I'm not sure those were rulings or not, though if there was a ruling against a sponsor it would of been BetOnline.
The $65K confiscation I got temp-banned at SBR for asking questions and not being satisfied with SBR's ruling. Lou and a couple suspected ghosts more or less called him a scammer. That one was a lot of people posting and demanding it be added to the newswire. It was then that they paid the player. But I wrote free articles for like 8 sites to cover that. Others were posting it on many forums. There was a ton of heat. At that point BetOnline reversed their decision and paid.
The one with the hacked poker account that the hand history was eventually given. Lou was pretty brutal in defending BetOnline. That was another where after heat and forum uproar BetOnline decided to pay.
The one with calm's balance hacked, SBR seemed to wait it out and just follow up. What happened behind the scenes I'm not sure but I don't view that one as having been a ruling.
I view the other hacked poker accounts where the complaint originated at 2+2 the same.
Wilt's case for $26K was similar. However here is one SBR might have helped expedite it. This is one I probably give SBR the most credit for but we're talking well known on forums pro who also writes for websites and worked for a training site. Also C.S. (YouWager) appeared early in the thread to vouch for the player's honesty.
The one with where the poster admitted to chipdumping $50 in a transfer, and they confiscated small 5 figures from him (saying the player confessed) - in this one I believe the player was likely involved in something shady. What? - I'm not sure and opinion has no relevance in arbitration, he might of been innocent of all wrong doing and just does not write well. I don't believe SBR handled that one well, and where did this ($12K?) go.. I'm not sure. Who did they refund. Did they profit from it etc. I don't know.
They have however assisted a few times. For example mathdotcom John helped with getting him a transfer at one point and he had some slow assistance. That one however involved
my all time favorite post (see post #4) which about sums up the SBR BetOnline issue.
As far as actual "rulings" I'm not too aware of any. They do assist and many didn't need rulings because after debated or it was obvious SBR assisted (and credit to them for that). In the actual complaints that go more to what's like an arbitration, I don't recall a time in the past 365 days that SBR ruled against a sponsor while that sponsor disagreed (it might happen).
I do know however several where they just turned the player away quickly. Tremp vs. Horizon and Dan bouton vs. 5Dimes are two examples the player wasn't given the time of day. (Horizon is associated with Heritage; a sponsor). I've expressed it to both Justin and Nelson Rose in private but SBR's handling of Cory1111 vs. Heritage tilts me. This has nothing to do with innocent or not but the process.