Should Betfair customers be able to recover funds from trap bettors?

"People using the standard interface have to go through an in-built protection system that Betfair kindly provide i.e confirm you want to place the bet (after you've entered your stake and odds, too). People using software with one click betting selected aren't likely to be new punters who will be put off the exchange after a bad bet is matched.

This is spot on. The idea that some innocent punter will come in and lose thousands in his first ever bet and never be seen again is quite frankly ludicrous.

or 1.24 and 12.5 in more regular markets.

Certainly you would encounter problems deciding where to draw the line as to what is reasonable. A serious student may take a radically different view from the market in their tissue.

I haven't got the solution to this of course, but I do agree with Feck. I just think it is wrong to be trying to make a profit out of others mistakes, but to be honest I'd be amazed if anything was ever done about it.

Remember when we had the Breeders Cup in Texas?  ATR went on about making it into a party night with your mates, drink lots of Bud, download the form for the whole meet,have a bet etc.  Now, after the Breeders Cup races had finished, they put on a couple of races for horses who  didn't make the cut in the Breeders Cup proper. They had race titles such as The Breeders Cup Handicap etc.  I studied the form for these as well, but I needn't have.  I just put up any prices I liked, and kept getting matched.  At one stage, I was getting an 11/1 shot matched, by some drunken fool, at 3.00!   And was I wrong to do this?  Of course not.  If people are stupid enough to bet on foreign races (which they they no nothing about) because are they drunk, its not my problem.  I will lay horses at as short a price as I can get away with.

Sadly those Breeders Cup nights of mass drunkeness seem to have gone.  It could be down to it being diluted over 2 days, now.  I remember when High Chapperal dead heated, Betfair reported that 6 different horses were backed to win the race while we were waiting for the result of the photo!
Betfair (who were obviously trying to avoid controversy) said that they thought that it was people trying to free up money!  LOL!

that's not a trap bet is it though

"I just think it is wrong to be trying to make a profit out of others mistakes"

But Dave, that is what any serious person attempting to make money on this site is trying to do!

Is it so much worse to put up 1.01 or 1.1 on a dog you think should be evens then put up 2.0 on a football side you think should be double that? I can't for the life of me see how!

I think the line that people would like drawn (that is also impossible to draw) is the line where the backer is getting the bet he thought he was getting.

If someone chooses to bet a horse at 3.0 that should be 12.0, that's entirely their decision.

If someone lays something at 12.5 when they thought they were laying 1.25 then that's a trap bet.

Again, I don't think you can realistically police it, which is why I put forth the suggestions earlier in the thread to help people police themselves and make fewer errors.

i'm amazed at the amount of people that think it's ok

and even more amazed at people that clearly don't understand a trap bet situation

Turtle, don't get me wrong I don't spend my time thinking about this sort of thing and yes are of course correct, everyone here wants to make money. I just can't get with the extremes of it that's all.

The Management, are you seriously suggesting that our good friend Feck would't start trying to trap people, with his new "invisible" interface?  Imagine what he would do with it at the Breeders cup, if we had another photo finish that took 12 minutes to resolve.  People wouldn't remember which horses were involved in the photo and even those who did could easily click an on an adjacent horse's name, when there are no odds against them to highlight which are the 2 involved in the finish!  He would jump at this opportunity!

So if you were looking at a market and you could back unders for 1000 before kick off would you just ignore it ? Bearing in mind somebody has made a silly mistake.

I can give you my word that I would never ignore any mistake whatsoever. If someone had put something up & I was first I would take it. Just like if I found money in the street, I'd pick it up.

As I said earlier in the thread a while back someone made a mistake which I jumped on. It came second and they collected!

The array of responses pretty much just confirm that on this exchange, like everywhere else, self interest pretty much rules the day.
Those who bet in a manner that makes them likely to be trapped one day, if not already, that is those who bet on a quick response, IR trading type way, or use one click betting tools, are most likely to say that trap betting should be banned or controlled in some manner.
Those who bet more deliberately and manually confirm all their bets, and are thus less likely ever to be trapped by stupid, out of line odds, say that trap bets are not a problem and caveat emptor.

So Dave, we've established that you are quite happy to take advantage of people's mistakes (as would anyone), but you seem to think it's wrong to offer a price which would benefit from someone's mistake?

If you don't mind me saying so, that seems more than a little bizarre!

