as a $2400 win.

After reading your post I am glad the OP has entered in to a chat with Steve and I hope there is a resolution in sight soon but it does not negate the fact that the onus is on the one making the allegation to at the very least present some evidence if they are making an allegation.

Personally, I would not be surprised if there is far more to this story than was elaborated on in the OP but time will tell whether the OP falls in the category of hiding things in his allegation or not.

A lot are pre-emptively taking the side of Sportsbet. That being the case, I'll play devil's advocate, even though 95% of the time the player is in the wrong. BCT has been able to get deposits back most of the time for first time infractions. Outside of BCT, both deposits and winnings are being confiscated by Sportsbet for accused 1st time offenses whether true or not.

I don't have any idea if the player is guilty or not of a first time infraction or multiple infractions. We all should wait, including myself, before taking sides. Just trying to level the playing field until we find out.

I don't know why but these words by OP sounds strangely familiar. I am having like a reading deja vu right now.
It's the wording and the story how it unfolded, I am sure I have read a very similar thing recently. Maybe I am just crazy or too tired right now but it REALLY seems familiar.

Anyway, routine checks by every casino are fairly normal, especially after being in profit. I know it's annoying but that's just how it is. Most of us have been there. For that reason I always advise to do KYC beforehand, right after registering. If you are winning you will have to do it at some point anyway so it saves you a lot of mental stress.

The most annoying part is waiting and getting unsatisfying answers which if you do KYC at the beginning is easy to avoid.

I have no idea of what happens outside the forum as focusing myself on cases [of casinos, not specific to one casino] on this forum only is already more than enough to take a better portion of my free time, but if what you said is true, then those people better start learning about the forum as it'll [apparently] give them better chance to get their case resolved.

people definitely should come here for help. Deposits get taken elsewhere. Easiest examples https://www.trustpilot.com/review/sportsbet.io


One guy had his money confiscated because it was dormant for 4 months. There was no follow up to say he got paid.

Actually they do this after 3 months.
I once had the same issue actually. I logged in after a long time and saw that my account was all 0s even though I knew there must at least have been a tiny bit left.
So I messaged support, they explained it to me and put my account back in active and the funds were back where they were. So it was no biggie to get it fixed.

With an unused account of 1 year it's a different story and this rule (deducting 5% monthly) is not cool.

https://www.talkimg.com/images/2024/04/29/rGW0D.png

Umm... how sure are we that those reviewers did not get what's rightfully theirs instead of getting things settled but didn't bother to come back to update the review? For example, cases on this forum are occasionally left unattended and not updated by the user once they get what they want and their case got resolved, people need to infer it themselves from the flow of the discussion and exchange of communication with SB's [or other casinos'] representatives.

Likewise, from your own example, how sure are we that the the player eventually got his fund back but he simply didn't bother to revise his entry on trustpilot?

And that is just from reviewer who are legit innocent. We still have to consider butt-hurt people who loses big or caught cheating on SB and tries to vent up their anger by creating a misleading review.

I don't read the reviews one by one, thoroughly [and not reading Stake representative's responses either], but if those "disputes" are transferred into this thread, I think at least half of them will be invalid due to the lack of supporting evidence?

 I do a lot of research for grading purposes, not just here and Trust Pilot. I’m sure that most cases posted publicly aren’t valid but Sportsbet, Stake and 1xbet are bad with confiscating deposits and winnings.

I am once again find myself in a confusion reading your post and think it's a bit contradictive. Perhaps you don't mind to explain it better?

1xbet-and-bit aside as their nefarious reputation is very much well established... about reviews for Stake and SB, if most cases that's being posted on trustpilot are not valid, then wouldn't it imply they're a smear campaign or people throwing muds or venting their anger for being busted?

And thus, them confiscating deposits and winning are either a false statement made by the smear campaigners and mud slingers, or a valid one from those who got their account blocked and got angry at SB and Stake [and perhaps any other big casinos out there] and try to make them pay by giving low rating and scalding review?

It wasn’t my intent to beat up on Sportsbet here with an onslaught of cases. But to answer your question it’s going to come across that way. A little later I’ll edit this thread and post cases where Sportsbet takes winnings and deposits. Even with accused first time offenses, Sportsbet wasn’t returning deposits. With Stake we just saw a case where Stake grabbed a guys deposits. It was the Porter rigged prop bets.

My opinion is if you are profiled as a loser, Stake and Sportsbet pay fast. They know you are giving the money back so they aren’t going to bother you. If you are profiled as a possible winner or hit for a lot of money, there’s a decent chance of having KYC done and it can be extensive. The other options would be to limit your wagers, give you a second set of lines or change your margins and it can be done fast.

This type of thing is by no means new to the sports betting industry. They’ve been profiling sports gamblers prior to the Internet when people had to walk in casinos. Limits were changed for some. Beards (people making bets for a winner to hide identity) are used to enter casinos.

What is new is that these online casinos are stealing money from winners and those hitting for big money.

You can't edit a thread [as in the opening post] unless you're the OP of the said thread. I believe you know this. Were you trying to say that you'll edit the post quoted above with lists of cases? If so, I'll suggest you to create a new and separate thread instead of posting it here.

It'll rather be OOT if you post it here... though with careful and proper wording, I think you can make it a bit on-topic.

