General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Are there some who are doing this, that is NOT trading,
NOT using 'bots' ?
NOT using 'bots' ?
Show More
yes paid 74k of premium charge at 20% and was very close to paying it at 40% when it was introduced last July-although in reality I would have stopped betting on here.I then did my brains between August and November last year which pushed my commission generated figure to above 70%-I'm a straight opinion punter who might end up with an all green book on less than 5% of the markets that i bet on
You must have one heck of a system Mr Guru to consitently pick winners to that extent.
I wish I was £1 behind you !
I wish I was £1 behind you !
you wouldnt want to be a pound behind me based on the the last 9 months Lex-never experienced such a bad run in the last the 10 years,which is why unless a rebate system was introduced it would be financial suicide for a straight opinion bettor to remain here and pay 40% with the possibility of a bad run around the corner and no refund of pc paid
I am a 'straight opinion' backer/layer but although I am
a net winner, most of my profit goes in commission although
I don't pay a PC. I was of the opinion that it was near
impossible to make enough to qualify for a PC but ofcourse
nothing is impossible. Perhaps I should be happy with a small
profit !
a net winner, most of my profit goes in commission although
I don't pay a PC. I was of the opinion that it was near
impossible to make enough to qualify for a PC but ofcourse
nothing is impossible. Perhaps I should be happy with a small
profit !
i have seen someone in the P&L thread in football forum who claimed to make 100s of thousands with pre off bets. he said that he doesnt watch the games let alone trade
They said they never introduced a rebate system because they were afraid of collusion between accounts to enable a big winning account to claim a large rebate. That's possible just now although it has to be done in advance. In any case, I suggested to them they could make the rebate only count towards future normal (not pc) commission charges as that would mean it would take ages to get back (particularly for traders) and they'd have the option of closing the account if they thought something underhand was taking place. They weren't interested in creating a bit of goodwill and alleviating the fears of many gamblers though. City kvnts.
trev h aswell. i see he made 5k plus one month lets bets ride and bets on nearly every in play match incredible. i am guessing he pays PC
Are there some who are doing this, that is NOT trading,
NOT using 'bots' ?
You have to use bots if you want to get a reasonably amount of money on at the best prices whether you are a "straight" player or not (assuming you mean players who take one opinion and stick to it). And yes pc2/3 affects every type of player.
NOT using 'bots' ?
You have to use bots if you want to get a reasonably amount of money on at the best prices whether you are a "straight" player or not (assuming you mean players who take one opinion and stick to it). And yes pc2/3 affects every type of player.
If you Monte Carlo the chance of making a more than 20% profit on your turnover by chance, you will see there will be some 'inadvertent' PC payers.
There will even be some paying pc despite making a series of negative expectation bets.
There will even be some paying pc despite making a series of negative expectation bets.
I pay PC at the 40% rate and I'm a straight backing/laying but do trade out sometimes, maybe 10% of the time.
Well done, the few who do win betting straight,
AND enough to qualify for PC. Not many of them
I suspect.
AND enough to qualify for PC. Not many of them
I suspect.
^ no I doubt if there is many of them,
but very unfair that they should pay a premium charge betting 'straight'
but very unfair that they should pay a premium charge betting 'straight'
Bluenose,
You are throwing money away. Why accept 3/1 on a 5/1 shot?
You are throwing money away. Why accept 3/1 on a 5/1 shot?
It's only 3-1 on a 5-1 shot if they always win.
But I feel any pc payers winning by betting straight wd do better to give placers a worse than 20% 'cut'.
But I feel any pc payers winning by betting straight wd do better to give placers a worse than 20% 'cut'.
Do people get others to bet for them ? I find that
hard to believe.
hard to believe.
Just a couple of points...
If Bluenose took 3/1 on 5/1 shots he'd come nowhere near ever having to pay PC.
Why is it unfair that straight bettors should pay PC if they qualify for it given that BF wants a minimum of 20% commission from punters.
