Sportsbet.io - A Case of Selective Withdrawal Approval and Dubious Practices

[holydarkness]

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.

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.



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?

[Rating Place]

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.

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.



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?

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.

Adrian Wojnarowski
@wojespn

Betting limits on NBA player props vary by sportsbook and customer, but are typically around $1,000 to $2,000. “People were trying to do whatever they could to bet Jontay Porter props [against the Clippers],” the source said. “And then, just a few days ago, the same thing. We had a bunch of people trying to bet under for more.”
7:59 PM · Mar 25, 2024
·
1.2M
 Views

from ESPN Senior Advisor

[holydarkness]

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'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.

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.
[...]

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?

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.

[Rating Place]

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'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.

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.
[...]

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?

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.

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

[holydarkness]

[...]
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?

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.

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?

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. [...]

[Rating Place]

[...]
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?

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.

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?

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. [...]

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.

[murkyz]

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

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?

[Rating Place]

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.

[holydarkness]

[...]

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?

That's because he's not a new fresh account, he's been on Stake for three years and on platinum 6, 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.

It turns out [...]

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.

[Sportsbet.io_complaint]

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.

[Rating Place]

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?

[holydarkness]

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:

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.

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 who require KYC and those who are not.

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.

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.



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?

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.

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?

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.

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.

[Rating Place]

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:

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.

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 who require KYC and those who are not.

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.

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.



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?

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.

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?

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.

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.

[Sportsbet.io_complaint]

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?

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.

[Sportsbet.io_complaint]

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.

[Pmalek]

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

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?

[holydarkness]

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.

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?

[Rating Place]

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.

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.

[AHOYBRAUSE]

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.

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.

[Rating Place]

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.

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.