Talking about OOT a little... that guy on Stake who bets on Porter, I wonder what made him think the repercussion for such violation [be it deliberate or his claim is true that he's just following a trend] will just earn him a slap on the wrist, get the bet voided, and he will ultimately still get his funds returned. I would love to see the world he grew up in.

Then I’ll do it this way since I said I don’t want to pile on Sportsbet. If Steve or Jeremy deny that Sportsbet is taking deposits for first time offenses, I’ll hunt down cases. Otherwise I won’t clog up the forum and will just comment on new cases.

The Stake player did nothing wrong. He was unfortunate to bet a game that turned out to be rigged. The player wasn’t in on it. Exclude the winnings and give him the rest of the money. Following the trend on one bet makes it ok for Stake to steal your balance? I follow the trend on tons of plays. Stake can’t steal the money from every single player that happened to bet that game. Other books aren’t stealing that money from anyone except those in on the fix. If you had bet that game, should Stake steal your money or just cancel winnings?

Even those deposits from the fixers will most likely have to be returned. Stealing the whole balance is illegal. DraftKings blew the whistle and I don’t think there’s been a conclusion to the case which is why the money is being held.

How do you propose this to be done? Do you want me to invite Steve and/or Jeremy to come back here? Far as I know, once they mark a case as settled [or handled externally, for this case], they're not returning to the thread. So your statement above has a very high chance of being missed.


How sure are we that he's innocent? Just like Stake can't prove that he got tipped to place the bet, that player can't also prove that his claim is true, that he's simply following the trend. I personally find it quite raising an eyebrow that [if he's simply following a trend] he placed a bet that's significantly higher than his usual bets, or that he bets on props. Maybe you can look into his betting history and do a profiling on him based on the data?

Oh, by the way, if I may ventured OOT just a bit further, to straighten things, in case there is any doubt about my "bias", that I made those statement on that thread based on assumption, Stake's ToS actually covered about holding the fund for such circumstances. I had it screen captured in one of my device in case the necessity ever arise. He simply did not "scrub" deep enough.

And no, this is not me being partial and siding with Stake. I still condemn their decision to drag cases for months and I still like to see myself as impartial on that case [despite that user seemingly think I am a devil's spawn]. I'm simply stating a fact here. A clause is written on their ToS, so I pointed that out.

It’s not for nefarious reasons but you are obviously siding with Stake. No one has proved the player did anything wrong and you think Stake can steal. There are no clauses that the player has broken.

Think logically. When people rig a game they make big bets. The line starts moving, a trend is set and honest people jump in on the bet. These people did nothing wrong.

If Stake had 500 people make that bet can Stake steal the balances of all 500 people?

I don't think I'm siding with Stake and I don't think Stake can steal, I'm simply [apparently] being the only one who read their ToS regarding this case. And being someone who read a ToS to get a better understanding of a case shouldn't directly translates into me siding with one party.

Let me break it down, currently they're at the moot point. Stake can't prove if OP got tipped or simply followed a trend, but the fact remains, jeffyeps placed a bet that's later become problematic and Stake suspected him that he's in a breach of 4.19. with a nail on 4.19.e. [that I'll have to say, it's a rather "clever" way for them to cover themselves], thus 4.21.

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/04/30/rTsXJ.jpeg (https://talkimg.com/image/rTsXJ)

It'll be a different case if Stake accuses jeffyeps out of the blue that he placed bet on a rigged game, or whichever point they can select from 4.19.a. to 4.19.d., for this, Stake will arguably tries to cheat from their player. The problem here is there was a basis. A game was rigged and made in collusive manner. Regardless he simply followed a tip or not, Stake reserves the right to withhold or retain the amount that otherwise payable to him as they consider the event may have occured or likely to occur.

They can't exactly be said stealing from someone who give their consent to consequences they'll face upon some clauses in a list of agreement, can they?

But allow me to turn the table, for argumentative purpose and not for nefarious reason. How sure are you that you are not biased and siding with the player? You require player on other cases to provide his betting history for your profiling. Has you profiled jeffyeps? What does it say? Here, below are the snippets of his bets that he previously provided. I believe analyzing betting history to profile someone is your forte?

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/04/30/rT3zC.png (https://talkimg.com/image/rT3zC)
https://talkimg.com/images/2024/04/30/rTkcb.png (https://talkimg.com/image/rTkcb)

I am biased. I always go in with the assumption that a player is innocent and a book must prove him guilty. His betting history isn’t good for his case which is why I didn’t declare him innocent at that point.

With the exception of books with licenses in the UK or US, no honest books give players limits where they can win $45k on prop bets and that's rare. I've never seen anything close to that. I'm sure Draftkings won't do that again. Books that do this are going to take your money if you lose and take your money if you win on a $45k win prop bet. NBA prop bet limits are normally between $300 and $2000 offshore. I'd guess $500 is the most common. I just found something that I'll quote below although I think he's talking about US books.

If I went by which is more likely, I’d say the player is guilty. At the same time it’s very likely that Stake was going to steal his money either way. When I've previously said the player did nothing wrong, the meaning was nothing wrong that has been proven.

