Horse Antepost
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
01 Jun 15
17:07
Joined:
Date Joined:
14 Nov 01
A year or two ago Betfair decided to change the way it deals with ante-post horse racing markets. While it is still possible to get a horse added to a market that isn't currently entered in a race (hoping for a supplementary entry in other words), Betfair now removes all horses (including those not originally entered) that do not remain in a race after a scratching stage.
This is hard to comprehend.
At the previous scratching stage for this year's Derby, for instance, it was impossible for the likes of Success Days, Sumbal etc to appear in the subsequently issued list as they were not in the race originally and could not be added at that stage. The supplementary stage comes much further down the line.
Betfair knows it is adding horses which people hope will be supplemented. Why it then removes these horses at a point when they cannot be supplemented is unclear.
Unfortunately, this can have grave consequences for people who may be hoping to balance their books when talk of supplementing emerges, as was the case with Sumbal, for one, this year. On His Own in the Gold Cup of 2014 would be another example. I'm sure there are plenty more. In the case of races such as the Derby and Arc it is almost inevitable that horses will eventually be supplemented AND which have previously been in Betfair's market....but then taken out for no good reason. So I would politely describe the current policy as frustrating. It also leads to difficulties unsettling bets that have prematurely been settled, with field positions dramatically changing as 'non-runners' suddenly become runners again. This was very ably demonstrated from around 12:30 this afternoon on the exchange.
I have spoken to a few people who also feel unease at how Betfair is managing these markets, but it seems individual emails and ‘live chats’ are easily batted away....
So I'd like to ask the forum if it would prefer horses which have not been scratched to remain in Betfair's market after a scratching stage? A simple 'yes' or 'signed' would suffice. Apologies for length of post but the bits of hair I haven't pulled out are now going grey over this. Any questions, do please fire away. Many thanks.
This is hard to comprehend.
At the previous scratching stage for this year's Derby, for instance, it was impossible for the likes of Success Days, Sumbal etc to appear in the subsequently issued list as they were not in the race originally and could not be added at that stage. The supplementary stage comes much further down the line.
Betfair knows it is adding horses which people hope will be supplemented. Why it then removes these horses at a point when they cannot be supplemented is unclear.
Unfortunately, this can have grave consequences for people who may be hoping to balance their books when talk of supplementing emerges, as was the case with Sumbal, for one, this year. On His Own in the Gold Cup of 2014 would be another example. I'm sure there are plenty more. In the case of races such as the Derby and Arc it is almost inevitable that horses will eventually be supplemented AND which have previously been in Betfair's market....but then taken out for no good reason. So I would politely describe the current policy as frustrating. It also leads to difficulties unsettling bets that have prematurely been settled, with field positions dramatically changing as 'non-runners' suddenly become runners again. This was very ably demonstrated from around 12:30 this afternoon on the exchange.
I have spoken to a few people who also feel unease at how Betfair is managing these markets, but it seems individual emails and ‘live chats’ are easily batted away....
So I'd like to ask the forum if it would prefer horses which have not been scratched to remain in Betfair's market after a scratching stage? A simple 'yes' or 'signed' would suffice. Apologies for length of post but the bits of hair I haven't pulled out are now going grey over this. Any questions, do please fire away. Many thanks.
Show More
Yes
Agree Headmaster
It is reasonable to assume anyone playing the ante-post markets has some level of understanding of the various entry stages. The rules are available on the page of these markets. I am sure Betfair could add reference symbols, for horses needing supplementing, scratched horses etc, for the less enlightened.
Agree Headmaster
It is reasonable to assume anyone playing the ante-post markets has some level of understanding of the various entry stages. The rules are available on the page of these markets. I am sure Betfair could add reference symbols, for horses needing supplementing, scratched horses etc, for the less enlightened.
Yes, signed,
and Betfair need to read The Headmaster's opening post above.
and Betfair need to read The Headmaster's opening post above.
Yes.
Signed.
As it stands at the moment, it's farcical.
Signed.
As it stands at the moment, it's farcical.
It just seems downright unfair that they allow punters to bet on horses and then remove them from the market even though there is still a possibility they will run. It's more than stupid. It's an integrity issue and they need to review it.
its a yes from me its a joke what they r doing if theres a chance of a horse running in a race it shud b on ere that's how u get big prices
Signed- we are all aware that horses may not run by removing them seems Betfair have decided they WILL not run, in case of Success Days- wrong yet again and then cancelled bets that had been struck without a word of apology or explanation -would be far easier to leave horses up rather than show themselves up as ignorant of how betting procedure/protocol works.
