[batistuta9]

Originally Posted by DB74

There is no doubt that paying out in full on Torres (one of the favs @ 18/1) would cost them more than paying 1/6th odds on 6 different guys

I would be amazed if many people backed Mandzukic or Dzagoev before the tournament

but the others especially gomez would have been well back, maybe ronaldo too
+ a lot would have backed dzagoev after his opening match remember seeing his two prices (before & after the game) unsure if the same happened with mandzukic

Originally Posted by MrJoeSoap

You do understand that this rule is there for many, many years? It wasn't made up to screw you out of your little Torres bet.

i know it wasn't & i didn't bet on torres.
i just think they should pay out on him & only him in this case as they've tie break rules in place unlike the PL for example

[DB74]

Originally Posted by batistuta9

but the others especially gomez would have been well back, maybe ronaldo too
+ a lot would have backed dzagoev after his opening match remember seeing his two prices

What do you mean "well back"

Gomez was favourite for months before the tournament started while Ronaldo was about 3rd favourite

[batistuta9]

Originally Posted by 28064212

"Top scorer" has exactly one meaning: Scored the most goals. Golden Boot has additional criteria. Can you tell me why the UEFA top scorers page has Alan Dzagoev in the second position, even though he came third in the Golden Boot award?

If the bookies offered markets on the Golden Boot, you could tell because they would offer markets on the Golden Boot. They didn't, they offered markets on top scorer only

At this stage you must be trolling.

The page hasn't been updated i'd say can you tell me why on this page he's third like you said he should be http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/season=...oot/index.html

it's not additional criteria, they're tie break rules.

there's no point to this at all, you're the one trolling because you couldn't be that slow to pick it up.

[ArmaniJeanss]

Originally Posted by DB74

What do you mean "well back"

Gomez was favourite for months before the tournament started while Ronaldo was about 3rd favourite

Typo I'd say, think he meant 'well backed', i.e., agreeing with you that they were amongst the favs.

[batistuta9]

yeah i meant well backed

[28064212]

Originally Posted by batistuta9

The page hasn't been updated i'd say

Despite the fact that Torres is down as having three goals, right

Originally Posted by batistuta9

can you tell me why on this page he's third like you said he should be http://www.uefa.com/uefaeuro/season=...oot/index.html

Because that page is for the GOLDEN BOOT award, not top scorer.

Halfway down this page. Again, not ranked by the golden boot criteria, they're all lumped together under three goals

Originally Posted by batistuta9

it's not additional criteria, they're tie break rules.

Use whatever phrasing you want. It doesn't change that they're solely for the awarding of the Golden Boot, not for top scorer

[batistuta9]

Players at UEFA Futsal EURO 2012 will be aiming to help their team to tournament victory but they will also have a chance of individual glory in the race for the adidas Golden, Silver and Bronze Boots.

As in previous tournaments the adidas Golden Boot will be awarded to the top scorer, although in Croatia the prize will not be shared, with the Silver and Bronze boots being given to those finishing second and third. If two or more players are equal on goals scored, the following criteria will apply:

link http://www.uefa.com/futsaleuro/news/newsid=1745868.html

Adrián López had double reason to celebrate as he claimed the adidas Golden Boot award to go with his UEFA European Under-21 Championship winners' medal with Spain.

Although the striker did not manage to score in Saturday's Aarhus final, Adrián's five goals were enough to take the honour as the top marksman in Denmark.

link http://www.uefa.com/under21/news/newsid=1647286.html

top scorer = golden boot & golden boot = top scorer

end of.



and we're aware of what way the bookies decide it incase you think were/i'm not

[MrJoeSoap]

Sigh.

[amiable]

Originally Posted by MrJoeSoap

Sigh.

Why sigh? Surely you know when someone puts ''end of'' in a post they have won and whatever you say won't be valid?

[kryogen]

Any bookie I spoke to were applying the dead heat rule

[efb]

lads before you go into a bookies, know what your betting on, how the winner is determined, maximum payout, related bets etc...

Because coming on the internet or work complaining when the rules were correctly applied does not show you in a good light.

[wynters]

Originally Posted by efb

Because coming on the internet... complaining when the rules were correctly applied does not show you in a good light.

... neither does coming on all smug and self-righteous. This IS an internet forum for football betting. Why isn't the debate relevant?

If the tournament's organisers UEFA have a method of awarding the Golden Boot to one particular individual at the end of the tournament, be it by tie-break rules or assists or other ways of assessing and measuring a players contribution to the tournament, then why can't that just be accepted as the final official ruling? Bookmakers are unnecessarily applying their own criteria to suit themselves. Why can't bookmakers just research UEFAs rules and adjust their prices on the basis of the official rules?

The Golden Boot award is, in-effect what 'less experienced' punters are betting their money on. Punters stake money in good faith based on the odds invited. So for it to come down to wordings ('Top scorer' v 'Golden Boot') is a get out clause for the bookie. It's not a fair bet in that sense if it's covertly weighted in the bookies favour...

I think anyone who's lost out on a few quid because of this has a right to feel a bit hard done by...

[amiable]

Originally Posted by wynters

... neither does coming on all smug and self-righteous. This IS an internet forum for football betting. Why isn't the debate relevant?

If the tournament's organisers UEFA have a method of awarding the Golden Boot to one particular individual at the end of the tournament, be it by tie-break rules or assists or other ways of assessing and measuring a players contribution to the tournament, then why can't that just be accepted as the final official ruling? Bookmakers are unnecessarily applying their own criteria to suit themselves. Why can't bookmakers just research UEFAs rules and adjust their prices on the basis of the official rules?

The Golden Boot award is, in-effect what 'less experienced' punters are betting their money on. Punters stake money in good faith based on the odds invited. So for it to come down to wordings ('Top scorer' v 'Golden Boot') is a get out clause for the bookie. It's not a fair bet in that sense if it's covertly weighted in the bookies favour...

I think anyone who's lost out on a few quid because of this has a right to feel a bit hard done by...

You placed the bet with Boylesports and not UEFA.
I think you feel aggrieved because you didn't get the support you expected.
If you are old enough to bet then you are old enough to read the rules and terms offered before the bet.

[kryogen]

Originally Posted by batistuta9

I'd just really expect them to pay out full on Torres as he is the top scorer i couldn't care about the other 5 & don't think they should pay on them.

wonder are they all doing the 1/6

Each and every one of them.

Seriously, its is headwrecking to have to see people repeat this time and time again. There was top scorer market, not a golden boot market.

There was more then 1 top scorer and as such bets were settled under dead heat rules as they always are.

The bookies are not doing anything wrong, the terms of the bet are laid out before the bet, they do not go by uefa criteria to have a single top scorer because they dont have to. They dont have a golden boot market.

Uefa want to have just one person awarded the golden boot, thats up to them. It doesnt change that there was more then one person who finished with the same amount of goals.

Get over it.

Or at least stop repeating the same old argument and pretending you don't get the concept

[ft9]

/thread