Grading dispute with Betjm

[kinosh]

The Super Bowl prop was "Number of Cardinals Players to score in game"
The bet was Over 3 Players +125

They graded this as a loss. I think it should be a push (players to score were Ben Patrick, Neil Rackers, and Larry Fitzgerald).

My reasoning is that the safety was a result of a Pittsburgh penalty, so no "Cardinals Player" was credited with the score. Betjm is saying the safety was credited to the Team, and therefore counts as a "Player." That's bullshit!!

 

[Reload]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

I'd say it should by the box score. If you only see points next to 3 names, then it's 3. Interesting call there though.

 

[IDENTITY]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

kinosh - they probably had more action on the other side...so had to screw ya so they wouldn't have to pay all those tickets. lol

 

[munson15]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Too bad, normally a safety would be credited to a particular player, but it couldn't be done here. I agree with you.

 

[kinosh]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Too bad, normally a safety would be credited to a particular player, but it couldn't be done here. I agree with you.

Exactly. If a named Player contributed to the safety, then that counts. NFL.com says "Penalty on J. Hartwig enforced in end zone for a Safety, 03:04." How the hell is that a "Cardinals Player??"

 

[Reload]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

I think throwing the challenge flag on this one will get a reversal! Keep us posted.

 

[tripp]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

you have the over 3? shouldn't you be happy then that you got the win?

 

[beedo]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

You seem to have a legit point here, kinosh. Technically, no more than 3 ARI players scored and the prop clearly states 3 players. While ARI did receive 2 pts on a safety (that was not credited to any ARI player in particular), BetJam counting ARI as "1 player" seems incorrect. Add one vote for PUSH and you should get your money back. I'm interested to read if anyone would defend the BetJam position.

 

[KZBOLT]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Will 3 or more Cardinals score (Kickers and 2 pt conv. count. YES +125

I think it was 3 or more?????????????

 

[Flamingo kid]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

The dispute is this. It is worded as PLAYERS but in reality, the word players probably meant 'entities'.

Its a wording issue. Since a player is a human being, than only 3 human beings actually scored. The points that were 'credited' to AZ were not actually 'SCORED'.

They were given to az on a penalty, so they werent points that were 'scored'. No one actually scored.

If the bookie didn't write into the rules that a safety that is credited to the team is a score, than you win. Its up to them to write all possibilities into the rules. Its not up to you, its up to them.

 

[kinosh]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

you have the over 3? shouldn't you be happy then that you got the win?

I didn't get the win. I got a loss.

 

[kinosh]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Tripp is right. I screwed up the argument. Forget the safety. Three players scored, the bet was Over 3, so the bet should be a push. If Betjm wants to count the safety as another player, then it would be a winning wager.

 

[Flamingo kid]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Tripp is right. I screwed up the argument. Forget the safety. Three players scored, the bet was Over 3, so the bet should be a push. If Betjm wants to count the safety as another player, then it would be a winning wager.

Maybe it should be a push. Do you feel you got lucky?

 

[kinosh]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Maybe it should be a push. Do you feel you got lucky?

It should be AT LEAST a push. But Betjm graded this as a loss.

 

[betfirstclass]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

KINOSH

do what we did after that MF ran INT back 100-Yards

call the COPS & explain you have been "Robbed" they refunded me in full this morning as I showed them the Video Evidence of 260 pound black man robbing me & running 100-yards to not only Get PITT cover but send the 1st Hf OVER the 23.5 . . . . .

 

[winkyduck]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

this is clearly a PUSH and i would bitch and get that money back

 

[Wade]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

scotty pulling a fast one once again.

 

[FairWarning]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

I played this at 5 Dimes and got a win.

 

[beedo]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Kinosh, you have a case here. Has there been any progress toward getting your money back?

 

[kinosh]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

This is Betjm's response:

Cardinals Player to score are Ben Patrick and Larry Fitzgerald.

As for other props like 3 unanswered scores by either team, CONVERSIONS do
not count as a score. they are "Conversions"

This prop had a disclaimer saying clearly TD's, FGs, and Safety (if any
player is involve into it) Never specified Conversion as being a score.
Arizona scored 4 times 3 TDs and a Safety ==> NOT 7 Times if we were
adding the Conversions.

Grading is ==> 2 Players

Regards

BetJamaica Customer Service.

 

[beedo]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

This is Betjm's response:

Cardinals Player to score are Ben Patrick and Larry Fitzgerald.