The Management, you were lucky to get a call from Betfair.  Year before last, I was trading on the St Leger market, on the morning that the ante post market was due to close on.  When it did close, they e mailed me to tell me that, although they knew that I was not a cheat and not using inside information, they were still going to void everyone's bets placed during that final hour, because they had become aware that someone with inside information had been laying the favourite, Age Of Aquarius, who did turn out to be a non runner.  I did actually benefit from this decision by Betfair, but I think that it was wrong and that it set a dangerous precedent.

Dave Edwards
If you found a purse on the street with a substatial amount of money in it, together with clear ID of the owner, would you attempt to return it to him/her. If so, with or without the money that was definitely in it when you found it ?

Come on now Turtle, be fair. What I am saying is that I would take advantage of a mistake as I am sure that anyone would, but I would not set out to perpetrate a situation where someone else might make a mistake.

Anyway, I got a lot of homework to do, so I'll bid anyone still reading this goodnight.

Froggy, you have my word that I'd return it, all contents intact.

Bottom feeders, how did you get on today with your trap bets?

Fair enough Dave, I just think we are getting onto very dodgy ground when we talk about morality in betting when we are on a site which we are trying to take other people's money! Good luck with your research.

biscuits, how did you get on today, did you manage to defend any more bookies who con people out of their money?

In case anyone is not aware, biscuits regularly defends bookies who advertise non existant prices, void bets after the off, and bets they deem to be part of "suspicious betting" (once the event has finished, naturally)

Him giving lectures on morality would have been a bit like Harold Shipman giving a talk on care for the elderly!

I have never defended such practices, turtleshead, that's what puts me on the opposite side to a bottom feeding shyster.

Funny, I've seen you do precisely that on various forums. People giving examples of bookies doing that, and lo and behold, there you are to leap to their defence saying how great they are!

Remind me again what it was you said earlier about how horrendous it was to offer simmilar prices in a place market than with the win market, I am sure anyone new could do with a laugh.

If someone mistakenly wrote 1/10 instead of 10/1 on a slip, of course I would condemn the bookie who paid out anything less than 10/1.

So how did your trap bets do todat, turtleshead?

Didn't do any, too busy winning money on the russian games.

How did your moral lecturing on a betting forum go?

I've got a better idea for anyone who could use a laugh,

turtleshead, RocketFACE et al -

advertise your trap bets on here and see how amused Betfair are.

turtleshead 20 Nov 10 01:29 

Why on earth would he do that and draw attention to it when he is trying to make money from it by hoping someone takes it by accident?

You really are stupid, aren't you?

Yes I am stupid, frankly. I'm argueing with a poster named after a stool of faeces protruding from a human bottom. 

If you see trap-bets onsite, post it on the forum, keep it visible and Betfair will likely get around to having a quiet word with the trap-bettor. Its not like Betfair want to see them up there. Its the same as a concession inside a supermarket trying to sell loaves for 99£ instead of 99p. Just embarrassing.

Yuk I'm going to stop reading now.
The imagery is getting revolting.

Btw does the stool from a turtle look like a human.
If so, I wonder who ?

Fine. And maybe you could also encourage people to post on the forum each time they see simmilar prices in a place market as a win market, anything to keep you happy, you snivelling little grass.

By: unitedbiscuits When: 20 Nov 10 22:01
If you see trap-bets onsite, post it on the forum, keep it visible and Betfair will likely get around to having a quiet word with the trap-bettor.


I wouldn't think so

At least you have admitted you are stupid, a small sign of progress I guess.

I don't understand the outright hostility on this thread. Through the market betting histories, you can see that every day, many people make terrible mistakes using Betfair. People who get completely appalling odds through a misclick or a typo. Why would anyone want these to happen?

Only the scum who try to profit from these errors want this to continue. It is that simple!

Naturally, we are wasting our time discussing it though. After all, can anyone think of ANY improvement that Betfair have made based on customer feedback here?

"It is that simple!"

Yes, you certainly are.

What would you like than, anyone who thinks he has been given a poor price due to his own laziness / stupidity / hastyness / lack of observation etc just to be able to contact betfair and get them to void it to make up for his mistake

Rocket to the FACE
When: 20 Nov 10 19:18
If I am going to bed or will be out of the house I'd rather have my money working for me than sitting doing nothing.

