is this wager legitimately deleted?

**bubba** · 01-07-13, 08:09 PM

after being robbed by betsislnds i am less likely to get upset by stuff like this but i feel they are wrong

**JasonDC** · 01-07-13, 08:19 PM

Originally posted by bubba

at least it was deleted before game time but i fail to see why it should be deleted (i attempted to get an explanation but they say to contact them after the game starts to receive my explanation which kind of defeats the purpose in my opinion!):

cliff notes: the wager i bet is under 44.5 yards for the longest fg in the game tonight. it said longest fg by bama/longest fg by nd over under 44.5 yards. i think it was pretty dam obvious what i was betting.

Straight wager 1xxxxxxx posted on Monday, Jan 7 2013 2:38PM was deleted on Monday, Jan 7 2013 7:15PM.

Football - BAMA makes longest FG/ND makes longest FG under 44½ -115 for Game
Risking $575.00 to win $500.00

Reason: wording error, should state: longest FG by either team
Contact customer support if you need further clarification regarding this deleted ticket.

You had 49k stolen from you at betislands, you lost your job, and you're still betting? I guess nothing can keep you down.

**bubba** · 01-07-13, 08:26 PM

i enjoy the challenge.

what do you think of the deletion

**JasonDC** · 01-07-13, 08:54 PM

Originally posted by bubba

i enjoy the challenge.

what do you think of the deletion

After having 49k stolen from you do you find it hard to enjoy your $500 wager? you have balls though..you lost your job and were talking about how much that theft impacted your life and you're still out here making nickel bets on props, wow.

**bubba** · 01-07-13, 09:15 PM

Originally posted by JasonDC

After having 49k stolen from you do you find it hard to enjoy your $500 wager? you have balls though..you lost your job and were talking about how much that theft impacted your life and you're still out here making nickel bets on props, wow.

chasing my stolen $. never claimed i was the sharpest knife in the drawer.

**tropolis** · 01-07-13, 09:25 PM

how long have you been unemployed?

**Maniac** · 01-07-13, 09:41 PM

They have made a right hash of the wording of it, but if I saw that bet as it was originally worded I would also think it meant "Longest FG by Bama or ND to be Over/Under 44.5yds"

To me the wording error isn't enough to void that bet as the original wording does have enough specifics for the bet to be understood as it says both teams and the line of 44.5.

The only possible mis-communication I could see is if someone thought that it meant you were betting BOTH Bama + ND needing to score FG's Over or Under the 44.5 - but anyone with a brain should know that a price of -115 would be too low for what would effectively be a 2 team parlay to either both kick over 44.5 or both kick under 44.5

**bubba** · 01-07-13, 09:49 PM

Originally posted by Maniac

They have made a right hash of the wording of it, but if I saw that bet as it was originally worded I would also think it meant "Longest FG by Bama or ND to be Over/Under 44.5yds"

To me the wording error isn't enough to void that bet as the original wording does have enough specifics for the bet to be understood as it says both teams and the line of 44.5.

The only possible mis-communication I could see is if someone thought that it meant you were betting BOTH Bama + ND needing to score FG's Over or Under the 44.5 - but anyone with a brain should know that a price of -115 would be too low for what would effectively be a 2 team parlay to either both kick over 44.5 or both kick under 44.5

i know for sure i have bet similarly worded props at this site with no problem at all. im surprised it was cancelled. very surprised. top book too

**Kaabee** · 01-07-13, 10:45 PM

the way they worded it it's like two props in one. who makes the longest and over/under.

**bubba** · 01-07-13, 10:52 PM

Originally posted by Kaabee

the way they worded it it's like two props in one. who makes the longest and over/under.

there was a side and a total. like there was an area to bet on who makes the longest fg in the game. or you could bet on the longest fg in the game too. oh well. i think they are wrong for cancelling this (very wrong) but at least they did it before the game and with written notifcation

**Bill Dozer** · 01-10-13, 11:26 AM

Seems legit bad line. It might be a Q for the handicapping think tank to do the math but under for just one team would be a lot more expensive.

