Forums

General Betting

There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 621 comments are related to the topic:
REVISITED : THE FAIRNESS OF INRUNNING BETTING

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 7 of 16  •  Previous | 1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 16 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 621
By:
birch2
When: 17 Nov 09 22:30
Shapeshifter

They will not take out runners in an IR event, whatever the rules say - The rules may force them to stop IR as we know it, but instantly taking runners out WILL NOT HAPPEN
By:
Roger OASIS
When: 17 Nov 09 23:21
birch2 17 Nov 23:30


Shapeshifter

They will not take out runners in an IR event, whatever the rules say - The rules may force them to stop IR as we know it, but instantly taking runners out WILL NOT HAPPEN


Very much agree birch2. As someone has posted above, what about the horse that hits the fence and the jockey is almost unseated - is the poor BF operator supposed to press 'suspend' until it's clear whether the jockey has managed to stay on?
By:
ewood
When: 18 Nov 09 00:17
Imagine trying to decide the exact point a horse has fallen or a rider has been unseated?? Would a more practical solution be Betfair forewarning in running players that people using their account to lay horses that have fallen/unseated etc will be barred from the site and then applying some effective monitoring to enforce such a rule? Would it be possible to set some parameters and criteria into some software that could flag up accounts with an unusually high percentage of such lay bets being matched?
By:
Moon Light
When: 18 Nov 09 02:17
It may be possible to deliver pics over the Net with less than a second delay.
It's impossible to guarantee this. Internet delay times vary dramatically with Net traffic and very much depend where you are in relation to the source.
By:
not_drwho
When: 18 Nov 09 06:18
"It was the same as the BBC TV feed."

That's impresssive because hithertoo the processing time alone has been around 1sec, not taking into account the transmission time.
I'll speak to my guys at the beeb and see how they're doing it. There is the possibility however that their terrestrial tx time was also slightly delayed compared to normal. I'll check anyway.
By:
Napoleone di Buonaparte
When: 18 Nov 09 10:02
RUK pics on BF have matched the clock on Sky Sat a few times
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 10:08
Pardon me for being a "thicko", but if the in - running rules and opportunities are the same for everyone, where is the unfairness ?
By:
Napoleone di Buonaparte
When: 18 Nov 09 10:10
How much more info is transmitted with pics than the actual prices? All that stuff on Justin TV seems pretty fast and thats all kids playing about with cheap pc's and dreamboxes.
By:
Moon Light
When: 18 Nov 09 10:23
Here are the results of two traceroutes to BF from my machine, last night and this morning. You can see it's about 40ms per hop. So what you get depends on where you live. It doesn't reach all the way to BF, because they don't respond to ping, a fashionable discourtesy.

traceroute to www.betfair.com (212.62.21.228), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 ipcop (192.168.0.3) 0.637 ms 0.558 ms 0.419 ms
2 ge0-1.lns2-c7.brm.planet.net.uk (62.25.204.233) 82.628 ms 32.303 ms 32.890 ms
3 ge4-0.pbr-1.brm.as5388.net (62.25.204.226) 39.178 ms 33.331 ms 33.971 ms
4 195.92.55.124 (195.92.55.124) 42.368 ms 41.658 ms 38.016 ms
5 195.80.72.218 (195.80.72.218) 43.823 ms 42.301 ms 38.273 ms
6 tenge2-1.ber-2.the.as5388.net (195.92.55.81) 43.105 ms 37.322 ms 37.934 ms
7 ae0-1701-xcr1.lsw.cw.net (166.63.211.52) 58.534 ms 39.303 ms 39.110 ms
8 * * *
9 xe-4-0-0.xcr1.lnd.cw.net (195.2.25.30) 44.007 ms xe-4-1-0.xcr1.lnd.cw.net (195.2.25.54) 73.670 ms xe-4-0-0.xcr1.lnd.cw.net (195.2.25.30) 56.614 ms
10 ge-5-0-0.dcr2.lnd.cw.net (195.2.25.6) 38.674 ms 38.542 ms 37.924 ms
11 csr01-ve240.lo1.cw.net (64.69.188.2) 40.874 ms 39.502 ms 39.925 ms
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
traceroute www.betfair.com
traceroute to www.betfair.com (212.62.21.228), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 ipcop (192.168.0.3) 0.656 ms 0.506 ms 0.380 ms
2 ge0-1.lns2-c7.brm.planet.net.uk (62.25.204.233) 48.999 ms 31.654 ms 60.854 ms
3 ge4-0.pbr-1.brm.as5388.net (62.25.204.226) 35.068 ms 33.621 ms 33.934 ms
4 195.92.55.124 (195.92.55.124) 38.951 ms 38.332 ms 38.891 ms
5 195.80.72.218 (195.80.72.218) 42.381 ms 43.229 ms 43.452 ms
6 tenge2-1.ber-2.the.as5388.net (195.92.55.81) 44.920 ms 38.580 ms 37.951 ms
7 ae0-1701-xcr1.lsw.cw.net (166.63.211.52) 44.441 ms 37.151 ms 39.012 ms
8 * * *
9 xe-5-1-0-xcr1.lnd.cw.net (195.2.25.133) 55.892 ms 47.773 ms xe-4-2-0.xcr1.lnd.cw.net (195.2.25.58) 38.812 ms
10 ge-5-0-0.dcr2.lnd.cw.net (195.2.25.6) 72.646 ms 49.795 ms 43.261 ms
11 csr01-ve240.lo1.cw.net (64.69.188.2) 47.636 ms 57.356 ms 44.611 ms
12 * * *
By:
Muqbil
When: 18 Nov 09 10:24
artie 18 Nov 11:08
Pardon me for being a "thicko"


