TOTAL REBOUNDS BY LAKERS IN GAME 1, O/U 51.5?

[sportshobby]

Ayce, I'm usually the biggest player advocate. But in this case the only thing Carib was guilty of is not more clearly defining the prop and how it would be graded.

Bob is right that Carib has gone out of their way to address the issue by refunding most of a losing wager.

[AYCE]

Whether its LVSC or Joe Q made up those lines has nothing to do with the bettors.

Please remember, I play with the books, NOT with LVSC.

If they will use any infocoming from LVSC, fine, thats how they wanted to run their business. But if they are going to tell me because LVSC has a rule that they decided not paying me and they (the books) failed to tell me that rule before I play the game, thats bullsh!t.

Not to mention thats something doesn't make sense at all!

Again, I am playing with the books, NOT with LVSC.

Again, LVSC has no say whatsoever on whether a book should pay you or not, see the difference between Olympic and Carib in this case?

The man that run the book is the guy to decide (to have the final word) to grade a bet, especially in situation like this.

[Dukey]

sportshobby,

Is it okay to not clearly define a prop? It doesn't seem like a big deal to you.

You admit that CARIB is guilty of not clearly defining the prop, yet in the same breath state that they "have gone out of their way to refund a losing wager."

Doesn't this whole problem stem from the fact that the prop was not clearly defined to begin with? Therefore it was CARIB'S fault for not clearly defining the prop, but I am supposed to suffer the consequences. Makes a lot of sense to me.

[Bob]

Dukey, I'll bet if you ask Spiro he paid off on both sides.

The prop didn't say team rebounds were included and it didn't say they were excluded, so that's up to you to clarify before you drop a couple of dimes on it.

Why is everything always everyone else's fault? If you're going to bet you've got know what you're doing.

If you know that there is a thing called a team rebound and you don't see it mentioned in the prop one way or another, then it is your responsibility to ask before you drop a couple of dimes into play.

If you don't know there is a thing called a team rebound....then you're in over your head and you shouldn't be playing that prop in the first place.

As near as I can tell, you bet the wrong side of a prop and got a win and a push out of it. If I was you I'd count my blessings and not trash these guys who let you off the hook.

[sportshobby]

There is fault on both sides for the offering, and for the placing, of a wager that is not unambiguously defined (along with specification of the source for grading it).

What I'm saying is, that if we all voted win or lose on your wager, you'd lose. TOTAL rebounds should of course include team rebounds, which are listed at the bottom of the individual rebounds table.

If I were in your position, I'd be thanking Carib for their offer.

[Dukey]

Bob,

Is that so? Then why don't you ask Butch about the number of some guy in Vegas he told me to call regarding the prop because that was supposedly his source.

This guy tells me that, yes, team rebounds were meant to be included, BUT...... the Vegas casinos CLEARLY DEFINED THAT TEAM REBOUNDS WOULD BE INCLUDED. The prop in Vegas probably read something like TOTAL REBOUNDS (INCLUDING TEAM REBOUNDS) BY LAKERS IN GAME 1, OVER/UNDER 51 1/2

There is a big difference, but there's no sense arguing with you about it. You just don't get it. If the Vegas casinos felt that a notation about team rebounds was necessary and vital to the integrity of the prop, then why should CARIB be allowed to leave it out?

Why don't you ask Spiro if he paid off both sides. He only told me that he graded the under as the winner, and took his losses like a man.

[This message has been edited by Dukey (edited 06-11-2000).]

[Dukey]

sportshobby,

I guess technical fouls should be included a player's foul total too, right?

Why don't we all have a vote then. You say I should have lost, so I guess I am down 0-1. If more people vote in CARIB'S favour, then I will offer them a public apology.

The real question that should be posed is, "Is the inclusion of team rebounds 100%, clearly defined in the prop?"

Because if someone doesn't agree that it clearly states that team rebounds are to be included, then how can they agree that I should lose the bet.



[This message has been edited by Dukey (edited 06-11-2000).]

[sportshobby]

I've already admitted that it was not 100% clearly defined. But surely you're not saying that because of the ambiguity, you should get wins; and that anything less is wrong by the sportsbooks.