As for other props like 3 unanswered scores by either team, CONVERSIONS do
not count as a score. they are "Conversions"

This prop had a disclaimer saying clearly TD's, FGs, and Safety (if any
player is involve into it) Never specified Conversion as being a score.
Arizona scored 4 times 3 TDs and a Safety ==> NOT 7 Times if we were
adding the Conversions.

Grading is ==> 2 Players

Regards

BetJamaica Customer Service.

OK, so the bet is a loss then. If they did have the disclaimer then there really isn't a question about it. Do you consider this settled? Looks like it to me..

 

[jacksorbetter]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

scotty pulling a fast one once again.

Maybe the dumbest thing ever said on EOG.

Scotty is the fairest man out there. Call him and speak to him about this.

 

[William Lee]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

BetJamaica screwed you if thats the case. THE PROP was how many Cardinal players will score. NOT how many times the Cardinals will score! They need to correct that problem and word there props different in the future!

 

[kinosh]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

OK, so the bet is a loss then. If they did have the disclaimer then there really isn't a question about it. Do you consider this settled? Looks like it to me..

I do not consider it settled. Betjm is using the "3 unanswered scores" disclaimer to justify why only 2 players scored, saying that conversions do not count as scores. On the flip side, Betjm offered this prop: Neil Rackers Points in game, over/under 6.5 kicking points. There was no disclaimer for the disputed prop.

 

[beedo]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

I do not consider it settled. Betjm is using the "3 unanswered scores" disclaimer to justify why only 2 players scored, saying that conversions do not count as scores. On the flip side, Betjm offered this prop: Neil Rackers Points in game, over/under 6.5 kicking points. There was no disclaimer for the disputed prop.

A clearer way to list the prop they actually wanted to list would have been:
"Total Cardinals Players to score TDs, FGs, and Safeties"

But instead it seems they listed "Number of Cardinal Players to Score in Game" with a disclaimer that disallows conversions.

I think it's a poorly worded prop but on the other hand their disclaimer explains how they interpret it. If there's any lesson to learn here for players it is to read the fine print. And if there's any lesson for books it's to offer more clearly worded props.

kinosh, I think you are right to be angry about this. But there's not much you can do because, according to them, the disclaimer clearly stated their interpretation of "player" and which scores are allowable.

:cheers

 

[Flamingo kid]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

This is Betjm's response:

Cardinals Player to score are Ben Patrick and Larry Fitzgerald.

As for other props like 3 unanswered scores by either team, CONVERSIONS do
not count as a score. they are "Conversions"

This prop had a disclaimer saying clearly TD's, FGs, and Safety (if any
player is involve into it) Never specified Conversion as being a score.
Arizona scored 4 times 3 TDs and a Safety ==> NOT 7 Times if we were
adding the Conversions.

Grading is ==> 2 Players

Regards

BetJamaica Customer Service.

But a conversion is a score, it counts as one point.

They need to clearly word the props, which it doesn't look like they did.

 

[kinosh]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

If Rackers kicked a FG, would that change anything? Rackers is on the Cardinals roster. Whether he kicked a XP or FG means that he scored. I don't understand why all the controversy with Betjm.

 

[oakas]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

I had the exact same wager at Carib.
They counted it a loss. I sent them a memo stating the Rackers extra point should be counted.

Well they wrote me back saying I lost. I told them to back to the prop as it was written. It stated kickers were included.

After about 15 minutes they finally gave me a push on it. It did not seem they were very happy about it.

 

[NBA MOOSE]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

If Rackers kicked a FG, would that change anything? Rackers is on the Cardinals roster. Whether he kicked a XP or FG means that he scored. I don't understand why all the controversy with Betjm.

Kinosh,


#1 have you spoken to Scotty directly?

#2 have you spoken to Shrink directly?

#3 did you do any of the above prior to posting this on the forum?



I for one think they need to fix this and agree with your dispute.

 

[Bucsfan67]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

i have forwarded this link to scotty, to make sure he is aware of it...as others have stated, Scotty is about as fair as it gets.....

 

[pioneer]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

This is Betjm's response:

Cardinals Player to score are Ben Patrick and Larry Fitzgerald.

As for other props like 3 unanswered scores by either team, CONVERSIONS do
not count as a score. they are "Conversions"

This prop had a disclaimer saying clearly TD's, FGs, and Safety (if any
player is involve into it) Never specified Conversion as being a score.
Arizona scored 4 times 3 TDs and a Safety ==> NOT 7 Times if we were
adding the Conversions.

Grading is ==> 2 Players

Regards

BetJamaica Customer Service.

According to this post, you lost. You need to refute this post. In one of your later posts, you said..."There was no disclaimer for the disputed prop." This is the crux of the matter; BetJm says this prop had a disclaimer and you said there was no disclaimer. One of you is incorrect.

