Removed and settled runners from Cheltenham A/P lists?

Monumental error I suspect.  It will look really weird reinstating any of the excluded runners over the next few weeks.

Yep, have been backing the odd horse with a view to a supp....they have now been removed after this scratching stage.   Obviously, they were never in the race in the first place ffs.

I did try to warn Betfair it was making a horlicks half way through the Champion Hurdle market mullering.  As ever, it presumes it knows best and ploughs on regardless.

Was looking for this thread. I was wondering the same thing. It must be a foul-up, surely. It'll take ages to put right
if past form is anything to go by. Have you been in touch with them HM?

I mean, since they finished up all 4 championship races?

Anyone who only laid "non-runners" will have been paid out. I expect it's just a ploy to get some PC into the bank
earlier than it was due.

Pete - they don't pay out on the non-runners in case the race is abandoned and the whole market is void.  Definitely a ****-up, but if they can't get antepost horses right what faith can people have I more unusual or complicated stuff?

Yes, I rang them Pete.  Spoke to someone who didn't sound like he handle on much, who would have spoken to someone equally clueless I’d imagine.

I don't know what's going on in Market Ops but that whole Department, which used to be brilliant imo, is now barely fit-for-purpose.  It takes a week(s) to get anything added to a market, they sometimes veto requests based on their own opinion of what may or not have a chance (blimey) and they've demonstrated quite clearly today that they have no idea about entries, scratchings, supplementaries etc.

Obviously been a change of personnel in the last year or two and it ain't working, not to my satisfaction anyway.

Just got a tweet. They've changed the rules and this is correct under the new rules.

Think I'll sell my shares.

Rule 13.2

Please be aware that runners who have not been entered at the various entry stages may be removed
from relevant race markets and all matched customer bet prices set to 1.0 even if there are later
supplementary stages. Should it appear likely that a specific runner may actually be supplemented
into the race this runner will be reinstated with all matched customer bets set back to the original
prices.

Fair dinkums, not a cods-up.  But what a weird way to proceed!  I do a nice trade in laying non-entrants but I guess I may well pick up the odd large windfall instead when a supplementary entry occurs.

For F***s Sake. 

I consider myself to be one of the larger ante-post players, I might be wrong (maybe not these days as much as BF has ripped the @rse out of it).  Was anyone consulted about this or asked if they thought it was a good idea? 

How about, if you're desperate to remove a runner, take out the ones that have just been scratched....but leave the ones in that weren't entered in the first place please.

It takes WEEKS to get BF to add a runner....now they're going to pull it out just because there's been a scratching stage (clearly, the horse couldn't have been scratched)...then it will take WEEKS to get the flipping thing added back in again, and in the meantime it's won the race you had hoped it would and the price has totally gone.

Are they trying to bury ante-post as too much aggro??? Doing a very good job of it if so.

Rule 13.2

Please be aware that runners who have not been entered at the various entry stages may be removed from relevant race markets and all matched customer bet prices set to 1.0 even if there are later supplementary stages. Should it appear likely that a specific runner may actually be supplemented into the race this runner will be reinstated with all matched customer bets set back to the original prices.

This is NOT an entry stage, Betfair.  It is a SCRATCHING stage.  There was no opportunity for a horse to be ENTERED at this latest SCRATCHING stage so why have you removed them?

This caused choas in the GC market as the whole market was 2.5% under-round for about two hours afterwards. It has only righted itself now. I suppose they are suggesting there are very few supplementary entries in these markets although I would have no idea of the stats for that.

In my humble opinion it is not for Betfair to:

a) Guess what may or may not happen regarding the make and shape of future races

b) Guess whether a horse may or may not line-up and/or be good enough to win

and it is for Betfair to:

c) Manage markets efficiently

d) Add horses to markets, when requested, if currently eligible and not publically retired or injured

e) Expect the unexpected and cover all angles

Currently, they are doing both of a and b and none of c, d or e.

HM, I'm pretty much with you. I don't understand their business model any longer. I don't think they do either.
To me, this is a minor irritation compared to the rule that denies the layer liability offsetting when laying the
field, but it's another nail in the coffin. The things that made BF different are gradually being chipped away.

I just don't know how Betfair can justify any of these decisions as making sense. It doesn't suit anyone, and it clearly lowers the liquidity. It means layers can't lay, so backers don't get decent prices.