Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Anaglogs Daughter
28 Dec 11 21:37
Joined:
Date Joined: 05 Jan 10
| Topic/replies: 14,089 | Blogger: Anaglogs Daughter's blog
Fury as Betfair void bets after in-running fiasco
By Paul Eacott racingpost.com

BETFAIR on Wednesday came in for fierce criticism from customers after they made the decision to void all in-running bets placed on a Leopardstown race after an incredible lay bet left a punter facing a theoretical £23 million payout

An internal three-hour long investigation into the fiasco concluded that usersof the site had suffered "a very poor customer and betting experience", after the decision was made to cancel all in-running bets placed on the race, in which winner Voler La Vedette was available to back at a price of 29 (28-1) as she crossed the line four and a half lengths clear.

A total of £1,642,094 was matched at that price after a lay bet of £21.3m was offered on the 13-8chance at 29 - which would have resulted in a whopping payout of almost £600m if it was all matched.

Betfair issued a threadbare statement which said the decision to void all bets was taken after it became apparent the appearance of the bizarre lay bet "was due to an obvious technical failure which allowed a customer to exceed their exposure limit."

Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin said: "It is an obvious error in the fact that the horse was 28 passing the line.

"To offer that kind of amount you would have to have £600 million in your account and anybody backing it at that price knew that something was wrong."

He continued: "It is clearly a technical failure that somebody somewhere was able to place a bet with that liability. Clearly nobody in their right mind would want to strike a bet like that."
The investigation into how the bet was able to be placed was continuing on Wednesday night and Calvin added: "In response to a number of customer questions on this matter, we would like to clarify that the account in question has no commercial relationship with Betfair other than being a customer."

Betfair's share price closed down 3.16 per cent on Wednesday at 781.50p.
Pause Switch to Standard View Tony Calvin: "It is an obvious error"
Show More
Loading...
Report EastLower Gooner December 31, 2011 12:09 AM GMT
That Morana chap has some balls.

seriously.

To still come on and completely try and hide facts from us AGAIN!!! even though Calvin said on ATR they would tell us everything. He's another one....Its easy when you're doing PR stateside on TVG for the Breeders Cup talking up betfair odds to the yanks...completely different when you're under scruitiny on ATR huding facts from innocent punters and hiding behind T&Cs.

comical.
Report guinness2dear December 31, 2011 12:12 AM GMT
The problem is they think nearly everyone who doesn't use a bot is a window licking farkwit.

And treat them accordingly...
Report elisjohn December 31, 2011 12:21 AM GMT
200 customers who feel bruised by this, i had no bet on the race but i feel very strong about the way this has been handled, betfair youre a disgrace and i personally hope that you end up in court
Report elisjohn December 31, 2011 12:25 AM GMT
please simply explain to me what the **** is a BOTGrin
Report tomb raider December 31, 2011 12:31 AM GMT
"Yes, we are disappointed when we feel we've let our customers down, but to my mind, I think the vast majority are people who realise they've got a better chance of winning with Betfair than with a bookmaker, and they appreciate that this is quite a complicated beast that we've built."

He missed out 'and when you reach certain thresholds we will pull your trousers down on a weekly basis and take a further 40-60% of your winnings for having the audacity to be a winning customer'
Report pixie December 31, 2011 12:38 AM GMT
Yeh, but if you've got a Bot that goes nuts on you at least you know you're all right.Laugh
Report tomb raider December 31, 2011 12:41 AM GMT
as posted on another thread, I got hit by a reduction factor that made balance go into the red for a few grand. Betfair wanted the money which they duly got. It was 'only' a few grand though :-)
Report Agent G December 31, 2011 1:00 AM GMT
good point by pixie.  i had 6 losing lays yesterday, thankfully they were all placed by my 'bot' which had clearly gone nuts.  they were all obvious errors, as i would never offer odds about winners.

betfair have since voided all 6 bets and refunded my extremely hefty losses.

they cannot name me.  for legal reasons.
Report Kelly December 31, 2011 1:05 AM GMT
I have always regarded the premium charge as an attempt to recoup money from the bot runners .  From that point of view , Betfair's position becomes debatable . If one of your customers wins all the time , do you bar him ( like the bookies do , and we have got bookie speak these last 2 days from the top at Betfair ) , or do you let him work away and take a big percentage of his ( guaranteed ) winnings for youself ?

