[Justin7]

I recently fielded a complaint against Pinnacle (and found they did nothing improper). The player disagrees strongly with my conclusions, so I thought I'd field it to everyone else here.

The Yankees-Orioles game began on June 28th. Baltimore led 6-4 at the end of the 7th inning (the last completed one of the day). At the start of the 8th, the Yankees took an 8-6 lead. The game was suspended, and completed on July 27th with the Yankees winning 8-7.

The rule governing this dispute is:

The result of a game is official after 5 innings of play unless the home team is leading after 4.5 innings. If a game is called or suspended, the winner is determined by the score after the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning, in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called. Monies will be refunded if the home team ties the game and it is then suspended. Events will not carry over to the following day unless otherwise specified.

The rule anticipates a cancellation or suspension, but makes no mention of a resumption of the game. The problem with this rule is that with a “strict” reading, it is ambiguous enough that a player could expect it to be graded the way the player argues. I have reviewed the same rule at other sites, and every single one has this same problem.

When a rule is ambiguous as this one is, we look at two other factors to decide how a rule should be applied. First, is there an “industry standard”? There is, and the standard (and Las Vegas rules, which are referred to in General Rules Paragraph 8) is to treat a game as completed at the last finished inning if it is suspended. This factor favors Pinnacle. The second factor is “what is most reasonable?” Both players and sportsbooks want bets to be resolved sooner than later. No one would expect a baseball game wager to take a full month to resolve. The most reasonable interpretation favors the prompt grading of wagers. Both “tiebreakers” suggest Pinnacle handled this situation properly.

I am recommending that Pinnacle (and all other sportsbooks) clarify this rule – this might require two rules – one for “callings”, and another longer one for suspensions

[bigboydan]

I can't believe were still talking about this game actually. I remember talking about this game in a thread in the bases section of the forum on the night.

BTW, Pinnacle is correct on this one.

[BigBollocks]

Justin I don't think they have to clarify a thing. This is a standard rule that has been in place for 30+ years in Vegas and now the offshores. I've won and lost heartbreakers as a result, but it is what it is. Does the player really expect the book to hold all monies for anywhere between 2-4 months just in case of a game resumption?

The game always reverts back to the last full inning. In this case any bets on the Orioles were a winner. If you were to ask every book to carefully rewrite a rule everytime a player took a tough beat we'd have rule books a 100+ pages long. This is just another case of irrational sour grapes that doesn't deserve any more attention in my opinion....

[bigloser]

There is another "Tiebreaker"

The book writes the rules, they have control over the rules. It is up to them not the player to ensure the rule is not ambiguous.

If a rule can be interpreted as being in favour of the player then that is how it should be called.

[LT Profits]

Actually, Pinny's wording is much more clear-cut than other books:

Events will not carry over to the following day unless otherwise specified.

And there it is! The fact that the game resumed at a later date does not matter. If other books would add that simple clause to their rules, there would be a lot less confusion.

[isetcap]

Actually, Pinny's wording is much more clear-cut than other books:

Events will not carry over to the following day unless otherwise specified.

And there it is! The fact that the game resumed at a later date does not matter. If other books would add that simple clause to their rules, there would be a lot less confusion.

So if a game has a couple rain delays and goes 20 innings, then Pin only grades the last full inning before midnight? There is ambiguity in that language as well.

[Halifax]

I don't see anything in their rules that would prompt you to say that their rules are 'ambiguous'.

Actually, it's pretty clear-cut:

"If a game is called or suspended, the winner is determined by the score after the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning, in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called."

The game was suspended. The above rule governs what happens when a game is suspended. Whether that game is (or is not) resumed at some later date is completely irrelevant.

Bottom line: Pinnacle graded it properly.

[LT Profits]

isetcap,

While I understand exactly what you are saying, there is a difference between a "delay" and a "suspension". Perhaps the best way to phrase it would be that is a game STARTS on the date scheduled, the final score shall revert to the last completed inning at the TIME OF THE SUSPENSION. Thus it is understood that a delay may go past midnight. That is the actual rule anyway, so phrasing it that way may take away the ambiguity.

[LT Profits]

Hilfax,

I believe he was referring to the "Events will not carry over to the following day unless otherwise specified" line.

[Halifax]

Hilfax,

I believe he was referring to the "Events will not carry over to the following day unless otherwise specified" line.

Even if that's the case, this rule is not ambiguous either.