Getting others to place bets? Surely only in horse racing?
If Bluenose took 3/1 on 5/1 shots he'd come nowhere near ever having to pay PC.
Why is it unfair that straight bettors should pay PC if they qualify for it given that BF wants a minimum of 20% commission from punters.
Getting others to place bets? Surely only in horse racing?
I think there are plenty of position taker who pay or has paid it.
I've never used a bot or any helping aid on here, every click is made manually. Nor am I a trader in the way one think of traders on here even if I sometime adjust positions a little during events. I do most of my betting on golf though so there's plenty of time to adjust positions. It's still very very rare that I don't have both huge red and green positions when tournaments are close to being finished.
And still my statement says I've paid 217 k in PC. From memory I think roughly half of that was when I(and everyone else) was on 20 %. The other half has been paid while on 40 %.
The most scaring part is that I would have had to pay another 177 k in PC had the 40 % (50 or 60 for some other) been there since day 1 of PC.
My commission generated number on the statement is 249 k. As there is no way of knowing exactly how much one has actually paid, it's only a gues when I estimate I've paid roughly 300 k in normal commission, but I don't think it will be far from the truth.
I've never used a bot or any helping aid on here, every click is made manually. Nor am I a trader in the way one think of traders on here even if I sometime adjust positions a little during events. I do most of my betting on golf though so there's plenty of time to adjust positions. It's still very very rare that I don't have both huge red and green positions when tournaments are close to being finished.
And still my statement says I've paid 217 k in PC. From memory I think roughly half of that was when I(and everyone else) was on 20 %. The other half has been paid while on 40 %.
The most scaring part is that I would have had to pay another 177 k in PC had the 40 % (50 or 60 for some other) been there since day 1 of PC.
My commission generated number on the statement is 249 k. As there is no way of knowing exactly how much one has actually paid, it's only a gues when I estimate I've paid roughly 300 k in normal commission, but I don't think it will be far from the truth.
To be fair, most "estimates" made by people who state their own PC charges are at least 1000% too high.
Eddie,
If you want to know how much commission you have paid. Email the helpdesk and ask for a spreadsheet or csv file of all the activity on your account since it was opened.
If you want to know how much commission you have paid. Email the helpdesk and ask for a spreadsheet or csv file of all the activity on your account since it was opened.
Thanks RT, but I'm not to botherd with exactly what I've paid in commission. It's the PC I detest as imo it's nothing but a tax on profit , more like regular income tax and as far as I know , Betfair is the only privat company acting this way like they were some kind of government.
It's not a tax on profit it's a minimum charge rate for using the system.
Catflaqpo if it was a minimum charge rate for using the system, then why should the minimum charge rate be different for different users? If it was a minimum charge of 40% for all pc payers then I could accept your viewpoint, but it is not. It is a tax based on past performance.
trev and ken, on placers, yes, and it's by far the easiest way to win. For me, this is just horses.
To explain why, let's take an example of the 3.30 at Newmarket today. This was a race featuring a lot of unexposed three year olds, mostly going over a new trip, that had come to hand too slow, or were not good enough, for Royal Ascot in ten days' time. As such the race was hard to price up accurately.
Every bookie bar Koral had Gosden's horse Trade Commissioner, lightly raced w/ a plausible form and pedigree, at a precautionary 2-1 or 9-4. Koral had 11-4, and there was no price on here. I wd be w/ the horse at 11-4, neutral or marginally against at 9-4 and a layer at 15-8. I got 500 pounds on at Koral through four people at the price, laid off at 9-4, laid a bit more below 2-1, then reversed around the bf sp, which was about 3.3.
