Quote:
Originally Posted by stormblower
Yeah but the correct way to play it would have been to show MM the proof first and then come to 2+2 if he shrugged it off.
JY's probably in a better position to assume whether MM would have shrugged it off or not - by the mere fact that MM has still not paid over a period of 18 months despite communications between the two if we go by MM's OP suggests to me that it would have been a forlorn act to hand the financial information to him a week or month prior.
As I have said previously and this relates to the naming of the bookie, there is no question in my mind that at the time (and up until the last noted message of Sep 2012) MM let his first win ride that he had confidence in the ability of JY to pay the money as why else would someone who is experienced in making sports bet (as we all concede MM would be) allow a bet to ride if he didn't have an expectation that JY had sufficient liquidity. This ends for me the need to release financial information for the necessary burden of proof that JY has got to show.
For those naysayers and forgetting that those text messages ever existed, I don't believe that MM gets another chance to redeem himself or in other words getting out of having to pay JY after making two clear mistakes:
1. Not doing the background checks on JY to ascertain whether he was good for the money in the event he won (well he did win, didn't say well I better not ride my luck any further as I don't know about this guy JY and cash out now - he chose to let his win ride! - MM is a big boy he should be able to stand up for the bets he makes)
2. Which follows and explains his satisfaction with the above by letting the first win ride.