People using the standard interface have to go through an in-built protection system that Betfair kindly provide i.e confirm you want to place the bet (after you've entered your stake and odds, too).

People using software with one click betting selected aren't likely to be new punters who will be put off the exchange after a bad bet is matched.

I don't really see how that relates to trap betting though? I do the same thing thing. Usually at night, before I finish trading, I put my whole bank up over dozens of bets in markets for the next few days. I used to get a very high proportion of these matched, but now bots tend to jump in front and only about 10% of the markets I place bets in get bets matched.

I guess that a trap bettor could put 1000 bets up and still have a decent return if only one or two get matched.

It's not just the 1.29 - 130 spreads and such tricks that get people though. The reason I started this thread is that I saw it in action. I layed 7 goals or more at 510 for a few quid, got matched and all the money down the queue got matched to 1.20! That 1.20 was placed in the queue specifically on the off chance that something like this would happen.

One solution would be for Betfair to scrap the premium charge and then deploy their own trap betting bot to make up the shortfall

"I layed 7 goals or more at 510 for a few quid, got matched and all the money down the queue got matched to 1.20! That 1.20 was placed in the queue specifically on the off chance that something like this would happen"

I don't understand, you laid 7 goals or more at huge prices, presumably late on when it was almost impossible, but someone else had left up a request wanting to be matched at 1.2 on something which was very unlikely to happen?

Yes. someone had offered to lay at 1.2 and got matched.

Don't you mean he offered to back at 1.2?

Otherwise, I can't see how your lay got matched, unless I'm missing something

Investor, so you won a few quid by offering 510 about a 1000 shot, and the other guy won a few quid by offering 1.2 about a 1000 shot. So you are less naughty than him? Or he is cleverer than you?

Somebody said earlier (Feck I think) that he was nearly caught out by clicking on a price that had been taken a split second before, and that can easilly happen if you have confirm bets turned off, but it is still the mistake of the taker and no one else. Even Lori's idea of coloured bands will not prevent it, as the colour will change a nanosecond before the click is executed, resulting in the same outcome.

This thread reminds me a bit of the state of society today, what with health and safety gone mad, bureaucracy everywhere you look, never ending compensation advertising bombardment on every commercial tv and radio channel, for christ's sake we don't want nannying here too! Yes this place can be a shark pool, but the alternative doesn't bear thinking about.

My opinion is that punters should have the freedom to put any price they like up from 1.01 to 1000, even if it represents fantastic value for them should it be matched, or it appears to be a so called 'trap bet'.

I don't put up such bets myself, but I want the freedom to be able to put any prices of my choosing, without the fear that a winning bet, placed in good faith, will be deemed a trap bet just because it's outside of an 'acceptable' range.

I speak as a person who has lost money through my own stupidity and making mistakes and has fallen foul of a so called 'trap bet'.

Trapping could be very easily prevented by issuing a warning when you're about to accept a bet that's x times worse than the average of the previous y bets matched on betfair on that outcome. That would obviously work better in pre-event markets than e.g. in ir horses where a horse can go from looking like an odds-on chance to a 1000.0 chance in a matter of strides but it would also be useful in ir sports where the odds changed more gradually. Being able to turn off the warning permanently or for the remainder of a single market would do away with most concerns anyway.

It's strange. You put up a solution and throughout the rest of the thread people say there's no solution. The above solution could be built in to the web page provided the price taken in the last y bets was broadcast along with the other odds.

What did you think of my safeguards in the 2nd or 3rd post of the thread Feck?

*I don't really care which are used, yours is fine too, I just want some options

Your suggestions are intelligent ones Lori but I just think mine is much simpler and could be there as a default yet could be overridden forever with a simple click by the more experienced users. Mine also takes into account the going rate (i.e. odds) for each outcome (even in early markets where no bets have been placed guide odds could be used e.g. rp betting f/c) whereas yours requires input for each race.

I don't know why we're bothering. As Mr Magoo says, have betfair ever listened anyway. They are the biggest sc.um of the lot and TurtlesBrain and NMoMark are their kind of guys.

Feck, old pal, don't you think that that is rather impolite language to use about the company which is allowing you to post on their forum?  Talk about biting the hand that feeds you...or would feed you if it weren't for queue jumpers, parasitic traders and city boys....

