Michael Schumacher v Mika Hakkinen confusion!!!

[Fred]

Michael Schumacher v Mika Hakkinen confusion!!!

Anyone get a result already from their book?

[Fred]

re Malaysian F1 matchup

Schumacher won (beat Hakkinen) 'on the track' then disqualified

The phrase "****sportsbook does not recognize suspended games, protests and overturned decisions for wagering purposes"

is relevant

Not set in concrete yet but I'm getting contrary interpretations of this phrase from different books with this identical phrase in their rules

ie some say Schumacher declared winner others Hakkinen

[Phil]

So far this is how it is breaking down

BOOKS GOING WITH IRVINE AS WINNER
all aussie shops
intertops (thankgod)

BOOKS GOING WITH MIKA AS WINNER
bowmans
vip

haven't asked some of the other antigua places yet.

I personally feel that to go with anything but the podium positions (eddie, Michael, Mika) is crazy as what happens if this DQ is overturned on appeal as may happen. Will the books then turn around and change the race winner yet again.

It has to be the person who crosses first. All else is irrelavent.

[Fred]

Thanks for the info Phil


I'm hoping for consistency, if nothing else, especially where the rule quoted above is used -- (it's an industry standard perhaps?)

Does anyone know if Schumacher was declared the 'official' winner proir to the disqualification?

Anyone know the official F1 web site?

I've only found unofficial sites.


Thanks -- I appreciate any info.

[Phil]

Fred, not sure about the official sites. But if you goto Yahoo/rec/sports/autoracing/F1, there are four good sites I use, again not sure if they are official or not.

Did you have anything on the boys in red in the race. I certainly did and am still shaking my head at some of the book's interpretations on the outcome.

what a day in the world of betting. First the confusion of the race and then the Mets slug a grand slam which turns into a single and the under stead of the over.

[boris]

How can books possibly pay on McLaren winning when the Ferraris can still appeal???? What happens when in three week's time the appeal is heard and they get the result back?

It's podium or nothing! The verdict was three hours later, all bets should have been settled by then. It's like a horse race with a post-race drug test - it might make a difference to the owners for prizemoney, but as for gambling, the matter's long been settled.

Irvine and Schumacher were disqualified at the same time.

[Phil]

here here! well said.

[Fred]

Thanks for your thoughts fellas.

My reading of the above rule is that post race events and decisions shouldn't affect bets.

I hear that the Starnet books are also now crediting Irvine and Schumacher as first and second after holding off a decision for a day.

However it raises the question of futures bets -- will Irvine bets pay for this race but his 'victory' (for betting purposes) not count towards championship bets on him?

Anyways -- now on to Japan!

btw found the official F1 site -- http://www.fia.com/

[Phil]

Ok, I still have a few more thoughts on this whole situation. fyi, I'm not belabouring this simply due to bitterness, as my books have paid my Irvine bets off.

First off, any books I mention, I'm not trying to embarrass or belittle, I am simply trying to show the problems inherent with doing anything but taking the original race finish order of Irvine, Schumaker, Hakkinnen as the betting results.

This is direct from Bowman's website's sports rules.

"Motor Racing
51. Includes Nascar, Indy Racing, Busch and Formula 1.
52. All wagers are action unless specified.
53. The winner for betting purposes will be the official podium winner, as declared by the sports’ governing body, at the conclusion of the race.

sports rules
6. Bowman International Sports Ltd does not recognise suspended games, protests, overturned decisions, etc. for wagering purposes, except where specifically stipulated below (e.g. see Baseball Rules 11 and 17).

4. For betting purposes the result of an event or game will be determined on the date of the events conclusion subject to official confirmation by the relevant governing body and according to house wagering rules and regulations, unless otherwise stipulated."

I've spoken to Bowmans and they are taking Hakinnen as the race winner. They told me that although their rules say "PODIUM FINISH", they also state, "AS DECLARED BY THE SPORT'S GOVERNING BODY". Hence since Formula One dq'd the ferrari's and declared Hakkinen the winner, that is who they are going with.

