[Leo Bello]

This is the rule that I don't quite understand. It is the law in 99% of books (though not all—so maybe I'm 99% stupid). If betting the total in baseball, the game must go 9 innings for action. Listen, if the total posted is 7, and I bet under 7, and after the first complete inning the score is 5-3, then as far as I'm concerned, I lost. Whether the game continues, whether the pitcher's mound is swallowed up by the earth, or whatever else might occur, all criteria involving whether that game will go under the 7 have been satisfied. Ain't nothing gonna happen to change that outcome!!! The game went over and will stay over from now until kingdom come. Now, if a guy bets over the total, that's different. He needs 9 (or 8½) innings for a legitimate decision.

Another thing, I don't care if you deal with the stupidest bettors on the face of the earth. If the over and under on a baseball game was listed as 7, and the game ended 18-10 in the 6th inning due to rain, an office will have 32 bettors calling in who bet 'under 7' explaining to the poor clerks words to the effect, "Hey, this is #37 calling in to just make you aware that I bet that game 'under the 7' that ended up 18-10 because of the weather, and I just wanted to remind you guys that the game doesn't count because it didn't go 9 innings." To which he will hear, "Thanks, 37, for callin' and lettin' us know."

Help me out baseball bettors.

[8ArIvd5]

Don't go crazy over shit you can't change.

[nikossf]

Don't go crazy over shit you can't change.

[LVHerbie]

If they let overs be graded winners people would try to angle betting overs in games likely to get rained out...

In the end it should break even for you working both ways but I know when it breaks the runs the wrong way it stings...

[LVHerbie]

The thing I hate is in tennis where you got a match locked up and someone withdraws... Always seems like I get stuck with the injured player toughing it out who can't move more then a foot to return a serve or the being on the wrong end when the opponent who just stubbed his toe decides he can't finish facing a match point down 5-0 in the final set...

[Sam Odom]

LVH , we can thank the Mob for the tennis rule change , not Vinnie but Igor

[HoulihansTX]

Baseball has more unwritten rules, than written.

[AlwaysDrawing]

The only thing that makes this rule even mildly okay is that it's standard across books.

That said, there would be no angle shooting if they just graded when the OVER had been exceeded. When the game is UNDER, it needs to go the full 9 because you only need one out to get the OVER. When it's OVER, there's nothing that could make it go under. The rain is irrelevant.

[Da Manster!]

This is the rule that I don't quite understand. It is the law in 99% of books (though not all—so maybe I'm 99% stupid). If betting the total in baseball, the game must go 9 innings for action. Listen, if the total posted is 7, and I bet under 7, and after the first complete inning the score is 5-3, then as far as I'm concerned, I lost. Whether the game continues, whether the pitcher's mound is swallowed up by the earth, or whatever else might occur, all criteria involving whether that game will go under the 7 have been satisfied. Ain't nothing gonna happen to change that outcome!!! The game went over and will stay over from now until kingdom come. Now, if a guy bets over the total, that's different. He needs 9 (or 8½) innings for a legitimate decision.

Another thing, I don't care if you deal with the stupidest bettors on the face of the earth. If the over and under on a baseball game was listed as 7, and the game ended 18-10 in the 6th inning due to rain, an office will have 32 bettors calling in who bet 'under 7' explaining to the poor clerks words to the effect, "Hey, this is #37 calling in to just make you aware that I bet that game 'under the 7' that ended up 18-10 because of the weather, and I just wanted to remind you guys that the game doesn't count because it didn't go 9 innings." To which he will hear, "Thanks, 37, for callin' and lettin' us know."

Help me out baseball bettors.

I agree with your argument and premise however why is it any different if a guy bets the over???!!....Using your example of 7, If I bet the over and the score is 5 - 3 after one, I should WIN the wager regardless also just like you should have lost regardless..The theory and argument works both ways..and believe me, I've been on the receiving end of this when I easily had the over and the game got called due to inclimate weather and the wager wound up a "no action"!......on the other hand, if you played the under and should have lost you would be like .........

[EASY_MONEY72]

The thing I hate is in tennis where you got a match locked up and someone withdraws... Always seems like I get stuck with the injured player toughing it out who can't move more then a foot to return a serve or the being on the wrong end when the opponent who just stubbed his toe decides he can't finish facing a match point down 5-0 in the final set...

people betting on tennis need serious psychological help.

[crustyme]

sometimes it helps you, sometimes it hurts you.

