REALITY COURT...

[REALITY]

REALITY IS THE PRESIDING JUDGE.

THE POSTERS HERE ARE THE JURY.

ONE ACCOUNT BEING PLAYED BY A MOVER WHO HAS TWO INDIVIDUALS CALLING IN UNDER HIS ACCOUNT AT THE SAME TIME.

THE CLERK CALLS OUT 1234 THE KNICKS -4 FOR 50.

ANOTHER CLERK CALLS OUT THE EXACT SAME BET FOR 1234.

REALITY STOPS THE MUSIC AND TELLS BOTH INDIVIDUALS THEY HAVE NO BET AND PULLS THEIR PASSWORD.

THE OWNER OF THE ACCOUNT HAD TO REVERIFY HIS INFO AND WAS GIVEN A NEW PASSWORD AND A WARNING THE NEXT TIME THIS HAPPENED HIS ACCOUNT WOULD BE CLOSED.

WAS REALITY RIGHT OR WRONG IN HIS ACTIONS.

NO HEDGING,SAYING I SHOULD HAVE GIVEN HIM AT LEAST ONE BET.

PLEASE VOTE YES OR NO.

THIS IS LIKE THAT SHOW MORALS COURT ONLY FOR GAMBLERS...

REALITY,THANKS THE GOOD LORD THAT HIS ADMIRERS CAN'T INVOKE THE DEATH PENALTY...

JUDGE REALITY

[Alpine]

YES, I believe Judge Reality was right. I'm assuming that "50" is your limit and that this was a pre-meditated attempt to circumvent known limits.

[guidoS]

how can i vote yes or no to the question was REALITY right or wrong in his actions?

but as i understand the ?, i vote WRONG!!!! y cant someone else have my password and bet with it? granted, it's not smart, but my wife has my password, but it's not illegal or morally wrong!

now if alpine's conditions apply, that is, that the 2 callers r trying to get double the posted limits, please allow me to hedge and say they get the posted limit!

[Alpine]

GuidoS,

You're right, there's absolutely nothing illegal or morally wrong with your wife having your password and even making a bet on your account(with your consent). But what are the odds that (unknowingly) you would both call at the exact same time to bet on the exact same game taking the same sides for the same amount? I'd guess it's about equal to the probability that all of REALITY's posts from now on will be in lowercase. In other words... microscopic

[guidoS]

alpine:

well, the odds must be 100% of it happening because BROTHER REALITY says it happened and he never lies! remember this was his hypothetical! in the real world if they ever catch my password being used once over the phone, they may put a hold on my account! but it might just happen one day that we bet simultaneously over the net! guido, the phonophobe

[Jeff]

This is a no brainer.....

Wrong.

REALITY should have honored one of the bets. Big deal, the movers screwed up and both called the same joint. They should be warned, and then they should get their act together so it never happens again.

Why would a book, which is in the business to take bets, turn down the action?

Probably 25% of the offshore wagering population is wagering with multiple accounts, partners, movers, etc.etc......Several players share accounts. It's part of the game.

The fact that this account was wagering with you in the 1st place, tells me you didn't have a problem with them being in your store, so why not take one bet and warn?

[ajax50]

WRONG I have a partner,we both have a screen.We live 500 miles apart.Im not calling him first to see if he saw the move.Im calling the book fast and if we both call simultaneously so be it.It happens,but not often.Books have said "someone is using your number"...I hang up knowing my partner is faster than I.

[tornado]

So as not to appear CS, I think you should accept the first and excerise your right of refussal on the secondary one.

[sportshobby]

Wrong. If this is the first time it has happened, only a warning is in order. Honor the first bet, decline the second one.

[Segundo]

This is a no-brainer. They obviously made a mistake and Reality, you know that they were not trying to bet double the limit. They should have been given one bet and a slap on the wrist for not having a separate calling list on them when going out on games.

Now, if you can prove that they were trying to double hit you then should they be thrown out for thinking you were not going to see it or should you keep them knowing that they are morons for even thinking so?

[REALITY]

I SHOULD HAVE ADDED THERE WAS A ONE CUSTOMER TO AN ACCOUNT PIN# RULE.

AT THE TIME THE PREVAILING SCHEME WAS PLAYERS USING OTHER PLAYERS TO PUT IN THEIR BETS OVER THE PHONE.

THE BET WON,NO PROBLEM.

THE BET LOSES,"I DIDN'T MAKE THAT BET,I WANT TO HEAR THE TAPE"

CUSTOMER SERVICE CUES UP THE CONVERSATION OF THE BETTING SESSION.

"THAT'S NOT ME"

"THAT'S NOT MY VOICE!"

YOU GET THE PICTURE...

REALITY

[guidoS]

Your Honor, Judge REALITY:

begging the courts pardon, but in an unrelated matter, what was so controversial about the ballot box thread? what was the major objection to it?

sorry, Your Honor, but inquiring minds wanna know y their mentor is no longer posting his pearls of wisdom ubiquitously over the web!

[REALITY]

GUIDO S,

YOUR REQUIRED READING ASSIGNMENT:

SPECIAL DELIVERY FOR DUE PROCESS ADVOCATE
POSTED 1-26-2001 AT 1:21 P.M.

BALLOTING PART II
POSTED 1-27-2001 AT 10:41 P.M.

THIS SHOULD ANSWER ALL YOUR QUESTIONS...

REALITY