Solid post Arun...I'd say the analogy isn't quite right. A prop bet, by it's nature, is between parties who both think the other person is getting the worse deal, based on the information they have. In this case, the person offering the wager intended to make it so lopsided that it couldn't be won or even accepted, but he miscalculated and allowed it to be easily won. Prop betting doesn't have (and shouldn't have) safeguards to restrict betting to what someone else considers reasonable; what's considered a reasonable bet varies considerably, but giving the loser an option to dispute the terms of the wager as 'unfair' after the fact isn't reasonable.
bobbo and DS both insist it was a valid wager which was accepted. DS clearly won it and complied with the described terms. There's simply no other conclusion to reach except "bobbo lost and is stiffing by refusing to pay".
Don't blame ya for staying out of this for so long or for not replying, this stuff is often a useless mess, and not everyone has the free time (or should waste it on this crap either probably
)