If a roofer charges a pensioner 25K for replacing a slate should the police be able to apprehend the roofer and retreive the money for the pensioner.

turtleshead Joined: 01 Jan 05
Replies: 4818 19 Nov 10 20:55   
No. Buyer beware, if you don't check the quote before accepting it's down to one person, you.

Rocket to the FACE Joined: 28 Oct 08
Replies: 7125 19 Nov 10 21:13   
I see no reason why the police should get involved.

FINE AS FROG HAIR Joined: 12 Mar 07
Replies: 1509 19 Nov 10 21:17   
Would probably set up all sorts of dangerous precedents.
Has to to be caveat emptor I'm afraid to say.

.Marksman. Joined: 13 Jul 10
Replies: 317 19 Nov 10 22:29   
As I see it, I should be allowed to make any quote I want.  Its not up to the police to arbitrate over whether a quote is a con or not.

turtleshead
Joined: 01 Jan 05
Replies: 4818 19 Nov 10 23:38   
Well said ^^^
What on earth do people think they are doing, is employing tradesman for adults or not?
Stop looking for ways to blame others for your own mistakes.

Rocket to the FACE Joined: 28 Oct 08
Replies: 7125 20 Nov 10 00:47   
If you are silly or unlucky enough to pay a tradesman who is clever enough to charge you way out of proportion for the job then nothing untoward has happened.

Rocket to the FACE Joined: 28 Oct 08
Replies: 7125 20 Nov 10 01:02   
I make 25K quotes for replacing the odd slate all the time. The majority are never taken up but many are. I am not ashamed in any way.
It can happen both ways. If I accept a quote of 25K to replace one of my missing slates then so be it. If you accept one of my quotes for 25K then so be it. There is no reason at all for there to be referee in the middle to make sure it's all nice and fair.

Trevh Joined: 21 Jul 06
Replies: 619 20 Nov 10 01:22   
I agree with Rocket 100%. We are all tradesmen out to make money, and making any quote that you see fit is completely acceptable to me. And that comes from someone who's never made an outlandish quote, but if people make the mistake of accepting outlandish quotes, then tough, they will have to learn from it. Yes that sounds harsh but there can be no other way without creating some sort of nannying farce.

Trevh Joined: 21 Jul 06
Replies: 619 20 Nov 10 01:41   
Pick pocketing is illegal for obvious reasons, offering any quote to replace a roof tile is legal for obvious reasons. It has been tagged as fraud but that's just a name, and a name I don't agree with.

turtleshead Joined: 01 Jan 05
Replies: 4818 20 Nov 10 01:42   
1.01 unitedbiscuits lost his life savings to a roofer because he didn't bother getting other quotes, and he whinged for days after!

turtleshead Joined: 01 Jan 05
Replies: 4818 20 Nov 10 02:04   
pmsl at people talking about morality on a tradesman forum
So biscuits, we can safely assume that if you saw someone who mistakenly advertised they'd pay 25K to get a tile replaced you'd refuse it as you wouldn't want to take advantage, yeah ok.

jacien1234 Joined: 21 Aug 10
Replies: 16 20 Nov 10 16:37   
Oh my god! You are complaining about paying a price for a job that you CONFIRM without actually checking the price you will be charged? Buyer beware!! If you don't like the price - dont employ the tradesman.

Karakondjur1 Joined: 28 Jul 10
Replies: 11 20 Nov 10 19:14   
I just can not imagine that people pay their life savings for a job and after that they will say - it is the police's fault. In all the cases in so called fraud it is the victim's fault. His own greed and stupidity. There are no excuses. It is quite easy for me - do not every pay more than 5K for a job. It is not worth it

turtleshead Joined: 01 Jan 05
Replies: 4818 20 Nov 10 19:32   
Where do you draw the line - is 10K for replacing a slate OK. 5K? 1K?
The whole idea is to give quotes which represent poor value to the person who wants the job done and good value for you. Why is specifically charging 25K seen as such a crime, I don't understand?

In the old days unscrupulous tradesman would've had the sh1t kicked out of them by the pensioner's concerned neighbours. The replies from some of the resident sc.um on here show how far this country has sunk since the acceptance of Thatcherism and Murdochism.

By: The Investor When: 21 Nov 10 00:14 Rocket to the FACE
When: 20 Nov 10 19:18
If I am going to bed or will be out of the house I'd rather have my money working for me than sitting doing nothing.

