Chit Chat
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Cannot be bothered with the comments I'll get on the horsie forum, enough intellectual souls on here to ridicule me 
Anyway its EW betting, been backing horses for near enough 40 years & its the place betting that puzzles me when a horse race is reduced from eight to seven runners I feel the punter is getting totally mugged but is it me or am I right.
An example
8 runners I back two 5/1 shots £1 ew total stake £4, they both get placed second & third place odds are a 1/5 1,2,3 so I get £2 back for each horse resulting in my money back.
Same 8 runners they take out an 11/2 shot making it seven runners, my two horses again come second & third resulting in the bookies only paying first & second, but they still clobber you with the 15% rule 4 so my return is nothing for the horse that comes third & I get 5/4 for the place on my horse coming second which returns £2.25 then they hit me with the 15% rule 4 leaving me with a return of £2.06
So no non runners I get £4 back a non runner I barely get back half at £2.06
So my question is is the punter getting totally mugged on ew betting when the places & odds change & a rule 4 takes place.
Yes I know what the answer is don't bet ew
Anyway its EW betting, been backing horses for near enough 40 years & its the place betting that puzzles me when a horse race is reduced from eight to seven runners I feel the punter is getting totally mugged but is it me or am I right.
An example
8 runners I back two 5/1 shots £1 ew total stake £4, they both get placed second & third place odds are a 1/5 1,2,3 so I get £2 back for each horse resulting in my money back.
Same 8 runners they take out an 11/2 shot making it seven runners, my two horses again come second & third resulting in the bookies only paying first & second, but they still clobber you with the 15% rule 4 so my return is nothing for the horse that comes third & I get 5/4 for the place on my horse coming second which returns £2.25 then they hit me with the 15% rule 4 leaving me with a return of £2.06
So no non runners I get £4 back a non runner I barely get back half at £2.06
So my question is is the punter getting totally mugged on ew betting when the places & odds change & a rule 4 takes place.
Yes I know what the answer is don't bet ew
Show More
If you back each way on the Betfair Exchange when a race is reduced to 7 runners, you still get the 3rd place, but at reduced odds.
Place betting odds have been a joke in this country for centuries, and it's about time it was addressed.
The horse that finishes 2nd is better than the horse who finishes 3rd, so their place odds should reflect that.
Big firms won't alter their odds, so the course books can't either.
It should be on the same lines as in the U.S. with Win, Place and Show.
But if it happened here, the big firms would get together and change it to suit themselves, not punters.
Place betting odds have been a joke in this country for centuries, and it's about time it was addressed.
The horse that finishes 2nd is better than the horse who finishes 3rd, so their place odds should reflect that.
Big firms won't alter their odds, so the course books can't either.
It should be on the same lines as in the U.S. with Win, Place and Show.
But if it happened here, the big firms would get together and change it to suit themselves, not punters.
It's a piss take to be honest. If I'm backing e/w then it's usually only on multi's, and if it's early in the day then I hate to back in races with the bare eight runners because you know what's going to happen.
I only back e/w singles at 20/1 ish, but if it only manages a place I only get 2/1 on my stake. Win only and half your stake.
I only back e/w singles at 20/1 ish, but if it only manages a place I only get 2/1 on my stake. Win only and half your stake.
There are selected races on the Betfair Sportsbook where you can back place only multiples.
always annoyed me pumps
if when i put my bet on the bookies are paying a 1/4 1,2,3,4 on sixteen runners
and they pull on out its now 1,2,3 that's altering the conditions after you had the bet
yes would be open to abuse but tell me the bookies don't pay a trainer/owner to pull
a horse out of a big handicap to save a fortune on 4th place
if when i put my bet on the bookies are paying a 1/4 1,2,3,4 on sixteen runners
and they pull on out its now 1,2,3 that's altering the conditions after you had the bet
yes would be open to abuse but tell me the bookies don't pay a trainer/owner to pull
a horse out of a big handicap to save a fortune on 4th place
Totally agree Wit
8 to 7
16 to 15
Sc rewed both ways, & yes the bookies save a fortune
Always thought there was a slush fund the big bookies use to pay off trainers to withdraw a horse a grand here a grand there, how much do you think they actually save, plenty on a rule 4 then loads more without paying 4th place.
8 to 7
16 to 15
Sc rewed both ways, & yes the bookies save a fortune
Always thought there was a slush fund the big bookies use to pay off trainers to withdraw a horse a grand here a grand there, how much do you think they actually save, plenty on a rule 4 then loads more without paying 4th place.
