It's been years since I have done a BOG bet but no doubt you are correct due to the bookmakers greed.
They want the cake and they want to eat it all. There were non-runners in the race but there was no Rule 4, so why should they reduce the price they guaranteed you at the time you placed the bet. Obviously tucked away in their rules somewhere, but surely they should shoulder some risk if they want custom from us.
I think as far as this comp goes you should get +35 otherwise it gets just gets too complicated for a bit of fun and Samacas.
I think there must have been a rule 4
retriever , all together there were 8 nr, from memory some of those were after i placed my bet with william hill, they settled the bet at around 4/1 which seems to confirm that non runners came later. Now it's not for me to say how best to make rules but logic dictates that unless we account for NRs then anomolies will crop up.
EXAMPLE we have a 1/3 fav who is a NR, the 5/1 2nd fav then wins at evens do we really think it should be settled at 5/1 ?
Last sunday i did point out the relevent numbers with some explanation so has to help
Samacas and avoid any doubts, what does surprise me is that nearly a week on others haven't commented and confirmed there was a rule 4.