I don't really see how that relates to trap betting though? I do the same thing thing. 



Because they're offered at odds that are nowhere near value. In fact trap betting is probably the easiest way to be sure that any bet that gets matches is a good bet for you. If you do the same thing then I'm not sure what your beef is?

And Feck i don't think that is a fair comparison. Does the tradesman first ask the customer if they deffinately want to get ripped off and if so for how much and at what level ?

Feck you seem to be angry about everything.

If it`s not BF it is the Tote or Scottish referees.

You seem to be a very sad and bitter man who should go and find another hobby that you might actually enjoy albeit I accept that may be an impossible task.

Rocket, I agree it may not be a fair comparison because, like having fast pics / snapping up photo money after the result / shell and peaing etc., with trapping there is an element of if you didn't do it somebody else would. It's not the fact you do it that makes you Thatcherite sc.um, it's the fact that you think you're right to do it. As far as sc.um goes though, you're the sh1te under the shoes of betfair as they're in the business of setting people up for you and then taking a 20% slice of your action when they could quite easily stop it.

Banks, you sound like a concerned and caring individual so I'd like to thank you from the bottom of my heart for your advice.

Trappers, tipster and system con-men and financial sector fraudster are all members of the same family. At least your average bank robber takes the chance that he'll have to pay for his crime.

Well Feck you're a better man than me and possibly the most chivalrous poster on here but I am here for myself and nobody else. If Betfair cracked down on it I wouldn't be fussed and I don't sit there rubbing my hands with glee I just think I was lucky to get it before somebody else did.

Rocket, just wondering, out of every 100 bets of this nature you put up how many get matched?

The last 1000 I've had 23 matches but I'd consider that higher than usual.

Rocket, if you had said from the outset that you took advantage of it but didn't think betfair should allow it I wouldn't really have had a problem with that. My main gripe is with betfair's indifference to their clients being ripped off.

Since I first posted what IMO is a solution to the problem there's been no shortage of posts containing the word Feck but, Lori excepted, not one has made a comment, positive or negative, about my suggestion.

I did say that in a roundbaout way, Feck:

By: Rocket to the FACE When: 19 Nov 10 22:12 I think that is a good idea Lori and must be easier for Betfair to introduce than a policy of refunding.

Fair enough Rocket. I think after that you got yourself into a bit of a hole trying to justify yourself though. Some of the others  sound like financial sector w@nks for whom this kind of thing is a way of life and something they'd openly boast about because they actually believe they're being clever.

Feck, I will say something positive.  I will give credit where it is due.
That long post about the roofers is f*king hilarious!  A masterpiece of sarcasm and irony.

Occured to me that "your" safeguards would appply more to markets that you deal in Feck and "mine" would apply more in markets that I'm in. (Things can go from 1.12 to 8.00 pretty quickly in a darts leg if someone misses three shots at a double for instance)

It is hilarious NoMark but it isn't far off qualifying for true story status IMO.

Lori, true. Could your ideas not be more or less merged with mine by allowing the user to change the value of the 'x' in my suggestion at market level? That could be done in such a way that inexperienced users would have the protection of the default x without being bamboozled with the usual betfair complexities.

By:
Rocket to the FACE
When: 21 Nov 10 10:56
By: The Investor When: 21 Nov 10 00:14 Rocket to the FACE
When: 20 Nov 10 19:18
If I am going to bed or will be out of the house I'd rather have my money working for me than sitting doing nothing.

I don't really see how that relates to trap betting though? I do the same thing thing.



Because they're offered at odds that are nowhere near value. In fact trap betting is probably the easiest way to be sure that any bet that gets matches is a good bet for you. If you do the same thing then I'm not sure what your beef is?

And Feck i don't think that is a fair comparison. Does the tradesman first ask the customer if they deffinately want to get ripped off and if so for how much and at what level ?


I wouldn't say I have any 'beef'. I just don't think trap bets have a place in a well functioning exchange. Newbies are likely to be put off if this happens to them early on. I'm a little surprised this hasn't been completely botted, and that you can get these bets matched manually.

There is a theoretical optimum price to offer. The closer you are to value, the more you are likely to get matched, but also the more likely you are to be wrong and offer odds that are 'too good'. Finding this optimum is tricky, but when it becomes the case that the highest theoretical returns are available to those placing trap bets, it's symptomatic of an underlying problem with the exchange.

