Golf
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Really? does anyone believe this? in open pull out today. i dont believe a word of it-companies should have to show these bets are real. most people cant get £50 on with this shower.
Show More
Would take 12 months and a sh1t load of petrol to get that on.
Plus the price would go once you got £50 on.
Plus the price would go once you got £50 on.
it would be interesting if all online books showed price graphs as betfair exchange do
it almost seems the right thing for them to do
it almost seems the right thing for them to do
I might barely believe they took £151.52 at 66/1 to win £10,000.
It must be true.
Every year a mysterious punter walks into a high street betting shop and has £50k on an outsider.
Every year a mysterious punter walks into a high street betting shop and has £50k on an outsider.
Should be done for subliminal advertising 20 years ago people used to believe this c rap Nowadays people laugh
I remember those laughable betting analysts after each of yday s horse races 10 k here 10 k there all horses one bookmakers putting 10 k on a horse and the taking bookmaker then putting 10 k on with the punting bookmaker
A la McManus ohh I've had 250 k on this ( taken 250 k in bets before ) and everyone going what a man
I remember those laughable betting analysts after each of yday s horse races 10 k here 10 k there all horses one bookmakers putting 10 k on a horse and the taking bookmaker then putting 10 k on with the punting bookmaker
A la McManus ohh I've had 250 k on this ( taken 250 k in bets before ) and everyone going what a man
Believe it or not its true..ive seen it £10,000 on Stenson laid before the Scottish open..
why do they knock back punters who want a 100 on a horse then 
I have just tried to see what I can get on stepson at 33/1 presently with Korals.
Max £30.30.
Complete and utter rubbish. Why do they stop u having a golf bet just because they limit u on horses? The 2 aren't linked!!!
Max £30.30.
Complete and utter rubbish. Why do they stop u having a golf bet just because they limit u on horses? The 2 aren't linked!!!
The guy/gal could easily be a serious long time loser.... Very easy to get big bets on if you lose big..
Haas chance - I phoned up yesterday for a £35 win bet at 9/2 and was on hold for 7 minutes whilst they got it accepted.
They restrict u online as then u don't get guaranteed odds but this doesn't apply to golf. It's a disgrace and a complete joke.
They restrict u online as then u don't get guaranteed odds but this doesn't apply to golf. It's a disgrace and a complete joke.
I wanted a £100 on a horse once and they laid me £50 I had to go down to Laddies for the other £50
£10,000 @66/1 ?
£10,000 @66/1 ?
i just got offered £14 max at 7/2...will the mystery(or is that mythical) punter get me on if he reads this please.
TYIA
TYIA
another sweaty few hours for peter barlow,carla will be fuming, 
I agree that j/c knock back some of the most ridiculous bets but i can guarantee this bet was laid..i have seen it with my own eyes..bet placed on line 10 grand on the nose.
I was reading a betting book by an old-time gambler named Pittsburg Phil from around 1905.
He mentions being told about a very large bet placed on a horse. So he went to the betting ring to see how much the price fell. The price didn't move. Pittsburg Phil realised the horse was not going to win, probably because the bookmaker who took the bet bribed the jockey to pull the horse.
Now if someone put £10,000 at 66/1 Henrik Stenson to win then his price would fall dramatically. I don't think it did. So my guess is the "bet" was fiction.
He mentions being told about a very large bet placed on a horse. So he went to the betting ring to see how much the price fell. The price didn't move. Pittsburg Phil realised the horse was not going to win, probably because the bookmaker who took the bet bribed the jockey to pull the horse.
Now if someone put £10,000 at 66/1 Henrik Stenson to win then his price would fall dramatically. I don't think it did. So my guess is the "bet" was fiction.
if coral had took the bet then would of had to back stenson on betfair to cover their loss lets say he was 70 they would have to put on £9500 on.most of the top fancied golfers prices liquidity was around the £1000 to £20000 range depending on price stenson would of been around £3000 to £5000 so they may of put 2 bets on at 70 and 65 to get the full lay if if thats what they did
stensons price then would of been 60 and thats hardly a massive price change but thats how the golf markets work on the majors
stensons price then would of been 60 and thats hardly a massive price change but thats how the golf markets work on the majors
The biggest problem I have with this bet is that Corals have an online payout limit on golf of £100k.
I know if you have a big losing account they will take some golf bets with a payout upto £100k. However, I also know of big losing accounts that they have hugely reduced despite the big losses (ie makes no sense whatsoever).
The company I have the biggest problem with is Paddy Power. They close accounts online so quickly it is frightening. They also will not take a bet of any note in their shops. You try and get say £250 ew on a player at 33/1 during the Open. No chance. They have all the adverts but are the most spineless bookie out there by a country mile. At one point during the Open I asked for an each way bet on a player £100) and was told i could only have win only...
I know if you have a big losing account they will take some golf bets with a payout upto £100k. However, I also know of big losing accounts that they have hugely reduced despite the big losses (ie makes no sense whatsoever).
The company I have the biggest problem with is Paddy Power. They close accounts online so quickly it is frightening. They also will not take a bet of any note in their shops. You try and get say £250 ew on a player at 33/1 during the Open. No chance. They have all the adverts but are the most spineless bookie out there by a country mile. At one point during the Open I asked for an each way bet on a player £100) and was told i could only have win only...