[Dukey]

sportshobby,

I am not saying I should get a win, I am more than happy with the almost no-action result. I think that is fair. In fact, all bets should have been refunded because of the failure to mention that "team rebounds would be included."

I am mad at Butch because he first tried to convince me that the prop clearly stated that team rebounds were included. He then told me that he didn't have room to add a notation to the prop because of space limitations. How come Olympic can find a way to add a notation? Butch should have just told me that the prop was meant to include team rebounds, but he failed to make that clear in his wording of the prop, so in all fairness the bets should be cancelled. I would have been more than happy with his honesty.

I am not trying to pull a fast one on anybody. Whenever I read any news report, summary, etc... on any basketball game, the final rebound tallies never include team rebounds. Any report on game 1 will tell you that the Lakers outrebounded the Pacers 48-36. Why are team rebounds never included? Why didn't these reports say that Lakers outrebounded the Pacers 57 to whatever?

That is why when I see any prop stating team rebounds, I never think that team rebounds are included. Do they even keep track of team rebounds in college basketball or the WNBA? I'd bet people have no idea.

If I saw a prop that read :
TOTAL REBOUNDS
KNICKS -1 1/2
HEAT +1 1/2

I would simply go by the player rebounds, which would co-incide with all the final news reports and summaries of the game. I would never think of including team rebounds. If the newspapers reported that the Knicks outrebounded the Heat 47-45, then I would think that the Knicks won the prop. I think a lot of people would think the same. A lot of Knick bettors would be pretty angry if they ended up losing the bet because the Heat had 4 more team rebounds than the knicks.

[gav]

1 vote for Dukey.

[Dukey]

Gav,

Thanks for the support. I think that is 1 vote for CARIB, and 1 vote for me.

Sportshobby, you seem a little unsure about your vote for CARIB. Perhaps you want to change your mind.

[sportshobby]

I think we're talking about voting on different things. I was referring to a vote on how the bet should be graded, all things considered, and assuming only two possible outcomes (win or lose).

How do you think this should be resolved? Should Carib pay BOTH sides, because there is some ambituity in the details?

[Dukey]

sportshobby,

TOTAL REBOUNDS BY LAKERS IN GAME 1, O/U 51.5

I argue that :

1) The wording of this prop in no way mentions that team rebounds would be included

2) Team rebounds are never counted in a teams rebound statistics : Lakers averaged 47 rebounds/game (nba.com, this average doesn't include team rebounds) I don't think there is any source out there that you'll be able to find the average team rebounds per game by the Lakers, so that should tell you how meaningful they are

Team rebounds are never counted in the reports, summaries, etc... of games : Any news report, summary, etc... of game 1 will tell you that the Lakers outrebounded the Pacers 48-36,

So my point is, I believe that most people who take this prop at face value would never think that team rebounds would be included. Team rebounds are an irrelevant statistic.

If team rebounds are to be included, there should definitely be a notation stating this. There was a notation stating that team rebounds would definitely be included in Vegas, so why should Butch and Carib be allowed to leave that crucial notation out?

Therefore my wager, if anything, should have been graded a winner (like at Olympic, which graded it as a winner), or a push/no-action bet at worst.

If Butch told me that the bet was meant to include team rebounds, and that he just forget to indicate that, then I would have taken his word for it, and I would have accepted the push on my bets. Instead he gives me a couple of lame excuses, and I have to fight with him tooth and nail to get most of my money back, and not even all of it.

TOTAL REBOUNDS BY LAKERS IN GAME 1, OVER/UNDER 51 1/2

So I guess the vote should have 3 options:

1) WIN

My bets should be graded as winners because
there is no reason to suggest that team rebounds would be included (take into consideration my arguments as to why I wouldn't think team rebounds would be included)

2) LOSS

My bets should lose because the wording of the prop clearly states that team rebounds would be included

3) PUSH

There is no mention of whether or not team rebounds were to be included, so the fairest resolution would be to refund the wagers





[This message has been edited by Dukey (edited 06-12-2000).]