I mentioned before that I think there is a big difference between offering poor value and trap bets. For me the difference is that poor value will be taken by people who don't know / can't be bothered to work out what the odds are, trap bets will be taken by people making a mistake that is typically realized instantly after the bet is matched.

in such a way that inexperienced users would have the protection of ...blah blah blah

Why do they need protecting?  They have already been given free bets, at the expense of Premium Charge payers.  (Which is more than they deserve.)

I just don't think trap bets have a place in a well functioning exchange. Newbies are likely to be put off if this happens to them early on. I'm a little surprised this hasn't been completely botted, and that you can get these bets matched manually.

Exactly. Ditto for those dim enough to be ripped of in-running. The problem is trying to convey that message to betfair when those who call the tune spent their past life ripping people off in the financial sector. They'd rather bury their heads in the sand and make up stats such as "more people are unaware that the people they are betting against may have more knowledge of the sport than they do than are unaware of feed delays".

By:
Trevh
When: 21 Nov 10 01:46
Investor, so you won a few quid by offering 510 about a 1000 shot, and the other guy won a few quid by offering 1.2 about a 1000 shot. So you are less naughty than him? Or he is cleverer than you?

Somebody said earlier (Feck I think) that he was nearly caught out by clicking on a price that had been taken a split second before, and that can easilly happen if you have confirm bets turned off, but it is still the mistake of the taker and no one else. Even Lori's idea of coloured bands will not prevent it, as the colour will change a nanosecond before the click is executed, resulting in the same outcome.

This thread reminds me a bit of the state of society today, what with health and safety gone mad, bureaucracy everywhere you look, never ending compensation advertising bombardment on every commercial tv and radio channel, for christ's sake we don't want nannying here too! Yes this place can be a shark pool, but the alternative doesn't bear thinking about.


I think that's a fair question. You could argue both ways. I would certainly not advocate any kind of nannying either.

However there are ways to achieve better execution. In my example let's say 1 goal or more to back is priced at 1.3; 2 goals at 2.8; 3 goals at 9 4 goals at 30 5 at 85; 6 goals at 200 and 7 goals at 510.

I don't know how 1.2 got matched, but one possibility is that someone accidentally clicked the second box in the que rather than my price. Anyway better execution would be to match at 510, then any other bets could part match against the price for 6 goals or more, 5 goals or more etc, which are all much higher than 1.2.

A bet on 4 goals or more, also wins if there are 7 goals or more (obviously). Betfair could pocket the difference, much in the same way as with cross matching, and the punter making the mistake would be much better off. It would only get matched in this way if this was optimal. If 510 was the only price in the queue, and someone puts in a back at 200 for a stake larger than mine, it wouldn't match against the 6 goals or more price, just sit in the queue on the other side (this gives them a chance to cancel if there are no trap bets up).

This is probably too complicated for betfair technically, but it would be an improvement. Many other trap bets could be taken care of in a similar way.

Why do they need protecting?  They have already been given free bets, at the expense of Premium Charge payers.  (Which is more than they deserve.)

How can it be at  the expense of those people who are charged the least? Also, many people are in this for the long haul and would rather we hung on to the cheated than let someone mug them and lose their custom altogether. If you owned a betting shop would you rather mug everyone for their wages as they walked through the door or have them come back week after week with their wages?

Also, many people are in this for the long haul and would rather we hung on to the cheated than let someone mug them and lose their custom altogether.

Yes, that's a very solid argument against trap betting! It's tricky to get people to stop if there are above average rewards involved for doing it though, even if it is to the long term detriment of the exchange.

Guys, please don't turn this into another PC discussion thread

We might have different definitions of what a trap bet is. I don't place any bets at 1.01

how would you define a trap bet Rocket?

why all the whinging bout trap betting, don't you people watch what your doing?

I'm careful when I'm driving near schools but I don't advocate the removal of lollipop men.

I have it down as being any bet offered at ridiculously poor odds.

I suppose the higher you go the less 'evil' it is as you are at least offering the unfortunate soul something for their money but you are presumably offering higher odds to attract them and the end result is the same, they get ripped off and you profit from it. The odds are offered so far from any true probability that differences in opinion can't excuse it, it's just outright bad bets for them.

It might not leave them with the same feeling as backing a 1.01 shot before the match has started though.