In fact, it provides more support for Pinnacle grading the wager as they did, and not waiting to grade the wager until the game was resumed / completed on a future date.

Anyhow, the portion of their rules that I quoted in my earlier post is the primary governing rule that handles this situation, and there is really no ambiguity in the wording of it.

[LT Profits]

But he was implying that if a game goes past midnight, it is indeed going into the next day and that a case can be made to use the last half inning before midnight.

[Justin7]

Halifax,

I think there is a little ambiguity. The last completed inning occurred when the game was completed. It doesn't specify "last completed inning before the suspension".

[LT Profits]

Exactly, so my phrasing is better!

Since I can't bet at Pinny, would they hire me to write for their website?

[isetcap]

I don't see anything in their rules that would prompt you to say that their rules are 'ambiguous'.

Actually, it's pretty clear-cut:

"If a game is called or suspended, the winner is determined by the score after the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning, in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called."

The game was suspended. The above rule governs what happens when a game is suspended. Whether that game is (or is not) resumed at some later date is completely irrelevant.

Bottom line: Pinnacle graded it properly.

Let me preface this by stating I had no action on this event.

There is most certainly ambiguity in the correct reading of the language in bold if Pinnacle graded the wager as a Baltimore win. There is no ambiguity if Pinnacle graded the wager as a New York win. Look at the statement piece by piece:

If a game is called or suspended,

The game was in fact suspended so what follows will take effect. No ambiguity here.

the winner is determined by the score at the end of the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning

Here is where there is a significant problem. Pinnacle graded the wager using the result after the last full inning which happened to be the 7th inning. Baltimore took the lead in the bottom of the 7th. Everyone assumes this is the way it should be graded but the statement goes on to defeat itself at this point. The 'unless' portion of the statement now takes precedent since it is explicitly accurate in this case. Since the 'unless' segment has now been activated, the statement tells us to apply the following...

in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called.

The game was called after New York took the lead, therefore the wager should be graded for the Yankees based on the language. Were this to go to a court of law, it would be very hard for Pinnacle to justify its decision to grade this as a Baltimore win based on their very own rule. New York bettors would be awarded the winning grade even though we all know that Baltimore should be the graded winner.

To say there is no ambiguity in the language is just absurd.

[Halifax]

Halifax,

I think there is a little ambiguity. The last completed inning occurred when the game was completed. It doesn't specify "last completed inning before the suspension".

There is really no ambiguity here.

You are referring to "the last completed inning", but remember what the rule says ... in the governing rule that I'm referring to (and apparently you're also referring to when you mention "the last completed inning"), the first part of the sentence starts off with "If a game is called or suspended, ...". This means that the "last competed inning" is referring to the last completed inning before the game is called or suspended. If you showed this rule to 1,000 reasonably intelligent people, I'm sure that greater than 99% of them would interpret the rule the proper way.

This guy who lodged the complaint is simply clutching at straws, and really has no leg to stand on.

[LT Profits]

isetcap,

When the rule says "unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning", that would mean if it happened in the bottom half of the CURRENT inning, in this specific case, the eighth. Since the bottom of the eighth never happened and the O's never got a chance to tie or take the lead, it goes back to last completed inning.

[Halifax]

the winner is determined by the score at the end of the last full inning unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning

Here is where there is a significant problem. Pinnacle graded the wager using the result after the last full inning which happened to be the 7th inning. Baltimore took the lead in the bottom of the 7th. Everyone assumes this is the way it should be graded but the statement goes on to defeat itself at this point. The 'unless' portion of the statement now takes precedent since it is explicitly accurate in this case. Since the 'unless' segment has now been activated, the statement tells us to apply the following...

in which case the winner is determined by the score at the time the game is called.

The game was called after New York took the lead, therefore the wager should be graded for the Yankees based on the language. Were this to go to a court of law, it would be very hard for Pinnacle to justify its decision to grade this as a Baltimore win based on their very own rule. New York bettors would be awarded the winning grade even though we all know that Baltimore should be the graded winner.

While it would be a bizarre method of grading this game, I do see your point regarding the wording. Looking at it in this light, the wording leaves a lot to be desired.

I was under the impression the complaint was because the wager didn't carry over to the date that the game was completed, in which case the guy doesn't have a leg to stand on.

But in the context that you provided, the wording actually could point to a favourable ruling for the guy (although I think everyone knows that that interpretation wasn't what Pinnacle had in mind).

