General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I have read that the bookmaker will always win no matter which horse wins the race...how can this be so when he has no control on who bets on what. Yes he may change prices on selections to reduce liability on others but that does not mean people will bet on them. Most money seems to be on the favourite (stating the obvious here) so is this where the bookmaker's risk really lies. ie if the fav wins he loses and vica versa.
Any bookmakers out there to clarify this,
Any bookmakers out there to clarify this,
Show More
not wishing to sound rude, but dont believe all you read
95% of bookies will have some liability or other on 95% of races
95% of bookies will have some liability or other on 95% of races
age 21, fishing for what, you seem to imply there is an under current here, perhaps you would care to enlighten us...
the bookmaker will always win no matter which horse wins the race
No , they lose on some races , win on most. As you say, thy will be more likely to lose on races where the favourite wins.
They do not expect to win on every race and are not likely to be much bothered about individual races, as they expect to be winning overall, long term.
This is because the odds are in their favour.
In a 5 runner race there is a 100% chance that one of the 5 runners will win it . If they are all as good as each other they would each be 4/1 (20% chance) .But the bookies would quote them all 7/2 (22.22% chance) . The difference between the real chance of one any the 5 horses winning and the bookies' book is 11.11% . So if they took £2,000 on each of the 5 at 7/2 they would pay out £9,000 on the winner but have collected £10,000, regardless of what won.
That is if they acheived a level book .That would be rare but i expect they often get it fairly well balanced . Typically they probably lose a little if the fav wins , win a little if one of the other fancied runners wins, and win a lot if an outsider goes in.
Overall the 11%, 15% or whatever margin they are betting to should provide them with that amount of gross profit, from which they need to cover their overheads, licences , staff, in order to make an actual net profit.
No , they lose on some races , win on most. As you say, thy will be more likely to lose on races where the favourite wins.
They do not expect to win on every race and are not likely to be much bothered about individual races, as they expect to be winning overall, long term.
This is because the odds are in their favour.
In a 5 runner race there is a 100% chance that one of the 5 runners will win it . If they are all as good as each other they would each be 4/1 (20% chance) .But the bookies would quote them all 7/2 (22.22% chance) . The difference between the real chance of one any the 5 horses winning and the bookies' book is 11.11% . So if they took £2,000 on each of the 5 at 7/2 they would pay out £9,000 on the winner but have collected £10,000, regardless of what won.
That is if they acheived a level book .That would be rare but i expect they often get it fairly well balanced . Typically they probably lose a little if the fav wins , win a little if one of the other fancied runners wins, and win a lot if an outsider goes in.
Overall the 11%, 15% or whatever margin they are betting to should provide them with that amount of gross profit, from which they need to cover their overheads, licences , staff, in order to make an actual net profit.
I have a mate who used to be a bookies clerk. Basically if a favourite wins they lose. If a second favourite wins they break even. Anything other than that and they win. He's been at some meetings where a rank outsider has gone in - e.g at 100-1. They did not take a single bet on the horse and so made a load of money. It's long term they look at and are prepared to take a hit now and then - that's the game
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539