SVB vs Chang Update Thread

[Jaden]

When you relate it to sports the flawed logic is apparent. During a football game, regulation ends in a tie, one team is getting 3 points on the spread....the bet isn't settled until an end result is settled right. The only time the spread of a game matters is when the exact result is reached...which is to say the game is finished being played. I don't know tho

This is why I stated that I thought the only fair thing to do is give the player who had made the spread the option of it being nullified or continued until the match is over. However, Thinking about it now, I would take it one step further. I would say, the person who had bet on Shane in this case should NOT get to win any money but that if Chang does cover the spread, the Shane bettor loses and has to pay. It would've been a different story had they extended the match prior to Chang making the 112th game.

I don't think that the Chang bettor automatically wins because he hit 112.

Jaden

 

[Poolplaya9]

This is why I stated that I thought the only fair thing to do is give the player who had made the spread the option of it being nullified or continued until the match is over. However, Thinking about it now, I would take it one step further. I would say, the person who had bet on Shane in this case should NOT get to win any money but that if Chang does cover the spread, the Shane bettor loses and has to pay. It would've been a different story had they extended the match prior to Chang making the 112th game.

I don't think that the Chang bettor automatically wins because he hit 112.

Jaden

That in effect gives the Chang bettor who got games on the wire two separate chances to win their bet. How can you have two chances to win in one set? Obviously that isn't fair and makes no sense. If Chang covered the bet under the conditions bet on, when it was still a race to 120 and the match length had not yet been changed, then those Chang bettors won. If they had not won by then, then once the match length was extended the bet is off, because the bet was on a match to 120, and a match to 120 no longer exists.

If you are saying that the Chang bettor getting 8.5 games on the wire shouldn't win the bet when Chang got to 112 before the match length was changed, that's ludicrous. The bet, and the spot, was based on a match length of 120 games (if the match was to be to 155, the appropriate spread would have been different). The bet with the 8.5 game spread was won/lost before the match length was changed. Nothing that happens after that matters any more, that bet is already over. No different than if they had not extended the match length and were still playing to 120, and at 119-119, one of them decided to quit and not continue play. Would you also argue that in that case the Chang bettors getting 8.5 on the wire shouldn't win? Of course not, their bet was won as soon as Chang hit 112. Nothing that happens after that matters any more.

 

[Jaden]

That in effect gives the Chang bettor who got games on the wire two separate chances to win their bet. How can you have two chances to win in one set? Obviously that isn't fair and makes no sense. If Chang covered the bet under the conditions bet on, when it was still a race to 120 and the match length had not yet been changed, then those Chang bettors won. If they had not won by then, then once the match length was extended the bet is off, because the bet was on a match to 120, and a match to 120 no longer exists.

No, that's what I'm saying...He DOESN'T get the win by hitting 112. The bet is nullified at 112. He only wins if he covers when they're done. He just doesn't lose if he doesn't cover at the end because he had already covered by getting to 112. That's the only way I see it being fair to both parties. The Shane bettor can't WIN because he didn't cover the original amount prior to the extension of the match, but he CAN lose if Chang covers the spread in the end.

Now, this is only if the cover amount had been made prior to the extension of the match as it was in this case. If they had extended at 109-111 or something prior to hitting the covered amount, then EITHER player should win at the END of the match, not before.

Jaden

 

[Poolplaya9]

No, that's what I'm saying...He DOESN'T get the win by hitting 112. The bet is nullified at 112. He only wins if he covers when they're done. He just doesn't lose if he doesn't cover at the end because he had already covered by getting to 112. That's the only way I see it being fair to both parties. The Shane bettor can't WIN because he didn't cover the original amount prior to the extension of the match, but he CAN lose if Chang covers the spread in the end.

Now, this is only if the cover amount had been made prior to the extension of the match as it was in this case. If they had extended at 109-111 or something prior to hitting the covered amount, then EITHER player should win at the END of the match, not before.

Jaden

I saw where you had edited you post (or I missed the last line in your post) after I put mine up, so I edited my post to address that. See post #630 again.