No worries m8, we are used to you by now.
By:
Amanda Hugnkiss
When: 18 Nov 09 10:29
artie 18 Nov 11:08
Pardon me for being a "thicko", but if the in - running rules and opportunities are the same for everyone, where is the unfairness ?

You are no thicko mate, your point is well made. Opportunities is the correct word. Not limited to specific people. The opportunity is there for everyone...............all after the fact as well.
By:
frog2
When: 18 Nov 09 10:34
What a crazy statement. On that logic the opportunity could be said to be there for everybody to rob a bank or mug an OAP. Just because an opportunity exists does not make it right or fair to exploit it.
By:
Feck N. Eejit
When: 18 Nov 09 10:59
Pardon me for being a "thicko", but if the in - running rules and opportunities are the same for everyone, where is the unfairness ?

We could all be running banks so they deserve their mega bonuses and pensions. Is that what you mean artie.

In case you haven't noticed, some people have to work. Not everyone is a silver spoon bankrolled by daddy.
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 11:01
Is it "right or fair" for knowledgeable form students to win money off "pin stickers" ? Is it "right or fair" for Bookmakers to take money from "mugs" with no sense of value or knowledge of percentages etc.etc.? The "unfair" list is endless . Why target in running for your latest moral crusade ? As an affirmed thicko (and full time punter), I'm happy with the status quo.Leave well alone.
By:
Muqbil
When: 18 Nov 09 11:09
artie, can you not differentiate between;

a) A pin sticker who actually has a chance (however remote) where ever his pin lands.

b) A stay at home ir player who backs a horse that he see's running well. Only trouble is the horse is already on the floor with a terminal injury.
By:
Feck N. Eejit
When: 18 Nov 09 11:10
Is it "right or fair" for knowledgeable form students to win money off "pin stickers" ? Is it "right or fair" for Bookmakers to take money from "mugs" with no sense of value or knowledge of percentages etc.etc.?

It's easy enough to distinguish fast pic players from slow pic players. How do you distinguish knowledgable form students from lucky punters artie? The former could employ loads of computers and still be a total mug.
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 11:40
Muq. - The stay at home player (me) can leave the house if he wishes. I can't be bothered but still bet IR occasionally. If he were locked in the house during racing hours, that's a different matter.
By:
Jack Bauer '24'
When: 18 Nov 09 11:48
not_drwho, ask your contacts at the BBC why up until June their pictures on Virgin Media were about 1 second behind analogue but since then are now almost 4 seconds behind.
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 11:49
"How do you distinguish knowledgable punters from .......". Well, some of the knowledgable ones come on here talking about their dreams of mass "mug fleecing", and how they can't get large bets on at the prices they want etc. ! ! !
By:
SHAPESHIFTER
When: 18 Nov 09 12:14
I reread the original post:

1. It has come to light in the mainstream press that there is a serious disadvantage for stay at home punters with professionals hiring out expensive boxes at racecourses to take advantage of picture delays.

