Ronnie Wiseman stiff's me for $3900

Now the rape comment and burglary comment is so far outside of what this is I had to say something and I usually dont get involved in these discussions.

In gambling the game is agreed upon by both parties. You either play or you dont based on the terms set up. Rape has no agreement nor does burglary and isnt even close to the same thing and is insulting to even insinuate that its the same.

The guy got stuck by whomever, maybe you will never know for certain but its between the players. They should have posted. They shouldve had the coin bet paid after so many moves etc and this never wouldve happened. Whos fault is it? The betters!! Yes, he got stiffed and its wrong but you know what? The only way to get stiffed is to get into a bet without posting and thats bad gambling period!!

If ronnie owes Im sure he'll pay up because from what I know, he always has.
There are obviously a lot of sides to this story and I'm not one for getting involved in someone elses business because its their business not mine and I dont want to judge anyone especially based on he said she said and I had no involvement.

We all do things that others may not agree with, its human nature to be different in our views. If we pay this close attention to our own issues and problems the world would be a better place for sure.

Let the boys work it out but lets not get ridiculous and start comparing rape victims to people that had a choice to post and chose not to! Thats on them!
Snap back if you wish but I'm not getting any further involved in this thread. I was really put off by the rape comment............unreal!

And Jam............you did nothing wrong. A good friend did what was asked of her, there is no harm in that.
 
miplayerstour said:
I was really put off by the rape comment............unreal!

Isn't it amazing how some people's IQ SHINES on through for everyone to see?!
Funny thing is that they actually think they are smart.
 
You Are What You Eat.......I Guess I'm Someone's EAR

It's been my experience in the past, while gambling at pool (and other things) that your opponent(s) size up the player, as well as their 'game'.

Gamblers will get away with what they think they can get away with. I'm covered in scars and mended broken bones by players that underestimated my conviction upon getting paid what I was due.

When you gamble, you takes your chances, sometimes on the score, sometime on the payoff and sometime with your life.

There are other (and easier) ways to make a living.

Doug
( would you like a beer with that eyeball ?) :)
 
Sounds like the 3 peeps involved need to get together and figure out who owes who.Obviously there was some missunderstanding.there may have also been dishonesty but we do not know that.

I am sure the debt will be made good
 
ShawnD said:
RACE2-9

Yes, there was some side action with Scott but he quit when Ronnie got down ten games. He gave the money to Ronnie. There were 6 witnesses. Ronnie then said he would stand good for the bet. We continued to play until he was 17 game loser. I told ronnie to square the penny off or i dont want to continue. He replied that no way would he lower the bet and that i would be in the wrong if i quit him while he was down. I was betting $500 a game with $200 a game on the penny. I got aired the 17 games on the penny and $500 for the last game.

Does this make sense to anyone? Scott was 10 games down at $200 a game on the side bet. He decides to pull up and gives the $2000 to Ronnie (????) instead of paying off Shawn.

If Scott paid off the $2000 he owed why would he give it to the player he didn't owe it to. I am sure the 6 witnesses would be pretty confused with this payoff also.

Am I missing something in this scenario?

Wayne
 
I think I am missing something here, why did you ask JAM if she knew me? (I think you meant me, even though you spelled it wrong ;))
 
Was I Clear ? .........CRYSTAL !

wayne said:
Does this make sense to anyone? Scott was 10 games down at $200 a game on the side bet. He decides to pull up and gives the $2000 to Ronnie (????) instead of paying off Shawn.

If Scott paid off the $2000 he owed why would he give it to the player he didn't owe it to. I am sure the 6 witnesses would be pretty confused with this payoff also.

Am I missing something in this scenario?

Wayne


Well, I'll take a crack at it.
If Ronnie is down 10 games at $500 each (his bet) and he's been paying off, he's stuck $5,000.
If Scott is down 10 games at $200 each and pulls up and gives Ronnie the $2,000, then Ronnie is still stuck $5,000... but now he has $2,000 more money in his pocket. That's four more games that he can pay off on his $500 bets. They let the coin continue to move at $200 per game, so Ronnie is taking at whack at getting even at $700 per game (although noone is standing good for the $200 per penny moved each game on Ronnie's side of the bet)

When the game ends, there's no money to pay off the $200 side bets, because Ronnie was using the money that Scott gave him to keep playing the $500 per game bet between ShawnD. vs Ronnie.

ShawnD. got air barreled for the finall $500 bet with Ronnie and ALL 17 side bet games being scored by moving the penny for an addional $3,400.......or $3,900 TOTAL

Doug
(how'd I do ?)
 
I'm confused exactly how many sides a story have? I've heard anywhere from 3 to 7 ....
 
