I have been perusing the thread and understand the OP. Maybe he opened the thread a little early but I understand him being pissed off.
Surely, if Stake.com is hiding behind their clauses, nothing can be done from a legal standpoint, but to me it seems morally reprehensible.
If the bets are voided, those who lost the bet are not going to protest, of course, it benefits them, but it is normal for the winner to be pissed off.
I think that in this case they should have assumed the mistake and pay edgycorner what is his, which in the total budget of Stake.com should be nothing.
I may be wrong & this is just my personal opinion, so no live bullets please.
I think the problem was with the betslip language used by Stake or their odds providers ??
If the wording had said "voided" instead of "adjusted" it would have been easier to explain that due to name change the bet had to be cancelled.
just shows.. watch what words you use !!
I don't quite understand this. If you get 1 to 1 it's the same as if they cancel your bet. He should have been given 1.2 of his bet, but whether they cancel it or give him 1 to 1 is the same thing. At least mathematically.
I don't know how he's going to be any less pissed off because they use one word or another.