No need to apologise, the guy's a tool.

Too risky after girah...

Your tilted because i have an opinion, im betting alot of money on my opinion, I gave valid reasons for my feelings, and listened to people just say im wrong because im wrong. Im sorry that tilts you.

I guess i should be nice to the keyboard warriors that just argue to argue, i should just listen to people when i know they are wrong, i should be nice when everyone is insulting me.

IM really sorry you are tilted,

Hey do me a favor?

No people have put up counter points that you choose to ignore.

The terms/conditions of the bet had no mention of a ‘no action’ clause when it was made. The bets were only focused on the final result of the match.

If I am wrong put me right. If so, I will agree with you that this match was 'suspended' by Black Friday and you can call this a 'no action'.

So we bet on an event, that was postponed, beyond a reasonable time?

Well, do you care?

Dont worry (I know you worry), I'm not in a lifetilt for it, just a brief moment in which I wrote my initial somewhat harsh message. But I'm over it :P

Someone could argue are the points you are making valid. But why are you dodging all the relevant questions? The one I think people would like to hear an answer to is the bet between you and ZJ going to determine the whole jungleman debacle as well? Well, we dont need to know it, but I think you, ZJ and jungle should come to an understanding about that. Because I know what happens if you dont. You lose the bet and you say "We never agreed this would determine my bet with junglemand" and if you win the bet you're gonna be all like "Well now I'm off the Jungleman bet as well". You are the kind of person who would do this and rules of the bet need to be made very clear or you're going to try to argue it.

you bet on a poker challenge. That challenge was never postponed. The challenge started at some point and has been ongoing ever since.

not sure about "reasonable time", but how long did u expect the challenge to last? and what would be an acceptable delay?

I feel like xbook bet as well as win bet should be settled now with currect results.

It's probably reasonable to give a discount on the win bet, since there is a small chance durrrr would climb his way back. What the discount should be is debatable though. Xbook bet probably shouldn't be given a discount since it could go either way.

Just my $0.02

QFT !

viffer,

If you had a bet on durrrr challenge 1, do you think right before Black Friday when it was ongoing for 2 years+ already, sidebets should have been void because it has been going on way too long (for your taste)?

Why should they be discounted and not canceled all together? Less than 1/2 the hands have been played. Bets were placed contingent on the match being completed.

In the mean time, full tilt and both players endured a catastrophic event that has, one, altered the nature of the event and, two, delayed it a substantial amount of time.

By the way, a note to all of you who keep complaining that Viffer is ignoring your arguments: you are missing his point. Why should he waste his (apparently plentiful) free time responding to irrelevant arguments? The only point viffer is arguing is that the essence of the match has changed due to black friday. Therefore, he is arguing, side bets should be canceled. Plain and simple.

You can argue that either black friday didn't alter the essence of the match or that even if it did alter the essence of the match, that the side bets shouldn't be affected. Everything else about durrrr dodging jungle pre or post black friday or that if durrr was up a million it would be different or that viffer is a scammer is irrelevant.

^^

"beyond a reasonable time" - this needed to be clarified when the bet was made (not during it).

You needed to include time constraints and 'no action' clauses in the bets!

Neither party asked for them so all that was agreed on was the outcome of the match.. no matter how long it would take!

What about the several times over the course of the last 2+ years that Viffer has addressed his own side bet argument in 2p2 threads and even by text with JM? Read the entire thread.

What about it?

You are all unwilling or unable to refute his logic head on so you keep attacking straw men.

Viffer (and JM) needed to include time constraints and 'no action' clauses in the bets to call this bet off without settlement.

Neither did - maybe they will learn..especially viffer since he is on the worse end of this.

Either viffer needs to settle with JM (doesn't seem likely) or he can wait for as many years as it takes for the challenge to be completed and hope that dwan wins.

There is NO OTHER OPTION because no other options were drawn up at the start of the bet.

Why is this so hard to comprehend?

Too much nuance for you.

Bettors can't have reasonably estimated that BF would have occurred during the course of the bets. Therefore, the bets are off.

If this is how you feel Dandy, do you think the xbook action from the hands already played should just be totally void then too? If so BIG LOL to you

Very compelling logic. About par for the course 'round these parts.

Xbooks intended to be settled after the completion of the challenge should be void. Less than 1/2 the hands have been played.

It doesnt matter if less than 1/2 the hands have been played. I dont think anyone even has a realistic argument to say any xbook action prior to BF should be void regardless of when they chose to settle up. The hands were still played and this "act of god" lol never had even occurred yet. Deciding to cancel xbook action from like now going forward is perfectly fine but anything prior is just someone trying to be a straight scumbag. Sounds like you are a scumbag

Brilliant. So I make an argument. You claim that only scumbags would make such an argument. Therefore I am a scumbag. Really brilliant stuff, brother...

Well any non scumbag wouldn't even consider making this argument. LOL you for not seeing this.


Another situation. Lets say you crossbooked me in a game and I said I was going to play for 6 hrs. 3 hrs in Im up X amount but an emergency comes up and I have to leave. Would you just consider it void then too? Im guessing you would. If so that is exactly what a straight scumbag would do. Try to weasle out of paying money they know they owe

So if I can not have reasonably estimated that a team has to change the material of their dresses for a few games during the season (e.g. because the producer had a technical problem) then my bets on the nba championship are off?

the problem with this logic is, that the influence of bf on the challenge is very miniscule as proven itt by the facts that durrrr stalled before bf and played a ton vs others on full tilt after bf.

Yeah, LOL me.

Well, it's not only that BF was basically unforeseeable but, more importantly, it fundamentally altered the nature of the event. So, for starters, neither player can play from the united states any longer. Also, Full Tilt, the very site where the event was agreed to played at, was shutdown for an extended period of time.

So while, yes, the challenge can still go on, mine and Viffer's argument is that the side bets are null because BF affected the event in an essential and irreperable way that could not have reasonably been predicted.

I'm tempted to get into analogies but I think it turns the discussion into too much about the analogies and not the logic.