Past post betting /slash angle shooting. Time to form a consensus - Sports Handicapping, Betting & Picks

SBR_John · 12-20-2007, 04:55 PM

A past post bet is one that is made after the event starts.

A lot of Books allow these bets in the opening minutes for several reasons. Main reason is to get all the action they can from the last minute players. Of course all books have rules to protect the book that state bets placed after the start of the contest are void.

By allowing last minute bets and bets into the start of the contest it opens the door for shot takers both player and book.

It also makes dispute resolution on these type of wagers subjective and impossible to fairly decide.

Its time this rule be strictly enforced. It will also open the door for the book to go back and void already graded games if it is found the bets were placed after the start. As what happened in the WW case.

cobra_king · 12-20-2007, 05:01 PM

If a book takes the bet they pay the bet, even if it is past posted, because if they don't want past posted action then take the bloody game off the board.

SBR_John · 12-20-2007, 05:06 PM

What about mistakes like a TV time moves up 10 minutes? Books are not able to operate 100% of the time getting every game off the board correctly.

I hear what you are saying though. It wouldnt be an issue if there were never mistakes.

My question is what happens when a mistake is made? Honor the bet or void it?

HedgeHog · 12-20-2007, 05:11 PM

Depends on the sport. A full game FB bet that is bet a few minutes past is no big deal. Horse racing past posting is a different animal--forgive the pun. For live sports bets, not ones over the internet, it is the Books responsibilty to know the start times of games. If they book it, they're stuck with it. Books like WW need to realize this and take accountability.

Dark Horse · 12-20-2007, 05:13 PM

The book can't have it both ways. If there is a disconnect between theory and reality - i.e. no past posting in the rules, but a past posting policy in reality- , then the book, and only the book is responsible for it. 'Action' speaks louder than words. A bet between book and player is a business contract. As cobra king says, if a book doesn't want players past posting take the game off the board when it starts.

SBR_John · 12-20-2007, 05:16 PM

This is going to be a tough consensus to form.

katstale · 12-20-2007, 05:17 PM

A few minutes, one way or the other is not gonna give either side an edge. The simple answer is this: if you book it, it's valid.

I would also say that any book that wants to be A rated should say they have a 5 minute grace period to allow for mistakes in starting times. If the bet gets down AND ACCEPTED in that five minute window it should stand no matter what. If it gets bet after that 5 minute window--it should be "no actioned" and the player emailed this fact immediately with a full explanation of why the bet was taken in the first place after the start.

Dark Horse · 12-20-2007, 05:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBR_John

What about mistakes like a TV time moves up 10 minutes? Books are not able to operate 100% of the time getting every game off the board correctly.

I hear what you are saying though. It wouldnt be an issue if there were never mistakes.

My question is what happens when a mistake is made? Honor the bet or void it?

If a book has a policy of accepting late bets then the risk of mistakes should have been factored into that overall decision.

If, on the other hand, a book is known to never accept late bets, then the bet is no good if the game started too early.

The book's own policy should be the overriding factor. Not rules that bail it out, unless it follows those rules itself (and I don't mean retroactively).

CrazyLou · 12-20-2007, 05:22 PM

This is really ridiculous and entirely selective on the books part.

We can send people into space. We can design tiny chips to control warheads. We can do all of this crap with computers. I know books can either design better software, or train their phone clerks more efficiently. Right?

The HG · 12-20-2007, 05:26 PM

Without question, the answer is, if a book takes the bet, it has to honor it. Any decent book should have this policy, without question. Now of course, in egregious cases, no the book doesn't have to honor the bet. And yes, "egregious" is still a subjective term. But leaving a game up for too long is not even close to being egregious.

What if, for instance, a book had a software glitch, and a line was left up past the end of the game, and a million people bet their entire bankrolls on the game, and the book had no way of knowing which were legit bets placed before the game? Of course, the book shouldn't honor those bets. What would I do? I would cancel all bets for that game, perhaps except maybe for those under a certain amount, and I would be very very embarrassed and apologetic, and maybe offer some kind of one-time bonus as an apology.

But for the average line being left up too long due to book laziness or error, no question a book should honor it.