The Betfair sportsbook is a total waste of time to be compared to Broyles is a very bad shoqw indeed
A slush fund of a grand won't work these days.
If the trainer of a rag knows his horse can't win, he can make more than a grand laying it on Betfair.
And if it's a proper rag, there will be no rule 4, they just dodge paying on whatever gets 4th.
In races like this you sometimes see two different books at the races.
Bookie 1 is going a quarter the odds and it's 7/1 the field
Bookie 2 is going win only and its 8/1 the field, and his rags will have larger prices than Bookie 1.
If the trainer of a rag knows his horse can't win, he can make more than a grand laying it on Betfair.
And if it's a proper rag, there will be no rule 4, they just dodge paying on whatever gets 4th.
In races like this you sometimes see two different books at the races.
Bookie 1 is going a quarter the odds and it's 7/1 the field
Bookie 2 is going win only and its 8/1 the field, and his rags will have larger prices than Bookie 1.
pumphol.
04 May 15 19:34
The Betfair sportsbook is a total waste of time to be compared to Broyles is a very bad shoqw indeed
I used it for a place only treble last week on the AW.
Got the first 2 home, a winner and a 2nd, but the double only paid 6/5.
I decided to put in one more to make it a treble.
I was stuck between 2 in the same race, a 7/1 shot and a 16/1 shot.
I tossed a coin and the 7/1 shot got the vote. It traded at 1.14 for a place in running (I got 2.7) but I never took my stake back.
I have no idea why it traded that low as it was last of 8
Naturally, the 16/1 shot got placed
04 May 15 19:34
The Betfair sportsbook is a total waste of time to be compared to Broyles is a very bad shoqw indeed
I used it for a place only treble last week on the AW.
Got the first 2 home, a winner and a 2nd, but the double only paid 6/5.
I decided to put in one more to make it a treble.
I was stuck between 2 in the same race, a 7/1 shot and a 16/1 shot.
I tossed a coin and the 7/1 shot got the vote. It traded at 1.14 for a place in running (I got 2.7) but I never took my stake back.
I have no idea why it traded that low as it was last of 8
Naturally, the 16/1 shot got placed
If you have to back ew back late. The rules are clear, have been in place in various forms for years, and as you would expect are slanted in favour of the layers (EVEN on here)
You all know this of course, and I only posted because of Pumphol's post re the Brown Envelope/Slush Fund. This myth has been around for about 50 years AND not once has anyone (bookie (or rep), Trainer (or rep) or investigative journalist (if such an animal exists in the Racing world) ever blown the whistle on this reputed practice. Not even Ken Payne
The simple reason is that it doesn't happen. McCririck used to spout this crap years ago until someone proved statistically that the incidence of non runners in 8 runner races and in 16 runner handicaps was exactly what you would expect given the number of runners.
Haven't we been here before
)You all know this of course, and I only posted because of Pumphol's post re the Brown Envelope/Slush Fund. This myth has been around for about 50 years AND not once has anyone (bookie (or rep), Trainer (or rep) or investigative journalist (if such an animal exists in the Racing world) ever blown the whistle on this reputed practice. Not even Ken Payne
The simple reason is that it doesn't happen. McCririck used to spout this crap years ago until someone proved statistically that the incidence of non runners in 8 runner races and in 16 runner handicaps was exactly what you would expect given the number of runners. Haven't we been here before
Not sure we have been here before on chit chat, maybe somewhere else 
It wasn't on politics forum or the Tai Kai forum.
I got quite excited when a filly I owned was declared for a 16-runner nursery at Southwell in 1998. I assumed that the Ladbrokes rep would make himself known when I got to the track and after withdrawing her I would see a monkey plus expenses appear on my account statement the following week.
Nothing of the sort. All 16 ran, I had £3,000 to £360 each way and watched her fight through the kickback to finish like a train into fifth, a head behind the fourth.
Nothing of the sort. All 16 ran, I had £3,000 to £360 each way and watched her fight through the kickback to finish like a train into fifth, a head behind the fourth.
I always wondered why when 2 places are paid it isn't 1/3 the odds a place?
Love the Betfair sportsbook today 
Didn't really fancy anything on form, so had go at the percentages.
4 trebles and an each way acca. 4 winners.
Didn't really fancy anything on form, so had go at the percentages.
4 trebles and an each way acca. 4 winners.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539