 

[Jaden]

That in effect gives the Chang bettor who got games on the wire two separate chances to win their bet. How can you have two chances to win in one set? Obviously that isn't fair and makes no sense. If Chang covered the bet under the conditions bet on, when it was still a race to 120 and the match length had not yet been changed, then those Chang bettors won. If they had not won by then, then once the match length was extended the bet is off, because the bet was on a match to 120, and a match to 120 no longer exists.

If you are saying that the Chang bettor getting 8.5 games on the wire shouldn't win the bet when Chang got to 112 before the match length was changed, that's ludicrous. The bet, and the spot, was based on a match length of 120 games (if the match was to be to 155, the appropriate spread would have been different). The bet with the 8.5 game spread was won/lost before the match length was changed. Nothing that happens after that matters any more, that bet is already over. No different than if they had not extended the match length and were still playing to 120, and at 119-119, one of them decided to quit and not continue play. Would you also argue that in that case the Chang bettors getting 8.5 on the wire shouldn't win? Of course not, their bet was won as soon as Chang hit 112. Nothing that happens after that matters any more.

The bet was based on a match. Yes, the match length was originally set at 120. But the bet was Chang +8.5. Not Chang to 112 games... Now if you had said, I'll bet you Chang gets to 112 games, then that's a different story.

It's because of the arbitrary nature of Shane giving up 8.5 games that this becomes a fiasco. Which is why I think what I stated is the only truly fair way to arbitrate it. Now, if both parties agree that it meant Chang getting to 112, then that's it, it's settled, but if they don't then there's a problem and you can't just say right off the bat, NO, the Chang bettor already won, because it isn't that clear cut and dried. I have NO horse in this race. I didn't bet and I wouldn't bet giving up games. I might give or take money odds, which I had already proved taking Jay's 50 to 1 that Trump would win the open, but I don't give or take games so I have no dog in this race.

I'm just describing what I see as an amicable resolution to an impossible to foresee situation.

Jaden

 

[Poolplaya9]

The bet was based on a match. Yes, the match length was originally set at 120. But the bet was Chang +8.5. Not Chang to 112 games... Now if you had said, I'll bet you Chang gets to 112 games, then that's a different story.

You need to think this one out a little more. With the 8.5 game spot the bet WAS for Chang to win at 112, because the bet was specifically placed based on a match length of 120. For your argument to hold water, both bettors would have had to have bet before the match length was known and with the understanding that the but applied regardless of what the match length ended up being, or both bettors would have had to have entered the bet thinking that it was very likely that the match length would change, and that that is how they would bet no matter what the match length was. Do you really think both sides made the bet based on any match length, or do you think they both made the bet based on it specifically being a race to 120?

You and everybody else already knows the answer. The bets were made based on a match length of 120, period. But in case you need some more convincing, do you really think the person getting 8.5 games going to 120 would have also asked for 8.5 games if the match was to 155? Of course not, they would have asked for 10.5 games of thereabouts to account for the longer race. And what if instead of lengthening the race to 155, the players had instead, when the scores were still around 40, had decided to just shorten the race to a race to 80? Do you think the guy who was spotting Chang 8.5 games would still be cool with spotting that much weight when it got changed to race to 80? Of course not, he would be wanting to spot a lesser amount.

The bet was made based on a race to 120. Any bets that were won by the spread being covered before the match was changed are still good, because those bets were done before the match was changed. Anything that happened after their bet was already won and lost does not in any way affect their bet, their bet was already over. But the rest of the bets that were still open, and made based on a race to 120, are now null and void because there is no longer a race to 120.

 

[jasonlaus]

The bet was based on a match. Yes, the match length was originally set at 120. But the bet was Chang +8.5. Not Chang to 112 games... Now if you had said, I'll bet you Chang gets to 112 games, then that's a different story.

It's because of the arbitrary nature of Shane giving up 8.5 games that this becomes a fiasco. Which is why I think what I stated is the only truly fair way to arbitrate it. Now, if both parties agree that it meant Chang getting to 112, then that's it, it's settled, but if they don't then there's a problem and you can't just say right off the bat, NO, the Chang bettor already won, because it isn't that clear cut and dried. I have NO horse in this race. I didn't bet and I wouldn't bet giving up games. I might give or take money odds, which I had already proved taking Jay's 50 to 1 that Trump would win the open, but I don't give or take games so I have no dog in this race.