Since neither can be proven, take away his winnings and return the rest of his balance. Dangerous precedent if Stake can steal whenever they want.


from ESPN Senior Advisor

I'm gonna drop the first paragraph of yours as things will spiralling down if it gets another oxygen.

What I'd like to address is the last paragraph [well, from my quote, not from your original post], whether stake should return his deposit or not.

Ethically, yes they should. They can't prove that the user is colluding, neither can the player proves he's innocent. If this is his first "offense", then jeffyeps entitled --again, ethically-- to a degree of benefit of doubt and get his betting fund returned. But legally? Stake has the full rights to do what they currently did, especially as there is an indication [as you acknowledged yourself] that his bets are somewhat questionable, and that he's not innocent.

I believe Jeffyeps made a wrong assumption when he said that he has scrubbed the ToS and didn't find any that justifies Stake to confiscate his fund, since the term only said voiding a bet. Well, unfortunately he only scrubbed the sports-terms, not realizing that it is a "sub-terms" of a larger one, where the point previously mentioned resides].

The question is [and I believe it should be the closing question of this topic as we're once again have been way out of the topic] what will you do and say on his thread?

Now, attempting to bring us back on track, to the topic being discussed, I believe you haven't give me an answer to this question?

I'd go "resolved". He took it to Steve in private and we haven't heard back. You could reopen if OP comes back.

Oh sorry for being unclear, I was not talking about the OP of this thread and his case. I was talking about your open proposal to Sportsbet's representatives.

As previously mentioned, SB's representative have tendency to not revisiting a thread when they consider it closed. But I think I can invite either one of them, or perhaps both, to answer your question below... if you still want to proceed?

I’m not really looking to rehash any old cases. I’m sure Jeremy reads the thread. If he disagrees with anything I’ve said then I’d be happy to show evidence requested but I’m not looking for a fight on old cases since there doesn’t seem to be any value to others.

Theres no way a normal stake account has these limits on nba props

I have used stake and when my account got semilimited my maxbet on props were around 300$ winnings theres absoluty no way that a new fresh account has a 20k$ winnings limit

Is there more background on this guy? Was he a massive loser to get better betting limits?

It turns out that every book except Stake paid the bet as a winner. That bet was in January. The second time the game was rigged in March is when people caught on to games being rigged. DraftKings blew the whistle in March and regulators went back and looked at more bets. Stake had zero intent to pay the player. No one thought the January game was rigged until it happened a second time.

The player posted at BCT in February. Stake didn’t know the game was rigged until March.

That's because he's not a new fresh account, he's been on Stake for three years and on platinum 6 (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5486388.msg63712809#msg63712809), and he did not get his betting limited, he get a bet withheld [and the whole amount confiscated, not just the winning], he placed a bet in Jontay Porter's bet.

---

To avoid confusion as happened to above poster, I'd invite you to address that concern on jeffyeps's thread and not here, focus things related to his case on his thread. Though I won't be able to comment much and/or help pushing things to Stake or even nudged them about it, given I've withdrawn myself from that thread.

Critical Warning: Consider These Risks Before Using Sportsbet.io

Review:

As a platform that has faced significant scrutiny, Sportsbet.io presents several red flags that potential users must be aware of before engaging with their services. My experience and extensive research have revealed alarming practices that raise questions about the platform's integrity and operations.

1. Misleading KYC Practices:
Sportsbet.io allows new users to deposit funds freely but restricts withdrawals following winnings, creating a misleading and frustrating experience. This is not an isolated incident but a recurring issue widely reported online. The platform's use of KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements is often arbitrary and serves as a pretext to withhold legitimate winnings. Their terms and conditions give them sweeping powers to request KYC and limit withdrawals at any time, akin to an authoritarian regime that applies rules selectively to benefit themselves. Despite assurances, many users continue to face hurdles even after completing KYC, leading to lost confidence in the security of their personal information.

2. Continued Risk Post-KYC:
Even after completing KYC, using Sportsbet.io comes with inherent risks. The platform's operations and the lack of transparency around its leadership and regulatory standing are concerning. Unlike reputable platforms that list their executives and corporate structure openly, Sportsbet.io's management remains a mystery, with no presence on professional networks like LinkedIn. Additionally, their gaming license is not recognized in major markets such as the UK, yet they sponsor Premier League football clubs, creating a false image of legitimacy.

3. A Cautionary Tale:
The recent collapse of FTX and the scandal surrounding its founder, SBF, serve as a stark reminder that no platform, regardless of its size or the surface credibility, is completely safe. Every user must weigh the risks carefully, recognizing that platforms like Sportsbet.io may operate in grey areas of regulation and customer protection.

Conclusion:
Potential users should approach Sportsbet.io with extreme caution. The practices observed and the difficulties many have faced suggest a pattern of behavior that prioritizes the platform's interests over user security and fair play.

what was the outcome after talking to Steve?

Not trying to defend SB [though I can see and hear myself that it awfully sounds like it] but, aren't these points extremely biased? I mean, if we break them down:


This is a common practice shared by any centralized crypto casino, not exclusively SportBet's. People are allowed to create an account and deposit without any prior requirement, and only later on, when the necessity arise, they're required to perform certain level KYC, as per what they've agreed on the ToS during sign up.