The WW case is not a good example of that, because clearly the player was in the wrong and the book was in the right. The player was being dishonest, while the book just wasn't responsible enough to not leave itself open to that kind of dishonesty. In that case, I don't feel one bit bad for the player, and I feel the book is being given a bad rap in that case.

But in general, a book should honor every bet it takes except in egregious cases.

SBR_John · 12-20-2007, 05:27 PM

crazyl it really is harder than you think. On a saturday you got 70 college bb games going off and nba and tons of other stuff. Some gets moved a little for TV with no notice. I can tell you from our own lines project it gets crazy with all the last minute changes on the weekends.

HedgeHog · 12-20-2007, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBR_John

This is going to be a tough consensus to form.

You're looking for an easy answer to a very tough question. Again it comes down to a case by case review. If it's an isolated case, a one-time thing, then look at what the conditions were at the time of the bet--and assume the player knew. If a place like WW keeps taking bets after kickoff, some 60 or 70 times, then rule against them for being stupid. Afterall, this is their business, and if they allow their reps to accept bets 5-10 minutes late repeatedly--it's on them. Afterall, the player (shot taker or not) has funds at risk too.

CrazyLou · 12-20-2007, 05:34 PM

Well under those circumstances I would hope a book is consistent more than anything else. I was speaking more along the lines of the WW case, where there is not a situation with time changes and just inefficiency on the books part. I am sure that kind of stuff happens more than it should.

The HG · 12-20-2007, 05:35 PM

Is it hard to make sure all the games are taken down on time? Maybe so, I have no idea. I bet Ganchrow could design a fairly simple program that would contain multiple checks for it. Even I can imagine a few things you could do, just right off the bat.

But if it is hard, well welcome to the world of having a business. A book should honor any bet it takes except in egregious cases.

cobra_king · 12-20-2007, 05:37 PM

If we are talking about major professional sports like football where start times are the start times and books are staying open to acquire any late action they can get, they should pay every single bet they take. If we are talking about a college game that gets moved up 10-15 mins for TV, that's an entirely different animal. In that case, the bet should be honored unless the book notices the mistake right away and CANCELS the bet right away with email notification. None of this waiting till the result is in, or even waiting until the game is half over. If they want to cancel this type of past post it MUST be done within a reasonable amount of time from when the game started.

HedgeHog · 12-20-2007, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SBR_John

crazyl it really is harder than you think. On a saturday you got 70 college bb games going off and nba and tons of other stuff. Some gets moved a little for TV with no notice. I can tell you from our own lines project it gets crazy with all the last minute changes on the weekends.

Time changes are posted very early in the week. Again, this is the Book's responsibilty to keep track of--and can't today's software tell when a game goes off? I think you have a pre-conceived notion to rule for the Book in this case and want our agreement.

jjgold · 12-20-2007, 05:44 PM

Lots of books lets you bet after the game has started because they are also taking shots at the player. If the game loses they say nothing but if the bet wins they void the bet.

HedgeHog · 12-20-2007, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The HG

Without question, the answer is, if a book takes the bet, it has to honor it. Any decent book should have this policy, without question. Now of course, in egregious cases, no the book doesn't have to honor the bet. And yes, "egregious" is still a subjective term. But leaving a game up for too long is not even close to being egregious.

What if, for instance, a book had a software glitch, and a line was left up past the end of the game, and a million people bet their entire bankrolls on the game, and the book had no way of knowing which were legit bets placed before the game? Of course, the book shouldn't honor those bets. What would I do? I would cancel all bets for that game, perhaps except maybe for those under a certain amount, and I would be very very embarrassed and apologetic, and maybe offer some kind of one-time bonus as an apology.

But for the average line being left up too long due to book laziness or error, no question a book should honor it.

The WW case is not a good example of that, because clearly the player was in the wrong and the book was in the right. The player was being dishonest, while the book just wasn't responsible enough to not leave itself open to that kind of dishonesty. In that case, I don't feel one bit bad for the player, and I feel the book is being given a bad rap in that case.

But in general, a book should honor every bet it takes except in egregious cases.

Bull. WW accepted 60-70 live bets, not internet error. They should live with the results, not change them weeks/months after the fact.