I'm just describing what I see as an amicable resolution to an impossible to foresee situation.

Jaden

The race was to 120, it doesn't matter if it gets changed to a race to 250, 120 at +8.5 for Chang was the bet PERIOD.

once Chang got to 112 it was over, changing the length to make it longer does not matter, if they shortened the race to 110 or 100 or 80 then it would matter and the bet should be called off.

 

[jasonlaus]

You need to think this one out a little more. With the 8.5 game spot the bet WAS for Chang to win at 112, because the bet was specifically placed based on a match length of 120. For your argument to hold water, both bettors would have had to have entered the bet thinking that it was very likely that the match length would change, and that that is how they would bet no matter what the match length was. Do you really think both sides made the bet based on any match length, or do you think they both made the bet based on it specifically being a race to 120?

You and everybody else already knows the answer. The bets were made based on a match length of 120, period. But in case you need some more convincing, do you really think the person getting 8.5 games going to 120 would have also asked for 8.5 games if the match was to 155? Of course not, they would have asked for 10.5 games of thereabouts to account for the longer race. And what if instead of lengthening the race to 155, the players had instead, when the scores were still around 40, had decided to just shorten the race to a race to 80? Do you think the guy who was spotting Chang 8.5 games would still be cool with spotting that much weight when it got changed to race to 80? Of course not, he would be wanting to spot a lesser amount.

The bet was made based on a race to 120. Any bets that were won by the spread being covered before the match was changed are still good, because those bets were done before the match was changed. Anything that happened after their bet was already won and lost does not in any way affect their bet, their bet was already over. But the rest of the bets that were still open, and made based on a race to 120, are now null and void because there is no longer a race to 120.

Exactly! Guess we were typing at the same time lol

 

[Jaden]

You need to think this one out a little more. With the 8.5 game spot the bet WAS for Chang to win at 112, because the bet was specifically placed based on a match length of 120. For your argument to hold water, both bettors would have had to have entered the bet thinking that it was very likely that the match length would change, and that that is how they would bet no matter what the match length was. Do you really think both sides made the bet based on any match length, or do you think they both made the bet based on it specifically being a race to 120?

You and everybody else already knows the answer. The bets were made based on a match length of 120, period. But in case you need some more convincing, do you really think the person getting 8.5 games going to 120 would have also asked for 8.5 games if the match was to 155? Of course not, they would have asked for 10.5 games of thereabouts to account for the longer race. And what if instead of lengthening the race to 155, the players had instead, when the scores were still around 40, had decided to just shorten the race to a race to 80? Do you think the guy who was spotting Chang 8.5 games would still be cool with spotting that much weight when it got changed to race to 80? Of course not, he would be wanting to spot a lesser amount.

The bet was made based on a race to 120. Any bets that were won by the spread being covered before the match was changed are still good, because those bets were done before the match was changed. Anything that happened after their bet was already won and lost does not in any way affect their bet, their bet was already over. But the rest of the bets that were still open, and made based on a race to 120, are now null and void because there is no longer a race to 120.

You prove my point.... If the game was changed to a race to 80 at 60 games, would you expect original bets to still be valid??? NO!!! because the reasoning behind the bets are no longer valid. Any change in the game should result in the nullification of ANY BETS....

Jaden

 

[Jaden]

Let me ask you guys a question because I've already stated I had no horse in this race. Did you have any bets on this match????Let's find out if you're as unbiased in this as me...

Jaden

 

[fishless]

You prove my point.... If the game was changed to a race to 80 at 60 games, would you expect original bets to still be valid??? NO!!! because the reasoning behind the bets are no longer valid. Any change in the game should result in the nullification of ANY BETS....

Jaden

What happens if the original bet had already been won?

 

[Poolplaya9]

You prove my point.... If the game was changed to a race to 80 at 60 games, would you expect original bets to still be valid??? NO!!! because the reasoning behind the bets are no longer valid. Any change in the game should result in the nullification of ANY BETS....

