>-Jeff asked (in his initial message to me) that the UT promote/sponsor/support this in some way. While I won't speak for Michel, I'd be surprised if he'd wanted to get involved with something that was, essentially, gambling.
>
>-There are state laws regarding gambling. I live in PA and Jeff lives in CA. Michel is in Canada, which is an entirely different country. In which location would a contract be valid?

I figure the UT and the general population thereof would be just witnesses.

Sounds like the old joke for confusing the law students:
A Mongolian airplane leased to a Vietnamese carrier crashes exactly where the borders of Poland, Slovakia and Czech republic meet. It was insured by a Swiss insurance company. Crew is half Chinese half Indian. Passengers are mostly Australians and New Zealanders. Their travel agency is based in Malaysia. Who will bury the survivors?

>-Just assume for one minute that it was totally legitimate to bet. You have to have an escrow agent to hold the $$$.

>But again, it is more complicated than you might think. (And I actually checked into this, more out of curiosity than anything else).

I know, having a lunch out is a contract. The legal system will eventually take all the fun out of everything.

Still, how do the Brits manage to wager just like that, and don't really involve lawyers at that?

>-The only wagering I ever do is dinner bets on sports games - in other words, friendly wagers. I would hardly characterize Jeff's challenge to me as a friendly wager.

Me too, even less. I only take those "man, if you can this piece of code with which we were tearing hairs out, you got a beer". The last two Guinness cans I got that way still serve - as ashtrays in my car.