[Halifax]

isetcap,

When the rule says "unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning", that would mean if it happened in the bottom half of the CURRENT inning, in this specific case, the eighth. Since the bottom of the eighth never happened and the O's never got a chance to tie or take the lead, it goes back to last completed inning.

Well, that's what common sense would have you believe. But if you read the rule strictly as it is written, and ignore the "intent" of the rule, Isetcap does have a point.

[isetcap]

isetcap,

When the rule says "unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the inning", that would mean if it happened in the bottom half of the CURRENT inning, in this specific case, the eighth. Since the bottom of the eighth never happened and the O's never got a chance to tie or take the lead, it goes back to last completed inning.

LT, I understand that perfectly and I certainly am able to grasp the dynamics of why Baltimore was the graded winner. I don't need to read any rules to agree with that. I am only saying that the statement in itself, as it is written, clearly grades New York as the winner. That simply can't be denied in this very specific situation.

[isetcap]

Well, that's what common sense would have you believe. But if you read the rule strictly as it is written, and ignore the "intent" of the rule, Isetcap does have a point.

I appreciate that you kept an open mind in reviewing the logic behind my argument. I also agree with you that common sense and "intent" would grade this as a Baltimore win. Unfortunately, the very reason all these rules are written is so that common sense and intent need not play a role in the grading process. Now Pinnacle wants to apply the unwritten common sense and intent rule, but that simply wouldn't and shouldn't stand up in any court of law.

[Halifax]

Maybe the guy's in a pickle because he scalped Pinnacle against a Euro book that graded it differently, and he's out some cash as a result.

Whatever the case, if Pinnacle does end up grading it a winner, I think his future as a bettor at Pinnacle will be over. Best case scenario for him is that Pinnacle offers him the deal that they often offer players who have a dispute with them: "We will grade your bet a winner, but close your account ... or you can keep your account open and have the bet graded as a loser"

[isetcap]

I agree with Pinnacle...

In any case, this must be a large wager and I guess the player knew the rule...

Usually if it was a small wager, pinnacle would probably just give the player the $25 or $100 or whatever... I've seen them do it before...

Sean

It is only because of the rule that the player has any grounds for argument here. I think that Pinnacle would be happy to grade this player's wager as a winner, but then their policy would be to grade all Yankee action for that day as winning tickets. Having already graded Baltimore the winner, this could be a significant hit for them especially in light of the increased action Yankees bettors often bring. If this were a US-run business, I would be very surprised if a class-action suit were not filed in this type of situation. Another great reason to make sure we don't have some kind of "regulated" gambling.

[LT Profits]

All it takes is the addiiton of one word to the rules:

unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the current inning

Pinnacle, I am waiting on your call from human resouces.

[isetcap]

Maybe the guy's in a pickle because he scalped Pinnacle against a Euro book that graded it differently, and he's out some cash as a result.

Whatever the case, if Pinnacle does end up grading it a winner, I think his future as a bettor at Pinnacle will be over. Best case scenario for him is that Pinnacle offers him the deal that they often offer players who have a dispute with them: "We will grade your bet a winner, but close your account ... or you can keep your account open and have the bet graded as a loser"

Interesting concept. I'd be surprised if there are any books that graded it as a Yankees win but if there was, he'd probably have better luck getting that side reversed by an industry watchdog.

[isetcap]

All it takes is the addiiton of one word to the rules:

unless the home team scores to tie, or takes the lead in the bottom half of the current inning

Pinnacle, I am waiting on your call from human resouces.

I agree completely and I will be happy to provide a reference. I suspect that Pinnacle will make the adjustment without paying for your expertise, though.

[LT Profits]

Some Euro books refunded all wagers on this game, as their policy is that supsended games completed within 72 hours (or is it 48?) will be graded based on the official result upon completion of the resumed game, and those not completed within the timeframe are refunded.

Perhaps our Euro users can verify?

[bigloser]

So the consensus seems to be Pinnacle were wrong.

So will the guy get his money?

[LT Profits]

No, Pinnacle was RIGHT, and they used the industry standard rules of Vegas. The issue is that their wording on their site is ambiguous, but that does not change the fact that they graded the play properly.

[LT Profits]

My post regarding Euro books was to point out those those few have THEIR OWN house rules where suspended games completed within a few days are not graded until final result is known. Pinnacle goes by the industy standard adhered to by 99% of books that rely on North American sports action.