Jaden

Like I said, you really just need to stop posting for a few and actually stop and think this one out, it is actually pretty obvious if you just stop for a minute and think it out real carefully.

I agree, that if the game had been changed to race to 80. all bets on who would win the set involving game spots of 40 games or less would be null and void because all those bets were still open and not yet won. But had somebody been getting say 61 games on the wire on Chang, then as soon as Chang hit 59 that bet is done, over, and what happens after that no longer matters and if they were to as in your example decide at 60 games to change the race to a race to 80, it doesn't in any way affect the bet that is already over and done with and settled after Chang hit 59.

One of several points you are missing here is that bets that were already over are already over and you don't get to undo them based on some future change that doesn't even affect them in any way. What gets undone when there is a match change are the bets that are still open, not the bets that are already closed. If this still doesn't make sense, lets take it to the extreme. What if people bet on who would win just the very first game of the match, the first person to get on the scoreboard. By your argument that bet on who won the first game needs to be cancelled since they ended up changing something about the match later on and that has nothing to do with that bet that was long over. Yup, it is as silly as it sounds. Bets that were over are over, and changes to the match made after that and that have no affect on those bets don't change a thing and somehow magically undo those bets that it didn't affect in any way. On the other hand, bets that are still open and un-won when the match length is changed, those are the ones that get cancelled because what was bet on, a race to 120, no longer exists at that point.

For the record I had no bets on this match, and don't know anybody who did. I have no bias in the matter, just using common sense and logic for a problem that is actually pretty easy if you just give it a little thought.

 

[CaleAYS]

I had a bet Shane winning. I didn’t have to give up games and once they extended we discussed if we are keeping the bet for first to 120 or going with the match. We both didn’t care and just went all the way. If I gave up the 8.5, I would have paid once Chang hit 112. The bet was 8.5 going to 120. It does not matter if the race was extended. The stipulations of the bet doesn’t change no matter how long they played. If they extended the race before Chang hit 112, then it could give options to the parties involved to work out a line or keep the bet in place, although imo there would be no obligation to people involved to alter the bet because they extended the race. The original bet, -8.5 to 120, is the bet no matter how long they play.

 

[Jaden]

What happens if the original bet had already been won?

If you already paid, then you're done, it means you agreed to the opponent winning. A bet can't be won until the match is over if the other party doesn't agree. What if Chang fell over dead of a massive coronary and they couldn't finish the match, what then? The match doesn't finish, it's no bet. Unless you agree.

It's just best to hash out all the details of a bet prior and now people know what to make sure they cover at the beginning.

Jaden

 

[Poolplaya9]

If you already paid, then you're done, it means you agreed to the opponent winning. A bet can't be won until the match is over if the other party doesn't agree. What if Chang fell over dead of a massive coronary and they couldn't finish the match, what then? The match doesn't finish, it's no bet. Unless you agree.

It's just best to hash out all the details of a bet prior and now people know what to make sure they cover at the beginning.

Jaden

You keep trying to think of it as if the bet was based on any match length. It wasn't, and you have to get that false premise out of your head because as long as you always keep starting with a false premise, you will always keep arriving at a false conclusion. The bet was based on a match length of 120, not an unknown match length, and not a whatever the match length ends up being, but a match length of 120.

So for those the gave Change +8.5 games, the bet very specifically was on whether "Chang gets to 112 before Shane gets to 120". The bet was not "Chang gets 8.5 games no matter the match length". The bet was "Chang gets 8.5 games in a race to 120 games", which is also known as "if Chang gets to 112 before Shane gets to 120 then Chang wins, and if Shane gets to 120 before Chang gets to 112 then Shane wins".

The only question, and I mean the only question, is did Chang get to 112 games or not before Shane got to 120 games, and before the match was altered. He did. That bet is over. Done. Settled. Chang beat the spread. Whether the guy you are betting with wants to pay or not doesn't change that the bet is over, done, settled, and needs to be paid up.