The concept of person to person betting as encapsulated in the founders brilliant idea did not I am sure include the concept of pre-programmed computers skipping around markets and creaming off small but regular profits .

Computers are machines which do as they are told .  Rubbish in equals rubbish out was the first slogan I heard when I started as a computer programmer many moons ago . Binary code is ingenious , but does have certain criteria to be observed and protected . De bugging was always in the equation , particularly when new programs were being introduced/ tested . Nothing I suspect has changed , and the hoax or rogue bet may be a billion to one chance , or it may involve a sharper mind than anyone has been given credit for .  When people can hack into the Pentagon computers etc trust in infallibilty goes out the window .

Once upon a time I was standing near a numpty fobt type machine , the person operating it stood back as the screen went "Chinese" -- to illustrate the occurrence -- , and the machine emptied itself of all its contents .  Apparently the company providing the machine said this could never happen , but it did . Never trusted machines / computers / sales pitches / company statements from then on , nothing is impossible or too improbable .

So if I had seen the 22 million at 29 I would immediately have not believed it as my mental arithmetic "head " would have kicked in , on auto , just like a bot .

Did not see the win market at all on Voler  , but some of those who bet in running on it deserve to win ( or lose ) something on bets struck before the rogue appeared , and the place market should stand ( Betfair could compensate any of the autotraders who link the place market lays / bets to the win market if they want , personally I would say "tough " to them )  , amounts involved for any adjustment on that market  would represent .00001 % of share price fall .

Reckon some of the sharp minds have not been at their best this week , unfortunate because a lot of us have great admiration for Betfair , but sometimes you have to cope with the rough as well as the smooth , and this week was not a good week for anyone involved .
Report Pluckier December 31, 2011 2:43 AM GMT
Who is saying it's a complicated beast?  What utter drivel.  It's a simple computer program or a concatenation of arbitrary terminal symbols.  Computers can add two numbers and compare two numbers and we humans built them.  A nuclear power station control suite is complicated and high risk.  You have a website.  It isn't complicated but if you want to say it is complicated then I would say that is a reflection of your technical competence. 

Happy to chat more should anyone wish.
   http://jaoo.dk/jaoo2005/speakers/show_speaker.jsp?oid=95
       
   I.E. Controlling the beast JAOO 2005
Report Pluckier December 31, 2011 3:19 AM GMT
BTW "Night Alliance" in the 12:20 @ Newbury is top rated - it'll be up the top of the betting so I might have a little go on "Present To You" Pulled Up Pulled Up any price.  Be Pluckier ;)
Report Anaglogs Daughter December 31, 2011 11:16 AM GMT
Betfair may lose out by not explaining how £600m lay bet was accepted

If the betting exchange is confident of no repeat glitch, surely it has nothing to lose by revealing the technical problem



Greg Wood  guardian.co.uk,


Betfair failed to address the question of how a £600m lay bet was accepted from an account with a balance of £800. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian


For a statement that Betfair hopes will be the "full and final" explanation of the bedlam that gripped the in-running market on Wednesday's Christmas Hurdle at Leopardstown, Friday's communication from Stephen Morana, the exchange's interim CEO, still seems to leave obvious questions hanging in the air.

The statement contains as much of the "who?" and "why?" of the affair as the Data Protection Act will allow Betfair to reveal, though the answers may not be ones that many of those whose bets were declared void will want to hear or, indeed, believe. The client whose rogue "bot" caused all the chaos, Betfair says, was a small-time player with less than £1,000 in his account, a pretty ordinary Joe Punter, by exchange standards at any rate.

The real significance of this is who he was not. This was not a hedging account operated by a bookmaking firm with unlimited credit, or an account connected to the "bots" which Betfair itself operates on the site.

In either of those cases there might have been something for a smart lawyer to get stuck into regarding the £23m that around 200 Betfair clients appeared to "win" on the race. But the truth is that the £21m worth of 28-1 offered about Voler La Vedette was a mirage. Wishing it otherwise will make no difference. You cannot win – or lose – what is not there in the first place and even the most opportunistic ambulance-chaser is likely to take one look at this fact and point to the door.

