Tweet
TOTAL REBOUNDS BY LAKERS IN GAME 1, OVER/UNDER 51 1/2
This was a prop that I saw at Carib that I liked, so I decided to send them some money. I played 3 separate wagers on the under for a total of $1050 to get back $900. Needless to say, the under was favoured.
I was following the game on the net, and the Lakers finished with 48 rebounds. All the written summaries of the game stated that the Lakers had outrebounded the Pacers 48-36. My wagers were graded as winners.
The next afternoon, my account at Carib is now in a negative balance. My wagers on the Lakers prop were graded as losers.
CARIB'S STORY (BUTCH)
Butch, at CARIB, tells me that team rebounds were included in the prop.
Question 1 - Would you think that team rebounds would be included in this prop?
To me, there is no mention of team rebounds in this prop. An example of a team rebound is when a Pacer player shoots the ball, and the ball goes out of bounds untouched, or off a Pacers player. The Lakers are then credited with a team rebound. Gee, what a meaningful statistic! How does one go about trying to handicap team rebounds? Does anyone even know how many team rebounds the Lakers averaged per game this year? Team rebounds is an irrelevant and useless statistic. Any news report in the world will tell you that the Lakers outrebounded the Pacers 48-36. Team rebounds are never included. Why on earth would I or anyone else believe they would be included in this prop UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED.
I told Butch that there would be no reason for me to think that team rebounds would be included in this prop. I told him that two of his own employees agreed with me, that my bets should have been winners, but they said that the final decision was one that would be made by management.
He first tried to convince me that the way the prop was worded unquestionably included team rebounds. Yeah right, try again Butch,
I guess that's why my wagers were initially graded as winners, because the person grading them also never even thought of including team rebounds.
He then tells me that team rebounds were meant to be included in the prop, and gives me a number to call in Vegas so I could hear this straight from his source. This guy tells me that team rebounds were meant to be included (I assume he is legit), and that the Las Vegas sportsbooks CLEARLY STATED THIS.
I call Butch back and ask him why there was no mention of including team rebounds in his prop, and he tells me, "not enough space on the on-line system." Give me a break! He also tells me that he has a sheet with all his props on it, and that the explanation of the prop in dispute was a couple of paragraphs long. "How am I supposed to put all that down on the internet", he tells me. Yeah, but Butch, you left out one critical detail, that teams rebounds would be included.
Question 2
Does CARIB not have an obligation to make the bettor fully aware that team rebounds would be included in this prop, and did they fail in that regard?
After a lot of complaining, Butch did credit my account back with $860. I asked for my bets to be graded as no-action, so I guess he fell $190 short of doing so. The $190 didn't upset me, it was Butch's attitude, his lame excuses, and his reluctance to admit any fault in this matter.
I asked him to hang up the same number on that specific prop for game 2, and I would pound the over for $5000, since he was so adamant that team rebounds were included. He tells me, "No problem, bet whatever you want, if my sources give me the same line." He never did post that same prop for game 2. Gee, maybe he can come here, and tell us why.
OLYMPIC'S STORY (SPIRO)
Spiro hung up the exact same line for that prop for game 1. The under 51 1/2 was favoured there too. My bet was originally graded as a winner, then later a loser. I woke the next morning, and was relieved to see that it was a winner again. Deja vu, could it have been this team rebound thing again?
I had to know, so I spoke to Spiro himself. He told me that the bet was originally graded as a winner because the Lakers had 48 rebounds. He then doublechecked all his props and noticed those team rebounds. He then adds the 9 team rebounds the Lakers got, so my bet was now a loser. Feeling unsure about this, Spiro calls him "man in Vegas", to ask him "what the hell a team rebound is." Spiro didn't even know what a team rebound is. Upon finding out what a team rebound was, Spiro laughed, and said no way, I can't add those. I guess he shared my opinion of team rebounds - that they were useless, and irrelevant. So he tells me that he "HAD TO DO THE RIGHT THING", and grade those under wagers as winners, despite taking a substantial loss for doing so. Hats off to Spiro!!! The conversation I had with Spiro led to him including the notation, "team rebounds are not included", in his Laker rebound props. I guess that's why I didn't buy Butch's "not enough space" excuse.
My biggest complaint is the unwillingness of some sportsbooks to make the bettor fully aware of what he is betting into. Because there was no mention of the inclusion of team rebounds in his prop, Butch could have gone either way with it, which would be whether or not to include team rebounds, depending on which way the action flowed on his prop. I am not making an accusation, just suggesting a possibility, and for the best interests of the bettor, we need to prevent this possibility from happening.
I checked out SOS because it was another Antiguan book. They put the same prop up for game 2. The over 50 1/2 was favoured at -125. Again, no mention of team rebounds, the wording was exactly the same as in game 1. I talked to somebody in management, and he said that team rebounds would be included. I asked why he didn't feel that a special notation regarding the inclusion of team rebounds was necessary, and he seemed disinterested. To him, the prop was not ambiguous at all.
I wanted so much to send money over there and pound the over 50 1/2, but how could I? I couldn't trust him. What happens if he decides not to include team rebounds after all? It would be my word against his. By the way, the Lakers got 47 rebounds, and 19 of those silly team rebounds, so I would have had an easy winner.
Did anybody bet this particular prop for game 1 at any book. How was it graded? Was it originally graded as a winner, and then later changed?
How should this prop have been graded? I welcome any and all opinions.