 

[Bucsfan67]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

scotty just replied and sent me a screen shot of the wager, and it shows the prop listed as touchdowns, field goals, and safety for a player....had Rackers made a field goal, t hen he is an eligible scorer for Zona, but he didnt.....Scotty also said anyone who has any question about this can feel free to contact him directly and he'll explain it....800-329-2909

 

[Bucsfan67]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

 

[Enfuego]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

scotty just replied and sent me a screen shot of the wager, and it shows the prop listed as touchdowns, field goals, and safety for a player....had Rackers made a field goal, t hen he is an eligible scorer for Zona, but he didnt.....Scotty also said anyone who has any question about this can feel free to contact him directly and he'll explain it....800-329-2909

Tell me this Bucs, how can a kicker's XP's be included in his scoring throughout the year but not on this wager. Don't his XP's count in his yearly statistics as scoring?

 

[Bucsfan67]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

i have no idea enfuego, i dont play many props, but when u look at the wager, as it was listed, there really isnt much gray area....it says PLAYERS SCORING A TD, A FG OR A SAFETY.......only 2 PLAYERS for Zona scored a td or a fg, and the safety wasnt credited to a "player" in the boxscore.....so its not a grading error...


I understand why Kinosh was confused, and can sympathize with him, but it does appear the prop was listed and the acceptable scores were listed...

as scotty said in his email to me, if he felt they made an error he would work with the guy, but it was graded as it should be..

 

[Flamingo kid]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

scotty just replied and sent me a screen shot of the wager, and it shows the prop listed as touchdowns, field goals, and safety for a player....had Rackers made a field goal, t hen he is an eligible scorer for Zona, but he didnt.....Scotty also said anyone who has any question about this can feel free to contact him directly and he'll explain it....800-329-2909

Forget what the screen says. It says number of players to score in game. Why not say "extra points do not count".? Why not just put that in there? Why be vague about it?

If a FG counts, why would an extra point not count?

If Xtra points don't count, than why bother writing the prop in the first place?

 

[royalfan]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Ofcourse the kicker counts. He scored a point. Not rocket science. The problem with books copying and pasting every prop on the list from someone is that only OLY or whoever knows how the hell to grade them sometimes. Since the safety was a hold no card scored on that but the kicker the TE and Fitz did. The answer to the question is three and it is a push. The book I bet it with got it right. Again this is simple and not rocket science. Books all just need to use some common sense.

 

[Bucsfan67]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Forget what the screen says. It says number of players to score in game. Why not say "extra points do not count".? Why not just put that in there? Why be vague about it?

If a FG counts, why would an extra point not count?

If Xtra points don't count, than why bother writing the prop in the first place?

those are questions that would best be directed to Scotty, whose number i included above..

i was just tyring to help out by getting an answer and posting the prop as it was listed...

In my opinion, i can see why an extra point wouldnt count, as it clearly lists TD'S, FG'S AND SAFETY, by a player.......if extra point counted, then whichever ever player scored the first TD, you would immediately be at 2 players right away......due to the xp.....a fg is a seperate entity from the TD..

but like i said, thats just my opinion, i dont play a lot of props and thats why, sometimes they are confusing....but who knows, if Kinoshi calls Scotty , something positive may come of it...

 

[pioneer]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Ofcourse the kicker counts. He scored a point. Not rocket science. The problem with books copying and pasting every prop on the list from someone is that only OLY or whoever knows how the hell to grade them sometimes. Since the safety was a hold no card scored on that but the kicker the TE and Fitz did. The answer to the question is three and it is a push. The book I bet it with got it right. Again this is simple and not rocket science. Books all just need to use some common sense.

Tell me Royalfan, did your book also specify that only TD's, FG's, and safeties counted as scores?

And common sense would say, that if a book listed a prop such as BetJam did, and specified that only TD's, FG's, and safeties counted as scores, that only 2 players scored. The answer to the question is TWO.

 

[pioneer]

Re: Grading dispute with Betjm

Forget what the screen says. It says number of players to score in game. Why not say "extra points do not count".? Why not just put that in there? Why be vague about it?

If a FG counts, why would an extra point not count?

If Xtra points don't count, than why bother writing the prop in the first place?

Now there's a novel idea...forget what the screen says!!!!!

So the book posts a prop on the screen, and the screen clearly says that only TD's, FG's, and safeties count as scores, and you want the book to forget what they're just said? How about if they forget that they promised to pay if you won? You did say to forget what the screen said.