How many times have we heard this 'roommate story' now from scammers?

lander · Sep 29, 2003

Roommates, huh?

Let's get this staight, you're either ..

A. You're college kids and SHOULD NOT be gambling at all. Let alone a nickel a pop.

B. You're gay lovers and SHOULD NOT be gambling because I have yet to see figure skating props.

C. The SAME person and are blatantly trying to scam a book with valuable lines and low limits by circumventing limits.

Ok, I still do NOT see any reason why any of you people, let alone Mods, beleive this "guy(s)" story.

I've seen a bunch of these stories over the years and it's simple ... if you are ACTUALLY roommates then pick one of the 300 other books to play at and save yourselves the troubles that are certain to arise.

RPM · Sep 29, 2003

yeah lander, nobody has a roomate for real. good point.

Angelle · Sep 29, 2003

well I do~

gee make me feel like a loser
we don't share a computer but do share an ip addy

PanchoSanza · Sep 29, 2003

Whether you have a roommate or not, you shouldn't both bet from the same computer or same IP so that books have no reason to be suspicious.

Why not just go buy your own computer?

If someone in my house wanted to open an offshore account, they would have to get their own PC and ISP.

Sorry, but I'm not going to risk my post up funds just so you can bet. But hey, not everyone has common sense I guess.

Dante · Sep 29, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> B. You're gay lovers and SHOULD NOT be gambling because I have yet to see figure skating props. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LMFAO

Angelle · Sep 29, 2003

OK so my question is -
if you all work at the same office or you are like my house and the computers are networked....

we can't bet at the same place?

I mean I am a complete square so it doens't matter.. but if I wasn't a square would it matter?

look I don't like scammers either, but their are some excepetions to reasons for the same ip

a better expamle than roomates would be people in the same office

i dunno i guess I disagree with ya'll on this one

dafunk · Sep 29, 2003

What I'm sick of hearing, is how the books only have a problem with this when it comes time to pay out.

If a book is going to stiff a player based on 2 accounts with the same IP address, then why don't the books compare IP addresses of all their customers every day... and stop any problem accounts as soon as this starts.

In this case, waiting until somebody is up 10 dimes and then crying "your breaking the rules" is bullshit.

Angelle · Sep 29, 2003

good point-
it should be done before they win big

lander · Sep 29, 2003

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by RPM:
yeah lander, nobody has a roomate for real. good point.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, I'm sure some people do, but let's consider WHY they have a roommate. Usually it's because they can't afford a place of their own. If they can't afford a place of their own then I hardly think that they should be each betting the max on sports games (since 90-some % LOSE).

Anyways, if you re-read

, my point was -

"if you are ACTUALLY roommates then pick one of the 300 other books to play at and save yourselves the troubles that are certain to arise."

My point was NOT that nobody shares an IP

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> What I'm sick of hearing, is how the books only have a problem with this when it comes time to pay out.

If a book is going to stiff a player based on 2 accounts with the same IP address, then why don't the books compare IP addresses of all their customers every day... and stop any problem accounts as soon as this starts.

In this case, waiting until somebody is up 10 dimes and then crying "your breaking the rules" is bullshit. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

100% False. I'll tell you why too. AOL customers, entire campuses (amongst many other people) have the same IP address at times. So, clearly, clearly, clearly, and IP cannot always be used to uniquely ID a person, BUT BUT BUT certain similiarities which have TINY mathmatical probabilities (same IP, and same bets, and same amounts, and same betting times) can offer VERY reasonable evidence that a person is cheating the book by circumventing the limits.

Now sure, there is a 1 in a 10,000,000,000 that all these "coincidences" are indeed, just coincidence, but I'm a betting man ... and I like the chalk on these bets

Jazz · Sep 29, 2003

There is another reason for roommates, or rather 'housemates' sometimes Lander, though I'll admit my case is more exceptional than common - my brother has a bipolar condition and is unable to live on his own. He has his own computer, but he has no interest in gambling and I have no interest in scamming, so it's a good fit. Besides, with the last 2 names and addresses being identical, how far could you go anyway?? lol

However, if they ARE roommates betting that kind of cabbage at Ewinner, there's no question that they are (1) not squares and (2) have enough money to buy another computer - for crying out loud, they are CHEAP these days!!!

I would have to agree with the comment that the book should be daily scouring their records for this problem they're so worried about, only when it comes time to pay out. What is so freaking hard about writing a program to do this and running it every so often?

Okay - just saw Lander's last post - I suppose such a program would also need to note similar bets? In any event, whatever the 'process' Ewinner goes through to determine this, why can't it be automated and run semi-daily?

