General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 495 comments are related to the topic:
BF bombard me with phone calls after forum PC criticism
BF bombard me with phone calls after forum PC criticism
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 495
|
By:
Betfair is a de facto monopoly for a variety of reasons Feck, you'd have to be pretty stupid not to see that.
|
|
By:
Your last post doesn't tally with your 5% claim and your penultimate post suggests you're not the full shilling.
|
|
By:
That was for fll.
|
|
By:
Although you're not the full shilling either TurtlesBrain.
|
|
By:
Just checking my Lifetime Profile on the PC portal, my commission generated figure is under 4% of my gross PL.
So it's probably closer to 8% as I believe this commisssion generated figure tends to be about half of the actual commission you pay? On my winning weeks it tends to be under 3%. I'd add that probably 75% of my profit comes from the 12 main markets. Maybe that's why you don't believe me. I don't give a damn whether you do or not tbh. All I know for a fact is that many genuine punters pay this charge because they're good at what they do and not due to any advantage they have over you or anyone else. |
|
By:
There was an argument in the old handicap book regarding value and someone put forward the point that true 3/1 shots won 25% of the time and you'd only win if you got better than 3/1 about them. One punter wrote in saying he'd only bet the 3/1 shot the 1 in 4 times it won. That was the stupidest post I'd ever seen until fll's 19:26 post.
|
|
By:
I'm glad I amused you feck.
I said I'd try to back the 1 winner at 110 I've always found it easier to find value in the longshots. I've backed a number of winners between the 20/1 and 50/1 range over the last 5 years and even 1 at 1000/1. Lori will turn up soon and say he was on too ;) I don't see anything silly in the 19.26 post. Infact I'd hope to back 2 110/1 shots ;) |
|
By:
Five leaves
Perhaps Feck doesn't understand that you only bet on the specials. You don't make markets on sports per se. As such you don't have the normal sports betting profile on wins versus losses. Is that correct ? |
|
By:
Yes, that's correct.
I know others who specialise on various sports who have smiliarly high returns. So it's not just specials punters. ofc I'm not winning anywhere near the amount that the guy earlier in the thread who said he market makes nearly every market on here, but that is unrealistic for the vast vast majority of people, as it would take a massive bank. He's basically a bookie. What I do I believe anyone can do if they put the work in and specialise. |
|
By:
This forum does seem to attract those who play with very big banks and use mathematical models and software to seek out any tiny edge and who therefore avoid the PC.
I'm not sure it's representative of most winners on here. 95% or more of my bets are on specials but I do dabble on the likes Golf, Darts and Snooker. You don't have to look far on those forums to see people (albeit a tiny percentage of the whole)who are clued up on those sports and I suspect make similar type profits to me on their particular speciality. These are the people who are hit by the PC. Betfair even moved the goal posts to catch us all, by abolishing the yearly 250 market threshold. Even though when they 1st brought it in I'm pretty sure one of the reason they stated was people over using the platform and therefore not paying their way. Clearly that wasn't the case with people who bet on fewer than 250 markets a year, so why abolish it? |
|
By:
I concentrate on one sport (tennis) mostly inplay position taker, but am pretty risk averse and avoid hefty losses, not a bot user, don't even use external trading programs.
So I'm paying PC because.... I'm too good  Suppose if I took on more risks when appropriate I'd be out of range, as I tend to hover around the 19% mark. |
|
By:
^^^ more or less what I said on a post earlier, but some retard from betfair decided yet again to remove it, even though it was 100% accurate, not libellous, and broke no rules whatsoever.
|
|
By:
Feck : One punter wrote in saying he'd only bet the 3/1 shot the 1 in 4 times it won
Haha, many punters appear to genuinely think like that though. Some of you are saying your posts have been deleted and you may be right, but some posts seem to disappear as a bug of the new forum, which adds to the paranoia. |
|
By:
Under the old system if you had 100 backs at 1.1 and they all won and I had 100 backs at 110.0 and one won, we'd both have the same turnover and gross profit but I'd be expected to pay up to 11 times the commission you would.
feck, so what your are saying is that a thicko punter with no skill, who has 99 loses out of 100 should be treated the same as a skillful punter going at 100/100?? what about the guy who has lost 100 from 100, maybe he should get a gold watch and a night out on the town?? |
|
By:
Almost inevitably FLL turns out to be mainly an IR "punter" on long term markets. This group tend to place scores of bets in the course of the market yet in the long run expect to pay a fraction of the commission of someone who maybe places a single bets on the same markets, with a fraction of the turnover but the same overall risk. If ever a group deserved "a level playing field" in the shape of a turnover charge it's this group.
|
|
By:
feck, so what your are saying is that a thicko punter with no skill, who has 99 loses out of 100 should be treated the same as a skillful punter going at 100/100??
Even if it was in any way relevant, who says he's a thicko punter with no skill? Perhaps the other 99 were beaten a short head. Are you saying losers should be charged up to 11 times more than those who make a profit? |
|
By:
in punting, getting a selection 99.99% right, still means a loss ie. beaten by a short head. 99 loses out of 100 means higher charges. answer? take responsibility for your own actions and stop losing. simple.
|
|
By:
Feck, the turnover/liability commission system you promote, how would that work out for someone backing/laying several runners ?