[ParlayininHTown]

So you're telling me you should lose on an under if there are 8 runs scored in the first inning, but you shouldn't win on the over? I mean, there's no way the over can't hit if it's already hit, even if the game ends after 5 innings. If all criteria for a game going under has been satisfied, it works the same way for the over. I don't see how it's not legitimate.

Seems kind of hypocritical ...

[Leo Bello]

You're right, parlay man. I neglected to mention the opposite being just as f---ed up. Sorry about that. If either has a decision, I think they should be graded.

[d2bets]

You're right, parlay man. I neglected to mention the opposite being just as f---ed up. Sorry about that. If either has a decision, I think they should be graded.

See post #4. If I knew a game was likely to be shortened, I'd just bet the over. If it's shortened, you can't lose. If it goes over, you win. If it doesn't get there, it's cancelled because it didn't go 8.5/9. Books would get reamed.

[Leo Bello]

sometimes it helps you, sometimes it hurts you.

You're right. I meant to suggest either over or under should be graded once they are decided.

I'll tell you what really drives me nuts. How can people who are lower middle class vote for the Republicans, who are going to screw them for everything they got. I feel sorry for those poor kids on those student loans. First, the Republicans change the law so that even in bankruptcy no one can discharge student loans; now, a few days ago, when they could have voted to keep student loans where they are instead of having them double (I think from 3.4% to 6.8%), the Republicans won't vote and help our kids but instead want the banks to earn double interest at the expense of our kids, but yet those same poverty-stricken people hate Obama for some crazy reason, such as he is Black, etc. Mark my words, Crusty, if the Democrats don't start taking off the gloves and start blaming the Republicans by name, they are going to lose come November. The election can be won by the Dems with one repeated slogan that is mentioned in every ad, in every interview, i.e., Republicans are for BIG BUSINESS AND MILLIONAIRES! I see people every day in the hospital, some dying of cancer but unable to receive treatment because they cannot purchase insurance. If you are wealthy or well off, this isn't a problem for you, but even many of these poor people believe they should vote against the Democrats and Obama, despite the fact that Republicans are for big business and the wealthy, and their decisions are killing this poor cancer patient.

[Leo Bello]

I agree with your argument and premise however why is it any different if a guy bets the over???!!....Using your example of 7, If I bet the over and the score is 5 - 3 after one, I should WIN the wager regardless also just like you should have lost regardless..The theory and argument works both ways..and believe me, I've been on the receiving end of this when I easily had the over and the game got called due to inclimate weather and the wager wound up a "no action"!......on the other hand, if you played the under and should have lost you would be like .........

You're right. I explained this badly. I meant to say that if either over or under are decided, they should be graded whenever the over or under is decided. But then, one decision would be unfair to the other bettor, so it probably does even out.

[stuntin909]

You're right. I meant to suggest either over or under should be graded once they are decided.

I'll tell you what really drives me nuts. How can people who are lower middle class vote for the Republicans, who are going to screw them for everything they got. I feel sorry for those poor kids on those student loans. First, the Republicans change the law so that even in bankruptcy no one can discharge student loans; now, a few days ago, when they could have voted to keep student loans where they are instead of having them double (I think from 3.4% to 6.8%), the Republicans won't vote and help our kids but instead want the banks to earn double interest at the expense of our kids, but yet those same poverty-stricken people hate Obama for some crazy reason, such as he is Black, etc. Mark my words, Crusty, if the Democrats don't start taking off the gloves and start blaming the Republicans by name, they are going to lose come November. The election can be won by the Dems with one repeated slogan that is mentioned in every ad, in every interview, i.e., Republicans are for BIG BUSINESS AND MILLIONAIRES! I see people every day in the hospital, some dying of cancer but unable to receive treatment because they cannot purchase insurance. If you are wealthy or well off, this isn't a problem for you, but even many of these poor people believe they should vote against the Democrats and Obama, despite the fact that Republicans are for big business and the wealthy, and their decisions are killing this poor cancer patient.

im bout to get fukkd on those student loans

[boeing power]

You're right. I explained this badly. I meant to say that if either over or under are decided, they should be graded whenever the over or under is decided. But then, one decision would be unfair to the other bettor, so it probably does even out.

So you believe a total should be graded if it is called after 5 innings.

You bet over 8.5 and the score is 5-3 at the end of the 5th, then game is called.

Over is graded a loser, and you would be on here bitching about the rules.

[LT Profits]

So you believe a total should be graded if it is called after 5 innings.

You bet over 8.5 and the score is 5-3 at the end of the 5th, then game is called.

Over is graded a loser, and you would be on here bitching about the rules.

