Yes. As long as one player wins by that score, "2-0" will pay. Same goes to the other 2 lines.

However, I think this sentence may be confusing you: "Note: This bet will have 4 winners, so prepare for multi-payoffs."

If a bet is going to have 4 winners, the odds cannot be paid off as listed. That would require taking money from nowhere. Therefore, the odds will be worse than listed (I briefly summed it up above). That is the drawback with having more lines.

From what I can piece together, I see you guys noticed that for World Cup Rd 2: Compatriot Battle, the odds were posted as so, but come payoff time, the odds were bs.

I'm not sure how I can make it clearer; there is no error. All I did was select the 4 winners like I was supposed to, and the software did the rest.

If you're wondering what the software did, it took the losing pool (6,576 cbs) and distributed it 4 ways, 1644 cbs/line. It then paid off each line as though the losing pool was only 1644 cbs.

In order for you to receive the odds displayed, the software would have to pull 50,941 cbs out of nowhere.

Notice how the odds displayed are the odds that would've paid <if> only <one> bet won.

Now why isn't this written in the Help Page, and why the odds are not corrected, I don't know.

However, this has been mentioned before:

Chessgames Bookie chessforum (kibitz #7592)

Chessgames Bookie chessforum

This is also not the first time multi-payoffs has happened this leg (actually the 7th or so).

< pitapino: The only reason <compatriot battles> got a pool of 15,000 was because of the odds that everyone saw with their eyes on the screen. >

There could be many reasons why it has a good pool. Maybe people found it interesting, or it was near the end of leg. For this bet, maybe they saw it as "if I randomly place money on a line, I have a 1 in 2 chance of winning <some> money, even if it's not much; compare that to regular bets, which are usually 1:3 or even 1:81).

< I haven't played in a year and a half >

You just registered a month ago.

< You should have explained on the betting page that the odds we were seeing was not accurate. >

I did: "Note: This bet will have 4 winners, so prepare for multi-payoffs."

If you're not sure what that means, just ask. People have done it before, and I have answered them.

< Even someone who has played for many years was fooled by the posted odds. Is <wordfunph> getting 14,000 for those two picks? If the answer is no the bet should be null+void. >

I wouldn't really say <wordfunph> was fooled. All he did was copy and paste the bet.

Now I do have 1 multi-payoff bet out there (World Cup R3: Pick Four (Winners)), but I think that could be the last one this leg.

<TL;DR>: There is no error. That's just the way multiple payoffs work. The odds will be worse than posted. I'm not refunding the bet. If you're not happy, then don't bet on bets with multi-payoffs. If you're not sure of something, ask.

< Mark: So there is an error. If the software is offering 25/1 on a player winning a game then you should pay 25/1. >

I agree. In that situation, only <one> winner is declared, so you will get full odds. In multiple payoffs, you won't.

< Am I supposed to know what the odds are when the software doesn't?? >

The final odds will depend on what the winners are, how many winners there are, and what the odds of the winners are.

< That bet should be null and void, I still don't understand why you refunded on the previous days wagers, >

Sorry, which bet did I refund that I was not supposed to?

< If I put 10 pounds on Man Utd to score first at the real bookies at 5/1 then I expect my winnings to be 50 quid, I don't see how you aren't getting this. If the odds are 100/1 they're 100/1 otherwise say so. >

I don't see how <you> aren't getting this. If you put 10 bucks on something at 5:1 odds, then you will receive 5:1 odds <if> you don't have to split your earnings with another winning line.

The reason why the odds aren't displayed as they <would've> paid, is that the software doesn't know I will pay more than 1 line. It's flexible like that.

< I've got 580 cb's on Yi at decimal odds of 6.84 to 1. That means I should win over 3k if he wins. If the odds are wrong then now would be a good time to say so? >

Looks like you fell a little short:

<229. MarkFinan -1,346>

<MarkFinan: Is the day over yet Frederick? Exactly. By close of business tonight I'll have more cb's than you.>

Not quite:

<5. FSR 7,554>

< Apr-16-15 Chessgames Bookie: < ... What's the lowest amount of cb's someone has placed top ten with?>

<moppa> placed 10th in Fall 2013 with only 2,711 chessbucks. However, during that leg the Bookie was inactive for much of the time, meaning nobody had time to make a big profit; it can't be fairly compared to other legs.

If Fall 2013 is excluded, the answer is <Ragh>'s c$3,701 from Summer 2011. Note, however, that neither Summer 2011 or Fall 2013 had a Pay Day; the current record for a leg with a Pay Day is <posoo>'s c$6,052 from Summer 2014. >

Chessgames Bookie chessforum (kibitz #8336)

The lowest ever amount someone placed 10th place is 2711 cbs. Excluding the 1000 cbs given at the beginning of the leg, that's just 1711 cbs of profit.

< 10. refutor 3,104 >

Firstly, when it says "Sep-18-15", it means by the end of Sep-18-15 <cg> time.

But anyway, that is the only bet where tiebreaks are not a factor. All other bets might not be paid off until tiebreaks are done (that is, pre-R3 bets).