• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

Board Bets

After unsuccessfully trying to resolve the bet situation with ME I've decided to apply the following.

If he wins both definitions, I pay.

If I win both definitions, he pays.

If we each win one, it's a push.

As the stats are currently a win and a tie in his favour, I feel this is the fairest way to resolve the situation.
 
That's fair.

I have no doubt that Mindz is trying to apply the GF to the letter of the law and is purposely ignoring the true intended nature of the bet.

This board has long held nothing but contempt for the "goal" that comes from a SO win.
 
SENSible said:
After unsuccessfully trying to resolve the bet situation with ME I've decided to apply the following.

If he wins both definitions, I pay.

If I win both definitions, he pays.

If we each win one, it's a push.

As the stats are currently a win and a tie in his favour, I feel this is the fairest way to resolve the situation.
Click to expand...

#Leafnation
 
corksens said:
That's fair.

I have no doubt that Mindz is trying to apply the GF to the letter of the law and is purposely ignoring the true intended nature of the bet.

This board has long held nothing but contempt for the "goal" that comes from a SO win.
Click to expand...

He set the terms of the bet. I accepted them. Simple as that.

A bet is a bet, the board didn't reinvent the rules of gambling. Go to Vegas with that mindset and see how it works out for you.
 
MindzEye said:
He set the terms of the bet. I accepted them. Simple as that.

A bet is a bet, the board didn't reinvent the rules of gambling. Go to Vegas with that mindset and see how it works out for you.
Click to expand...
Meh. You're playing the "technically" card. It's beneath you.
 
SENSible said:
After unsuccessfully trying to resolve the bet situation with ME I've decided to apply the following.

If he wins both definitions, I pay.

If I win both definitions, he pays.

If we each win one, it's a push.

As the stats are currently a win and a tie in his favour, I feel this is the fairest way to resolve the situation.
Click to expand...

You and I agreed to a bet. Minutes prior to the bet offer, you noted that the Leafs and Sens were tied in goal differential in 12-13. The only place where this is true is in the NHL's official tracking of goal differential. You then went on to offer a bet based upon goal differential. I accepted the bet on the implied terms.

You have a choice. Honour the original terms of the bet, or be Leafnation if you lose. If I lose according to the original terms of the bet, I will promptly make payment to the account of your choosing.

It's really that simple.
 
We've never used SO goals for in the past...and we shouldn't now no matter what was loosely discussed at the time of the bet.

The terms should have been made more clear and agreed upon by both parties.

It's a push in my mind.
 
I can only speak for myself, but regardless of my personal distaste for the integrity of the shootout, I've always used NHL.com's official goal-differential metrics. And those happen to include shootout goals.
 
corksens said:
Meh. You're playing the "technically" card. It's beneath you.
Click to expand...

A bet is a bet. Betting is a precise endeavour with defined rules. You don't get your money back from the house because in the nature of the bet, Aaron Rodgers was supposed to be healthy all year and that's why Green Bay didn't win the superbowl.

It's ****ing asinine. If anyone is playing the "technically" card it's you clowns. Well "technically" he didn't define goal differential in the bet (though...he did), so M.e is being an *******.

He made a bet, I took the bet as it was offered. He has a choice, honour the bet as it was offered (which was clearly with the NHL's official goal differential in mind) and not change the bet half way through the season now that he's losing, or when the final tally comes about and if he loses and doesn't pay, be Leafnation.

Try this shit with a bookie, or in Vegas, or with anyone you would gamble with, ever...tell me how it works out for you.
 
JaysCyYoung said:
I can only speak for myself, but regardless of my personal distaste for the integrity of the shootout, I've always used NHL.com's official goal-differential metrics. And those happen to include shootout goals.
Click to expand...
You would be speaking for yourself.

I remember PTBNL and zeke both using ESPN in the past because they don't include the SO goal.
 
MindzEye said:
You and I agreed to a bet. Minutes prior to the bet offer, you noted that the Leafs and Sens were tied in goal differential in 12-13. The only place where this is true is in the NHL's official tracking of goal differential. You then went on to offer a bet based upon goal differential. I accepted the bet on the implied terms.

You have a choice. Honour the original terms of the bet, or be Leafnation if you lose. If I lose according to the original terms of the bet, I will promptly make payment to the account of your choosing.

It's really that simple.
Click to expand...

A couple weeks ago when I updated this thread and used the official goal differential in the standings and Sensible freaked out, I was almost SURE that he had been using those exact same totals but I was too lazy to go back and prove it. I'm not surprised at all though.
 
MindzEye said:
A bet is a bet. Betting is a precise endeavour with defined rules. You don't get your money back from the house because in the nature of the bet, Aaron Rodgers was supposed to be healthy all year and that's why Green Bay didn't win the superbowl.

It's ****ing asinine. If anyone is playing the "technically" card it's you clowns. Well "technically" he didn't define goal differential in the bet (though...he did), so M.e is being an *******.

He made a bet, I took the bet as it was offered. He has a choice, honour the bet as it was offered (which was clearly with the NHL's official goal differential in mind) and not change the bet half way through the season now that he's losing, or when the final tally comes about and if he loses and doesn't pay, be Leafnation.

Try this shit with a bookie, or in Vegas, or with anyone you would gamble with, ever...tell me how it works out for you.
Click to expand...
It's not Vegas. You aren't a bookie.

The closest comparison is a bet between two "friends" - despite the fact that I know you two aren't buddies.
 
I love how now, in this case, there's a ****ing board consensus that matters. These ****s fight almost every board consensus ever, tooth and nail no matter how ridiculous it looks, but now there's a board consensus that supersedes the original terms of an agreement?

Let's get something straight. Sensible isn't an acquaintance of mine, he isn't a friend, and I'd possibly take a walk to find somewhere else to piss if he was to spontaneously combust in front of me. So when two people who have no personal relationship enter into a monetary agreement with each other, the only fair way to handle the arrangement is to always abide by the original letter of the agreement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top