As for the "why", it cannot be a complete coincidence that – as was pointed out on Betfair's own forum within a few hours of Wednesday's race – the initial sum offered against Voler La Vedette was the highest possible in a 32-bit binary computer system.

It may be that this is simply, by definition, a power of two, and that the rogue "bot" was operating a variant of the doubling-up "Martingale" system that has ruined so many roulette players down the years. But in some respects, how the bot arrived at its particular choice of bet and stake is much less important than the question of how on earth Betfair's system was able to look at a bet risking £600m against an £800 balance and cheerfully wave it through.

There are plenty of Betfair customers using bots, after all, and their potential to do some very strange things if their code is not sufficiently tight is well known. Even non-automated Betfair punters – which numerically must be the great majority – get things wrong from time to time. Indeed, there are probably dozens of people every day who try to put through a huge bet that they cannot afford, just to see what happens.

In all there may well be thousands of bets each week that get rejected because the account concerned does not have the funds to cover it. Yet this one got through.

This is the "how" question, the one that really matters, and it is scarcely acknowledged in Friday's statement. Betfair says commercial sensitivity about its systems – and the possibility that some might look for other loopholes if it broadcast the exact reasons for Wednesday's debacle – means that it cannot go into any more detail.

But this comes with a significant PR cost attached, since it may suggest to customers – as well as Betfair's many vocal critics – that it has something to hide. If it truly has confidence that its systems are robust, and that Wednesday's events can never happen again, why not be more forthcoming about the detail of how it managed to get this one bet so horribly wrong? The question that some customers of the exchange will be asking themselves now is: why should I trust Betfair, if Betfair does not trust me?
Report guinness2dear December 31, 2011 12:43 PM GMT
As SB's other blog on this was posted i think this should be on here as well..


springy     31 Dec 11 10:44 
Sean Boyce's latest offering....


A Palpable Hit?
Posted on December 31, 2011

More than 48 hours, and four statements, after the events during the Leopardstown 2.00 race on the 28th what do we know of what happened? Betfair has told us that the error has been identified, replicated, fixed and rigourously tested but they are still no nearer to actually describing it to us. Which is a shame.

The account holder, we are told, has less than a grand in his account and no commercial link to Betfair. That’s fair enough and of course will be verified once the first cases arrive with IBAS. I would still strongly urge Betfair to open its books to an independent third party. They’ll have to do so with IBAS I’d have thought but they could win a lot of credibility by voluntarily bringing in a body like IBAS or the Gambling Commission to verify their own findings immediately. We are talking about more than £20 million of consumers’ ‘winnings’ which won’t be paid after all.

At least though we can put to bed some of the theories that were circulating. The ‘glitch’ theory was always the most convincing. It does look like we’re dealing with ‘**** up’ rather than conspiracy here. Personally I’m most convinced so far by the 32 bit vs 64 bit miscommunication of code between customer bot and Betfair. It does not however resolve the situation. We know (very roughly) what happened but we don’t yet know what should happen next. It is likely that adjudication, negotiation and perhaps legal action will be required to do that.

The most curious aspect of acting CEO Stephen Morana’s statement was this line;

    At 4.41pm on the 28th of December, we announced that the in-play markets associated with this race would be voided due to technological failure in accordance with our terms and conditions. This is similar to the “palpable error” rule enforced by other bookmakers in the past.

It’s a fascinating choice of words. Partly for its inaccuracy – Betfair’s clause relating to technological failure appears to bear no resemblance at all to standard ‘palpable error’ rules as they normally appear. Partly too though for the departure it marks from Betfair’s entire settling history and what it tells us about where this story might lead next.

Betfair has always resisted any attempt to apply the ‘palpable error’ rule to what happens on its site. That’s why no such rule, nor anything like it, appears in their rules or in their terms and conditions.

I’m sure that every customer that has ever offered a palpably incorrect price on Betfair would love to see a palpable error rule applied in their favour. For example the layer who inadvertently offered 1000 about a short price favourite at the cost of £200,000. That’s before we even get to the correct score markets that are allowed to be traded even once they have become impossible to win on.