That's why it's actually [regardless how "anti-privacy" and counterintuitive it is] always advised to clear your KYC prior to play and/or deposit on any casino, to prevent inconvenient situation in the future.

There's no win for this argument. If the casino make it a requirement for their customer to perform KYC during sign up, prior to any game play or even a deposit, I can hear them screaming "this casino steals identity through enforced KYC!". If they don't require you to perform it upon your first, second, third, or twentieth play, and only requested that when they deemed it so, situation as quoted above occured.

Can you name me one or two casinos that does not require their customer to perform KYC at one point? Even a web3 casinos [decentralized casinos] will require KYC upon certain triggers.

If you don't want to perform any KYC, then go to a casino that doesn't require KYC. Here, there's a thread listing casinos (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5381143.msg58974603#msg58974603) who require KYC and those who are not.


Can you please be more clear on what you mean by them lacking a transparency in regulatory standing? It's there, at the bottom of their page, like where most casinos have it: the information and the seal of validation of their licensor.

https://talkimg.com/images/2024/05/04/rrbha.jpeg (https://talkimg.com/image/rrbha)

And, "their gaming license is not recognized in major markets such as the UK", is this a fact? That UK major market does not recognize Curacao gaming license? Where can I validate this statement? If it's true, then many casinos out there are in a serious identity crisis, many of them are licensed by Curacao authorities. Anyway, how does it related [UK recognizing a license or not] to what a company sponsored?

Further, in order for me to get a better understanding of who you referred to and I can compare them myself with many casinos I know, can you please mention the names of those reputable platforms that list their executives and corporate structures transparently?


As what can be inferred on both points above, this is not exclusively applied to SportsBet. In relevance to that part of post I quoted above, any platform poses this risk. Literally any platform. Your brick and mortar bank even poses this risk. Why does SB being specifically and exclusively mentioned here?


I don't think I still need to cover this part, do I? I am more than willing, if people asked me to. Meanwhile, it'll be very very nice of you if you can address all of those points I raised above in reply to your own.

Betcoin, Nitrobetting and ParlayPlus are pretty good as far as not asking for KYC. If they ask, you've done something wrong. Stake and Sportsbet are bad with KYC since innocent people seem to be getting caught in the net. Delays can be long. Maverick and Roobet are mandatory KYC. The rest are in the middle as far as sportsbooks go.

I'd like to acknowledge Steve from Sportsbet.io for his efforts in addressing my withdrawal issues. While it's clear he has done what he can, unfortunately, he doesn't have the authority to overturn decisions made by the security and safety team. Thanks, Steve, for your assistance throughout this process. It's a tough situation, but your effort hasn't gone unnoticed.

UK Residents: Don’t Register With Sportsbetio.uk Before You Read This!
https://www.bettinginstitute.co.uk/how-to-bet/sportsbetio-uk-review/

Established in 2019, Sportsbet.io is an online gambling platform specializing in cryptocurrency betting, including Bitcoin. However, due to the UK Gambling Commission's concerns about cryptocurrencies potentially increasing the risks of money laundering and illegal activities, UK fans are redirected from Sportsbet.io to a different site.

UK Operations and Regulations:In the UK, gamblers are restricted to www.sportsbetio.uk and cannot access www.sportsbet.io. The UK site is operated by TGP Europe Ltd, which holds a UK operational license and is regulated by the UK Gambling Commission. TGP Europe is based in the Isle of Man, known for its offshore financial services.

Cryptocurrency and Market Focus:While Sportsbetio.uk avoids mentioning cryptocurrencies, aligning with stringent UK regulations, the international site, Sportsbet.io, advertises itself as a hub for cryptocurrency betting. It boasts of being "the freest betting platform worldwide," accepting currencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Ripple. Despite sponsoring Premier League football clubs, Sportsbet.io's marketing and operational strategies suggest that their primary target audience is not UK residents but likely bettors in Asian countries where regulations might be more permissive regarding cryptocurrency gambling.

While Sportsbet.io invests heavily in promotion, notably through sponsorship of Premier League football clubs, they seem to neglect crucial aspects of customer experience and loyalty. This contradiction is stark, considering the platform's heavy marketing outlay. It appears that despite their high visibility in the sports world, their actual commitment to user satisfaction and trust falls short.

I've learned that disgruntled users are starting to organize through social media to expose the questionable practices of Sportsbet.io. They are gathering information across various platforms including Reddit in the US, TikTok, X (formerly Twitter), and Xiaohongshu in China, to share their negative experiences and warn potential users. This grassroots movement highlights a growing dissatisfaction with how Sportsbet.io handles its operations, particularly concerning the transparency and fairness of withdrawals and the use of KYC as a gatekeeping tool.

These actions by users reflect a deep-seated frustration and a drive to hold Sportsbet.io accountable, urging potential bettors to reconsider their choice of platform. The company's focus appears to be more on expansion and less on the quality of service provided to its existing user base, a strategy that might ultimately tarnish their reputation and undermine their promotional efforts.

I have tried to access Sportsbet.io with a UK IP address and I get a notification on my screen that Sportsbet.io isn't available for users in the United Kingdom. There is also a button to redirect to Sportsbetio.uk.