**nicabet** · 01-10-13, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by bubba

Football - BAMA makes longest FG/ND makes longest FG under 44½ -115 for Game
Risking $575.00 to win $500.00

Reason: wording error, should state: longest FG by either team
Contact customer support if you need further clarification regarding this deleted ticket.

Originally posted by Bill Dozer

Seems legit bad line. It might be a Q for the handicapping think tank to do the math but under for just one team would be a lot more expensive.

What part of the wording implies only one team? It says BAMA and ND

**BigDaddy** · 01-10-13, 12:45 PM

Originally posted by nicabet

It says BAMA and ND

yep

**wrongturn** · 01-10-13, 01:07 PM

If it interprets as both BAMA and ND, then the opposite over bet will make no sense, like both team have to make longer than 44.5 to win the wager?

Having said that, I think there is no confusion what this common prop is really about, that is: the longest FG of game is over/under 44.5.

**Bill Dozer** · 01-10-13, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by nicabet

What part of the wording implies only one team? It says BAMA and ND

"Football - BAMA makes longest FG/ND makes longest FG under 44½ -115 for Game"

It says "Bama". So, if the other team kicked a 60 yarder he would lose with the intended wording. If they didn't cancel it he would have double the chance of winning.

**nicabet** · 01-10-13, 01:47 PM

YOu appear to be missing the /ND ie Notre Dame ie the other team.

**BigDaddy** · 01-10-13, 01:56 PM

BAMA makes longest FG

ND makes longest FG

**tto827** · 01-10-13, 01:58 PM

I can't get an example right now cause I'm on my phone. But lots of props like this books list one team for one side of the bet, and the other on the other one.
If this was the original wager, yes, probably deserves to be voided, but if it is one of those where that's is just how to pending wagers confirm pages shows it, you should have won.

This post may seem very dumb if you haven't seen what I'm talking about before.

**wrongturn** · 01-10-13, 02:04 PM

Another twist of this wager, should it have won? Because there was no FG in the game. Should be no action?

**cutter2225** · 01-10-13, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by Bill Dozer

Seems legit bad line. It might be a Q for the handicapping think tank to do the math but under for just one team would be a lot more expensive.

Not surprised you pop up defending the side that makes you money. Keep up the stellar work.

**cutter2225** · 01-10-13, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by wrongturn

Another twist of this wager, should it have won? Because there was no FG in the game. Should be no action?

Any wager on the longest fg under for the game is automatically a winner if theres no fg's made or attempted. No twist there.

**cloverfield** · 01-10-13, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by Bill Dozer

"Football - BAMA makes longest FG/ND makes longest FG under 44½ -115 for Game"

It says "Bama". So, if the other team kicked a 60 yarder he would lose with the intended wording. If they didn't cancel it he would have double the chance of winning.

Your explanation for this is really weird as you completely ignore the ND wording. I clearly read it as the longest FG of the game being over/under 44.5 by either team

**eastern2** · 01-10-13, 10:18 PM

Originally posted by Bill Dozer

"Football - BAMA makes longest FG/ND makes longest FG under 44½ -115 for Game"

It says "Bama". So, if the other team kicked a 60 yarder he would lose with the intended wording. If they didn't cancel it he would have double the chance of winning.

Dear Lord you are seriously this retarded?!?!

It says bama makes longest fg SLASH ND makes longest fg under 44.5 yds - the SLASH would imply both teams but you probably get a cut on all losses so its prob in ur best interest for bubba to lose all his $$

**bubba** · 01-10-13, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by Bill Dozer

Seems legit bad line. It might be a Q for the handicapping think tank to do the math but under for just one team would be a lot more expensive.

book did not claim it was a bad line, the just claimed th wording was strange. over under 44.5 yards is just about the common # on all nfl games. i did not know about these kickers.

i would actually say that since there was no fg, then the wager should be no action barring the wager stating something differnetly