how big a scumbag is my friend? you decide

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i can't believe this thread is happening on a gambling site.

OP: post this in sports betting forum here and see what they say.

(spoiler: they'll tell you that the person who demanded his money was correct)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, if I bet the No on "Will the AL win the all-star game" at Bodog and it ended in a tie, I'd be looking to get paid. If I made an off-the-cuff bet with a friend for $2 for which it was pretty damn clear that a tie was a push, I wouldn't be demanding to be paid $2, even though technically I may have won the bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think baseball is a bad example because ties "aren't possible"

in golf match play/skins ties are common and are totally accepted as being different from winning the hole.

i dunno, if i was golfing and I said "i bet X doesn't win this hole" i would mean "halve or lose"

if you said "there's between 40 and 50 jellybeans in the jar" and there were actually 50 i could see there being an argument. but the fact that in golf win/halve/lose are three common and distinct outcomes make this pretty clear cut in my eyes.

[/ QUOTE ]

the all star game ended in a tie a few years ago.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably the nittiest post in the history of the interweb. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

my point was that i would gladly take a win from a sportsbook on a technicality, but would not do so from a friend. i now understand what mason was saying about a tie being commonplace in golf, as opposed to in my example (though that was really irrelevant to the point i was trying to make -- albeit rather poorly, apparently).

why people feel the need to take uncalled for jabs at other posters in what are otherwise civil threads is beyond me. it is quite obvious i wasn't being nitty and merely missed the quotes around "aren't possible".

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm making a jab at your post, not you, and I believe it was totally called for.

There have been millions of professional baseball games played since the game was invented in 1849, and probably 2 or 3, MAX, that have ended in a tie. That is why your post was superbly nitty.

[emon87]

dude it wasn't a win, friend 1 is correct.

But also kind of a prick

[Homer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i can't believe this thread is happening on a gambling site.

OP: post this in sports betting forum here and see what they say.

(spoiler: they'll tell you that the person who demanded his money was correct)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, if I bet the No on "Will the AL win the all-star game" at Bodog and it ended in a tie, I'd be looking to get paid. If I made an off-the-cuff bet with a friend for $2 for which it was pretty damn clear that a tie was a push, I wouldn't be demanding to be paid $2, even though technically I may have won the bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think baseball is a bad example because ties "aren't possible"

in golf match play/skins ties are common and are totally accepted as being different from winning the hole.

i dunno, if i was golfing and I said "i bet X doesn't win this hole" i would mean "halve or lose"

if you said "there's between 40 and 50 jellybeans in the jar" and there were actually 50 i could see there being an argument. but the fact that in golf win/halve/lose are three common and distinct outcomes make this pretty clear cut in my eyes.

[/ QUOTE ]

the all star game ended in a tie a few years ago.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is probably the nittiest post in the history of the interweb. DUCY?

[/ QUOTE ]

my point was that i would gladly take a win from a sportsbook on a technicality, but would not do so from a friend. i now understand what mason was saying about a tie being commonplace in golf, as opposed to in my example (though that was really irrelevant to the point i was trying to make -- albeit rather poorly, apparently).

why people feel the need to take uncalled for jabs at other posters in what are otherwise civil threads is beyond me. it is quite obvious i wasn't being nitty and merely missed the quotes around "aren't possible".

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm making a jab at your post, not you, and I believe it was totally called for.

There have been millions of professional baseball games played since the game was invented in 1849, and probably 2 or 3, MAX, that have ended in a tie. That is why your post was superbly nitty.

[/ QUOTE ]

obviously ties in baseball are not commonplace. that wasn't the point of my example. the point was only that i would exploit something not clarified in the rules of a prop versus a sportsbook, but not versus a friend.

as i have already said, i didn't follow the point of mason's post initially, so what you perceived as me being nitty was merely a misunderstanding. anyhoo, i'm done with this thread.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You guys are all wrong. It's a total angleshoot and he's a scumbag for collecting. If he really thought that he would win on a tie, HE should clarify since its obvious the other parties did not think this is what the bet meant. This is the only right answer, I can't believe so many of your got it wrong. There should be no hustling of friends.

