Quote from: BitcoinGirl.Club on Today at 08:33:05 PM

Quote from: holydarkness on Today at 07:50:11 PM

The problem was, all of his bets on the multi actually were winning ones, suppose it was not cancelled. But it got cancelled by the casino, thus he didn't get the winning as it is considered as a cancelled multi-bet. BUT, the cancellation was from the casino, not from the match itself facing issues. Suppose the casino didn't "intervene", the matches saw their end and he would get his winning.

So what I get from here is, one or more selections were still due to get results but the casino cancelled all the betslips and the results of those particular selections went in favour of the batter. Correct?

Uhh, to be sure we're on the same page, I understand by "batter" you're referring to "bettor", thus, the player? If you are, then: yes.

To clarify, the multi-bets were cancelled by the casino and there were no winnings as the event [that should be won by the player suppose the casino did not cancel it by themselves] "were not finished".