Let's say you lay 5 horses in a race with 15 runners. You lay 2 @ 5 (4/1) for 1.000 each and 3 @ 10 (9/1) for 500 each. Neither win and your profit before commission is 3.500 What would you pay in commission ? |
|
By:
in punting, getting a selection 99.99% right, still means a loss ie. beaten by a short head. 99 loses out of 100 means higher charges. answer? take responsibility for your own actions and stop losing. simple.
You're advocating a commission scheme that rewards risk avoidance and penalises risk taking (which was exactly what betfair's original commission scheme did and still does to a lesser extent). "Simple" is an accurate description imo. |
|
By:
no i'm advocating a scheme based on the skill of winning.
|
|
By:
Eddie, first can I just say that, despite being a gambler, I'd opt in to the current system. The default turnover scheme is more about protecting your average betfair user (and prospective user) from the complexity of the current system as well as preventing pc payers from spreading downright lies regarding the charge. Calimero : "You pay 20% commission on betfair. It is an injustice it is." Newbie : "That's strange. I only pay 2%".
Second, I think it was Lori that suggested both the backer and layer should pay a turnover charge on the lower of the backer/layer liability. I'm going off this idea because e.g. in an 8 horse race where they're all trading at 8.0, backing 7 of them is the same as laying the other but the backer of the seven would pay 7 times the turnover charge of the layer. |
|
By:
no i'm advocating a scheme based on the skill of winning.
No you're not. You're advocating a scheme that rewards strike rate. |
|
By:
strike rate? hmmm...you would mean winning more bets than losing..?
|
|
By:
What's the best? 99 winners at 1.01 and 1 loser or 1 winner at 110.0 and 99 losers?
|
|
By:
Almost inevitably feckwit has a problem with anyone who manages to win money.
Yes I place dozens of bets over the course of a 3 months series of Big Brother. Mostly long and medium term positions. This is what probably 95% of those who bet on these shows do. I'm just pretty decent at it, because like McChicken I put the work in and therefore have an excellent knowledge of these markets. Maybe you should try the same rather than spending your days complaining that everyone else has an advantage over you and defending the PC. |
|
By:
five cells left, in case you haven't realised, you're the one that's complaining. If you want to avoid the pc and pay a much higher percentage of your profit in commission maybe you should try gambling instead of spending your days whinging about the charge. You don't get gamblers starting threads saying they should only be charged on their profits for the flat season or their Ascot profits.
|
|
By:
Feck - if you are able to make a living pure gambling without the need to trade/green up/ dutch/cheat using a variety of methods etc then you are a talent nay, a genius Sir , but i doubt many folk are able to , i very much doubt anyone is able to .
|
|
By:
on the subject of the portal , it claims i made 536 last week ..where if i key in that 7 day period it is actually only 106 .
trying to get through now to them i'm sure they don't use the 7 day 00.00 - 23.59 times |
|
By:
Feck, I recieved a return call from my man at BF. Although he couldn't go into specifics he informed me that in no way anything I said in my post warrented a suspension. (he's still looking into it)
Apparently, my idea of BF having a seperate site for PUNTERS only was not the cause of the delation. It was when I mentioned two particular (big shot) names who could take advantage of the punters situation that the post was pulled. Obviously I wont repeat the names..... |
|
By:
Alain & Armand?
|
|
By:
The first name rings a bell Feck, but as for the second.....
|
|
By:
Coachbuster
Date Joined: 08 Apr 06 Add contact | Send message When: 14 Jun 11 12:29 Joined: Date Joined: 08 Apr 06 | Topic/replies: 13,446 | Blogger: Coachbuster's blog on the subject of the portal , it claims i made 536 last week ..where if i key in that 7 day period it is actually only 106 . trying to get through now to them Confused i'm sure they don't use the 7 day 00.00 - 23.59 times Yeah, I saw my £4k loss on a match at 1am Monday 6th June, grouped together with the previous week. bit confusing. |
|
By:
They use GMT, not BST. So 1am BST is midnight GMT.
|
|
By:
it all a mess
cant make it pay how the fxxk can we pay when the bills comes think and fast then it not 0.71% club any more how low can u go pls u do target wrong players high rollers my ass |
|
By:
only 0.71% makes 15k a year
then only make less how much less therefore it CANT BE DONE THE END OF THE WORLD IS HIGH AND ASKING 25% HIGHER ON FUN FOOTY BETS [>o] |
|
By:
only 0.71% makes 15k a year
then only make less how much less therefore it CANT BE DONE THE END OF THE WORLD IS HIGH AND ASKING 25% HIGHER ON FUN FOOTY BETS [>o] |
|
By:
only 0.71% makes 15k a year
then only make less how much less therefore it CANT BE DONE THE END OF THE WORLD IS HIGH AND ASKING 25% HIGHER ON FUN FOOTY BETS [>o] |
|
By:
Investor - theyre ivestigating -so hopefully i will hear soon ,could be a technical glitch
|
|
By:
Investor-gating
 |
|
By:
only 0.71% makes 15k a year in year 2003 or 2004
if that right why bother with the pc surely more than 10% is elsewhere which ticked in trillions by now |