I had the max wager on:
"The longest fg of the game will be under 42.5 yards."
That is the EXACT wording of the prop.
The prop did not say "The longest MADE fg will be under 42.5 yards."
In the Seattle game, a fg was ATTEMPED but missed. That means the result is ZERO yards, and under players should have been paid given the wording of Nine's prop.
Instead, nine graded it as a push. I spent 10 minutes with their prop manager, Mike, who was a gentlemen but did not budge in my request to regrade it. He insisted the prop meant to say MADE fg. I told him THAT MADE NO SENSE BECAUSE 1) the prop did not specify a FG had to be MADE, and 2) once a FG was attempted, the prop became "live action" because at that point, it was possible for one side to win and one side to lose. It was Mike's position that "this is the way they always have graded it." I said fine, if that was the case, they should have specified the FG had to be MADE in the body of the prop language.
IF NO FGS WERE ATTEMPTED, THEN I AGREE 100% THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NO ACTION. IN THIS CASE, I BELIEVE NINE IS LOOKING FOR A WAY TO AVOID PAYING OUT THIS PROP. THEY HAD SUBSTANTIAL ACTION ON THE UNDER, AND MIKE ADMITTED NOBODY WAS ON THE OVER DUE TO THE WEATHER.
I heard 5 dimes had the exact same wording of Nine's prop and paid out, so kudos to 5 dimes.
"The longest fg of the game will be under 42.5 yards."
That is the EXACT wording of the prop.
The prop did not say "The longest MADE fg will be under 42.5 yards."
In the Seattle game, a fg was ATTEMPED but missed. That means the result is ZERO yards, and under players should have been paid given the wording of Nine's prop.
Instead, nine graded it as a push. I spent 10 minutes with their prop manager, Mike, who was a gentlemen but did not budge in my request to regrade it. He insisted the prop meant to say MADE fg. I told him THAT MADE NO SENSE BECAUSE 1) the prop did not specify a FG had to be MADE, and 2) once a FG was attempted, the prop became "live action" because at that point, it was possible for one side to win and one side to lose. It was Mike's position that "this is the way they always have graded it." I said fine, if that was the case, they should have specified the FG had to be MADE in the body of the prop language.
IF NO FGS WERE ATTEMPTED, THEN I AGREE 100% THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NO ACTION. IN THIS CASE, I BELIEVE NINE IS LOOKING FOR A WAY TO AVOID PAYING OUT THIS PROP. THEY HAD SUBSTANTIAL ACTION ON THE UNDER, AND MIKE ADMITTED NOBODY WAS ON THE OVER DUE TO THE WEATHER.
I heard 5 dimes had the exact same wording of Nine's prop and paid out, so kudos to 5 dimes.