In the end I had a trading win, but wd have been equally happy with a low three-figure back or lay. I cdn't have done any of this w/out placers. I don't think price volatility or poss. bookie restrictions are comparable in other sports.
trev, 22.5% from straight punters wd be felt as less unfair if bf pursued, or closed down, those who win through inside information and what look like corrupt practices. Instead they let them keep around 80% of their winnings, and keep them in the pool fighting for prices w/ those pricing only on opinion and proven approaches.
To explain why, let's take an example of the 3.30 at Newmarket today. This was a race featuring a lot of unexposed three year olds, mostly going over a new trip, that had come to hand too slow, or were not good enough, for Royal Ascot in ten days' time. As such the race was hard to price up accurately.
Every bookie bar Koral had Gosden's horse Trade Commissioner, lightly raced w/ a plausible form and pedigree, at a precautionary 2-1 or 9-4. Koral had 11-4, and there was no price on here. I wd be w/ the horse at 11-4, neutral or marginally against at 9-4 and a layer at 15-8. I got 500 pounds on at Koral through four people at the price, laid off at 9-4, laid a bit more below 2-1, then reversed around the bf sp, which was about 3.3.
In the end I had a trading win, but wd have been equally happy with a low three-figure back or lay. I cdn't have done any of this w/out placers. I don't think price volatility or poss. bookie restrictions are comparable in other sports.
trev, 22.5% from straight punters wd be felt as less unfair if bf pursued, or closed down, those who win through inside information and what look like corrupt practices. Instead they let them keep around 80% of their winnings, and keep them in the pool fighting for prices w/ those pricing only on opinion and proven approaches.
Hazel, I understand the jump from 20-40 but I didn't ever really get the 50/60 bands. However the fact that their are different tiers doesn't change the fact that it is implemented as a minimum percentage of profit rather than an outright tax on how much you make.
It is surely intended to be prohibitive for people with a history of lots of lots of small greens....
99.9% of my bets are on US racing and without seeing the market prices as they happen on here i wouldnt be in a position to be profitable. Because of the way the markets develop(last 5 minutes) its pointless me putting up any bets as they are immediately undercut and are off the screen within seconds or giving free information away. Ive tried the purple place but its useless liquidity wise. Ive also tried backing on the tote and laying here to try and offset charges but you can end up in a right mess if a few go the wrong way or you think your bets are on the tote and 15 hours later betfair decide they're not.
I would think that quite a lot of punters with good strike rate/decent profits also pay the 40% or worse charge.
I would think that quite a lot of punters with good strike rate/decent profits also pay the 40% or worse charge.
catflaqpo
09 Jun 12 16:25 Joined: 11 Nov 11 | Topic/replies: 593 | Blogger: catflaqpo's blog
It's not a tax on profit it's a minimum charge rate for using the system.
yeah a minimum tax rate
09 Jun 12 16:25 Joined: 11 Nov 11 | Topic/replies: 593 | Blogger: catflaqpo's blog
It's not a tax on profit it's a minimum charge rate for using the system.
yeah a minimum tax rate
askari1
Date Joined: 29 Nov 01
Add contact | Send message
09 Jun 12 17:51 Joined: 29 Nov 01 | Topic/replies: 1,288 | Blogger: askari1's blog
It is surely intended to be prohibitive for people with a history of lots of lots of small greens....
I think the 50%/60% is aimed at inside info guys / hooverers / trap bettors and others who profit so consistently that what they are doing can't really be called 'betting'.
The chance of me ever paying more than 40% by PC under the current charging structure is very close to zero. There is a chance I'll be paying 40%+ of profit in commission at some stage though.
Date Joined: 29 Nov 01
Add contact | Send message
09 Jun 12 17:51 Joined: 29 Nov 01 | Topic/replies: 1,288 | Blogger: askari1's blog
It is surely intended to be prohibitive for people with a history of lots of lots of small greens....
I think the 50%/60% is aimed at inside info guys / hooverers / trap bettors and others who profit so consistently that what they are doing can't really be called 'betting'.