So the opportunity is there for me to either rent a box or have a track side team to assist me or be at the track myself. It is my choice to not go thus, in the oppinion of some, I am handicapping myself. So be it and if I choose to play in-running, it is my choice to do it from home as it was the same as my choice to upgrade to broadband while others rode dial-up.

2. Since the beginning of this week a horse that unseats its rider (by falling or elsewise) cannot win the race.


This is an issue that betfair will have to address in their rules. When hockey first started up on betfair, they said the games were not monitored after the puck drop so if a goal went in, the market was not suspended. As well, when the game finished, the market would not always be suspended on time. We were aware and accepted the rules of betting in-running for hockey.

Betfair will have to come up with the wording but it has been widely accepted for years that in the WIN market, as it becomes apparent that a horse will not cross the line first, layers will go up to 1001/1. This happens PRIOR to the winning horse hitting the line. The rule now states, in addition to following other rules such as jumping all assigned hurdles, that if a horse is a faller, it cannot win. This is simply a rule that is now in place and the horse that is the faller is no different than a horse that does not complete the course first in the win market who can also be laid up to 1001/1

[i]
3. Betfair, with its Premium Charge and
By:
SHAPESHIFTER
When: 18 Nov 09 12:15
By the way: I had broadband long before most on betfair. Was my advantage "unfair" to those that remained on dial-up?
By:
ewood
When: 18 Nov 09 12:38
Regarding the new ban on remounting, am i right in saying that the Irish have not brought in this rule? If that's so and if Betfair do change the rules for British racing then would in running punters betting on a race at Punchestown be dealing with one set of rules and then 5 minutes later at Fontwell with another??
By:
Feck N. Eejit
When: 18 Nov 09 13:29
The "fairness" of in-running is not an issue. If you don't think something is fair or don't like the rules of the bet, then don't play.

If you replaced in-running with "a shell and pea stall" does the exact same principle apply? Would you be quite happy to see shell and pea stalls licensed and operating in e.g. airports and train stations with tourists being mugged as they enter the country? Would you require notices to be put up "Some movements described as normal by some people may in fact be feigned"?
By:
SHAPESHIFTER
When: 18 Nov 09 14:05
Feck N. Eejit, deal with the reality rather than giving a hypothetical for your stance on the situation.

Your post hasn't swayed my overview on the situation. The betting is based on the rules of horse racing.
By:
SHAPESHIFTER
When: 18 Nov 09 14:06
I may be mistaken but rereading your post, you feel that people are "**ing" by betting from the track or with faster pictures than others.

It is not **ing since most, if not all, that they use is available to most, if not all, that bet in-running.
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 14:14
Feck is concerned because he doesn't like "mugs" losing their money to people with fast pics etc. rather than losing it to him with his superior form knowledge etc. He couldn't care less about "fairness", but he likes to jump on these bandwagons.
By:
Vital Spark
When: 18 Nov 09 14:23
This is a copy of a letter i sent to the Chairman of the Gambling Commission
Dated 24th July 2009.
As yet no reply has been made by anyone.

Sir,The matter of 'In Running Betting' on Horse Racing has for some years
caused me much concern.
The replies i have received from the Commission on the subject do not satisfy me.
This includes a recent Freedom of Information Request.
I am also persuing the matter with the Sports Minister ,i await a reply to my initial letter.

I was going to write to all the Commissioners individually,including your good self,to ask their personal views.
To save me the trouble i hope your office could distribute the message below,to all the Board Members.Thank you.
Regards ******** *********

Sir or Madam, You as a Member of the Board recently endorsed the outcome findings, into the 'In Running Betting Issues Paper'.

Being a Gambler and a customer of Betfair i am well aware of all the issues.
I would like to ask each of you the following,please.

*Did, or do you have any concerns with Horse Racing(in running betting).

*Do you concider that some Gamblers having access to information,faster pictures,etc,before others receive it,to be fair.

*Do you concider that horses that have either been injured,fallen,pulled up,unseated rider,etc,then bets are placed after the mishap,to be fair.

