Betfair didn't publicise the Killultagh Vic race

Because it's one thing for a bookie to do something like this - the punter wins and the bookie loses and it looks great.

But if you advertise an Exchange by pointing out someone staked a secondhand car and won a house, you're also showing up that someone staked a house to win a secondhand car and lost the house, which isn't such a cheerful story.

That's my take anyway.

I think the idea the sharks always win puts people off the exchange. This time the shark got severely bitten himself.

They wont publicise this because they would be questioned on exactly how much the winning punters' won - which could be less than half the layers lost, because of their little skimming bot. It would have worked at its absolute maximum in this case.

But it doesn't end there - tomorrow alot of the winners will see big lumps taken via the premium charge.

Brilliant business acumen

They could easily hide behind customer confidentiality on how much was won and lost. And the press are mostly too stupid to question them on PC implications. I wonder if the person who lost is being protected for some reason. Or they are concerned about the "fairness" of in running. But I think the overall reason is they dont want to promote the exchange,,,

@kat: "how much the winning punters' won - which could be less than half the layers lost, because of their little skimming bot."

Go on, explain how that works?  When people talk about Betfair's 'skimming bot' they're normally talking about cross-matching and that's not going to be much involved here.

The 1000 layer is laying 1000 when people on slower pictures are backing at sub 1.1. Massive cross matching oppo.

Don't think crossmatching is used on in-play horse racing markets. At least that's what I've been lead to believe from other punters on the forum. And the odds on some markets only go to back that up.

@TheFear - don't see how that's a cross-matching opportunity, all the bets are on the same horse.

@Darlo - it's very clear on the API that HR win markets cross-match in-play (API lets you request just 'raw' prices or 'virtual ' prices - which include the cross-matcher's offers - so it's easy to see the effects).

@kat "tomorrow alot of the winners will see big lumps taken via the premium charge."

The winners were betting I/R with slow pics. They are likely to be losing punters, up till now. The "big win" exclusion will apply. They won't pay PC, even if they won £400K. Especially not if they won £400K.

How do we know who the winners were? People at the track would have laid this "faller" before the 1000 man and seen it re-start before him also. Very possible some slow pic players fluked it too, of course.

Longbridge - not totally sure what the technical term is but I meant BF would (possibly) be laying 1.1 and backing back at 1000 and probably laying odds-on the eventual winner and the eventual second or third.

Longbridge - not totally sure what the technical term is but I meant BF would (possibly) be laying 1.1 and backing back at 1000 and probably laying odds-on the eventual winner and the eventual second or third.

Cross matching doesn't work like that.

Easiest way to see it is in 2 or 3 runner markets. If something is available to lay at 1.01, and the opposite runner would therefore be 100, the crossmatcher gives you 100 if the best available price is only 25, and does so by laying the 1.01. The crossmatching bot essentially gives everyone a fair price, with the only (and it's a big only) proviso being that Betfair takes the minute percentage proportion of the difference.

Thanks. What's it called when you always seem to get matched at the price you asked for?

You mean when you think you probably ought to get better odds?

Either, the crossmatching bot not working, not turned on, or not designed to be turned on. Or - particularly in some markets - a temporary drop in liquidity and hence a bigger price difference or an indication of not enough money about to take your bet.

Fear, I guess it's possible that the 1000-layer was operating with more than a one second delay, if all he ever did was lay fallers. In which case people at the track could have cashed in.

But I prefer to believe that anybody risking £500,000 has fast pics, fast internet, and knows about the cancel button. I like to believe that the winners were mug punters who were trying to back odds-on about the same time, only with slower pics and slower internet, so their bets arrived a split-second after the lay at 1000. Then they would have cursed and tried to cancel, but too late, they'd been matched at 1000!

I like to believe that the winners were trying to back odds-on about the same time, only with slower pics and slower internet, so their bets arrived a split-second after the lay at 1000. Then they would have cursed and tried to cancel, but too late, they'd been matched at 1000!

That happens a hell of a lot of time. Hence why this strategy of laying 1000 is probably very profitable. Especially when the info you're getting is way ahead of the market.

Imagine, you try to win £10 (back £50 at 1.2), and you accidentally win £ 49,950!

darlo - xmatching on IR horse racing has been in place for years

betfair will always match you at best available price..... unless the market goes overround. Once the market goes overround (as it would have done in this instance) then betfair will match you to a max of a 100% market and skim the rest.

If you think its a 'minute percentage' in this instance, you are wrong

I've regularly seen multiple horses both matched at odds on at the same time. That shouldn't happen if crossmatching was in place.

I'm sure there's limits on their bots. But it would be very, very interesting to know if Betfair were involved in this market.

There certainly was in the past. But it's a very long time since I've seen the crossmarket bots overbroke. But it's only so obvious in 2-runner markets like tennis, cricket, snooker, darts, etc.