I believe my Super Bowl prop was graded incorrectly

Search

New member
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
9,069
Tokens
This is the wager.


[15104] NEW ENGLAND WONT WIN IN OT -1700 (NEW ENGLAND WIN IN OVERTIME vrs NEW ENGLAND WONT WIN IN OT

When I made this wager, my thinking was I win this wager 3 ways.

1> New York Giants in in regulation
2> New York Giants win in overtime
3> New England win in regulation

Bookmaker thinks that since New England did not win, it is no action.

At the very least, it is not clear, and this should be graded a win. There was no stipulation that the Patriots had to win.

Who is right?
 

New member
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
9,069
Tokens
I am thinking about it again,

It does say:

NEW ENGLAND WIN IN OVERTIME vrs NEW ENGLAND WONT WIN IN OT.

That somewhat implies NE has to win. I should have read it better.

Still looking for opinions.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
44,254
Tokens
there is no way the line would be -1700 if the intent of the bet was N.E had to win.
That would be the most crazy line in the history of bookmaking.

All you have to do is look at the line to see the intent of the bet.

Its was graded wrong

Who in the world would make a bet that was -1700 that NE not only had to win but they also had to not win in OT. That line should have been -120 at the most. Not -1700
 

New member
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
9,069
Tokens
It should have been worded this way.

If New England wins, it will not be in OT.

If New England loses, no action.



-1700 make sense in that case.

If it was worded that way, I would not have made the wager though.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Oct 31, 2004
Messages
44,254
Tokens
You need to fight this man.
No question in my mind the intention of the linesmaker was that if N.E did not win in overtime you win the play.

No person in the world would lay -1700 on a play where the only way you could win 1 for for 17 bet is for N.E to have to win the game and not win in overtime.

Thats nuts. You could have bet -150 on N.E winning in regulation or overtime.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2012
Messages
22
Tokens
This one is EZ!
The prop as it’s presented and the big odds attached to it... breaks down to this: Will NE win in OT? Yes +1000 or NO -1700 the NO is a huge favorite, bigger than -1700 that's for sure. (it’s not specified NE must win the game for action)
The correct grading of this prop is NO -1700 (win) Yes +1000(loss)
This type of Prop is a simple win or lose prop – you can’t have the Patriots lose the game in reg and it becomes a double loss.
It’s a basic rule; you can’t have one outcome lose both sides of a two-way Prop Bet.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
23,931
Tokens
there is no way the line would be -1700 if the intent of the bet was N.E had to win.
That would be the most crazy line in the history of bookmaking.

All you have to do is look at the line to see the intent of the bet.

Its was graded wrong

Who in the world would make a bet that was -1700 that NE not only had to win but they also had to not win in OT. That line should have been -120 at the most. Not -1700
^^^^ He's got it right. They're pulling a fast one on you and you should be paid, and the bookmaker knows this. The line is so obvious, and he's stealing from you.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
23,931
Tokens
It should have been worded this way.

If New England wins, it will not be in OT.

If New England loses, no action.



-1700 make sense in that case.

If it was worded that way, I would not have made the wager though.
If that was the case you would get a no OT line, which would be better than the money-line, not 10 times worse. Bookmakers aren't stupid people this guy's a thief, and should be outed so no one plays there.
 

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
2,604
Tokens
No person in the world would lay -1700 on a play where the only way you could win 1 for for 17 bet is for N.E to have to win the game and not win in overtime.

Thats nuts. You could have bet -150 on N.E winning in regulation or overtime.

Not disagreeing with anything that has been said about you should being paid since the wording never mentioned any stipulations of NE having to win.
But that quoted part has one major flaw: If he bet the ML -150, his bet now would have been a loss. The way the book is grading it now, he is getting a push. So the odds aren't that idiotic since it only has action if NE wins and them winning in OT would be a huge underdog vs them winning in regulation (with any NYG win being a no contest).
So you can't just compare the odds to the ML, where you lose if the Pats lose outright.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,104,595
Messages
13,422,870
Members
99,199
Latest member
digitalscript
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com