Player Disadvantage due to Welching

I just had a co-worker welch on a bet involving hockey. This has me wondering just how much of a betting disadvantage private gambling can be. I would have to guess for me my private lifetime Sports betting has been similar to dealing with Keno-level player disadvantage. Private poker games have not been a problem since I wised up a very long time ago, but I never seem to learn with Sports bets. Is there something about Sports betting? There seem to even be problems with casinos to judge by some threads here. Vote if you like.

Circumstances: After losing a couple of bets, this co-worker claimed to have no knowledge of a third bet. But the bet was on and he knew it. The fact is, had I lost the third one, I would have paid him, and I told him that to no effect. I think he just figures I should be happy enough to have collected on two bets.

As is often the case, there are complicating factors that prevent me from pushing to collect this bet. At work, rows over anything with anybody are to be avoided. I particularly need this guy's cooperation in my work, so it would be foolish for me to try to collect when the bet was over a small amount. It's another case of the wisdom of picking the time and place of your battles [or whether to fight at all]. The furthest I can go with it is to tease him a bit about it, to remind him he owes me in some fashion, which will be enough.

But the fact remains, it's another case of Welching.

Quote: odiousgambit

I just had a co-worker welch on a bet involving hockey. This has me wondering just how much of a betting disadvantage private gambling can be. I would have to guess for me my private lifetime Sports betting has been similar to dealing with Keno-level player disadvantage. Private poker games have not been a problem since I wised up a very long time ago, but I never seem to learn with Sports bets. Is there something about Sports betting? There seem to even be problems with casinos to judge by some threads here. Vote if you like.

Circumstances: After losing a couple of bets, this co-worker claimed to have no knowledge of a third bet. But the bet was on and he knew it. The fact is, had I lost the third one, I would have paid him, and I told him that to no effect. I think he just figures I should be happy enough to have collected on two bets.

As is often the case, there are complicating factors that prevent me from pushing to collect this bet. At work, rows over anything with anybody are to be avoided. I particularly need this guy's cooperation in my work, so it would be foolish for me to try to collect when the bet was over a small amount. It's another case of the wisdom of picking the time and place of your battles [or whether to fight at all]. The furthest I can go with it is to tease him a bit about it, to remind him he owes me in some fashion, which will be enough.

But the fact remains, it's another case of Welching.

If it's a big enough bet (more than 5 bucks?), then we always write it down. Email also works. Just use words like "points" instead of dollars if you are scared of Big Brother.

My office has (mostly) solved this problem by writing things down. In our case, we use napkins. That stems from the fact that two of my coworkers were out at lunch and without paper when the first such bet was made. Now we actually keep a stack of napkins specifically for betting. The "napkin bets" are then kept in a drawer until resolved.

The only remaining problems are about how bets resolve. Example: I owe you a sandwich and you owe me a burrito. Are we washed, or do we need to go to lunch together twice?

I try not to make bets with non gamblers anymore because of this. If I bet a gambler then I know it will be honored or the guy's rep will suffer. Non-gamblers it's different. Also I've been in too many situations where someone says "I'll be $1000 that X" and I accept, explain that this is a real and binding bet, get their agreement then win the bet and don't get paid because $1000 is "so much money". Nevermind the fact that I would have paid up. One girl tried to explain to me that saying $1000 is the same as saying a million dollars since both are ridiculous amounts of money lol. My solution is to not bet with these people or if they really want to bet on something to make them post up.

I have had a couple of very bad experiences betting with people I didn't fully trust. In both cases there was a misunderstanding on bets that I believe I should have won. In both cases there was no compromise the other party simply refused to pay. My advice is to only take bets on faith from people you fully trust.

In case anyone is wondering, here are the bets in question in my case:

1. For a while I accepted a lot of baseball bets from somebody. It was understood that unless otherwise requested, all bets were "listed pitchers," meaning that if there were any changes to the lead pitchers before game time, all bets would be called off. This happened in one case with a bet that I would have lost. Since there was a pitching change I felt the bet was void. The other party said that I provided bad customer service by not informing him of the pitcher change, because he would have let the bet stand anyway. My version was that it was not my responsibility to notify him of pitching changes. A friendship was ruined over that one.

2. In the World Cup soccer games you can bet on the winner after the regulation time period or a tie. A friend bet on a particular team to win. I warned him that a tie after regulation would be a push, which is what happened. Then his team went onto win in overtime, and he claimed a victory. I said I warned him that the bet was based on the regulation time period but he claimed that if I said that he misunderstood me. Again, another friendship ruined over that one.

In both cases I was already owed money and the other party deducted their alleged wins from the balance. So what I think should have been two pushed turned into two losses.

Quote: Wizard

2. In the World Cup soccer games you can bet on the winner after the regulation time period or a tie. A friend bet on a particular team to win. I warned him that a tie after regulation would be a push, which is what happened. Then his team went onto win in overtime, and he claimed a victory. I said I warned him that the bet was based on the regulation time period but he claimed that if I said that he misunderstood me. Again, another friendship ruined over that one.

Had a problem with this myself. It stemmed from the difference between the Injury Time that's added to every half (2-5min usually) because of the running clock, and the actual Extra Time for the knockout rounds after the Injury Time and before Shootouts... (when matches can't end in ties...)