[This message has been edited by Dukey (edited 06-11-2000).]
This was a prop that I saw at Carib that I liked, so I decided to send them some money. I played 3 separate wagers on the under for a total of $1050 to get back $900. Needless to say, the under was favoured.
I was following the game on the net, and the Lakers finished with 48 rebounds. All the written summaries of the game stated that the Lakers had outrebounded the Pacers 48-36. My wagers were graded as winners.
The next afternoon, my account at Carib is now in a negative balance. My wagers on the Lakers prop were graded as losers.
CARIB'S STORY (BUTCH)
Butch, at CARIB, tells me that team rebounds were included in the prop.
Question 1 - Would you think that team rebounds would be included in this prop?
To me, there is no mention of team rebounds in this prop. An example of a team rebound is when a Pacer player shoots the ball, and the ball goes out of bounds untouched, or off a Pacers player. The Lakers are then credited with a team rebound. Gee, what a meaningful statistic! How does one go about trying to handicap team rebounds? Does anyone even know how many team rebounds the Lakers averaged per game this year? Team rebounds is an irrelevant and useless statistic. Any news report in the world will tell you that the Lakers outrebounded the Pacers 48-36. Team rebounds are never included. Why on earth would I or anyone else believe they would be included in this prop UNLESS SPECIFICALLY STATED.
I told Butch that there would be no reason for me to think that team rebounds would be included in this prop. I told him that two of his own employees agreed with me, that my bets should have been winners, but they said that the final decision was one that would be made by management.
He first tried to convince me that the way the prop was worded unquestionably included team rebounds. Yeah right, try again Butch,
I guess that's why my wagers were initially graded as winners, because the person grading them also never even thought of including team rebounds.
He then tells me that team rebounds were meant to be included in the prop, and gives me a number to call in Vegas so I could hear this straight from his source. This guy tells me that team rebounds were meant to be included (I assume he is legit), and that the Las Vegas sportsbooks CLEARLY STATED THIS.
I call Butch back and ask him why there was no mention of including team rebounds in his prop, and he tells me, "not enough space on the on-line system." Give me a break! He also tells me that he has a sheet with all his props on it, and that the explanation of the prop in dispute was a couple of paragraphs long. "How am I supposed to put all that down on the internet", he tells me. Yeah, but Butch, you left out one critical detail, that teams rebounds would be included.
Question 2
Does CARIB not have an obligation to make the bettor fully aware that team rebounds would be included in this prop, and did they fail in that regard?
After a lot of complaining, Butch did credit my account back with $860. I asked for my bets to be graded as no-action, so I guess he fell $190 short of doing so. The $190 didn't upset me, it was Butch's attitude, his lame excuses, and his reluctance to admit any fault in this matter.
I asked him to hang up the same number on that specific prop for game 2, and I would pound the over for $5000, since he was so adamant that team rebounds were included. He tells me, "No problem, bet whatever you want, if my sources give me the same line." He never did post that same prop for game 2. Gee, maybe he can come here, and tell us why.
OLYMPIC'S STORY (SPIRO)
Spiro hung up the exact same line for that prop for game 1. The under 51 1/2 was favoured there too. My bet was originally graded as a winner, then later a loser. I woke the next morning, and was relieved to see that it was a winner again. Deja vu, could it have been this team rebound thing again?
I had to know, so I spoke to Spiro himself. He told me that the bet was originally graded as a winner because the Lakers had 48 rebounds. He then doublechecked all his props and noticed those team rebounds. He then adds the 9 team rebounds the Lakers got, so my bet was now a loser. Feeling unsure about this, Spiro calls him "man in Vegas", to ask him "what the hell a team rebound is." Spiro didn't even know what a team rebound is. Upon finding out what a team rebound was, Spiro laughed, and said no way, I can't add those. I guess he shared my opinion of team rebounds - that they were useless, and irrelevant. So he tells me that he "HAD TO DO THE RIGHT THING", and grade those under wagers as winners, despite taking a substantial loss for doing so. Hats off to Spiro!!! The conversation I had with Spiro led to him including the notation, "team rebounds are not included", in his Laker rebound props. I guess that's why I didn't buy Butch's "not enough space" excuse.
My biggest complaint is the unwillingness of some sportsbooks to make the bettor fully aware of what he is betting into. Because there was no mention of the inclusion of team rebounds in his prop, Butch could have gone either way with it, which would be whether or not to include team rebounds, depending on which way the action flowed on his prop. I am not making an accusation, just suggesting a possibility, and for the best interests of the bettor, we need to prevent this possibility from happening.
I checked out SOS because it was another Antiguan book. They put the same prop up for game 2. The over 50 1/2 was favoured at -125. Again, no mention of team rebounds, the wording was exactly the same as in game 1. I talked to somebody in management, and he said that team rebounds would be included. I asked why he didn't feel that a special notation regarding the inclusion of team rebounds was necessary, and he seemed disinterested. To him, the prop was not ambiguous at all.
I wanted so much to send money over there and pound the over 50 1/2, but how could I? I couldn't trust him. What happens if he decides not to include team rebounds after all? It would be my word against his. By the way, the Lakers got 47 rebounds, and 19 of those silly team rebounds, so I would have had an easy winner.
Did anybody bet this particular prop for game 1 at any book. How was it graded? Was it originally graded as a winner, and then later changed?
How should this prop have been graded? I welcome any and all opinions.
[This message has been edited by Dukey (edited 06-11-2000).]
Comment