I am confused about your case. What site did you initially register and play on? The main domain or the UK domain?
If you played on the main domain with a UK IP, how was that possible? Maybe Sportsbet didn't have this ban for UK players at the time. Did you use a VPN or some other way to mask your location?

About the case, have you done the KYC verification or did you refuse it?

I'd like to see that my wall of text --that's located above the post you replied to-- was not there just to be a decoration, and I find it rather hard for you to miss it by accident. May I ask why you don't bother to address any of them?

Books that advertise the heaviest, Stake, 1xBet, Sportsbet, have become the worst for players. Lots of KYC, delays and outright left of winnings and deposits. They should spend more money on competent employees rather than all advertising.

Not really.
Nitrobetting aka Nitrogensports held my money hostage for weeks many years ago. They asked me to verify and log in with a "unique IP", not even allowing to use my phone carrier IP, it was hilarious.
And even after I took care of absolutely everything they still let me wait around 5 weeks to finally let me withdraw.
Of course they had their baseless multi account question like "what is your connection to user 12345678", which was total nonsense.
So please don't name a site like nitro to be trustworthy, KYC free, and so on, because they are not.

Sure KYC might be annoying but sportsbet.io and stake both gave me 0 troubles regarding that, I verified right after registering and was never asked for anything again. Sure I am not a fan of stake overall, they deceived their players a lot with promises that were never upheld, but KYC was never an issue, just the empty promises.

That’s absolutely crazy to be holding your money for 5 weeks. Sportsbet and Stake are still the most intrusive by far with the longest delays. Proving source of funds is insane. Even when using the exact same third party for ID checks they are always getting declined by Stake but accepted at other books which makes no sense.

I have gone through the four posts you have made and noted there are far too many parts of the story/situation that could be elaborated on but you never did. If the story was presented in full, I think there would not have been some of the questions that come to mind now.

Did you use a VPN? Are you located in one part of the world but used an IP address for another to breach the Terms and Conditions you willingly accepted when you registered at Sportsbet?

You never explained your side of the story in full and now with the link for UK based (potential) customers, you have given the impression you are from the UK but it raised more questions because UK residents are not allowed to use the website.

I am not stating there is something untoward on his part but the OP should have mentioned that at the first opportunity in order to be open, clear, concise and honest. If he had presented a comprehensive review of the version of events as he saw them unfold questions about KYC, AML, VPN and his location would not need to asked as that information would already have been put out there.

The next question is why would the OP omit key information in his complaint?

This case is the same as the one against BC.game. In both instances the players made bets in major sports leagues. Here it's NBA and EPL. There's no reason to multi-account. BC.game made the right decision and decided to pay the player. Sportsbet should do the same.

When trying to figure out any crime, look for the motivation and intent to commit a crime. The OP has no reason to commit a crime here and multi-account. The dollar amounts aren't circumventing limits and the lines are never advantageous at Sportsbet. Pay the player.

Sportsbet - give us one reason why a guy would multi-account betting $500 in major markets?

This process of fairness should not only apply to BC Game and Sportsbet it should be the same for all online gaming/casino websites. All of those businesses should always be conducting themselves with the utmost professionalism but what everybody has to accept is that their customers are willingly registering themselves and accepting the Terms and Conditions.

What that effectively means is the OP was not forced to register and play there, on the contrary he opted to deposit funds there in order to place bets. As of yet he has not even fully explained what the background to his allegation was therefore it would not be appropriate to jump to conclusions and state Sportsbet should pay the OP. Let the OP explain what happened first.

If we have seen the last of the OP before he provides detailed explanations about what he claims happened, in that scenario this allegation should not be taken seriously.

You can't possibly know what has happened here and what the player isn't telling us. There are so many questions left unanswered, and it seems he is only sharing what he wants to share. He said that he talked to Steve, but we don't know what about. Judging by his last post, it's got something to do with the United Kingdom. The UK is a restricted jurisdiction on Sportsbet.io. It begs the question, how did he register and play at the casino if he is from there? I am not saying Sportsbet decision is the right call, but I am saying there isn't enough information here to side with either party.

Agree that I don’t know what happened other than intent. If the OP played from a banned jurisdiction at Betcoin and some others, then Betcoin would return his money.

Sportsbet can’t keep stealing money. Yesterday Sportsbet stole $500 from an another player claiming attempted double spend using a rule stating “ in our sole discretion”.

It was the same as the last one. At first they accused the player of multi-accounting and the changed to double spend using this rule.



Some of their rules in their ToS would be thrown out in court. Sportsbet took deposits again.

I am failed to understand how do you find a connection and similarities of this case with one from BC. How is this case similar with BC and which case is it? OP barely tell us the whole story, and evaded my attempt to breakdown his complaints. I personally think there are a lot more than meet the eyes with OP's case, let alone make a connection on similarities with cases with BC.

And how do you figure motivation and intent, if I may ask? How do we know if someone tell the whole truth and made his intent clear instead of hiding things and distort his intent?

we know there wasn’t ill intent since the only reason to multi-account is to circumvent limits and abuse bonuses. OP did neither.

I’ve seen cases at Betcoin where a player makes bets from a banned jurisdiction. Betcoin cancels winnings and returns the deposit.

Sportsbet has to stop stealing deposits on first time infractions. And if they claim double spend, then prove it instead of using ToS “ in our sole discretion”.