The problem is that "trap" is an emotive word.  I have just been playing a game on chess dot com and I trapped my opponents queen.  I love springing traps.  Especially when I lull them into a false sense of security, by sacrificing one of my minor pieces.  It makes me feel good to see their vulnerability.  Anyway, I never hear anyone, over there, whinging about falling into a trap.  In fact most of the players over there have such big egos, that they are too embarrassed to admit to making such foolish mistakes.
Yet I have just had another peek at this forum, and people are still at it.  Wanting refunds, due to their own blunders...pathetic.

I don't think you get the point marksman.

A new customer that gets caught out in this way, is likely to be put off using betfair. That's bad for the long term health of the exchange.

Although I do make blunders occasionally, I have never been caught out by a trap bet in a big way. It seems that this topic stirrs up a lot of emotion from people who are both for and against.

My view is that taking action against trap betting is good for the exchange. I'm not for retrospectively cancelling bets, or punishing trap bettors, but I am for measures that make it more difficult for them to operate by way of better bet execution systems.

If Betfair build this in, I would like for the benefit to be passed on to the losing customer.

Trevh     21 Nov 10 01:46 
Investor, so you won a few quid by offering 510 about a 1000 shot, and the other guy won a few quid by offering 1.2 about a 1000 shot. So you are less naughty than him? Or he is cleverer than you?

It must require an astonishingly high level of intelligence to offer 1.2 on a selection that should be correctly priced at 1000.

Somebody said earlier (Feck I think) that he was nearly caught out by clicking on a price that had been taken a split second before, and that can easilly happen if you have confirm bets turned off, but it is still the mistake of the taker and no one else. Even Lori's idea of coloured bands will not prevent it, as the colour will change a nanosecond before the click is executed, resulting in the same outcome.

You're correct that Lori's idea would not benefit anyone using single-click software in the particular situation that you described above. It would, though, be likely to dramatically reduce the probability of someone mistakenly laying a selection at 101 in the belief that they were laying at 1.01 or making other similar errors in most circumstances.

Given that the aim of Lori's suggestion would appear to be to reduce the probability of customers being caught out by trap bets, rather than eliminate trap betting entirely, it would seem that his idea would be likely to prove relatively effective. Therefore, your criticism above might be regarded as 'nit -picking'. ;)

I have previously been the victim of a trap bet. I felt angry and terrible about it. And it was all my own fault because I was surfing the net and not paying attention to what I was doing.That is the problem with todays society. No one takes responsibility for their own conduct. A person slips on the footpath and breaks a leg. They blame everyone but themselves. The council,homeowner,shoe manufacturer, passing dog etc are all to blame. never them.
No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to bet.

i think that although its very annoying it would be a bad thing to stop as who is to say when a price becomes a trap bet and when its just about fair as someone tries to back ,lay at a value price.i often put up £2 bets to block these people at odds that will not be taken on events that i am watching and would encourage other people to do the same and try to stop regulate these people ourselve which is a much safer option than introduing regulation that may end up counter productive.

Haha, so basically you are undercutting the trappers ;)

FFS, the trappers must be shipping in a new bunch of galoots (who start reading the thread at the last post) every page.

THERE IS A F*****G SOLUTION THAT CAN BE OVERRIDDEN YOU STUPID C***S.

Feck, I briefly reviewed the entire thread content, including your suggested solution, before posting.

Whilst your idea has merit and would probably be of benefit to some customers, it wouldn't seem to be very effective in the avoidance of trap bets in many in-running markets, as you acknowledged.

It would also appear to be of limited use where few or no bets had previously been matched on any given selection. I did note that you made a suggestion to cater for some markets where no bets had been placed on a selection, using rp prices, but I believe that this would be difficult to implement in many other markets.

Additionally, there would seem to be a possibility that those intent on placing trap bets may attempt to trick the users of your solution by matching bets at false prices e.g. 1.01, possibly in conspiracy with other trappers or simply using multiple accounts. 

As many trap bets seem to be placed in relatively low liquidity in-running markets this would appear to represent a significant flaw.

Feck, I briefly reviewed the entire thread content, including your suggested solution, before posting.

It wasn't you I was getting at jt.

Whilst your idea has merit and would probably be of benefit to some customers, it wouldn't seem to be very effective in the avoidance of trap bets in many in-running markets, as you acknowledged.

