Maybe someone that is a lot smarter than me can answer this question. Why does TOW have Bet Jamica rated a 10+ and their parent Olympic, rated a 9? The following books are also rated 10+ and are ahead of Olympic. ABC Islands, Canbet,Bodog, and Skybook. The books that are rated 9+ and 9 , the same as Oly, is scary. Has OLY dropped that far? It does not make sense. I have my own theory but I hope it is not true. Any help out there? :money8: LT
Any SERIOUS player offshore will tell you that all very good books ratings can range anywhere from 8-10,,,,,,,,,depending on any given day and is precisely why I take ratings such as these with a grain of salt.
I guess the main thing to keep in mind is that any book rated a 9 or higher is a solid, dependable, and highly worthy book for the majority of players.
In that respect, these ratings serve a very worthwhile purpose to the newbies of the offshore gaming world.
I guess the main thing to keep in mind is that any book rated a 9 or higher is a solid, dependable, and highly worthy book for the majority of players.
In that respect, these ratings serve a very worthwhile purpose to the newbies of the offshore gaming world.
The reason was not so much that Oly made a decision questionable by others familiar with the F1 case. It was the fact that Oly agreed to arbitration in advance and when the arbitration decision went aginst them, they refused to abide by the decision.
When regulation finally occurs in this biz, these types of things will be handled by regulatory board reviews, etc.
The arb panel is the closest thing we have to that now and sadly, Oly decided not to honor their agreement in entering into arbitration
When regulation finally occurs in this biz, these types of things will be handled by regulatory board reviews, etc.
The arb panel is the closest thing we have to that now and sadly, Oly decided not to honor their agreement in entering into arbitration
Actually what happened was Oly while cooperating by furnishing information on the F1 issue never agreed to be bound by any arbitration.
Olympic did consider the result of the very hotly debated arbitration (2-1 votes in favor of player) but still decided there was not enough cause to change their original stance on the matter.
wil..
Olympic did consider the result of the very hotly debated arbitration (2-1 votes in favor of player) but still decided there was not enough cause to change their original stance on the matter.
wil..
I was the player involved in the F1 case, the amount involved incidentally was $55,000.
It was a complicated case, and wilheim is correct. Olympic did not categorically agree to abide to the arbitration ruling. I don't think Olympic had any intention of paying me in any circs, they were just hoping the ruling would go in their favour so I would go away.
TOW should be commended for doing the right thing, downgrading Olympic for their shoddy actions.
The most disappointing aspect of the case (or perhaps the second most disappointing aside from being stiffed) was that TheRx declined to follow suit. I took it up with TheRx after all, whose moderators advised me to refer it to TOW and his panel.
But now Olympic advertises with TheRx - money talks!
:nopityA:
It was a complicated case, and wilheim is correct. Olympic did not categorically agree to abide to the arbitration ruling. I don't think Olympic had any intention of paying me in any circs, they were just hoping the ruling would go in their favour so I would go away.
TOW should be commended for doing the right thing, downgrading Olympic for their shoddy actions.
The most disappointing aspect of the case (or perhaps the second most disappointing aside from being stiffed) was that TheRx declined to follow suit. I took it up with TheRx after all, whose moderators advised me to refer it to TOW and his panel.
But now Olympic advertises with TheRx - money talks!
:nopityA:
You know what? To have a case "heard" by an arb panel (in my humble opinion) should not be agreed to under any circumstances if the intention is to not stick to the decision.
Think about it.
If it goes my way then I use it to my advantage, and if not, I disregard it?
This does not remind me of a Spiro type move. I certainly know I do not know the facts like JamesHunt or Oly.
Think about it.
If it goes my way then I use it to my advantage, and if not, I disregard it?
This does not remind me of a Spiro type move. I certainly know I do not know the facts like JamesHunt or Oly.
You can read about the whole thing by clicking my username and "find previous posts".
I dare say it did hurt Roberto's bottom line. Not good for the credibility of TOW panel either, who would want to take a case there now? A shame, as the industry badly needs that kind of regulation.
I'm sure there's plenty of stuff going on behind the scenes between watchdog sites and sportsbooks about which we can only guess.
I dare say it did hurt Roberto's bottom line. Not good for the credibility of TOW panel either, who would want to take a case there now? A shame, as the industry badly needs that kind of regulation.
I'm sure there's plenty of stuff going on behind the scenes between watchdog sites and sportsbooks about which we can only guess.