Here's the latest case changed from multi-account to double spend.

Speaking in general manner, I would like to argue that the reason for multi acc is not strictly to circumvent limit [an action made by casinos where they only allows player to place bet to certain value at max] or abusing bonuses. There are numerous others. Evading ban, evading self-exclusion, manipulating gambling pattern detection [they made new account before their abusive gambling pattern triggered casino's flags], even bypassing limit [as in withdrawal limit, not the betting limit] imposed for an account.

Speaking specifically for this case, how do we know that this player does not abuse bonus or do anything detrimental?

And circling back to my original question, how do we figure motivation and intent? I assume user's narrative plays a big role in it, so it invites a question of how do we know they tell the truth and not hiding things, thus obscuring his intent and motivation?

I don't think Sportsbet gives bonuses for sports gambling. The other reasons aren't plausible because of the markets bet and dollar amount. No book cares about a $500 bettor in a major market. It's not going to draw attention.

My guess is banned jurisdiction but I could be wrong. The whole point is that no advantage was gained by the bets of the player. We have to start treating these cases as they would with a fiat book. Fiat and crypto have almost identical ToS. Books just apply the ToS differently. I play at crypto books because I don't want to be hassled and believe that the bitcoin price will rise. There's too much hassle going on with some of the crypto books.

I am sorry, but I can't take you seriously, and I don't trust your neutrality. You seem to be motivated by other factors. Shilling Betcoin while pulling down other bookies you don't like. You remind me of another account (which might actually be your alt account based on the username) that praises Nitrogen Sports on every occasion.

I am not aware of the case and can't comment on your judgement. Regarding double-spending. Sportsbet.io has instant deposits. That means, you can play with your bitcoin even before the transaction confirms on-chain. However, you won't be allowed to withdraw your funds before the deposit transaction has been confirmed on the blockchain. If you attempt to manipulate this feature by double-spending, while at the same time requesting a withdrawal, then I completely agree with the casino for confiscating the player's balance and banning him. If that's what happened. It's manipulation and cheating and deserves to be punished.

One does not mistakenly double-spend a bitcoin transaction. But if the player did so to bump the fees to get a quicker confirmation, it's a completely different matter, as long as the bumped transaction didn't go to another address not under the casino's control.

Assuming that OP did accessing from UK, and thus violate their restricted region ToS, I believe this question you made earlier are now answered?


Oh, one thing that I forgot to address on the beginning of our discussion today, that question is actually... wrongly worded. OP was never accused of multi-acc, he simply got his account blocked upon withdrawal request, which now [if we assume the UK theory] become apparent why such situation happened to OP and why would a guy pull a stunt for USD 500 bet.

Nonetheless, moving on, I am still interested in knowing more about your method to "figure out any crime" as it might be beneficial for future cases, so I'd like to repeat, "how do we figure motivation and intent? I assume user's narrative plays a big role in it, so it invites a question of how do we know they tell the truth and not hiding things, thus obscuring his intent and motivation?"

I find it a little strange that Sportsbet is the only book grabbing deposits for attempted double spends. They started off with multi-accounting and then changed to double spend since the rule is "in their sole discretion".  Sportsbet and Stake are the only two that I’ve posted negatively about and it’s due to recent problems. You make a lot of false allegations. I asked Theymos to change my username and he was nice enough to do it. I know that Sportsbet is your favorite book but you have to be objective. I’ve praised BC.game a couple of times recently, "Great job BC.game and all casinos should follow". I don't even have a rating up for them yet. I praised leebit 2 days ago. I praised Trustdice a day or two ago. You also ignore the times that I've stated Sportsbet is correct. I used Betcoin because I could have proved my point if needed. I'll continue to praise the good books and call out the bad. The goal is to help players. You want to back Sportsbet for an obvious theft while being unfair to Nitrobetting. When you were saying untrue things about Nitrobetting, at first I assumed that you didn't know better. Now I know that's not the case. Whenever someone asks why Nitrobetting isn't on your list, you continue to be untruthful even though people corrected you on multiple occasions. You are the last person who should be questioning motives. I have no idea why you keep posting erroneous information on Nitrobetting when you know it’s not true. At the same time, I don’t care why you do it.


Look for why a player would want to cheat a book. Circumventing limits, bonus abuse or bot use to gain an advantage is almost always the reason. Someone that only value bets may be using a bot. If all bets are value bets in small markets, he is using a bot. If someone is betting mostly widely available lines, he’s honest. Players getting an advantage is what books look out for. If a player posts 10 of his plays, he can easily be profiled and we’ll know what he’s doing.

I've done a little bit of everything in the industry although things are 1000x more advanced now with biometrics and AI. If someone thinks they are going to get away with multi-accounting, they are dead wrong. Services such as Veriff are really good. AI is used for betting patterns. All data is being stored.

Back in the day the only worry was multi-accounting and sharps. The only thing that needed to be looked at were bets to see if there was a reason to multi-account. If the bets were all value bets then this player had to be limited or banned. These people also needed to be looked at for multi-accounting because they get banned and limited everywhere. Players that only bet prop bets have to be looked into. Female players are also a red flag for multi-accounting. The thing back in the day is that it was no harm, no foul. The book didn't search for every rule in the ToS or look for loopholes. Deposits weren't being confiscated. Some books even paid out bad lines that other books cancelled. They would give you the choice. Take your winnings and get banned or cancel winnings and keep playing.

