Ian Gascoigne



Nick Hicks

The father's got his game face on. Should imagine he'll bust in time for this evening's sat. Good luck fatman.

[This morning I was trying to punt Saint Luke]

This morning I was trying to punt Saint Luke in the 3m Hcap Hrd at Uttoxeter.

3 of the first prices up were B365, Boyles & WH. Across the 3 bookmakers the total I could get on was c£3.85 ew.

And yet they still e-mail me all three of them....shouldn't be allowed imo.

Shrewd man.

Largely irrelevant if you can't get a bet on mind....

I'm genuinely not a big punter, and I can't get on. I can only imagine for someone like yourself the principal headache comes not in picking winners, but in getting on.

This morning I was trying to punt Saint Luke in the 3m Hcap Hrd at Uttoxeter.

3 of the first prices up were B365, Boyles & WH. Across the 3 bookmakers the total I could get on was c£3.85 ew.

And yet they still e-mail me all three of them....shouldn't be allowed imo.

VBOL to all Blondes playing, and to Tighty also for what I can only assume is a fairly monumental task.

'[ ] Sure did' means he did mate

Ah. Like a double negative?

Thanks all. As it was, I think the 'meeting a client' line may have been a bit of gamesmanship, and a means to him getting out whilst underweight.

[ ] He sure did go out last night.

We both weighed in this morning, me at 13st 2.5lbs for a 1st 3lbs loss (now a rather healthy weight for someone 6'3") and him at 11st 11.5lbs for a 1st 1.5lb loss (more healthy for someone 5'7" tall).

Mission accomplished, and both of us rather healthier than we were

Virg-In.

Didn't mean to suggest 250 should be the buy out. That's just the wind up. I'd probably accept a pint.

Struck a similarly ridiculous bet for a grand with my flatmate who had just played his first ever round of golf. Granted he's a natural sportsman, but he was willing to bet at even money that he'd break 85 round the same course a year to the day later. Mental. Natural sportsman? Yes. Sufficiently committed to improve that much at golf over a year? No.

I let him off 6mths in for a pint and an admission he had been rather overly self-confident when p1ssed.

The Barney Curley autobiography is a good read I'm told - trainer, punter, organiser of massive coups and most perplexingly a confirmed large-scale philanthropist.

Oh just the fact it's a day early? just make him sweat. Tell him he can buy out for £250, get him to buy you lunch etc etc

Yep, he's just hit the weight a day early. And only by half a pound. And only by crash-dieting (thoroughly against the spirit of the bet if not outside of the terms).

I have offered him the option of discussing a buy-out once a week for the last couple of weeks. He has always told me to fk off.

I'm going to make him squirm, try to find out a bit more about what he's doing this evening, and then make a decision. 1/8 I let him off 5/1 I make him pay.

[If it was made 100% clear that the terms of the bet involved a weekly weigh in at a set time/date and someone didn't adhere to these then the person should have to pay up imo]

If it was made 100% clear that the terms of the bet involved a weekly weigh in at a set time/date and someone didn't adhere to these then the person should have to pay up imo.

Although in the past when stuff similiar to this has happened to me we usually end up just calling it quits as its not worth the hastle or the falling out really over a small amount of money. Just look to the positives that you are both a bit healthier and can smash the Xmas mince pies and bucks fizz!

Weekly weigh-ins were never part of the terms. Only things that matter for the bet are the weigh-in and the weigh-out. The weekly weigh-ins became standard through pressure from him when he was losing weight consistently and looking to press the psychological advantage/keep momentum. The minute he 'cracked' he point-blank refused to weigh-in.

I agreed to let him off if he answered the following question...

"If I had refused to weigh-in for two and a half weeks, informed you I'd been starving myself and running til 2am the last three days, then weighed in half a pound under and wanted to get sh1tfaced this evening, would you let me off the bet?"

When he just started shouting over me/being objectionable, and didn't answer the question, I decided to make him squirm for a bit longer.

As per the title, I'm facing a dilemma in a weight-loss bet with a friend/colleague...

Around 6-7 weeks ago we made a bet on the following terms: "Each of us must weigh in. Weights are recorded, and we each must lose a stone Vs this figure in a weigh-in on the morning of Friday 16th December. If one loses a stone and the other doesn't, he who hasn't lost the weight must pay the other £500. If both (or neither) lose a stone then the bet is void".

Now then...we had been weighing in each Monday, and it became the 'done thing'. Two and a half weeks ago my mate refused to weigh in, and had done so until this morning.

I have lost 1st 2lbs and been 'underweight' for c10 days. He came in this morning, 'jumped' on the scales, and weighed in 1st 1/2lb 'underweight'. He stated he had not been getting on the scales as he had a couple of messy evenings and put a bit of weight back on. He also says he has been killing the running til 2am for the last few days to make the weight.

He wants to call the bet quits now, as we have each made the weight, as he is entertaining a (mutual) client this evening and wants to be on top form.

Do I.....

a) Call the bet quits
b) Insist on the original terms and weigh in tomorrow?

He can easily afford the £500, and regularly bets larger sums than this. If I hold him to the terms he will play a huge guilt trip about how I'm preventing him from doing us mutual benefit by acquiring client etc. etc.....though tbh I feel it's just him trying to get out whilst he happens to be underweight.

Our move?

[an incompetent ticket inspector]

Ticket or otherwise the behaviour of 'big man' is absolutely heinous.

We all want to get to where we are going on time when we travel, but any logical soul accepts the (admittedly frustrating) possibility of delays.

Here these delays are exacerbated by an incompetent ticket inspector, which some giant daft twot uses as an excuse to take out some pent up aggression under the guise of 'the public interest'.

He will get a fcuking in the courts for what effectively amounted to ABH, and rightly so.

To be fair I should add "and an objectionable youth"

Ticket or otherwise the behaviour of 'big man' is absolutely heinous.

We all want to get to where we are going on time when we travel, but any logical soul accepts the (admittedly frustrating) possibility of delays.

Here these delays are exacerbated by an incompetent ticket inspector, which some giant daft twot uses as an excuse to take out some pent up aggression under the guise of 'the public interest'.

He will get a fcuking in the courts for what effectively amounted to ABH, and rightly so.

A full team of Rooneys would, imho of course, finish top half.

I believe they would be top of the "Goals Scored" column, and bottom of the "Goals Conceded" Column.