You've done a great job today in math, Smorgie!

large_gold_star.png
 
Smorgass Bored said:
Well, I'll take a crack at it.
If Ronnie is down 10 games at $500 each (his bet) and he's been paying off, he's stuck $5,000.
If Scott is down 10 games at $200 each and pulls up and gives Ronnie the $2,000, then Ronnie is still stuck $5,000... but now he has $2,000 more money in his pocket. That's four more games that he can pay off on his $500 bets. They let the coin continue to move at $200 per game, so Ronnie is taking at whack at getting even at $700 per game (although noone is standing good for the $200 per penny moved each game on Ronnie's side of the bet)

When the game ends, there's no money to pay off the $200 side bets, because Ronnie was using the money that Scott gave him to keep playing the $500 per game bet between ShawnD. vs Ronnie.

ShawnD. got air barreled for the finall $500 bet with Ronnie and ALL 17 side bet games being scored by moving the penny for an addional $3,400.......or $3,900 TOTAL

Doug
(how'd I do ?)


I think you explained it perfect - and if it's like that, Ronnie owe 3900
 
miplayerstour said:
<snips>In gambling the game is agreed upon by both parties. You either play or you dont based on the terms set up. Rape has no agreement nor does burglary and isnt even close to the same thing and is insulting to even insinuate that its the same.
Theft has no agreement either. Just because they are gambling, does not make it ok for one of them to steal. It's like the girl that agreed to go on a date with the guy where the assault occured. Having an agreement to do one thing, doesn't make something else ok.

miplayerstour said:
The only way to get stiffed is to get into a bet without posting and thats bad gambling period!!
The only way for the girl to get raped is to not carry a gun. The only way to get burglarized is to not have armed guards at your house 24/7. Do you realize how ludicrous your victim blaming sounds? Protecting yourself is smart, but it doesn't make you at fault for their actions if you didn't protect yourself enough to prevent it.

miplayerstour said:
If ronnie owes Im sure he'll pay up because from what I know, he always has.
The agreement was not that he pay up when he can, it was that he pay up at the end of play. You happen to be selling anything? If you are go ahead and ship it to me and the money is on the way. When you end up wondering why the money never came and are still waiting around for it I'm sure you will be just fine with that, as long as you think I might pay you some day, right?

miplayerstour said:
Let the boys work it out but lets not get ridiculous and start comparing rape victims to people that had a choice to post and chose not to! Thats on them!
What you are saying is just as rediculous as saying the girl had a choice to carry a gun but chose not to. Sure, it's smart to take precautions to protect yourself, but real blame always lies with the perpetrator, not the victim.

miplayerstour said:
I was really put off by the rape comment............unreal!
And I was really put off by the putting all the blame on the victim comments............unreal!
 
Smorgass Bored said:
Well, I'll take a crack at it.
If Ronnie is down 10 games at $500 each (his bet) and he's been paying off, he's stuck $5,000.
If Scott is down 10 games at $200 each and pulls up and gives Ronnie the $2,000, then Ronnie is still stuck $5,000... but now he has $2,000 more money in his pocket. That's four more games that he can pay off on his $500 bets. They let the coin continue to move at $200 per game, so Ronnie is taking at whack at getting even at $700 per game (although noone is standing good for the $200 per penny moved each game on Ronnie's side of the bet)

When the game ends, there's no money to pay off the $200 side bets, because Ronnie was using the money that Scott gave him to keep playing the $500 per game bet between ShawnD. vs Ronnie.

ShawnD. got air barreled for the finall $500 bet with Ronnie and ALL 17 side bet games being scored by moving the penny for an addional $3,400.......or $3,900 TOTAL

Doug
(how'd I do ?)
And Scott said he was done, gave Ronnie the money. Ronnie thought it was more stake for him, so he kept playing. Sounds like a big mis-communication error on a few peoples part. This would be an interesting one to try and resolve!
 
I Also Think It Will Come To An Agreeable Outcome......EVENTUALLY

Neil said:
And Scott said he was done, gave Ronnie the money. Ronnie thought it was more stake for him, so he kept playing. Sounds like a big mis-communication error on a few peoples part. This would be an interesting one to try and resolve!


I don't think Ronnie 'thought' it was more stake for him, I think Ronnie USED IT as more stake for him. I think Ronnie is an old time seasoned gambler and knew EXACTLY what he was doing and that HE was/is responsible for the entire $3,900.

Doug


Edited to add: I think that's why Ronnie said that he didn't want to 'lower the bet' to Shawn. Ronnie was stuck 10 games at $500 and he would need to win 10 games to get 'even'. If he could keep the bet (including moving the penny) the same, he was only down SEVEN games..... Get It ?


.
( I'm seldom wrong about these things)
 
Last edited:
Rubyron said:
A few more. :)

If you're too good a shooter, I'll leave on a scooter.

If I "air" you don't fuss or I'll leave on a bus.

If you win the bet, I'll be on the next jet.

If I'm down when we're through, will you take I.O.U.?
Lol! on the next jet.
 
Back
Top