To me it would definitely deal with pre-event markets and I did suggest that each person be able to have their own editable personal value for 'x' at market level.

It would also appear to be of limited use where few or no bets had previously been matched on any given selection. I did note that you made a suggestion to cater for some markets where no bets had been placed on a selection, using rp prices, but I believe that this would be difficult to implement in many other markets.

Many markets on lastfiveminutes.com already have bookmaker prices available by the time they open but even when they don't it wouldn't require a good odds compiler to guess guide prices within 2 times the true odds.


Additionally, there would seem to be a possibility that those intent on placing trap bets may attempt to trick the users of your solution by matching bets at false prices e.g. 1.01, possibly in conspiracy with other trappers or simply using multiple accounts.

There would be ways of beating that e.g. when finding the average of the last y bets ignore any that overrode the warning (wouldn't work for ir) or (for ir) even base it on average of last y top offers.

A way won't exist that will cut out everything but we don't make murder legal because some people will get away with it.

good thread

I would certainly welcome having your solution as an option for customers but my preference would be for Lori's idea of coloured coded prices. That suggestion would seem to be easier for all customers to understand and would also be likely to involve less work for Betfair. Therefore, perhaps it also stands a greater chance of being implemented.

Unfortunately, I tend to agree with your earlier comments suggesting that the implementation of any solution to tackle the problem may be some way off.

scrooge mcduck i think you are being very negative what i am talking about is putting £2 up at a price that wont get matched for example at 5.0 when the lay price might be 1.92 and the trap bettor has 19.5 up on the other side its surpring how quickly this cheeses them of and they move on if more people did this they would soon get sick and we could maybe hound them out by ourself.

jt, Lori's colour coded prices wouldn't help in the error I almost made (i.e. refresh happened as I clicked) but yes it would help overall.

I agree with you but it would be effective against trap bets of the type that I described above e.g. 1.01/101

I would welcome your solution being made available to all customers too but it seems to me that the colour coded price idea would be significantly easier for Betfair implement as an initial step.

It happened in Pisa v Lanciano which is in play now.
http://oi54.tinypic.com/25pnzvp.jpg

Here's where better bet execution would have seen this guy matched against the 100 offered for 6 goals or more and 29.82 offered for 5 goals or more rather than the ridiculous 1.01.

It's fairly obvious what is a trap bet.
http://oi52.tinypic.com/15p0bp5.jpg

My suggestion here is that if someone was to accidentally hit the second box and bet £20 back at 1.24 instead of 999 for 7 goals or more, he would match the £3 at 999, £12 at 210 (6 goals or more), the rest at 61.81 (5 goals or more).

That way he is getting real prices and optimal execution, and the people who are putting 'real' bets up get matched.

Nice animated pictures

Nice pictures Investor. I was so convinced I tried to shut the graph window to see the rest of the market!

Scarecrow, I know mate - just messing.

I actually think the warning is all they need do - just like the you've entered odds higher than 99.

Trouble is betfair might be making a fair amount off these bets so it might not be within their interests to deter trappers any more than they have.

It's definitely in betfair's interest, because trap bets being matched, mean customer funds churn less, leading to less commission received. The Premium charge will partially offset this though.

very round about way investor but true nonetheless

The Investor, I appreciate the thought and effort that has gone into your presentation.  But the second box is there for a reason:  Some people want to get as much on, as quickly as possible.  They sometimes want to jump the queue to get a bet on.  This is OK, but if they don't check the bet before submitting it, they are going to get what they deserve. Why should the whole interface be changed, just because some people are too careless to check their bets.
On page 1 of this thread, I described a simple method to reduce the available to bet balance.  Why can't people just use this method, and quietly get on with their betting?

Sure marksman, but sometimes people click the second box by accident.
I'm not suggesting the interface needs to be changed, just that the bet execution method could be optimized. It still wouldn't eliminate trap betting altogether though.

I'm really not too worried about trap bets for my own account, it's more for inexperienced users. If they are put off by it, that will indirectly affect me.

Why can't people just use this method, and quietly get on with their betting?

In my instance if I'm trading, say, four markets at once, I may want a "max bet" in any one of the four, so I'd need four times the amount open (I do use the aussie wallet for hiding money sometimes)

I can still be trapped for four times what I'm comfortable with.

I suspect people who have bot assistance are doing far more than just four markets at once.