To lead after 25 minutes

[dave5perth]

Going by replies so far looks like I'm in the wrong, and the wording is basically stronger than I thought.

 

[Charlie Bernstein]

Hi there. I'll try to explain this to make things clear. I saw this on a bookmaker's site with odds beside this (Manchester [no space between ( and Manchester] Utd. to lead after 25 minutes). I took this bet, as this implied to me that if Manchester Utd. were leading after 25 minutes, I would be correct. Manchester Utd. led after [or at] 27 minutes, so I assumed I had won, but the bet was put as a loser. When I queried this, I was informed this means up to 25 minutes and is clear and can't be taken any other way. I gave them various examples as to why this bet could be taken different ways by customers, as the wording is not clear as to what they perceive this to [delete only] mean. So would I like input as to what this implies to anybody looking at this, because I feel other customers could possibly interpret this as after 25 minutes.

I think that the phrase is meaningless and that it's a bad idea to give money to an online bookie.

 

[GoesStation]

I understand what you are saying with certain terminology, but what I'm trying to find out if something could be interpreted wrongly by the wording not being as clear as it could be.

The answer is clearly "yes, it could be misinterpreted"; after all, you've just lost a bet which you thought you'd won based on your understanding of the brief description on the shop's display.

This is a risk any time you engage in an activity as a beginner. Experienced punters don't consider your question because they've known for a long time exactly what the description means. My advice is to consider your lost bet as tuition in the school of sports betting, and to remember to ask when misunderstanding an unfamiliar expression could cost you money.

 

[SoothingDave]

So you feel the wording could be better, to eliminate any misunderstandings? I agree, but when I put this to them for future customers who may read this differently as to what was meant, I was informed that you can only read this one way, which I disagreed with. Anyway was just looking for opinions from various forumites just to see if this could be misinterpreted or very clear.

Yes, I see where you could be confused. But I also know enough to know what they meant. I am pretty sure that, if the bet was what you thought it was that it would be worded differently.

 

[Rover_KE]

Whatever you think, the bookie knows what he means and it's no good asking him for a payout if Man U don't take the lead until the 26th minute.

 

[dave5perth]

Whatever you think, the bookie knows what he means and it's no good asking him for a payout if Man U don't take the lead until the 26th minute.

Hi there, its not about the payout everything was sorted, I was only asking forum if this could be interpreted in different way's, with how this has been worded.

 

[jutfrank]

dave5perth - you have clearly shown that it could be misinterpreted, and your reasoning makes some sense.

But, first, I can tell you don't watch a lot of (UK) football because this way of phrasing is fairly widespread in the world of footie commentating and punditry so it just wouldn't be misinterpreted by those familiar with football language.

Also, it doesn't make much sense to make a bet that Man United will be leading at some time during the period between 25 minutes and 90 minutes, does it? We would bet that they will be leading at some specified point in the match, i.e. the 25-minute mark.

If I said something like "I got bored after two hours of waiting and left", how would you interpret that? At what point in time did the boredom happen?