General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 115 comments are related to the topic:
new premium charge 60%
new premium charge 60%
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 115
|
By:
Ken, as a profitable punter yourself you are exploiting the 99% as well. Unless no-one is allowed to win and lose on here, someone is being exploited. It does come across that as far as you're concerned anyone who wins at a faster rate than you is 'at it' in some way. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you are not the glass ceiling of human endeavour in straight gambling, no-one has that position.
In terms of sympathy towards people who pay 60% commission from PC2 payers, what sympathy do you have to people who pay 99% commission, or who lose money on here to you? None I suspect by virtue of the fact you are still on here making bets trying to take their money. It's a bit late to try and apply some vague communist ideals to a concept like a betting exchange you've also made money from. |
|
By:
ics, people who are being charged a PC are not recreational
punters backing winners and losers, sometimes winning, more often losing, overall the commission beating them in the whole. PC payers are exploiting a loophole in the system and are exploiting it to the extent that the are keeping 95% of their profits and the brokers (BF) were never going to stand for a group of people giving them 5% of their profits as payments for the use of their creation. We are not talking about people who are good at picking winners but something else, and BF were never going to stand for that. I don't think BF ever envisaged this happening and are now doing something about it. It may be that if the trsders, PC payers disappeared, the prices I back at may get better, I don't know, but I do know that I am not better of while they are creaming mone out of the market day after day. On my betting, I have paid over the years 64% of my gross profit and most of that has been in the most recent years, to the point where I now bet less and less as backable prices are harder to find. I'm doing the same as I was 5/7 years ago but nowhere near as successful, so something has happened to the markets. I'm not jealous of PC payers, and could do the same as the do but I choose not to, all I say is don't complain now the loophole has been closed. Just an opinion, and what I think won't make any difference, or do you think BF will be influenced by my opinion ? If I am doing better than some others I am doing it betting straight, not what PC payers are doing. |
|
By:
Of course the average winner on here would be better off if a large group of other winners 'dissappears'.
Wasn't any 'loophole' that existed already closed with the original Premium Charge? There are financial traders who are billionaires paying less than 30% in trading fees (some even pay a minuscule fraction of that). I don't hear any of their brokers imposing a 10fold increase in charges over 3 years, because they couldn't. There is a healthly level of competition. This has nothing to do with 'loopholes' being closed and everything to do with a lack of healthy competition among betting exchanges. Ken, how would you feel if the ultimate loophole is closed and long term winners are charged 80% or 90% of winnings. It's ok when some small minority of other people are adversely affected, but people have a habit of changing their tune when they are affected themselves. |
|
By:
These people don't 'bet' in the conventional way, so the
exchange would be better of without them, they weren't anticipated in the first place, and I believe the imposition of the PC, 20% and 60%, are steps to remove them. The first charge didn't work, maybe the 60% will work though. It may be a small minority of other people but I am sure there is a lot of money involved. |
|
By:
Ken, I am in the PC2 net. I don't trade, I don't bet in running, I don't courtside, I'm not using robots, 95% of my bets are lays, I'm not subject to insider information, I have a full time job, I have sizeable spells without winning. What is this mythical loophole I'm exploiting? Because whatever it is, I suspect you are doing it also, just at a slower rate.
It is a tax on rate of winning not strategy used, because those two can be disentangled in a matter of minutes. Similarly there will be plenty of people who never pay PC who do untold 'damage' to the site- there might be a trap bettor who catches a few people out and ensures they never come back, but never ultimately makes the PC cut. There might be someone who operates micro robots that deter people from placing bets in markets, why try and back or lay on here when your bets get immediately covered, might as well just use a regular book, and so on. |
|
By:
ics, I am generalising so if everything you say is true,
then perhaps I am referring to all Super PC payers bar you. You seem to be a special case, take it up with Betfair. |
|
By:
If I can do it, it's a certainty there will be others in the same situation.
