What is the biggest ever traded matched on here?

win final nadal v federer 3 2 result, over 50 mill matched

Wow, thats insane.

English Soccer / Barclays Premier League / Winner 2009/10 400,175 10,323,871
UEFA Champions League / Winner 2009/10 1,130,819 3,432,838
English Soccer / Barclays Premier League / Relegation 2009/10 190,808 2,848,723
World Cup / Winner 2010 1,176,129 2,462,544
UK / Next General Election / Most Seats 85,532 1,826,825

world cup will be huge

yeah Fed /Nadal was the biggest

I think the record on a footbal match is about 25m , which was Argentina vMexicio in 2006

I expect with Tennis though there is a lot less money risked than on football, as it is just recycled by the traders .

I only bet on Tennis for interest occasionally, i recall one match where by the end i'd apparenyly placed £500 worth of bets , but i was never more than £18 red or green on anyone

Yes, Federer v Nadal was certainly the biggest turnover on a tennis match to date. Tobermory's point about money in and out is probably partially correct, but not sure about less being risked.
There are regulalry single bets over 250k matched prior to the start of early round matches of Grand Slams (usually on Federer or Nadal at extremely short odds). 2008 French Open 2nd round there was a single bet of 600k on Nadal prior to the start of play. Last year's Wimbledon final had over 8 million matched prior to start of play.

2004 US election winner market traded over £28 million if i recall correctly, Gore trading at 1.3 about midnight

world cup will be huge

Yep, when I started out in 2006 I grew my bank by nearly 20% in two weeks.

In money that translated to a profit of £375 :D

Pretty sure some horse races attract £100 bets

2008 French Open 2nd round there was a single bet of 600k on Nadal prior to the start of play.



:0

I think some nutter lobbed a million into the grand national either last year or the year before.

I'm sure you're all wrong about Fed/Nadal. That was the biggest at one point but then Fed/Roddick last year surpassed it, mainly due to going the distance - and beyond!!

I wonder if Betfair will exclude some world cup markets from the premium charge, because if they dont some big gamblers may look elsewhere. I hope to dramatically increase my stakes for the wc but I'm on the pc boundary so I dont want to dip in because of a few bets.

They want the bigger winners to go elsewhere, they might one day decide to exclude some really crud markets from PC perhaps, to encourage layers to return, but they're not going to care about a market that will have plenty of liquidity anyway.

I wasn't around for the last world cup so I dont know how big it was, but if it's a lot bigger than normal markets we might have some big losers that could get caught, footballers etc. Because they can potentially bet a lot more than they do on normal markets, they could effectively find themselves paying pc because of their strike rate on around 10 bets rather than over 250.

More money for the shareholders bubbly

cdog it was tennis for sure .... makes horses racing mickey mouse

we might have some big losers that could get caught, footballers etc

doubt any whales pay pc, more likely the purely punt and are long term losers or winner paying more commision than is needed for pc

PC payers' outright bets are surely likely to reduce their comm over the long term.

But I'm not a fan of the mechanics of the pc and think it shd have a rebate element.

askari1 04 Mar 15:47


PC payers' outright bets are surely likely to reduce their comm over the long term.





Outright markets were a good part of the reason I pay PC.

askari, I'm not looking at this from the angle of a pc payer. I'm more or less a straight gambler with total charges atm of around 25%. If I increase my stakes for the world cup, I could be in a situation where if I win during the world cup I'm likely to pay pc. If I lose I lose. Under those circumstances I would have to look at other places to bet. It would be different if I was a regular pc payer.

What makes you different from any other PC payer. They're not some mysterious breed of people. If I raise my stakes and have a nice win , i pay more too, that's what the PC does to you.

You'll have to do what the rest of us do and when you get near your 20% threshhold, either bet elsewhere for the extras or lower your stakes accordingly. Being on 25% "at the moment" doesn't make much of a case for you being exempt. In fact it's pretty crazy that you think you should be.

People only whine about it when it seems they might have to pay it, before that it's just something that other, naughty, people pay.

But if you lose you will eventually get back to under 20% and start paying pc again. I probably wont ever pay pc again under normal markets.

huh?

Why should it be one rule for you and one for me? If I have a winning run I pay PC, if I have a losing one I don't.

If you paid just a little less commission you'd be paying it quite often. I fail to see why you should be counted a special case just because you'd like a smash up on the world cup. I'd like a smash up on all kinds of things, but can't because of the PC

You're wrong Lori. If you are someone who is likely to achieve a winrate that averages less than 20% over time then you can afford all kinds of "smash ups" because any loss will eventually be a rebate for you.

Someone who knows they are going to average 25% commission over time has to be much more circumspect. If they ever go into PC territory (by, for example, overstaking a few events and getting lucky) then they will never get the PC back.

You're assuming that edges don't get eroded over time. You're always in the position that your next PC payment could well be your last as the game gets tougher.