John I want to preface my opinion by saying that I really appreciate the opportunity to constantly discuss shop out in the open on these boards. I think we're all helping to better define the industry and acceptable standards by discussions such as these...

Here's my problem with the 5Dimes and BetJM comparisons. In both of those cases, you had a player who probably shouldn't have been making additional wagers, but got them through. However, all the additional wagers were made before the events in question started with standard odds found across the net (or track odds in the BetJM case).
This case is entirely different John. Again if it were one or two instances I agree the player should be paid. We can get Ganch to run the numbers, but betting 50-100 halftime lines with an average advantage of 75% is a no-lose proposition in the long run. I really think you're hurting this site's future power and weight in decision making by pursuing cases such as these, and that is where it effects all of us. Why is this OK due to bad/careless clerks via the phone, but past posting on games that are well underway and left up by careless people on the internet isn't? Does betting by phone give you a safe haven for shot taking that betting on the internet doesn't? This whole case and SBR's pursuit of it is very puzzling to me...
