Title: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: SuuPRlim on October 26, 2010, 10:54:42 AM So last night at dinner we got into an minor argument over a side bet.
3 of us were waiting for someone else to join and someone said, "How long before Joe mentions he's slept with that waitress" I decided to set a line on 16minutes and both of them had a cheeky punt on the OVEr. The 16minutes elapse and he hasn't mentioned it, they both claim to have won? My understanding of bets like this, on events that aren't gurenteed to happen is that Im betting IT WILL HAPPEN WITH 16 MINUTES, and they ARE BETTING IT WILL HAPPEN AFTER 16 MINUTES. My Side surely cant be that a) It will happen, and b) It will happen within X timframe because it that case the value in these cases is always with the OVER, because the event is more than even money to actually happen, so whoever takes the under gets ridiculously freerolled. If I was betting that he'll mention it in the first 16 minutes and they are betting he wont mention it in 16 minutes then thats a different story ofc. An example was brought up of a bet on a football game but you bet on +/- 2.5 goals, but as the game is guaenteed o finish either +/-2.5 goals surely that is a different scenario. ***N>B*** He did mention it within the meal so I lost the bet, just wondering what people think the ruling is? Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: Eso Kral on October 26, 2010, 11:02:21 AM If he mentioned he slept with the waitress before you left the premises (this being the close of the bet ie overs) then they win the side bet, if its mentioned after thats just after timing and you win!!
As played they defo win Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: StuartHopkin on October 26, 2010, 11:06:02 AM Remember (<16mins)<(eternity-16mins) its a handy little equation
Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: gatso on October 26, 2010, 11:08:09 AM need clarification. did they claim the win on 16 minutes in front of him? if so I'd say you get the win as they're influencing the bet
otherwise bet stays open indefinitely as you didn't set an end time. if he ever mentions it then they win Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: EvilPie on October 26, 2010, 11:11:16 AM If you regularly have little bets with mates and like a bit of banter you should be looking for any angle possible to grim him and get out of this.
If you don't do it often just paaaiiiiiii him once the 16 minutes is up. If it's a biggish bet and you're taking it in any way seriously set the rules out first. As for your argument about always taking the over because the guy who takes the under gets freerolled. Surely that depends where you set the line?? Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: titaniumbean on October 26, 2010, 06:19:57 PM pics of waitress or gtfo out ickle dave!!!
Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: SuuPRlim on October 26, 2010, 06:49:13 PM If you regularly have little bets with mates and like a bit of banter you should be looking for any angle possible to grim him and get out of this. If you don't do it often just paaaiiiiiii him once the 16 minutes is up. If it's a biggish bet and you're taking it in any way seriously set the rules out first. As for your argument about always taking the over because the guy who takes the under gets freerolled. Surely that depends where you set the line?? It wasnt a tiny bet, but small in comparison to the bets me have made between us. No I obv lost this bet, cos he mentioned the waitress during the meal, But surely I do not loose the bet after 16 minutes? otherwise im just massivley freerolled? Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: doubleup on October 26, 2010, 07:11:29 PM But surely I do not loose the bet after 16 minutes? otherwise im just massivley freerolled? otherwise bet stays open indefinitely as you didn't set an end time. if he ever mentions it then they win Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: SuuPRlim on October 26, 2010, 09:47:39 PM I think in future Il specify that its within a time period, I just assumed this much obvious.
Obv would be angling but as he mentioned it anyway Im just gonna have to pay. :)up TY for feedback Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: doubleup on October 26, 2010, 10:14:08 PM I think in future Il specify that its within a time period, I just assumed this much obvious. you dont need to specify a time period, you just need the probability of the specified event occuring in the specified time period to be greater than .5. Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: titaniumbean on October 26, 2010, 10:17:12 PM pics of waitress or gtfo out ickle dave!!! ahem Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: SuuPRlim on October 27, 2010, 05:18:23 AM she is OLD and FRENCH
no brags here. Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: titaniumbean on October 27, 2010, 05:25:07 AM Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: DMorgan on October 27, 2010, 05:26:02 AM This is why over/unders are usually done with things that are certain to actually happen
Seems like it would have been better to bet on whether or not he'd mention it and I'd probably take the side that he wouldn't depending on your definition of 'old' Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: SuuPRlim on October 27, 2010, 08:37:41 AM Oh, he was pretty certain to mention it lol - we're not dealing with a regular person here lolol
yh. I just assumed that the bet was HE WILL MENTION IT IN THE FIRST 16MINS OF THE MEAL ... OR ... HE'LL MENTION IT IN THE REST OF THE MEAL - because imo no other bet is remotely fair at even money. Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: pleno1 on October 27, 2010, 09:07:17 AM pics of frenchies hairy armpits or gtfooooo
Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: gatso on October 27, 2010, 11:22:54 AM it's sickening the way you were done over by your mates
reminds me of the time sledge got screwed for his net worth betting on atp tennis. that was a sad day, this is too Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: Boba Fett on October 27, 2010, 02:48:56 PM I agree actually, I think if you leave the building and it hasnt been mentioned its a push.......although this should probs be worked out beforehand.
Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: doubleup on October 27, 2010, 04:47:29 PM I agree actually, I think if you leave the building and it hasnt been mentioned its a push.......although this should probs be worked out beforehand. but this will involve 2 exponentially distributed probability calculations rather than one and also a probability calculation as to the likely duration of the meal and its very easy to get that lot wrong when you're a bit pished. Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: Boba Fett on October 27, 2010, 10:05:51 PM I agree actually, I think if you leave the building and it hasnt been mentioned its a push.......although this should probs be worked out beforehand. but this will involve 2 exponentially distributed probability calculations rather than one and also a probability calculation as to the likely duration of the meal and its very easy to get that lot wrong when you're a bit pished. Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: SuuPRlim on October 28, 2010, 02:25:58 AM it's sickening the way you were done over by your mates reminds me of the time sledge got screwed for his net worth betting on atp tennis. that was a sad day, this is too :( I agree actually, I think if you leave the building and it hasnt been mentioned its a push.......although this should probs be worked out beforehand. The best quote of the thread, mainly because it's the only one that fully agrees with me. but this will involve 2 exponentially distributed probability calculations rather than one and also a probability calculation as to the likely duration of the meal and its very easy to get that lot wrong when you're a bit pished. sigh, gonna have to take my expotential calculator to diner now Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: mondatoo on October 28, 2010, 08:09:47 PM Pretty com when me and Amatay had a bet with Cos at the cricket which I think may've been time related,Anyway we won and started celebrating as you do and Cos was like "WTF ,I won why you celebrating" Me and Amatay looked at each other confused,Cos sure hadn't been railing the wrong side of the bet,ROFL.
Title: Re: Side Bet Ruling Needed Post by: SuuPRlim on October 29, 2010, 03:08:25 AM Pretty com when me and Amatay had a bet with Cos at the cricket which I think may've been time related,Anyway we won and started celebrating as you do and Cos was like "WTF ,I won why you celebrating" Me and Amatay looked at each other confused,Cos sure hadn't been railing the wrong side of the bet,ROFL. like |