Yep £100k online limit. So they would be happy to accept £10k at 66/1 knowing only payout £100k. Same as £1500 at 66/1!!. Something very strange about it. Surely they have a duty to advise backer of limit when bet placed? or do they see it as a good PR opportunity which it isn't when you realise backer only getting 10/1 for his £10k ???
Was Stenson that big a difference on here pre tourney? Seems a strange bet when you think of the liquidity here on majors week. Probably fictitious bet if you ask me for PR reasons.
But why would anyone bet £10k at 66/1 online with Korals if cannot get full payout of £660k if rules say max £100k ???
Steve palmer wrote the article
either he egged the amount in article or coral spokesman doesn't know own betting limit
either he egged the amount in article or coral spokesman doesn't know own betting limit
people do that alot with multis in the bookies where they would never get the payout they think due to limits.
emailed coral
how long till I get a response
hoy lake next year
how long till I get a response
hoy lake next year
Just tried to back woosnam and tinning in the seniors. Korals best price at 125/1 and 200/1. Maximum 1.20 and 0.60. Online.
Not sure about why you half wits even post about this...
With Korals limits you would have to be the biggest mug in the World to even get £100 online...
"In Store" their "Managers" would not know what golf is..
But they will be experts on the immigration system....
With Korals limits you would have to be the biggest mug in the World to even get £100 online...
"In Store" their "Managers" would not know what golf is..
But they will be experts on the immigration system....
And of course there is the Irishman with the suitcase who walks in every year and has the lot on an outsider.
By the way lads the suitcase went on Graeme mc dowell to win the Canadian this year.chargeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
chargeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
siralex - save your 60p Tinning injured in practice lol
I just reread the article again
was it for the punter or the bookie?
It's crazy I should be even asking that question
was it for the punter or the bookie?
It's crazy I should be even asking that question
Your complaint about Coral Eurobet Ltd – article in the Racing Post
Thank you for contacting the Advertising Standards Authority. I’m sorry to tell you that we can’t deal with your complaint because it relates to editorial material, rather than a specific claim in a paid-for advertisement – we cannot comment on statements made in articles such as you refer to. If you have concerns about the information included in editorial material, I would suggest writing to the Editor of the publication.
ie--it has to be a paid for article or you can't complain
Thank you for contacting the Advertising Standards Authority. I’m sorry to tell you that we can’t deal with your complaint because it relates to editorial material, rather than a specific claim in a paid-for advertisement – we cannot comment on statements made in articles such as you refer to. If you have concerns about the information included in editorial material, I would suggest writing to the Editor of the publication.
ie--it has to be a paid for article or you can't complain
press complaints commission
http://www.pcc.org.uk/
All members of the press have a duty to maintain the highest professional standards. The Code, which includes this preamble and the public interest exceptions below, sets the benchmark for those ethical standards, protecting both the rights of the individual and the public's right to know. It is the cornerstone of the system of self-regulation to which the industry has made a binding commitment.
It is essential that an agreed code be honoured not only to the letter but in the full spirit. It should not be interpreted so narrowly as to compromise its commitment to respect the rights of the individual, nor so broadly that it constitutes an unnecessary interference with freedom of expression or prevents publication in the public interest.
It is the responsibility of editors and publishers to apply the Code to editorial material in both printed and online versions of publications. They should take care to ensure it is observed rigorously by all editorial staff and external contributors, including non-journalists, in printed and online versions of publications.
Editors should co-operate swiftly with the Press Complaints Commission in the resolution of complaints. Any publication judged to have breached the Code must publish the adjudication in full and with due prominence agreed by the Commission's Director, including headline reference to the PCC.
Accuracy
i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the Commission, prominence should be agreed with the PCC in advance.
iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.
iv) A publication must report fairly and accurately the outcome of an action for defamation to which it has been a party, unless an agreed settlement states otherwise, or an agreed statement is published.
http://www.pcc.org.uk/
All members of the press have a duty to maintain the highest professional standards. The Code, which includes this preamble and the public interest exceptions below, sets the benchmark for those ethical standards, protecting both the rights of the individual and the public's right to know. It is the cornerstone of the system of self-regulation to which the industry has made a binding commitment.
It is essential that an agreed code be honoured not only to the letter but in the full spirit. It should not be interpreted so narrowly as to compromise its commitment to respect the rights of the individual, nor so broadly that it constitutes an unnecessary interference with freedom of expression or prevents publication in the public interest.
It is the responsibility of editors and publishers to apply the Code to editorial material in both printed and online versions of publications. They should take care to ensure it is observed rigorously by all editorial staff and external contributors, including non-journalists, in printed and online versions of publications.
Editors should co-operate swiftly with the Press Complaints Commission in the resolution of complaints. Any publication judged to have breached the Code must publish the adjudication in full and with due prominence agreed by the Commission's Director, including headline reference to the PCC.
Accuracy
i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the Commission, prominence should be agreed with the PCC in advance.
iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.
iv) A publication must report fairly and accurately the outcome of an action for defamation to which it has been a party, unless an agreed settlement states otherwise, or an agreed statement is published.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539