No that is not what he is saying, he is saying that if a game already went Over, Over should be a winner and Under should be a loser. It is obvious that the case you gave should be a refund, whereas he may have a valid point on his case, although I do see it from the book's perspective why it should be a refund to discourage the shot-takers.

[boeing power]

No that is not what he is saying, he is saying that if a game already went Over, Over should be a winner and Under should be a loser. It is obvious that the case you gave should be a refund, whereas he may have a valid point on his case, although I do see it from the book's perspective why it should be a refund to discourage the shot-takers.

Ok thanks,
ya in that case it's a tough call, it probably should be graded but like you said guys would be taking shots.

[DiggityDaggityDo]

pitcher's mound is swallowed up by the earth...

[DiggityDaggityDo]

Ok thanks,
ya in that case it's a tough call, it probably should be graded but like you said guys would be taking shots.

Power, you won 2 iPads also?? G'damn... Lucky mother fukkers. I only have a coffe mug and sbr panties so far.

Working on an iPad thoooo.

[andywend]

You're right. I meant to suggest either over or under should be graded once they are decided.

I'll tell you what really drives me nuts. How can people who are lower middle class vote for the Republicans, who are going to screw them for everything they got. I feel sorry for those poor kids on those student loans. First, the Republicans change the law so that even in bankruptcy no one can discharge student loans; now, a few days ago, when they could have voted to keep student loans where they are instead of having them double (I think from 3.4% to 6.8%), the Republicans won't vote and help our kids but instead want the banks to earn double interest at the expense of our kids, but yet those same poverty-stricken people hate Obama for some crazy reason, such as he is Black, etc. Mark my words, Crusty, if the Democrats don't start taking off the gloves and start blaming the Republicans by name, they are going to lose come November. The election can be won by the Dems with one repeated slogan that is mentioned in every ad, in every interview, i.e., Republicans are for BIG BUSINESS AND MILLIONAIRES! I see people every day in the hospital, some dying of cancer but unable to receive treatment because they cannot purchase insurance. If you are wealthy or well off, this isn't a problem for you, but even many of these poor people believe they should vote against the Democrats and Obama, despite the fact that Republicans are for big business and the wealthy, and their decisions are killing this poor cancer patient.

Leo, you're upset about interest rates on student loans going from 3.4% to 6.8% and you also don't like the fact that students are required to pay these loans back with no exceptions. Why would anyone of sound mind ever make a loan to a liberal democrat? You treat those that default on their home mortgages as innocent victims and consider the lenders who are getting stiffed as criminals.

The scary thing is there are plenty of brain-dead liberal democratic politicians in positions of power that have the same crazed, warped thinking as you do and thats why our country is $16 TRILLION in debt. How do liberal democrats and socialists around the world deal with the problem of runaway deficits? They believe the answer is to continue to spend way more than what we take in via tax revenues.

When times are good, liberal democrats believe in more government spending. When times are bad, liberal democrats believe in more government spending.

There is no greater danger to the middle class than Barack Obama and the democratic party and ObamaCare is the best possible example:

Dating back to the 1950's, liberal democrats and labor unions have tried and tried to get socialized medicine legislation through congress and they failed many times because the American people have always strongly OPPOSED it.

Now ObamaCare is passed and all the liberal democrats who drafted the legislation have made sure to exclude themselves and their loved ones from having to participate in it. To make matters worse, over 1000 different labor unions have requested and received waivers from ObamaCare as a thank you gift from Obama for all of their financial support given during the 2008 presidental election.

To recap:

Those who strongly SUPPORT and are responsible for ObamaCare = Liberal democratic politicans and labor unions.
Those who have strongly OPPOSED socialized medicine dating back 60 years = The majority of the American people

Those who have managed to exclude themselves from having to participate in ObamaCare = These same liberal democratic politicians and labor unions.

Those who are STUCK with ObamaCare = The American people who have strongly opposed it from Day 1.

Why do the lower middle class and many poor people vote republican even though it might not be in their financial best interest to do so, THERE'S YOUR ANSWER!!!

Unlimited medical care is NOT a right and NEVER can be. As long as you're willing to put in a regular 40 hour work week, just about every business offers some sort of medical care coverage to their employees. If you're not willing to work full-time, then you're NOT ENTITLED to unlimited high quality medical care.

The life-long poor decisions of the cancer patient is whats killing him but since liberal democrats can't take personal responsibility for anything that goes wrong in their pathetic lives, its not surprising that you're trying to transfer the blame to the republicans.

Liberal democrats have done more damage to this planet than any terrorist group ever could.

