Agree with everyone who responded already, but it's the same as locking in a sports bet and finding something out after. Doesn't matter.

Take the Cavs at -12 and find out 30 minutes later that Lebron is resting and the line goes to -5, you can't cancel the bet.

This.


And this.

Seriously what is it with nvg and this victim shaming?
This post is not about moaning but warning others

I've a source who says Shaun Deeb may have been crossing his fingers behind his back when the handshake was made.

Seriously though this seems pretty questionable situation. #popcorn

NO money passed hands, not even a third man to counsel the situation. Bets can always be renegotiated or cancelled up to the start of the event.

Only the desperate won't allow reconsideration ; he owes nothing, not even a farewell.

money doesn't usually get exchanged BEFORE the outcome of a bet

people don't usually have a third party arbitrate.

Shaun is unregistering before the first hand has been dealt, totally fine imo.

This is about as wrong as it gets.

Mountain out of a molehill. 30 mins isn't enough to let this become anything huge. It isn't 100% ethically perfect but neither is expecting a free 5k or whatever as some ridiculous settlement for 30 minutes of certainty.

For dinner I ordered $20 worth of McDonalds, I stared at it for 30 minutes and decided I didn't wanna eat dog ****.
Drove back with it, and told them my order needed cancelling.

Not really trying to defend Shaun here as I don't really know anything about this, but it seems more analogous for the line to move from -12 to -5, Shaun not knowing that, and booking -11 with a friend who does know that.

Fair enough.
My point is, if you lock in a bet, you lock in a bet.
It's your job to know all the info, do the research, etc and then... It's a gambol

All this analogy bs is just that: bs and irrelevant.
Its a trick used by people in the wrong to try and convince others
they are not in the wrong.

A man made a bet and that bet had to be played/negotiated out.

That doesn't sound funny at all. Sounds like the type of thing that would at least open a discussion for making a bet invalid.

Think your Cavs sports bet was a better comparison. Your not gambling on the food tasting good, and then deciding to return it before having a bite.

If you have a group of people coming together to make 100s of thousands of dollars in bets then it might be wise?

For dinner, I ordered $20 worth of McDonalds at their drive-thru. I then waited in a long line of cars to get the food. By the time I got to the pick-up window 30 minutes later, I told the clerk that I changed my mind and cancelled my order. She said okay and I then drove away and all was right with the world.

See, I can come up with a ridiculous McDonald's analogy (albeit not nearly as ridiculous as yours) to argue the opposite position.

This is why escrows exist. Pretty scummy if you ask me (which no one did).

Try making that bet at a sports book then coming back 30 minutes later to 'cancel' it.

If your position is that a bet isn't a bet unless cash changes hands, you should probably position your position somewhere more suitable. Like the toilet.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For anyone that agrees with this, I assume it would be ok for any of the teams to just tell Daniel they want to "cancel their bet" and not take part once the draft is complete and they don't like their team?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

NVG is dumb.

It get's weird though as Shawn was "approached" and offered the bet. There's a non-zero chance that this was just a straight angle-shoot and once learning about the angle, Shawn gtfo'd.

Amongst my my circle of degens, everyone is allowed to backout right up until the start of the game/event that is being bet on. Once it starts, then you're locked. But this is to preserve the true gamble and ensure there's no angling amongst friends.

While Shawn may technically be on the hook for something, I think the person who approached Shawn would do well to acknowledge that a 30 minute backout is hardly post worthy. Forcing him to buy out is just scummy. If I were Shawn, I'd never give action again if offered, especially if the information learned was something I considered the offerer already knew, thus the motive to offer me the bet.

The information that Shawn "heard" is very significant in this situation IMO. Saying "he shook on it!" and attempting to lock someone into giving you money is just ridiculous.

So why do you think people shake on it when a bet is made?

I mean you could always hedge and bet the opposite side, but you're right, no way of cancelling action. Obviously this isn't really an option here. Seems pretty scummy to not even offer buyout or anything.

isn't that the whole purpose of prop betting?