Any changes the players made to forfeit this set, extend this set, or the like AFTER this bet was already done, won, and over, have nothing to do with this bet, and do not in any way affect this bet. Just like if two people had bet on who would win the first game of the set and get on the scoreboard first, whatever happens in the set after doesn't that doesn't in any way affect the bet that was already won and over.

 

[mikeyfrost]

You keep trying to think of it as if the bet was based on any match length. It wasn't, and you have to get that false premise out of your head because as long as you always keep starting with a false premise, you will always keep arriving at a false conclusion. The bet was based on a match length of 120, not an unknown match length, and not a whatever the match length ends up being, but a match length of 120.

So for those the gave Change +8.5 games, the bet very specifically was on whether "Chang gets to 112 before Shane gets to 120". The bet was not "Chang gets 8.5 games no matter the match length". The bet was "Chang gets 8.5 games in a race to 120 games", which is also known as "if Chang gets to 112 before Shane gets to 120 then Chang wins, and if Shane gets to 120 before Chang gets to 112 then Shane wins".

The only question, and I mean the only question, is did Chang get to 112 games or not before Shane got to 120 games, and before the match was altered. He did. That bet is over. Done. Settled. Chang beat the spread. Whether the guy you are betting with wants to pay or not doesn't change that the bet is over, done, settled, and needs to be paid up.

Any changes the players made to forfeit this set, extend this set, or the like AFTER this bet was already done, won, and over, have nothing to do with this bet, and do not in any way affect this bet. Just like if two people had bet on who would win the first game of the set and get on the scoreboard first, whatever happens in the set after doesn't that doesn't in any way affect the bet that was already won and over.

He did a lot of things...beating the spread wasn't one of them though. That's just a lie. He was tied at the end of day 3...whatever you roll that up into is on you. Let's not say stuff that sounds good.

Games get changed on the fly all the time. You gotta communicate when change happens.

 

[Poolplaya9]

He did a lot of things...beating the spread wasn't one of them though. That's just a lie. He was tied at the end of day 3...whatever you roll that up into is on you. Let's not say stuff that sounds good.

Games get changed on the fly all the time. You gotta communicate when change happens.

He got to 112 before Shane got to 120, and before anything about the match was changed. That is what the Change gets 8.5 going to 120 bet was on, and the bet is over, Chang won that bet.

Matches do sometimes get changed, and when they do, all open bets that were based on a certain match length get cancelled, because that match no longer exists. Now if you get together with the other guy and decide to continue the bet for the new match changes, or if was stated in advance that the bet continues even if this that or the other conditions of the match get changed, then of course that is what happens, but if nothing like that is specified in advance, then obviously an open bet based on a race to 120 can no longer exist if a race to 120 no longer exists.

 

[penguin]

A wise man once said...

 

[iusedtoberich]

He got to 112 before Shane got to 120, and before anything about the match was changed. That is what the bet was on, and the bet is over, Chang won it.

Matches do sometimes get changed, and when they do, all open bets that were based on a certain match length get cancelled, because that match no longer exists. Now if you get together with the other guy and decide to continue the bet, or if was stated in advance that the bet continues even if this that or the other conditions of the match get changed, then of course that is what happens, but if nothing like that is specified in advance, then obviously an open bet based on a race to 120 can no longer exist if a race to 120 no longer exists.

Do we know for sure they changed the bet after the 112 was hit? What if they decided when it was 105-108 (I'm making up the score), that if it ties in the next 30 minutes, lets postpone? In that scenario, the decision to change the race would have been made before the 112 was hit, but it took until 115 all to take effect.

 

[Poolplaya9]

Do we know for sure they changed the bet after the 112 was hit? What if they decided when it was 105-108 (I'm making up the score), that if it ties in the next 30 minutes, lets postpone? In that scenario, the decision to change the race would have been made before the 112 was hit, but it took until 115 all to take effect.

As said before, I totally agree that if that decision to extend the race was made before Chang hit 112, then that bet is cancelled. All accounts are that the decision to extend the race happened at 115-115, after Change already won all the bets where he was getting 5 or more on the wire and those bets were long won (or lost depending on which side you were on) and done.