[MonkeyF0cker]

Leo, you're upset about interest rates on student loans going from 3.4% to 6.8% and you also don't like the fact that students are required to pay these loans back with no exceptions. Why would anyone of sound mind ever make a loan to a liberal democrat? You treat those that default on their home mortgages as innocent victims and consider the lenders who are getting stiffed as criminals.

The scary thing is there are plenty of brain-dead liberal democratic politicians in positions of power that have the same crazed, warped thinking as you do and thats why our country is $16 TRILLION in debt. How do liberal democrats and socialists around the world deal with the problem of runaway deficits? They believe the answer is to continue to spend way more than what we take in via tax revenues.

When times are good, liberal democrats believe in more government spending. When times are bad, liberal democrats believe in more government spending.

There is no greater danger to the middle class than Barack Obama and the democratic party and ObamaCare is the best possible example:

Dating back to the 1950's, liberal democrats and labor unions have tried and tried to get socialized medicine legislation through congress and they failed many times because the American people have always strongly OPPOSED it.

Now ObamaCare is passed and all the liberal democrats who drafted the legislation have made sure to exclude themselves and their loved ones from having to participate in it. To make matters worse, over 1000 different labor unions have requested and received waivers from ObamaCare as a thank you gift from Obama for all of their financial support given during the 2008 presidental election.

To recap:

Those who strongly SUPPORT and are responsible for ObamaCare = Liberal democratic politicans and labor unions.
Those who have strongly OPPOSED socialized medicine dating back 60 years = The majority of the American people

Those who have managed to exclude themselves from having to participate in ObamaCare = These same liberal democratic politicians and labor unions.

Those who are STUCK with ObamaCare = The American people who have strongly opposed it from Day 1.

Why do the lower middle class and many poor people vote republican even though it might not be in their financial best interest to do so, THERE'S YOUR ANSWER!!!

Unlimited medical care is NOT a right and NEVER can be. As long as you're willing to put in a regular 40 hour work week, just about every business offers some sort of medical care coverage to their employees. If you're not willing to work full-time, then you're NOT ENTITLED to unlimited high quality medical care.

The life-long poor decisions of the cancer patient is whats killing him but since liberal democrats can't take personal responsibility for anything that goes wrong in their pathetic lives, its not surprising that you're trying to transfer the blame to the republicans.

Liberal democrats have done more damage to this planet than any terrorist group ever could.

You don't know much about the world, people, or simple economics if you think that everyone with a job can afford medical coverage or that their job provides it. You also don't seem to know that people just starting employment with a company are typically not enrolled with full benefits immediately. Many places make you wait up to a year. A third grader could tell you that not everyone can work in white collar jobs or jobs that offer ANY type of full benefits package.

And on top of all of that, you completely fail to realize that not everyone is able-bodied and/or is employable in a competitive and productive workforce.

But those are just minor details. Right?

[smitch124]

When I hit an over in the 6th inning I fully expect a torrential rain storm by the 7th inning stretch.

[milwaukee mike]

When I hit an over in the 6th inning I fully expect a torrential rain storm by the 7th inning stretch.

that's why i only play overs in indoor stadiums

[balls2wall]

I am guessing part of the reason is that they are hopefully getting close to 50/50 action on the over and under. If they just paid off the winning side of the bet and refunded the other side they would be taking a blood bath.

[Leo Bello]

Leo, you're upset about interest rates on student loans going from 3.4% to 6.8% and you also don't like the fact that students are required to pay these loans back with no exceptions. Why would anyone of sound mind ever make a loan to a liberal democrat? You treat those that default on their home mortgages as innocent victims and consider the lenders who are getting stiffed as criminals.

The scary thing is there are plenty of brain-dead liberal democratic politicians in positions of power that have the same crazed, warped thinking as you do and thats why our country is $16 TRILLION in debt. How do liberal democrats and socialists around the world deal with the problem of runaway deficits? They believe the answer is to continue to spend way more than what we take in via tax revenues.

When times are good, liberal democrats believe in more government spending. When times are bad, liberal democrats believe in more government spending.

There is no greater danger to the middle class than Barack Obama and the democratic party and ObamaCare is the best possible example:

Dating back to the 1950's, liberal democrats and labor unions have tried and tried to get socialized medicine legislation through congress and they failed many times because the American people have always strongly OPPOSED it.

Now ObamaCare is passed and all the liberal democrats who drafted the legislation have made sure to exclude themselves and their loved ones from having to participate in it. To make matters worse, over 1000 different labor unions have requested and received waivers from ObamaCare as a thank you gift from Obama for all of their financial support given during the 2008 presidental election.

