Help please with possible palpable error.

How much you got on? If small I doubt it will matter.

2 bets, £8 win and £5 e/w at 100/1.

I would take 1.02 you are fine, but could be gubbed.

Thanks for the help, he is now 15/1 on Betfair !

good luck and hope he comes through for you. then the bookie comes through for you too.

I wouldn't lay off too much - you could end up in the ultimate bad position if you fear a palp.

For what reason do you fear the palp - just that one book had him at 100 and the rest at 33s? Or were there a number of withdrawals etc and they hadn't made a new book?

Purely that their price was 100/1 and next best price was 33/1, across the High Street on Easyodds. He was tied for 5th after round 2.

I'm not going to bother laying off, for £18 I'll just let it ride.

100/1 is about 1% probability
33/1 is about 3% probability

They'd have a tough time trying to convince a Judge that a 2% difference in probability is Palpable Error.

I'd definitely sue in a small claims court if they tried it on

Escapee 09 Jan 14:36
100/1 is about 1% probability
33/1 is about 3% probability

They'd have a tough time trying to convince a Judge that a 2% difference in probability is Palpable Error.

I'd definitely sue in a small claims court if they tried it on

I don't understand why most people seem to think in this way. 2% being a 'small' difference. One event is three times more likely to occur than the other. To me that is a huge difference.

In decimal odds 101 is to 34 as 10.1 is to 3.4.
In one case there is roughly a '2% difference' in the other roughly a '20% difference'.

If you ask a bookie why they run a book at 120% they'll probably say to make a profit and allow for a margin of error.

A 2% variation in probability is well within the boundaries of the error margins when the probabilities can only be guesstiimated at best.



Or do you know the outcome probabilities of such an event with a greater accuracy than 2% ?

I think not

Or do you know the outcome probabilities of such an event with a greater accuracy than 2% ?

I think not

I can estimate outcome probabilities with greater accuracy than 2% on longshots.

For instance, I'll be able to asses whether something is closer to 1000/1 than 500/1. Using your line of reasoning that would imply a level of accuracy within 0.1%.

What I mean to make clear is that if an event is priced at 101% back and 99% lay, a longshot can still be way out of line.

Wonder what happened with this

Jan 9, 2010 -- 1:36PM, Escapee wrote:

100/1 is about 1% probability33/1 is about 3% probabilityThey'd have a tough time trying to convince a Judge that a 2% difference in probability is Palpable Error.I'd definitely sue in a small claims court if they tried it on

I agree.

How would I do this?

I would have the bookie present several examples to the judge of prior errors that are considered palpable.

I would then calculate the percentage they were out.

Chances are, they would be larger percentages making this one look tight.

I would also show other events and sports where the bookies prices were paying better than 5% (football, baseball) than their competitors yet weren't considered 'palpable'.

Then, watch them squirm

I'd also wear a neck brace and walk with a cane....the suffering and stress showing.

In UK, Palpable error is illegal under the UK Gambling Act (all bets are recoverable in law - including bad bets) and Unfair Terms and Conditions Act.
For the latter palpable is one sided and undefinable. Bookmakers take views or used to - in law they are the expert at setting odds not the customer.
Bookmakers will not go to Small Claims Court but pay out as they know it is an area which they have no right to still keep in their terms and conditions. The GC ahould also pick this up as they have a legal duty to ensure gambling is conducted in a fair manner.