mariachi-19
Full Member
Lets be real though, if he was paying out at whatever stupid fecking odds system the UK run on (lets say £3.43) zero chance they pay that out.Negative nelly.
Lets be real though, if he was paying out at whatever stupid fecking odds system the UK run on (lets say £3.43) zero chance they pay that out.Negative nelly.
They have still paid money out they didn't need to though.Lets be real though, if he was paying out at whatever stupid fecking odds system the UK run on (lets say £3.43) zero chance they pay that out.
They have still paid money out they didn't need to though.
It’s Paddy Power, they do shit like this all the time, they’ve looked at the numbers and decided it’s worth the advertising.
I know they've done it a fair few times and it's good marketing, but it's something they still didn't need to. Imagine having your losing bet get paid as a winner. It's good for the punters who had Hamilton on.
Don't really understand why people feel the need to view everything as negative.
It’s nothing to do with being negative. It’s a question of cost vs benefit.
The odds meant not many people were placing that bet so it’s not cost them much to generate some headlines and get people thinking they’re some “good guy bookie” who might pay out even when you lose and given them credit. Exactly like you’re doing.
It’s not cynical to say they’ve only done it because it’s in their favour, it’s just obvious and realistic.