3 ms·

I bet on the Giants -3.5. Oh, the casino has taken advantage of my misunderstanding of -3.5. False equivalency. This isn't the casino saying 'hey, we don't kn

I bet on the Giants -3.5. Oh, the casino has taken advantage of my misunderstanding of -3.5. False equivalency. This isn't the casino saying 'hey, we don't know what 820-1 means', this is the guy saying to the casino 'hey, you thought that was a 2-1 win but it was really a 820-1 win' when it wasn't. To fix your analogy, it would be if the Casino had -3.5, but when it came time to collect, they told you it was actually -350. That would also be fraud.

LanceH 14y ago
It is the casino's agent saying the payout is 10x what it should be. The user was merely making use of machine functions made available to him.
jerf 14y ago
This is another one of those places where analogies hurt more than they help. You can come up with an analogy to mean whatever you want here, so that's not helpful, and it's not like anybody's confused about what happened. (It's like I was in a car, and I was betting I could make the jump over the bridge, but while I was in midair the police moved the bridge...)