It would only be worth taking it up with Betfair if it wasn't intended to be a tax on rate of winnings. |
|
By:
The loopholes were never closed, that's the problem. The PC didn't close the loopholes, it legitimised them. It legitimised all of them, the illegal, the quasi-legal but definitely unethical, and the mildly distasteful arbers and traders.
Now that BF is taking the majority share of the profits, what incentive do they have to close any loopholes? In effect they've gone from being an accomplice to the ringleader, reaping the lion's share of the profits from the various nefarious schemes. |
|
By:
Anyone who wins at a faster rate than kenilworth HAS to be cheating.
(It's physically impossible to do so otherwise) **** END OF THREAD ****  |
|
By:
"and the mildly distasteful arbers and traders"
Not sure why you would say that, as these are among the biggest providers of liquidity on the site, without which "normal" punters would find it harder to get their bets matched! |
|
By:
By the way, ICS is not a special case, he is just one of a totally-predictable unfortunate minority.
Remember this: if a hundred monkeys each made two totally random bets a week on betfair, after 10 years/1000 markets at least TWENTY monkeys will have a lifetime profit and less than 40% commission paid. Yes, you heard right. More than 20% of big betters will pay PC even if they have absolutely no betting strategy at all. These PC-paying monkeys must exist, statistics dictates it. Why don't we hear from them? Because they don't know they are monkeys. They think they have found a winning formula, naturally. Anybody would think that, having made £250,000 in over 1000 markets. |
|
By:
It seems a cord has been struck with modjadji.
|
|
By:
I do not trade. When I first came on here it puzzled me when, after taking a price the money for that price was more or less replaced straight away. Of course after a short while I realised that it was people trading back/lay. Its not often I post on here these days but it seems to me that all types of punters are needed to make the whole thing work fluidly.
|
|
By:
ken if i understand you correctly, the exchange would be better off without PC paying winners?
If the current batch of winners was removed, people like you would on average become more consistent winners (you will be getting matched at better value, as there is less 'smart money' around). What I do want to know though, is what your reaction would be if betfair decided to get rid of the PC payers that according to you they would be better of without and this sequence of events occured: 1) current batch of PC payers is removed. 2) kenilworth and friends quickly start to make much larger and more consistent profits as the ratio of smart money / mug money has shifted massively in their favour 3) kenilworth wins too consistently and is removed. Like I said, I think you would be ready to change your tune very quickly. You could of course take measure to win 'less consistently' but this is what current PC payers are already doing anyway! |
|
By:
kenilworth
I im just a punter..I don't have fast TV, inside info, and don't trade....but if I didn't get better at my punting each year , i would not be now making a profit IF you believe the PC help you get a better price, your a donkey |
|
By:
Two good posts sun.
|
|
By:
Not sure why you would say that, as these are among the biggest providers of liquidity on the site, without which "normal" punters would find it harder to get their bets matched!
|
|
By:
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
|
By:
very good chance Im the lucky monkey....It better to be lucky then smart
|
|
By:
[b]Investor2[/b], You have a very vivid imagination and I think
I will just give it a miss, as I don't feel like attempting a response to such hypothetical situations, especially when you seem to be trying to take the p!ss. |
|
By:
That's a shame Kenilworth, as from where I see things, TheInvestor2 has a very valid point.
|
|
By:
getafix, you answer it for me, giving you a chance
to use our imagination. An imaginary answer to an amaginary question. |
|
By:
It's called contingency planning ken.
In a nutshell: You'll be singing a different tune when you're the one affected. |
|
By:
how anyone can defend the 60 percent charge? if they are they definitely not paying it or only thing left works for bet unfair
|
|
By:
Kenilworth, I don't need to use my imagination, I now "shop" before placing my bets. In the past it would have been 100% betfair (even if price better elsewhere (but still value at bf prices)). Not all PC2/3 payers though are fortunate to be sole backers/layers/value players; therefore they will get replaced by the next 250k limit band (or "new" accounts/alter egos of those who have used up their allowance already - there will be no risk in being rumbled). Don't be so naive to think it is just Sumo who is affected. There will be a quite a small chunk of "ordinary" players (not monkeys lol). This is proved simply by looking at the difference in purple's pre race liquidity.
