Trying to clear a debt, a sport gambling lawyer has three days to locate what is believed to be a non-existent object while avoiding a watchful detective.

Perhaps you are correct.

My response is a matter of courtesy, not curiosity. Your tweaked logline does not induce me to want to know who/what it is, to wit, read the script. There still is no bait on the hook. Or rather, there's a mystery bait. I don't know what it is, have no idea how it may smell or taste, no idea whatsoever if what there is about it that I might find appealing. You expect me to accept on faith that I'm going to like it.

Maybe some will bite on mystery bait. I won't. If you think your tactic will actually enhance the chances of your script getting read, well, good luck -- because IMHO you're going to need it. One man's opinion.

You support my original decision to not include it in the log line because unless you read the script you won't know who/what it is. The struggle for the our protagonist, lawyer, is to locate something believed to not exist, the tony bill, and avoid the people who are protecting it.

I'm confess to being clueless: who/what is a 'legendary tony bill'?

Just say he's a lawyer with a sports gambling debt.

With four days to find the legendary tony bill, a lawyer and hotel clerk must avoid its guardians and a watchful detective.

ugh, no thats not right....perhaps its not important for the logline what kind of things hes gambling on...

maybe it should be " "...a gambling sports-lawyer..." or is that just as confusing?

Thank you everyone for your feedback and willingness to explain your comments. Definitely appreciated.