[/ QUOTE ]

took a lot of posts to get to the correct one. somewhat sad reflection on the poker community imo. not that i think people who disagree are dishonest or bad people, but in a friendly setting if things are worded loosely, trying to sucker/angleshoot is just lame.

[/ QUOTE ]

How easy would it be for someone to use this kind of "spirit of the bet" logic to angle shoot someone in a different way? In my opinion the friend who isn't paying is the one angling. Bets are bets, you pay attention to the wording, and shake hands or whatever, and that's that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Especially if you go to a gambling site to ask what their take is on it. Do they really expect people on a gambling site to say he doesn't owe him the $2?

There is no angle or hustle being done here either. What's being done is a cheap lesson in prop betting.

b

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
Those that are calling it an "angleshoot" are wrong because he's not using some technicality to demand his money. The bet is clear as day, so its not an "angleshoot," its "enforcing the outcome" or "following the rules" or "paying the winner" or whatever else you want to call it.

If you want to argue that he should have understood that there was a misunderstanding - how that could be, I don't know, the bet really is THAT clear - fine. And if you think he should let his buddy slide because of the misunderstanding and the reaction demanding the money will provoke, fine, and I agree with that. But it doesn't sound to me like he's being shady or manipulative or anything like that when it comes down to the actual bet. Its just the sand in the crack of his buddies and their idiocy that's causing the friction.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree completely.

Funny that people don't see the guy trying to get out of paying the $2 as an angleshoot. I see that as the angleshoot than the guy trying to collect. Why? Because he's going against what he 'literally' said and is trying to get off on the technicality as much as the other guy is trying to collect. Except the guy trying to collect is right. This bet is clear as day.

Also, those that think the guy is a jerk for going after $2. Like above, why isn't the other guy paying the $2 then? That goes both ways also. Anything worse than watching some whiner bitch and moan over a $2 bet that he owes? You lost, just pay the stupid bet and hit the 19th hole. If the $2 really meant that much, and is causing this much comotion, you probably shouldn't have bet it.

People that think this is a hustle don't know what a hustle is. Unless you're saying the guy hustled himself out of the $2. HE stated the terms. It also doesn't seem like many who think the guy is a scum really know about betting on a golf course.(as many have pointed out.)

Where I grew up, when you lost a bet you paid. You didn't try to weasle out of it after the result because you mispoke the terms. You sucked it up and learned from it. Otherwise you got the rep as someone not to bet with because you don't pay. Arguing 'principle' on this in favor of the guy that lost is just rediculous. The principle is: He lost. By his own rules.

b

[34TheTruth34]

For all you douchenozzles saying "ZOMG ITS ONLY $2!!!!!1!!!!!!", pretend it's for $2K or $200K or whatever amount of money is significant to you.

For all you douchenozzles saying "ZOMG WHY WOULD HE TRY TO ANGLESHOOT HIS FRIENDS!!!!1!!!!!", pretend they are strangers who never met before or people who hate each other but still play golf and gamble with each other.

Now that your head is clearer (you're welcome), try to decide who you feel is in the right.

My intuition tells me that you have to base your decisions on past bets. Has this come up before? If so, how was it resolved? If you guys have been betting every hole for the last 5 years like this and it has always been a voided bet if the hole is halved, then that would take presedence, the bet would be voided, and the guy is a scumbag angle shooter.

If, however, this is the first time he's ever proposed any kind of bet like this (maybe he has never been involved in the betting before or maybe he's new to the group or something), then you have nothing to go on other than the exact wording of the conversation. The guy refusing to pay has been outplayed and he is the scumbag for trying to welch on a bet that he clearly lost because he was not smart enough to realize he took a bad bet.