TheGeneral+ · Sep 29, 2003

dafunk,

Good post. The book shold be looking for the similarities from the start, not only after a withdrawal request is made. Odds are that the books will sit and watch and hope for losses, then it is no problem. If it turns into winnings, then there are problems.

chaz · Sep 29, 2003

I believe that DaFunk has hit the nail right on the head. It seems that there is only a problem with common IPs when the player(players) in question have beat the books for large amounts. There is never a problem when the player loses !! It is management's responsibility to diligently follow and identify this practice and then question the players about this commonality before they cry about perpetrated abuses. If they have not performed their due diligence then they are accountable and not the players. Neither the player or the book should ever be in a "lose-lose" position but management has to assume responsibility for the their own inactions and not seize the opportunity to stiff winning players based on their own ineptitude. The books have our money so it is their responsibility, both morally and ethically, to pay us when we win.

RPM · Sep 29, 2003

is it unheard of for two friends to both like some of the same games? or maybe one friend is better at picking winners than the other, so the second guy just bets whatever the first guy does.

perhaps lander is correct, playing at different books would be the way to go. but that doesnt mean the funds should be stolen now.

dafunk · Sep 29, 2003

quote-

100% False. I'll tell you why too. AOL customers, entire campuses (amongst many other people) have the same IP address at times. So, clearly, clearly, clearly, and IP cannot always be used to uniquely ID a person, BUT BUT BUT certain similiarities which have TINY mathmatical probabilities (same IP, and same bets, and same amounts, and same betting times) can offer VERY reasonable evidence that a person is cheating the book by circumventing the limits.

Now sure, there is a 1 in a 10,000,000,000 that all these "coincidences" are indeed, just coincidence, but I'm a betting man ... and I like the chalk on these bets

Reply -
Exactly how hard is it to write a subroutine that calls attention to accounts with the same IP address and then comparing the bets being made from those accounts?

If a book really has a problem with this, then they should be checking for it every day. They could then stop the problem before it starts.

If you book the bet you pay the bet.

What we are really seeing, is shady books who have knowingly let this go on for months if not years, crying foul when it comes time to pay.

Angelle · Sep 29, 2003

Hi chaz-
haven't seen you around in a while

dafunk-
very good post!

Fishhead · Sep 29, 2003

Many newcomers to the world of internet gambling. They have no idea how using the same computor can possibly be a problem.

chaz · Sep 29, 2003

The unfortunate fact of this business is that there are scammers on both sides of the fence looking to gain the edge on the other party. They do not care how they gain this edge as long as they take down the money. Knowing this, the other party has to be aware of the dangers involved and protect themselves accordingly. To cry "abuse" after the other party has beat you is unconscionable. The are valid points to be made for both sides but the ultimate responsibility lies with the book to protect itself. If it has not done so then they must assume responsibility and PAY the players. There never is a valid excuse to not pay players if the book is at fault for not having implemented the proper controls.

Hi Angelle
How are you? I pop in now and then if I have feel that I have something of value to contribute. I hope that all is well with you and Jen.

lander · Sep 29, 2003

"Exactly how hard is it to write a subroutine that calls attention to accounts with the same IP address and then comparing the bets being made from those accounts?"
Well, I don't think it's particularly hard, but remember ... not all books have programmers on staff. Should they? well, probably, but they do their best to minimize overhead.

I don't know if EWinner has their own programmers, but I doubt it ... check out the IGW site,- it's basically a "we'll handle the software for you" deal, so they probably assumed they didn't need it.

If a book really has a problem with this, then they should be checking for it every day. They could then stop the problem before it starts.
Books have thousands of customers AND they have clear rules stating ONE ACCOUNT PER PERSON. They took responsibility by making their rules public.

If you book the bet you pay the bet.
Well, if you join the book follow the rules. It's not so simple. Scammers CANNOT be rewarded .. it opens the doors. It hurts the industry. and it hurts the HONEST player.

What we are really seeing, is shady books who have knowingly let this go on for months if not years, crying foul when it comes time to pay.
I'm unaware of any evidence stating that EWinner has known for months they were being scammed. Perhaps they suspected, but that would warrant investigation, no?

Angelle · Sep 29, 2003

I am doing well thanks for asking

PatrickMcIrish · Sep 29, 2003

Chaz - good post. Good to see you hanging around.

How many times have we heard this 'roommate story' now from scammers?

There's always next year, like in 75, 90-93, 99 &

OG

New member

New member

Active member

New member

Banned

New member

There's always next year, like in 75, 90-93, 99 &

New member

Another Day, Another Dollar

New member

OG

Banned

New member

Active member

New member

There's always next year, like in 75, 90-93, 99 &

New member

SportsOptions/Line up with the pros

Forum statistics

Share this page