|
|
By:
Investor, I won't be singing any different tune, as
it's not that important to me. Rs1, They don't have to justify it, the are happy knowing they have no where else to go, and if they do, they BF, will consider themselves well rid. Sorry if that seems harsh, but it's realistic. |
|
By:
The increase in purple's/other exchanges liquidity imo is partially down to the pc players such as myself now offering bets at multiple places. There is very little risk comparatively to the costs of paying PC.
|
|
By:
Getafix, I really don't know, or care how many are affected by the
PC. I'm playing Devil's Advocate here and have no agenda, I just say it as I see it, sorry if it ruffles you. You say there are a lot of 'ordinary' players, and you may well be right and BF know exactly how many. They, BF, will do what they think best for the company, and you shouldn't expect them to do anything else. |
|
By:
there is no where to go ... but that doesn't mean put up an unfair charge out of greed
harsh reality we stuck with it an even may get worse ... I'm still hoping something else comes along .. if it does it won't be bet c a c k or some W ankers B ollox Exchange |
|
By:
you know what i mean ...
|
|
By:
Fair point, it doesn't generally ruffle me, the only point that does is the general notion that only cheats are paying pc2/3 this is definitely not the case and it affects the "normal" (or should I say regular type bettor (no trading whatsoever)) punters too. It is just another obstacle for me and am happy to pay in order to use betfair but I will try and reduce costs wherever possible. My fear is for betfair themselves, as I believe the shift of "value" players placing bets at numerous exchanges will be more costly to betfair than the amounts they were hoping to receive in new pc payments. If pc2/3 fails then it will only get worse for everybody as I believe it will just mean new bf charges dreampt up and applied! That is, of course, if the argument that the exchange in its pre pc2/3 status was not sustainable - which has not yet been proved. Only time will tell!
|
|
By:
sun
02 Sep 11 16:23 By the way, ICS is not a special case, he is just one of a totally-predictable unfortunate minority. Remember this: if a hundred monkeys each made two totally random bets a week on betfair, after 10 years/1000 markets at least TWENTY monkeys will have a lifetime profit and less than 40% commission paid. Yes, you heard right. More than 20% of big betters will pay PC even if they have absolutely no betting strategy at all. sun, I haven't done any calculation on this, but I consider myself to have a very good understanding of maths and probabilities and I refuse to believe this could be correct unless you come up with some kind of proof. |
|
By:
Eddie I did a simulation of this, 1000 coin tosses of a fair coin paying 2% comm when winning and 3% implied.
This strategy was in PC territory 9 times out of 200, with lowest comm generated of these 9 times 29.26%. That might be exceptionally low though, as the other 8 were above 36%. Someone should run a simulation tens of thousands of times to get more accurate figures. Seems like out of the 100 monkeys about 4-5 will pay PC rather than 'at least 20'. |
|
By:
Wait, I'm gonna do this properly [;)]
|
|
By:
Nah what I posted before was completely wrong sorry
|
|
By:
Hi Eddie
You can check for yourself that a punter at 2% comm betting flat stakes at odds of 2.0 will have to win 516 out of 1000 bets to have paid less than 40% of profits in (deemed) commission. The chances of this happening can be looked up in Binomial Distribution tables or Excel as 16.35% But that is the best case scenario. At odds higher or lower than even money, the chances increase. For instance, if all the bets are at odds of 11, 97 wins makes you liable for PC3, odds of 26.62%. Similarly for odds-on, eg at 1.1 it's 915 wins, chances 27.92%. And punters backing 1.01 shots have nearly a 50% chance of being liable for PC 'by accident'. If, as is likely, the stakes are not all the same, then that will also increase the probabilty of having to pay PC3 compared to the level-stakes examples above. Having checked this, I am sure you will agree that any simulation with 1000 bets of mixed stakes and odds will almost certainly produce a 'accidental PC rate' of more than 20%. Because of the £250,000 threshold, the above only applies to punters making very large bets. It should certainly apply to anybody on 2% commission. |