I don't bet much on sports and rarely money.

But when betting with someone notoriously unreliable, well, don't.

If you must, then set the bet down in writting, including all definitions of regualtion time, overtime, etc. Both parties should front the money in advance, to be held by a neutral thrid party (ie not part of the bet) chosen by both parties.

In other words: seriously don't.

Quote: Wizard

Again, another friendship ruined

This has to be the worst possible outcome and the value of the lost bet has to be weighed against the value of the friendship. This supposes, though, that what happened didn't just reveal that this was no friend; one has to question whether a Welcher can be a friend at all. It might be 'good riddance'.

If it is a business associate, it's similarly complicated and although you may have needed to know that person was a Welcher you might not want to cut the ties.

Quote: SOOPOO

Your $5 bet is now booked.

A light came on when I saw SOOPOO doing this. Although in my latest case I felt there was no doubt we had bet [I am 100% sure he knows we did], surely to say something like this while you show you are actually writing it down, is just smart. I think in my case had I done that he could not have justified the welching, whereas as it is no doubt he is saying to himself he was right. Lesson learned I hope.

People can just get weird over money. If I win, I pay, it's not worth the bad juju to me. I just view it as a bonus if someone pays me a bet I won. If they don't mention it, I don't, and I just make a note of it and how that person gets weird over money. It's helpful that the dollar amounts are not high, $100 or less, but if someone is weird over $20, they'll be weird over $2, $2,000, or $2 million as well. I've stayed out of several office lottery pools for this reason. I can get my own tickets.

I have a similar policy with "lending" money to friends. I call it a loan, but view it as a gift and never mention it. But I've never loaned money to someone who didn't pay me back once.

But yeah, mathematically, it's a disadvantage, but as far as dealing with private bets, I think there's more to consider than EV.

Quote: cclub79

Had a problem with this myself. It stemmed from the difference between the Injury Time that's added to every half (2-5min usually) because of the running clock, and the actual Extra Time for the knockout rounds after the Injury Time and before Shootouts... (when matches can't end in ties...)

Since I don't know the nature of the problem, this is a completely unbiased comment.
As a former soccer official, I can attest that the injury time added on at the end of the half should be viewed as normal course of play time. The normal course of play ends at the moment the referee blows the whistle to end the half. Whether the time was 90 min total, or 95 minutes because of added injury time is irrelevant.

BTW, the injury time is added because there is supposed to be 45 min of 'playing time' each half. In professional soccer you have ball chasers, but in lesser games the players have to chase the ball. More than once I would see the team that was leading walking to get a ball that had gone off the field. And yes, time was added to the clock to mitigate the time wasting

if think we need to differentiate between "injury time" and "extra time" I assume the wiz was referring to extra time

Quote: WizardofEngland

if think we need to differentiate between "injury time" and "extra time" I assume the wiz was referring to extra time

Injury time = added time, as in the portion of the match against Algeria in which we scored a goal to win the group. ;)

Good luck v. Switzerland on Saturday, we'll be watching!

Quote: RaleighCraps

Since I don't know the nature of the problem, this is a completely unbiased comment.
As a former soccer official, I can attest that the injury time added on at the end of the half should be viewed as normal course of play time. The normal course of play ends at the moment the referee blows the whistle to end the half. Whether the time was 90 min total, or 95 minutes because of added injury time is irrelevant.

BTW, the injury time is added because there is supposed to be 45 min of 'playing time' each half. In professional soccer you have ball chasers, but in lesser games the players have to chase the ball. More than once I would see the team that was leading walking to get a ball that had gone off the field. And yes, time was added to the clock to mitigate the time wasting

Yup. I knew that as well, which is why there was a problem when it came time to collect.

Quote: cclub79

Yup. I knew that as well, which is why there was a problem when it came time to collect.

Now wait a minute, you arent the guy the Wizard bet and he says it was a push? [g]

Quote: odiousgambit

Now wait a minute, you arent the guy the Wizard bet and he says it was a push? [g]

haha...no way! If I was, I would have analyzed the +EV of being friends with the Wizard and would have paid him whatever he said was owed or waived whatever I was due!

Quote: ItsCalledSoccer

People can just get weird over money. If I win, I pay, it's not worth the bad juju to me. I just view it as a bonus if someone pays me a bet I won. If they don't mention it, I don't, and I just make a note of it and how that person gets weird over money.

I find it strange that people would even make a bet without having the intention of paying in the case of a loss. To me, it's like going to a restaurant knowing you don't have any money, or have no intention of paying for the meal. For me, I wouldn't even go to the restaurant if I didn't have enough money. And I wouldn't make a bet if I wasn't going to pay it off should I lose.

Quote: ItsCalledSoccer

I have a similar policy with "lending" money to friends. I call it a loan, but view it as a gift and never mention it. But I've never loaned money to someone who didn't pay me back once.

This is why I don't loan money. If I have the money, and can afford to give it to someone, I don't mind helping someone out. If they ever pay me back, hey whatever. But by not thinking of it as a loan in the first place, I avoid getting upset or hurt over not getting paid back.