Now I then mentioned that Ferrari are appealling this decision (to be heard this Friday). And so I asked them what they would do if upon appeal, the dq is overturned and Ferrari's 1 2 finish is reinstated. Bowman's told me that in this situation they would infact HONOUR the Irvine bets as winners. Now that would be a good thing of course for Irvine backers. But the obvious next question is what becomes of the Hakkinen bets they graded as winners. To this question, they could only say that they did not know.

Between the two options of declaring the Hakkinen bets losers, or simply paying out on both Hakkinen and Irvine as race winners, they could not say which they would do as yet. Incidently I have also spoken to Carib, who are taking Hakkinen as the winner but who also say that upon appeal, if ferrari were reinstated they would have to make the decision as well inregards to what to do with the Hakkinen bets. I got the impression that they would also honour the ferrari bets if the appeal is upheld.

Incidently, the three lettered sportsbook whom we are not allowed to name here has honoured Irvine as the race winner. I spoke to them yesterday and they said they were going to do whatever Vegas was doing. Since Vegas takes race winners as betting winners regardless of latter events, this is the correct decision. I know some people have had problems with these guys, but they were very professional and courteous to me in arbitrating this question.

Now my whole point to all this is this. Just imagine you have Mika to win. You are paid off, but in a week the ferrari appeal is upheld and your sportsbook subsequently debits your account the winnings. Can you imagine how crazily steamed you would be. I personally believe that if the appeal is upheld most places that are declaring Hakkinen will simply end up paying out on Irvine as well and not debiting the Hakkinen winners, simply as a matter of good customer relations.

But I hope that all the sportsbooks out there can see what an INCREDIBLY messy situation is created, once they start going with anything but the immediate final result of a race. They open themselves up to this endless litany of appeals and create nothing but annoyed customers.

Having said all this, I'm sure sportsbooks aren't intentionally trying to piss anybody off and they are probably in the same boat as the players, wishing that this whole thing had not happened. However it did, and for that reason, this is why i just think that the rules need to be much clearer on this sort of thing.

While F1 is more of a niche sport, this exact same thing could happen in a NASCAR race and with so many more wagers on it, it would create far bigger problems.

A final note. Mika Hakkinen has spoken out about this to say:

"It (the DQ of Ferrari) doesn't feel right. They won the race fair and square on the track."

Not only does this speak volumes about how classy a guy he is (afterall with the DQ he is a lock for the driver's title), it nicely sums up my feelings on the whole incident.

[AussieVamp2]

Hakkinen classy? Not a few weeks back when he was looking decidedly shaky.......

[Joanne]

I would like to make all our customer's aware that www.sportingbet.com has paid out on both winning drivers for this event.

People who wagered on Hakkinen or Irvine will find that their accounts have been updated with any winnings accordingly.

Joanne Casey
Customer Service Manager

[AussieVamp2]

well, Joanne
that sounds classier than any F1 driver

except maybe Jack Brabham

[Cons]

I think Sportingbet made a very nice move by crediting both results. Overall I think only Irvine bets should have won, but the entire situation is uneasy to say the least. If the decision is upheld, I think it will kill off the sport. It will be suicide for F1, which is why I think Ferrari will end up getting fined, while Irvine will be reinstated as winner and given the 10 points. It will set up a grand finale and that's exactly what the sport needs at the moment.

[AussieVamp2]

not that we would be cynical and suggest that this is what tv would want, eh?

and hadn't they been using what they were penalised for for some time?

[Cons]

I really think the sport needs it. The better man won and he did it without the help of some shortened car part.

It would be like disqualifying a soccer team because one of the player's shin pads was too wide.

There have been times when it was discovered that the goal posts were too high and yet the results stood.

If the car part in question didn't help Irvine in any way, he should get the points and Ferrari should be penalised or cautioned. It's not good for the sport if the results get decided behind closed doors instead of on the race track. We'll see what happens, though I'm convinced Irvine will get his points back (unless it's deemed the part clearly gave his car an advantage).