Today the books are doing a lot of scamming. If a player breaks an inconsequential rule, by the letter of the law his money can be taken. I believe if there is no intent to cheat a book, then don't take his deposits. Looking at bets speeds up the process. If the bets aren't value bets where you can arb or take the weak side, then there is no advantage to the player. If there's no advantage it's not that big of a deal if you are playing at a banned territory since it's an even playing field. The book let you play there so they can't all of a sudden grab your deposits.

The books that steal deposits have the right to steal by the terms. But what about terms such as "in our sole discretion". If the ToS is against something that a judge would throw out in court, then the ToS should be ignored. If not ignored then us players have to stick together and stop books from taking advantage of us.

If you have players post all their bets, I’ll give you real life examples and tell you if there is ill intent. It’s similar to the last BC.game case.


BC paid and I respect their decision. There wasn’t a lengthy process where BC.game searched to find something irrelevant.

This entire wall of text is completely off-topic and unrelated to this case, and I don't care about it. You reminded me of that other person (your alt account) based on your praises for particular casinos and your username, and I was right. You are the same person. It's completely irrelevant to this scam accusation what any of the casinos/sportsbooks you like to highlight and shill are doing or what they did in the past. Focus at the subject in hand if you want to be taken seriously and stay off the shill pills.

My thread opened in 2014, it has 258,000 views talking about Sportsbook ratings and the only people that call me a shill are you Sportsbet guys.

I find it strange how this thread has been derailed over a period of time and it has coincided with the time when the OP has stopped posting too.

Looking at this from a neutral perspective, there really have been far too many walls of text related to when the Rating Place account posts. Clearly he has an agenda against Sportsbet and it is similarly uncanny in the sense that a certain member is chasing/trolling/harassing Blackjack.fun.

Two questions:

First, he is wearing a Blackjack.fun signature and an eXch avatar therefore why call him a Sportsbet guy?

Second, name who you think are the Sportsbet guys.

I’ll admit I went overboard with Sportsbet although everything is true. Long history with Jeremy, Steve and another after I gave them a “C” rating. Lots of attacks in my thread and elsewhere.

With Pmalek he posted Sportsbet is his favorite book although he's not part of Sportsbet. Pmalek doesn't always tell the truth about Nitrobetting, otherwise I find him a great poster. I got blindsided because I didn’t see the false attacks coming from Pmalek.

edit, I sure hope that you aren't accusing me of anything with Blackjack.fun. I stay in scam accusations and my thread.

Someone needs to call shrink asap, because one of the worst patients escaped mental institution and he needs to be returned their quickly.
He changed his name and he imagined that his worthless casino ratings are relevant to anyone  ;D

 I don't mind a little ribbing but at least be funny or use new material next time. Repeats don't make me laugh. I didn't want to call anyone else out of the Sportsbet guys, but here's one of them that use to stalk me.

I have had nothing but positive experiences betting on sports on Sportsbet, and when someone asks what casinos to try, I have no doubts when I recommend Sportsbet to them. If that means it's my favorite book, then I guess it is. But if you think for one second that I would defend them if I see them scamming, then that's your problem.   

You are the one coming to conclusions here about what happened, when not even the OP told the whole story.
Stick to the topic of discussion without bringing Betcoin and Nitro Betting into the equation and how they do things.

This will be the last post that is not related to this scam accusation that I will reply to you.

I cannot recall reading your thread therefore I do not know anything about it except for what have written here but if you accept you went overboard constantly attacking Sportsbet then I hope that part of your posting has come to an end.

Him stating his favourite book is irrelevant and it does not seem as though he attacked you and I have not seen any false attacks. It seems you are taking almost every opportunity to attack one company you do not like and the problem here seems to be that you are associating any member that either is part of their signature campaign or simply providing positive comments without attachment as part of them. It is unnecessary for you to do that.

No, I was pointing out similarities between you and another specific poster that is all.

I’m not looking to continue petty arguments but will reply to this. With this case I'm not sure how people can take Sportsbet's side if it's a jurisdiction infraction. If the OP is from the UK and deposits $50,000, makes one bet and wins $3000, can Sportsbet take $53,000. They should take the $3000 winnings and return the $50,000 deposit. I have no problems with these cases if winnings were voided and the balance returned.

It’s not my intent to rock the boat and I admitted my mistake but I don’t need lectures from anyone on how and what to post. Normally I'm respectful to all posters that don't attack.


 I said that I don't know what happened. Quote below is what I said.

But that's just the thing, we have no idea what happened. The OP didn't tell us. What we know from the posts they made is that they won some money and had their withdrawal request denied. From that point on, we are completely in the dark. I think the player was asked to conduct KYC, but they didn't want to. We know they spoke to Steve and acknowledged his efforts in trying to fix the situation, but that apparently didn't fix things in the player's favor.

We still don't know what the casino asks of the player and what it is that the player can't provide. It's got to be something related to identity verification and their place of residence, otherwise the player wouldn't have posted those reviews and warnings they copied from somewhere on the internet.

