General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Isn't it about time the SP Executive took the returned SP away from the ring and based it on this exchange
the phrase - 'to good money' is an absolute joke, when probably less than 10% of stakes are taken on the course
Hence, the big 3 been able to easily manipulate any market (except possibly, the main festival meetings)
Hence, also, a few course bookmakers (at small meetings) been able to determine overrounds of 150%+, if they wish !
This cannot, in any way, satisfy the GC's fair and open objective that it sets itself
Its every individuals' option wether he takes unfair odds, but when the GC looks to protect the young and 'unknowing' (vulnerable) as one of its main principles,
then how can they bury their heads when this 'robbery' is taking place.
No race should have an SP returned over 120% - a simple method to do this would be to take the 100% market of this exchange at race start - and apply
a mark up to equate each runner to a total make up of 120% - giving the industry 'their' proper and just margin to settle bets.
Obviously some races (2 or 3 runners) would need some adjustment, but the general drift of not going above 120% generally, should be quite simple to
implement
I think honourable course bookies would accept this, but the 'firms' and unscrupulous bookies would shriek at such a change - so GC / SP exec ...............
do you want to really protect them or not?
the phrase - 'to good money' is an absolute joke, when probably less than 10% of stakes are taken on the course
Hence, the big 3 been able to easily manipulate any market (except possibly, the main festival meetings)
Hence, also, a few course bookmakers (at small meetings) been able to determine overrounds of 150%+, if they wish !
This cannot, in any way, satisfy the GC's fair and open objective that it sets itself
Its every individuals' option wether he takes unfair odds, but when the GC looks to protect the young and 'unknowing' (vulnerable) as one of its main principles,
then how can they bury their heads when this 'robbery' is taking place.
No race should have an SP returned over 120% - a simple method to do this would be to take the 100% market of this exchange at race start - and apply
a mark up to equate each runner to a total make up of 120% - giving the industry 'their' proper and just margin to settle bets.
Obviously some races (2 or 3 runners) would need some adjustment, but the general drift of not going above 120% generally, should be quite simple to
implement
I think honourable course bookies would accept this, but the 'firms' and unscrupulous bookies would shriek at such a change - so GC / SP exec ...............
do you want to really protect them or not?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 7
|
By:
there are some on course bookies offering 1/6, 1/7 and worse a place....one bookie at salisbury went 1/12 a place
|
|
By:
Yeah, that always angered me Sweetchild, back in the day.
They might as well have a sign up saying "we don't want each way business as its only 2% margin." I don't blame them at all for changing the number of places being paid with regards to bad each way races but that's on a race by race (case by case) basis. |
|
By:
Who was the bookmaker?
|
|
By:
jack wilson
|
|
By:
In that particular race they bet to 134% and at 1/12 the odds a place,
the same margin. Not a race to bet in, but he couldn't be expected to bet ew to the standard terms. |
|
By:
Robin Grossmith - RP page 2 today on the decline of the ring
'you dont need the brains of Lloyd George to work out where it will all end up unless something is done about it' .............and on attracting a younger crowd 'We've got to tell them what we offer and the value they are getting' Well Robin, you dont need the brains of an amoeba to know which end of 'value' they will be at !!!! |
|
By:
why do bookies want an overound of 120 % when they do the majority of their stuff these days at 103 % ?
|