Motor Sports

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
13 Sep 09 22:46
Date Joined: 24 Jul 06
| Topic/replies: 1,355 | Blogger: nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip's blog
being deployed. ibas me thinks
Pause Switch to Standard View are unsporting ods the only firm who...
Show More
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip September 17, 2009 8:53 PM BST
asked sb to review their decision to settle my italian gp safety car bet as a loser and received this reply.

"wait til traders come back"

Report frippar September 18, 2009 11:19 AM BST
what kind of book is that? some noname firm, why bet at them at all?
Report stockwell September 22, 2009 12:03 AM BST
watch the race again mate, then go to IBAS - car very clearly did come out. it was even shown on telly
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip September 23, 2009 11:07 AM BST
contacted ibas a week ago stockwell, not had a reply from them. below is an excerpt from the official f1 website.

Hamilton, however, did not. Going into the last lap Button was 3.3s behind Barrichello, with Hamilton a second further back. But going through the second Lesmo Hamilton lost control of his McLaren, spun and thumped the inner wall before spinning again and strewing the track with debris. Out went the safety car, as Barrichello crossed the line to score his second victory of the year and to reduce Buttons championship points advantage to 14 points, 80 to 66.
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip September 23, 2009 11:32 AM BST
Kelly: Ok Sir this is the response we have had from our traders: The safety car was announced, but Barrichello finished the race and the safety car technically was on the track AFTER the race was finished.
Report JPJ September 24, 2009 1:55 AM BST
The race isn't finished when the 'leader' crosses the finishing line.

Don't let them get away with it. gl :)
Report budvar September 25, 2009 10:40 AM BST
They haven't got a leg to stand on. The SB traders do not decide when a safety car is deemed deployed, the race stewards do. If they say the SC was deployed, and it was, it was. SB are wrong unless they have in their rules that the traders decision is final, in which case nobody should bet with them.
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip September 26, 2009 10:25 AM BST
still not had a reply from ibas to acknowledge receipt of my claim?
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip October 31, 2009 1:43 PM GMT
ibas acknowledged receipt of my claim weeks ago but still not heard nowt. must have a big backlog of claims.
Report stockwell October 31, 2009 11:53 PM GMT
further to this thread mate, I can tell you the Saftey car was on track BEFORE Rubens crossed the line. I dont have it on Sky+ any more though I dont think Im afraid.
Report SA - Lacks middle pace - Faded November 1, 2009 12:21 AM GMT
Nobby have a play of this , move it along to about 77 mins

not conclusive but comms appears to say SC out before Rubens crosses the line and certainly before 2nd and 3rd do, who because they are under yellows couldn't race to the line.
Stick with IBAS I think you should get paid.
Report SA - Lacks middle pace - Faded November 1, 2009 12:25 AM GMT
Addditionally the SC mark comes up on screen much before Rubens crosses the winning line
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip December 21, 2009 3:02 PM GMT
ibas rule in my favour. up yours unsporting bet.
Report brentford December 21, 2009 3:50 PM GMT
pleased for you fella (genuinely)
sounds like bit of a pi$$take and they got found out.
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip December 21, 2009 5:01 PM GMT
cheers to brentford and all who supported me. a rare victory for the punter.
Report Paul Haigh - Total Respect December 22, 2009 8:50 AM GMT
nobby - any chance of emailing me a copy of the ruling please?

Report Paul Haigh - Total Respect December 22, 2009 8:50 AM GMT
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip December 22, 2009 9:31 AM GMT
will do.
Report hhssaspi1 December 22, 2009 3:29 PM GMT
post the ruling on here mate, would make interesting reading!
Report ocukstinky December 23, 2009 3:52 PM GMT
Well done chap, for once the punter gets what is rightly theirs.
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip December 23, 2009 11:47 PM GMT

1 a sporting bet customer complains that his bet whether there was a safety car during the italian gp should be settled as a winner as the safety car was deployed after lewis hamilton crashed on the final lap.

2 sporting bet say that as their market was for the safety car during the race and as such the winner had crossed the line without ever being behind the safety car then they believe there was no safety car during the race.

3 the key to this dispute is the way the market was presented. in the panels opinion if sporting bet had wished the bet to mean there had to be a period in the race when cars ran behind the safety car then they should have defined it in that manner.

as it is we believe that the race was still on when the safety car was deployed. even if barrichello had crossed the finishing lineprior to the safety car being deployed the race itself was still on as all the other drivers were still racing for position.

the panel also note that the website link provided by the complainent shows SCindicating that the safety car had been deployed. this information would also have been communicated to the drivers via their in**pit information systems. in our opion therefore the race was still on when the safety car was deployed.

4 the panel therefore adjudicate in favour of the customer.
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip December 23, 2009 11:49 PM GMT
apologies for some grammer errors.
Report nobbybarnesranoverthewrongtrip December 23, 2009 11:50 PM GMT
ffs grammar even
Report caramba December 24, 2009 3:00 AM GMT
well done
Report stockwell January 8, 2010 12:37 AM GMT
justice, and a pretty poor do from sporting to drag out a perfectly genuine bet this long. heads in shame on this one.
Report coney January 8, 2010 3:15 AM GMT
1 for the punters well played mate. 1 of the most weasel settlements ive ever heard off

f uk u unsport ingbet
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.


Instance ID: 13539