*The Commissions endorsement statement into "In Running"ended by saying this
"Keeping Gambling Fair and Safe For All"
With the above questions in mind,could you explain what this means,please.

I look forward to your replies.

Regards ******** *********
By:
Biscar Two from a mile back
When: 18 Nov 09 14:26
It's easy to see who those that have done their money are

These are the same people who blame the jockey when their horse gets beat imho
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 14:36
The GC probably think " It's that crusading idiot who keeps losing his money on the horses , and can't spell ,again, best ignore him".
By:
Feck N. Eejit
When: 18 Nov 09 14:40
I may be mistaken but rereading your post, you feel that people are "**ing" by betting from the track or with faster pictures than others.

It is not **ing since most, if not all, that they use is available to most, if not all, that bet in-running.


In my analogy anyone is free to open a shell and pea stall.

It's not available to all anyway. Some people work and even if they're off the nearest course might be that far away they won't make work the next day. It's irrelevant in any case. At the point a bet is struck it's either fair or it isn't. How can it be fair if one of the sides knows the horse is already beaten? How can a bet be fair if one side has 7 seconds to cancel while the person trying to match their bet is stuck behind the clock?
By:
Feck N. Eejit
When: 18 Nov 09 14:48
Feck is concerned because he doesn't like "mugs" losing their money to people with fast pics etc. rather than losing it to him with his superior form knowledge etc. He couldn't care less about "fairness", but he likes to jump on these bandwagons.

I recognise the fact that **ing customers is the surest way to get rid of them (they are my cusomers as well as betfair's) but I also despise Thatcherism. Clearly you are a devotee of her philosophy.
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 14:51
How can it be fair if one punter with 20 years experience of horse racing and form etc. is betting against a newcomer with limited knowledge. NOTHING IN BETTING IS FAIR.
By:
Jack Bauer '24'
When: 18 Nov 09 14:54
Biscar, it's easier to tell who the people with an advantage are that are afraid of a level playing field imo.
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 14:55
You could argue that the " surest way to get rid of customers" is to put them against a form expert with a shrewd sense of value.
By:
Vital Spark
When: 18 Nov 09 14:57
artie 18 Nov 15:36
The GC probably think " It's that crusading idiot who keeps losing his money on the horses , and can't spell ,again, best ignore him".

Are you implying i am an idiot ,thats rich coming from the self confessed "thicko'
By:
Feck N. Eejit
When: 18 Nov 09 15:01
artie, how would you go about stopping people with 20 years knowledge betting against newcomers? Who's to say the person with 20 years knowledge would have an advantage anyway?
By:
Napoleone di Buonaparte
When: 18 Nov 09 15:02
artie 18 Nov 15:51


How can it be fair if one punter with 20 years experience of horse racing and form etc. is betting against a newcomer with limited knowledge. NOTHING IN BETTING IS FAIR.

Dont you think people laying after the event is stretching this a bit far though?
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 15:08
I'm suggesting that that is what the man at the GC may say to his colleague. Did you not see the inverted commas ? I think you're a zealot who needs a mission in life to give you a sense of worth. It's a pity you've chosen to try and destroy in running betting for the many thickos like me who are perfectly happy with the current situation.
By:
Vital Spark
When: 18 Nov 09 15:16
Here is the position of the GC,i received this from a Mr Ingram.

There are 2 main
points to consider here.
Firstly the legal position regarding bets placed after the
result is known and
secondly the issue of whether the product being offered
here by Betfair is fair
and open.




Section 9 of the
Gambling Act 2005 states
that a transaction may be a bet despite the fact that the
event has already
occurred i.e. in this case that the horse has fallen and
one party to the
transaction knows that the event has already occurred or
failed to occur. This
means that bets on fallers will still be considered as
legal betting contracts
post Nov 2nd despite the change in the BHA
rules.




The secondary issue
relates to the
fairness of this in respect of the product offered by
Betfair. All operators
have a duty to display warnings to customers where there is
reasonable belief
that they may be relying on 3rd party broadcast
feeds to assist with
their betting. The in running warnings displayed on each
market by Betfair
fulfill this requirement.
By:
artie
When: 18 Nov 09 15:21
In other words "bog off Mr. Vital Spark". Good for them.
Page 7 of 16  •  Previous | 1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 16 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com