I had the Rockies and they gave me the W. Never can figure it out. If the salami was over the number you should pick up a W otherwise I see no wager if you had under and you really would want it that way. I say that because you have already won the over bet and nothing can happen to change this course. Under is a different story.
Yes, I totally agree with the 8.5 for the RL but if the game is at 8.5 o-u and the score is 6-4 in the 7th and is then called, is not the o-u already done also because it can only be one way, overs would win and unders have already lost. It can't change the outcome so why don't they let that stand also. If it is under the 8.5 then the game has to be seen as a no wager because the over can still be attained. It is puzzling to me how you can go from an absolute winner no matter what to no wager.
Trust meeee, for whatever reason, Vegas has it so that an over/under, even if an over ALREADY WON, HAS to go at least the full 8.5/9 innings... it's cost me a couple of winning bets over the years when I HAD IT WON (And with my luck, never in the opposite manner, of course), but that's just one of the new non-sensical things that they have going on.
I was saying last night that people who had that Cubs/Rockies OVER had an EVEN WORSE BAD BEAT than the Packers/Seahawks game because at least in their case, they actually had the bet won, even without replacement refs. It doesn't get any worse than that, but luckily, it only happens 2-3 times a year. It's extremely, extremely, extremely rare
at least the over backers got a push tho