Don't you find it unusual that the player hasn't said what is wrong with their account and their withdrawal request? Besides thanking Steve, there are no further accusations or more information about the situation from the player's mouth. Maybe I am wrong, but to me, that sounds like the player has realized that they are in the wrong and this case is finished. If not, I'd love to hear what the player has to say and why they have been quiet ever since speaking to Steve.   

I stated earlier that the case should be marked as resolved since the player went to Steve.

Resolved or Unsolved? Only the player can inform the community about the nature of the case. All we can do is speculate. The player last posted on 6 May. They were online 2 days ago, but didn't post anything. Unless they break silence soon, it's pretty self-explanatory that this is finished.

my opinion is resolved unless OP comes back and then open up again but I have no complaints on however it’s labeled.

Can you provide a link for this alleged incident if has been reported in this forum as an alleged scam. It is important to stay on topic but if for the sake of reference another case is being mentioned members cannot take the word of another member at face value. As long as you can provide some sort of link that explains the alleged scam, it can be looked at.

Who lectured you?

The $50,000 was a fictitious case being used as an example to say that the deposits should also be returned for first time infractions. If there are multiple infractions then I can see confiscating deposits as a deterrent.

This section here at BCT has been good at getting deposits back, unlike other places. Because of the success, I asked Theymos if it were ok to start a binding arbitration section. Theymos had no problem with it but there didn’t seem to be much interest here so I let it go.

As far as pointing out old cases and lectures, I think the past should be left in the past.

The OP is not posting here and for that reason there is no way to understand what the full allegation against Sportsbet actually was. It is not fair for others to speculate when the OP can write walls of text but not even explain what he claimed happened.

I have decided to unwatch this thread because quite clearly it has been derailed to the point the OP has become obsolete and everything that remains has become off-topic.

I start off pro player with all cases, the book must prove guilt, but don't come to any conclusions until facts are produced. At the same time I would ask that you do the same thing. While Sportsbet may not take $2400, the amount of deposit may have still be in question at the time of your post. Players are not going to come here for help if you start off posting a side before hearing anything. They know that they will berated. New people will come to BCT for help if treated fairly. That said, 95% of the time the player will be a scammer but we can help the 5%. If wanted I can point people here to BCT that currently aren't at BCT since I read forums world wide.

First, I cannot prove or disprove guilt or innocence but the burden of proof has to lay with the one alleging there was wrongdoing. If I post an allegation about you stealing $2400 I have to provide some evidence to support my claim. Plucking allegations out of thin air or making them on weak foundations is not the way forward and never has been.

Second, if the OP has not even explained the full story and does not provide screenshots of transaction, Sportsbet account area etc then there is no compulsion on any member to waste their time speculating about what might (or might not) have happened?

As the OP is no longer posting here, I will unwatch this thread as there is nothing any member could add that remains on-topic while the OP did not explain his allegation in full.

I don't think that any of us came to a conclusion that the player was innocent, but we are looking at things backwards. The $2400 was in the player's account. The book took the player's $2400. The onus is on the book to prove guilt. Otherwise you are prejudiced against the player. No where in the world are you guilty until proved innocent. The book should make a claim on why they confiscated the money, then the player refutes the allegations. This should be for the future, not the current case.

If I am not mistaken, and unless I understand things wrongly, what you asked theymos was if he's okay with people [specifically, me, though I did not say I am interested to offer that specific model you proposed to him] opening a service of binding arbitration, of which theymos replied that he doesn't mind, and that people does not need his permission to start such service.

The question [and answer] was not about a binding arbitration section, it's about offering an independent service, of which I can understand that [the way I understand it] theymos seems surprised that you said I am interested to offer, because I think he knows I solve things here without looking for anything in return, other than contributing to the forum and help others, that'll be quite likely a direct opposite of offering an independent binding arbitration service, since the service-provider might wish something in return.

Bottomline: the topic you raised and he addressed was about a service that's separate from and is nowhere part of the forum and/or supervised by the forum. Thus, not a section.


I'll repeat and change part of my earliest sentence in this post into a question: unless I understand things wrongly?

my thoughts were non-profit binding arbitration section where you made the final decision with input from all. I was thinking that other players with problems outside of BCT would come here too. Since posters here at BCT didn’t jump in the conversation, it seems that others weren’t interested and feel as though this section here is fine as is so I scrapped the idea. I think you and others do great as is and there’s no need for another section because of the lack in interest.

I think this will be has to be my last reply to this topic on this thread, because we keep derailing topics discussing matters that's beyond the original point of the threads.

First, what I marked in bold, section. I didn't read theymos's full conversation with you as it happened privately on PM, and you [rightfully so] only share snippets of it, but the way  I understand it, he is not interested about a section, as in sub-board. He allows people to create a thread or a post announcing and linking to a separate site, or something alike, that caters the service, but it will not be part of the forum.

Second, the one I mark in underline, they did not jump in as the discussion because [like this one... if I may be blunt, actually like most of the discussion people had with you in the past few weeks] it's out of topic. The discussion was made on a thread where someone accuses a platform of something, and there we are, talking about other things. [I even actually nearly missed the post made by the OP of that thread]. People are reluctant to jump in as they know it'll be very much OOT.

That's why I ended that discussion with a suggestion to,