To recap:

Those who strongly SUPPORT and are responsible for ObamaCare = Liberal democratic politicans and labor unions.
Those who have strongly OPPOSED socialized medicine dating back 60 years = The majority of the American people

Those who have managed to exclude themselves from having to participate in ObamaCare = These same liberal democratic politicians and labor unions.

Those who are STUCK with ObamaCare = The American people who have strongly opposed it from Day 1.

Why do the lower middle class and many poor people vote republican even though it might not be in their financial best interest to do so, THERE'S YOUR ANSWER!!!

Unlimited medical care is NOT a right and NEVER can be. As long as you're willing to put in a regular 40 hour work week, just about every business offers some sort of medical care coverage to their employees. If you're not willing to work full-time, then you're NOT ENTITLED to unlimited high quality medical care.

The life-long poor decisions of the cancer patient is whats killing him but since liberal democrats can't take personal responsibility for anything that goes wrong in their pathetic lives, its not surprising that you're trying to transfer the blame to the republicans.

Liberal democrats have done more damage to this planet than any terrorist group ever could.

Andy, you make good points if your beginning premises are correct, but many are not. I'm a physician, who is 61 years old, and please do not state that the cancer patient got cancer because it was his fault to begin with. This harsh and callous assessment might just come home to roost some day, so I am just going to assume that you said it without thinking. When I see young children stricken, I don't see a liberal or conservative, but I do question why this child's family will be saddled with a bill for perhaps $400,000. Could you pay this bill, Andy? I'm not in private practice, so I am paid a salary, but when an aspirin costs $45, something has to stop this greed. Also, I do not condone walking away from student debt, or any debt, for that matter. But legitamate bankruptcy laws are there for a reason. The Republicans changed the law to help the banks because of greed. Another thing, I am a Reagan Republican! Can you believe it? I am not a 'bleeding heart liberal.' But what has turned me away is that you seem to have lost your compassion, your humanity, your ability to really 'feel' for another person who might be less well off than you or less fortunate than you. Are all sick people sick because it is their fault. Are all unemployed people not working because EVERYBODYis LAZY! Everyone who works pays in to Social Security. It is one of MY biggest taxes. Since I and everyone my age has paid into this for 40 years, don't we deserve what was promised us? This is no ENTITLEMENT! My God, I've exceeded half a million that I paid into this. Where's my money? All peopled unemployed have unemployment insurance taken from their checks, and their employers must also pay premiums. You only collect unemployment if you lost your job because of something NOT YOUR FAULT! If you are a goof off and get fired, guess what? NO UNEMPLOYMENT FOR YOU. This is not an entitlement. What if you paid your life insurance premiums and then you died and the company told your wife they are only going to pay half because they don't have the money. Is your death benefit an entitement? We can differ forever, but I do caution you (and I will go so far as to guarantee you) that some day some misfortune will strike you hard and you will remember my words. Whether in the Bible or religion or wherever the premise brought home is that "A society is not judged by how it treats its wealthiest or most well off, but how it treats its widows and orphans and those that are most in need." Don't forget, if Christ came today, he would not spend time with the rich or with you or with me, but with the lazy, with the bums looking for handouts, the downtrodden, the con men looking for free handouts from jackass, so-called 'liberals' like me. Roosevelt pulled this country out of its greatest depression after the Republicans and Hoover claimed that the people should take their suffering and get off their lazy asses and pull themselves up and not look for handouts from him. Andy, I can only say that your day is coming. Soften that hard heart of yours or some day God or Fate or something will strike you or someone whom you love unreservedly and will remind you that we are our brothers keeper, or are you angry that I and others are compassionate, or did something already happen to you to make you so hardhearted. With what measure you judge, it shall be judged against you.

[AribaAriba]

totally agree with the bs rules on this one, its not a rocket science to figure it if it should ruled out a win. well, but if your'e on the other side of the bet you'll be thanking that this rule hasnt figure it out by books.

[LT Profits]

I am guessing part of the reason is that they are hopefully getting close to 50/50 action on the over and under. If they just paid off the winning side of the bet and refunded the other side they would be taking a blood bath.

This would not be the case, Over would win and Under would lose. Remember the OP is only talking about cases where the game already went Over before completion. If a game is still Under when shortened, I think the whole world agrees that the refund rule as is is correct.

[Da Manster!]

When I hit an over in the 6th inning I fully expect a torrential rain storm by the 7th inning stretch.

+1 nomination for speaking da' truth!!...I've had more than my fair share of those situations!...