The chance of me ever paying more than 40% by PC under the current charging structure is very close to zero. There is a chance I'll be paying 40%+ of profit in commission at some stage though.
About 20% of my profit goes in commission (I only bet straight). Personally, if and when I get close to the 250k limit, I will put as much business through the other site(s) as I can. That could be as much as 100k a year comm lost to bf due to this punitive "charge".
I imagine they lose as much as they gain.
I imagine they lose as much as they gain.
What about people like Hazel, or maybe even smaller-denomination players, who have market-made for a profit of 5-10 pounds per market ten or more times a day, full-time, for eight or more years?
They wd be paying super-premium charge; and bf's attitude towards them seems just to be that they're under the feet of their incumbent low-profit, high-comm. market makers. The company wd be happy to lose their custom.
Bf's culture seems never to its small trading losses as marketing spend / the cost of keeping up goodwill. They will blow thousands marketing to new players who in all probability don't exist, but aren't prepared to find an accommodation with small winners who run risk and supply liquidity.
They wd be paying super-premium charge; and bf's attitude towards them seems just to be that they're under the feet of their incumbent low-profit, high-comm. market makers. The company wd be happy to lose their custom.
Bf's culture seems never to its small trading losses as marketing spend / the cost of keeping up goodwill. They will blow thousands marketing to new players who in all probability don't exist, but aren't prepared to find an accommodation with small winners who run risk and supply liquidity.
I punt straight, rarely trade my position much (used to trade far more, but the in play stuff has got worse over the years, people at venues beating people at home, etc)
Pay a fair bit of pc, obviously I get hit hardest when I have a good week punting. Long term, the net effect is that it more than doubles the charges I would pay to bf with no pc - similar to a lot of folks I guess
Whenever betfair troll out their explanations about why they had to introduce pc, none of their arguments apply to me. I'm not botting, tick trading, or doing anything that slows the site down, or scalps pennies from other users.
I can't believe that Bert envisioned a super tax for straight punters who are successful when he dreamt up the ideal of a betting exchange.
Pay a fair bit of pc, obviously I get hit hardest when I have a good week punting. Long term, the net effect is that it more than doubles the charges I would pay to bf with no pc - similar to a lot of folks I guess
Whenever betfair troll out their explanations about why they had to introduce pc, none of their arguments apply to me. I'm not botting, tick trading, or doing anything that slows the site down, or scalps pennies from other users.
I can't believe that Bert envisioned a super tax for straight punters who are successful when he dreamt up the ideal of a betting exchange.
Bert didn't think of a lot of things when he dreamt up the idea of an exchange ( which btw wasn't an original dream).
The PC doesn't seem to have affected liquidity in quite the dramatic fashion that was generally predicted on here.
Why is that ?
The PC doesn't seem to have affected liquidity in quite the dramatic fashion that was generally predicted on here.
Why is that ?
Lack of any viable competition for many.
Winning £100 on here, and paying £50 in tax is still better than netting £9.95 anywhere else.
Winning £100 on here, and paying £50 in tax is still better than netting £9.95 anywhere else.
What happened to the mass migration to other exchanges by all the heavy hitters on here ?
you say liquidity is fine, i spent half a day trying to get a bet on a match where there was never any real liquidity offered just bots controlling the game between themselves.i am just a regular punter who only uses betfair now and again,the last 2 times i have attempted to place a bet no liquidity there.how many punters will waste there time trying to get a bet on with these bots controlling the games.if betfair is about the popular matches where the liquidity is then there are bookmakers who will take decent bets on these games and there inplay is superior to betfair.
the traders and bots will always defend betfair and i agree no other exchange comes close,but everytime i come back to betfair it gets more complicated to place a bet.the bots are calling the shots on betfair but us punters want simplicity .
the traders and bots will always defend betfair and i agree no other exchange comes close,but everytime i come back to betfair it gets more complicated to place a bet.the bots are calling the shots on betfair but us punters want simplicity .
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539