Made a wager this morning on a tennis match. I took a player +1.5 Sets. It paid out +250.
I ended up winning the bet. Here's the issue.
The match closed at around -2000 for the favorite to win. The line for +1.5 sets on the underdog should have been closer to like +800. I wouldn't be surprised if the book would have canceled bets on anyone who played the favorite at -300 -1.5 sets if it had won. Because a 20-1 favorite is HIGHLY likely to win in straight sets. This is 100% a bad line.
I get it, I'm an idiot. I dunno why I didn't notice why the odds were so low.
Is there an precedence in a case like this? I'm thinking if I bring it up to the book they will either laugh at me, or cancel the bet altogether. At end of day my funds were at risk, and I think I deserve to be paid the true odds. If I had lost I wouldn't have been paid anything. I wasn't taking any shot at all.
Thoughts?
I ended up winning the bet. Here's the issue.
The match closed at around -2000 for the favorite to win. The line for +1.5 sets on the underdog should have been closer to like +800. I wouldn't be surprised if the book would have canceled bets on anyone who played the favorite at -300 -1.5 sets if it had won. Because a 20-1 favorite is HIGHLY likely to win in straight sets. This is 100% a bad line.
I get it, I'm an idiot. I dunno why I didn't notice why the odds were so low.
Is there an precedence in a case like this? I'm thinking if I bring it up to the book they will either laugh at me, or cancel the bet altogether. At end of day my funds were at risk, and I think I deserve to be paid the true odds. If I had lost I wouldn't have been paid anything. I wasn't taking any shot at all.
Thoughts?