We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Maybe it’s time for Betfair to recognise that there are two type of beasts here – betters and traders and explicitly have two different markets.
In the betting market then bets stand as with the current rules
In the trading market if any market which is scheduled to go In Play fails to go In Play for any reason. then ALL bets in that market are VOIDED. At least then we’ll have a safety net for those who rely on In Play to close their positions.
If two markets is a non starter then have an option when you place your bet to VOID if no In Play. This would then only be matched with counter parties with the same option set
I haven’t really thought this through but I was wondering what others thought of the idea. Is it a total non-starter or does it have some merit?
In the betting market then bets stand as with the current rules
In the trading market if any market which is scheduled to go In Play fails to go In Play for any reason. then ALL bets in that market are VOIDED. At least then we’ll have a safety net for those who rely on In Play to close their positions.
If two markets is a non starter then have an option when you place your bet to VOID if no In Play. This would then only be matched with counter parties with the same option set
I haven’t really thought this through but I was wondering what others thought of the idea. Is it a total non-starter or does it have some merit?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 30
|
By:
This would deny gamblers access to the famous liquidity and value of the middlemen. Backers and layers would end up being matched with each other at worse odds than the value odds that are usually offered by the middlemen who sit in between them.
If that sounds imbecilic to you then ask one of the suppliers of the famous liquidity and value to explain it to you as it's their argument. |
|
By:
They already have two markets ,problem is on the other one all the bets are hidden and no fecker knows where.
|
|
By:
There you go Martin, frames has outlined the logic of the middling men's argument.
|
|
By:
Why can't the middlemen occupy the "middle" in both markets treating each as separate markets
|
|
By:
Not sure what you mean Martin.
|
|
By:
Ok - we now have two market for the race
Market 1 - Where bets stand as with the current rules Market 2 - If it fails to go In Play for any reason, then ALL bets in that market are VOIDED. I'm not sure who these middle men are exactly, but why can't they trade in both markets |
|
By:
You don't need different markets, you just need 4 bet types. C, K, OC and OK, O standing for outage.
|
|
By:
Or alternatively, an internet technology company with a valuation that was £1.5BILLION a short while ago, could run a website that actually works.
|
|
By:
Or alternatively, an internet technology company with a valuation that was £1.5BILLION a short while ago, could run a website that actually works.
and cares about it's customers!! |
|
By:
The cross matching is messing it up. All they need to do is turn it off.
|
|
By:
You don't need different markets, you just need 4 bet types. C, K, OC and OK, O standing for outage.
The different market approach should be quicker to implement since all the existing software caould be used - but yes the extra option will work - although you might need extra software to only match like against like (i.e. InPlay voiders against InPlay voiders) |
|
By:
What do C and K stand for?
 |
|
By:
Ok - we now have two market for the race
Market 1 - Where bets stand as with the current rules Market 2 - If it fails to go In Play for any reason, then ALL bets in that market are VOIDED. I'm not sure who these middle men are exactly, but why can't they trade in both markets Most trades are such that the trader is sitting between true layers and backers. If the layers and backers are all in Market 1 (which presumably they would be as they want their bets to stand) how can the trader sit between them if he's in Market 2? |
|
By:
Cheers
|
|
By:
They should refund the bets of all traders, as if they left nobody would be able to get on, isn't that right feck?
 |
|
By:
Martin, some form of 'cancel if doesn't go inplay' would be a good thing.
I've thought this before when betfair went through an awful period of advertising matches as inplay then just suspending them. When THAT happens there are other options, like opening a second parallel unmanaged inplay set of markets, that would deal with things to a extent BUT the latest trick of 'crashing on the busiest period of the week for 5 hours' has few options. But the thing is the person matched by the bets in good faith could then validly complain. Perhaps BF could then ... REmatch bets/lays of a like (i.e. keep) type and see what's left over and divvy it up or something. If you're matched at 1.51 for £10 at the end of the day you don't really care who layed it come settling. What betfair DOESN'T have at the moment is an incentive, other than loss of business, to make the site and matches being dependable more stable. Something like the above might concentrate a few minds... |
|
By:
Cross matching is good, but I think the price taker should get the improved odds. What betfair call 'best execution' isn't.
|
|
By:
Cross matching is very bad indeed primarily as before it was introduced it exposed the many punters that could not do the 1/odds -1 calculation.
|
|
By:
I don't understand why it's bad based on that reason Alex ?
Unless of course if it's bad because it's stopped you benefitting from those punters ignorance ? |
|
By:
Unless of course if it's bad because it's stopped you benefitting from those punters ignorance ?
Correct.  |
|
By:
BF have spun a very dubious and misleading line about it being "best execution" - when quite clearly it is not! -
Agreed. I don't know whether the advertising standards authority has powers over the missives they put out on this subject but best execution is clearly inaccurate. |
|
By:
Agree with the management, cross matching is the biggest scandal on here
Blatant robbing of the pool money dressed up as though betfair are doing us a favour |
|
By:
I haven't bothered to study cross matching rules in details as it's not in use in the markets where the majority of my activity is, But I was under the impression that Betfair now is giving you the closest odds incriment available, which at least is much better than the deal when it was first introduced ?
|
|
By:
It is better than before for people that don't take the best odds that are already offered up. The best strategy, if taking the odds off the book is your bag, is to spend a few seconds thinking about which is the best way to skin that cat. Betfair are taking the roundings from people that have never contemplated cat skinning.
It can work for you, however as if the money that looks as if it money on the book is actually cross matching logic money, then you jump the queue ahead of the cross matching money and then you can take the real money on the other side of the book to lock in the rounding profit. |
|
By:
Cross matching is the only good thing to come out of betfair towers in 10 years.
|
|
By:
Ah one other thing. It would not surprise me if cross matching is effected on markets that you don't think it operates on. It is difficult to identify on high volume markets with a number of selections.
|
|
By:
Feck N. Eejit
Cross matching is the only good thing to come out of betfair towers in 10 years. It is probable that most of my lays at 1,000.0 are matched as a consequence of cross matching. That is good. |
|
By:
Feck N. Eejit
Date Joined: 10 Jan 02 Add contact | Send message When: 14 Mar 11 10:01 Joined: Date Joined: 10 Jan 02 | Topic/replies: 3,104 | Blogger: Feck N. Eejit's blog Cross matching is the only good thing to come out of betfair towers in 10 years. Surely even you would agree that the price taker should get the better price rather than betfair skimming it? |
|
By:
Yes, but I'd rather lose the buttons involved than it not being there.
|
|
By:
Their skimming the breakage is a minor scandal. These sums of money aren't negligable to bf.
In response to martin, who was thinking through something for h/s before the likely suspects came in and changed the subject to their fav. topics, to some extent the 'take SP' option in horses has this effect anyway. Custom and generic interfaces allow you to put up the other side of a trade automatically whenever your amount is matched and these can also be marked as reverting to 'take SP'. Thus even when bf have to confect SPs when their site is down, everything a bettor put up can be squared off. |