Good work, thanks to all. Please drive any traffic you can on to this thread as I suspect we'll need quite a loud voice before anyone takes notice. Sint - your post resonates loudly. Was green for £KKKKKs Sumbal but not able to manage my book while all the supplementary talk was going on (as horse had been removed). No-one's trying anything dodgy, everyone knows the deal and the market will determine the price....but not being afforded that basic right was ridiculous. MTD - I have also wondered why a cutting edge tech firm like Betfair can't flag up horses that need supplementing if they're that concerned about it. Different colour, different font, a symbol - take your pick Betfair.
Please keep going and flag this up to anyone who has an interest, thank you very much.
Please keep going and flag this up to anyone who has an interest, thank you very much.
I had bets voided yesterday (from the day before). It wasn't clear why some of the bets matched after the market
reopened were OK, and some were voided. Anyone here understand? I think they said they put Success Days back in
twice, or something??
Of course, it would never have happened if they'd listened to us before.
reopened were OK, and some were voided. Anyone here understand? I think they said they put Success Days back in
twice, or something??
Of course, it would never have happened if they'd listened to us before.
Brilliant response all, very many thanks. Just giving this a little nudge for a few more signeds then will get over to the powers that be.....
signed and a perfect opportunity for betfair to listen to there customers and perhaps do some positive actions instead of the negatives of recent.
Could I trouble any or all of you to digest the ante-post Rules for the Melbourne Cup?
By my reckoning these are still the old Rules we all used to work to and understand.
Why is it the Australians and those betting A/P down under can have that perfectly reasonable system in place while we get shafted at every scratching stage????
By my reckoning these are still the old Rules we all used to work to and understand.
Why is it the Australians and those betting A/P down under can have that perfectly reasonable system in place while we get shafted at every scratching stage????
Also why can't they let you offset lays
in big h'caps on horses who are in the
h'cap proper.(ie top 40 weighted horses
the GN and 35 Cambridgeshire).
in big h'caps on horses who are in the
h'cap proper.(ie top 40 weighted horses
the GN and 35 Cambridgeshire).
Just saw this now, absolutely agree.
Also, integrating the A/P and Day-of-Race markets for trading purposes would be a great idea. Can't imagine it's that hard to do - if I have winnings of +X on a horse in the A/P I should be credited with winnings of X to lay off. Simple, very helpful.
Also, integrating the A/P and Day-of-Race markets for trading purposes would be a great idea. Can't imagine it's that hard to do - if I have winnings of +X on a horse in the A/P I should be credited with winnings of X to lay off. Simple, very helpful.
yes of course although the recent forfeits in the Arc have seen a partial return to the good old days
I think they might have listened a little bit (for once) because they didn't foul up the Arc market this year.
They did leave it suspended for an unreasonable length of time, but that's better than messing things up totally.
They did leave it suspended for an unreasonable length of time, but that's better than messing things up totally.
Re the Melbourne Cup, yes the rules are unchanged. The big difference between their rules and our rules
is that the Aussies have never had money back for ballotted horses, so don't expect it. Our bookies have
always paid stakes back for ballotted horses hence the rules difference. "It's always been done this way, Guv".
Consistent?
Golf Majors - non-runner, stake returned, no rule 4 (or BF equivalent)
Tennis Majors - non-runner = loser
Melbourne Cup - non-runner = loser
Grand National - non-runner = loser UNLESS it is a ballotted horse then it's money back and no rule 4
is that the Aussies have never had money back for ballotted horses, so don't expect it. Our bookies have
always paid stakes back for ballotted horses hence the rules difference. "It's always been done this way, Guv".
Consistent?
Golf Majors - non-runner, stake returned, no rule 4 (or BF equivalent)
Tennis Majors - non-runner = loser
Melbourne Cup - non-runner = loser
Grand National - non-runner = loser UNLESS it is a ballotted horse then it's money back and no rule 4
Totally agree. Signed.
I had an issue with this in the past, just couldn't comprehend how and why they would operate like that.
I had an issue with this in the past, just couldn't comprehend how and why they would operate like that.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539