As an error it only explains the amount staked. Not the price. We’re being told the customer’s bot made an error in its staking but that the price also constituted something obviously wrong. Which is it?

There are other issues with Betfair’s reference to a ‘palpable error’. Plenty of people (and their robots) trade markets without even looking at the race. It’s the numbers that matter to them, not what’s happening on the track. In such an environment the idea of an error relative to what is happening on course is undermined. How is 29 obviously wrong when the favourite is trading at 20′s on?

And of course, such traders are not alone. Betfair plays too. Betfair’s own cross matching robot does not watch the race but it does bet on it. Might the Betfair bot not in fact have been at least partly responsible for ensuring the overall percentages on the market remained apparently sensible?

It may prove a little tough to claim ‘palpable error’ if you’ve been a backer and layer at those odds yourself. Besides which if 28/1 about a 13/8 shot is a rick how about the countless other errors offered by players on the site every single day? Errors that are quickly gobbled up by ever vigilant robots, including potentially those operated by the exchange itself.

None of which is to prejudge how such a claim might be dealt with in the future. That would depend on how the case is made and supported but it is an interesting development nonetheless. A development which suggests Betfair is thinking along similar lines to me as regards the challenges they still face regarding this issue.

Why, when they have the technological failure clause in their rules, would Betfair be looking to draw upon a rule that they don’t have but which most bookmakers do? I’ll look at the most serious challenge of all in my next post. Grab a beer and some popcorn. This story’s only just begun.


http://boyciesblog.wordpress.com/2011/12/31/betfair-palpable-hit/
Report guinness2dear December 31, 2011 12:44 PM GMT
Metinks Greg Wood believes the spin more than he should..
Report Pluckier December 31, 2011 12:47 PM GMT
You don't leave holes in your software application which can then be exposed via it's API.  The bot did what bots do.  The Betfair API allowed the bot to do what it did.  Don't blame the bot, blame the idiot who left the hole - That's the Betfair technical people.  Simple and the truth with no BS
Report Anaglogs Daughter December 31, 2011 12:57 PM GMT
Make a mistake and phone up Betfair and tell them to cancel the bet and see what you are told....It wont be 'ok we'll do that'
Report EastLower Gooner January 1, 2012 12:53 PM GMT
Betfair will not reveal technical glitch details

By Paul Eacott

8:21AM 1 JAN 2012

BETFAIR on Saturday said they would give no further details regarding the exact nature of the "technical glitch" which resulted in the exchange voiding bets worth £23 million.

One Betfair customer, who had less than £1,000 in their account, was faced with that potentially massive payout after an automated betting system, or bot, attached to their account was able to place the rogue bet.

Betfair promised that a "highly technical" explanation of what occurred would be published after internal investigations were completed but the Racing Post has been told that will no longer be the case.

Interim chief executive Stephen Morana said in a statement on Friday that the decision to void all in-running bets placed on the Leopardstown race was taken in accordance with their rules and said it was "similar to the palpable error rule enforced by other bookmakers".

That resulted in some of the exchange's users questioning whether they were liable for their errors.

Clarifying Morana's point, Betfair spokesman Tony Calvin said: "Certain legal provisions are needed to protect online businesses such as ours, otherwise they would not be viable.

"Stephen mentions ‘palpable error' because it is a concept many punters will be familiar with. We aren't specifically invoking that same rule but we are saying a business such as ours needs to have the ability to protect itself - legally and contractually - to be viable.

"This is why our terms specifically say we can void markets/ bets if there is a technological failure. It is clear, concise and obviously very much needed."

Calvin continued: "In our case, in our industry, Stephen - and we - thought a reference to the traditional bookmakers' equivalent of ‘palpable error' would help people to understand the point."


....
Report Kriskin January 1, 2012 5:13 PM GMT
ttt
Report Pluckier January 2, 2012 11:55 AM GMT
It's not "technological failure" if your technical team don't fully test their software or their release processes, we call that "procedural failure" otherwise known as poor software delivery or in non-techie speak "p*ss poor". 

Say what you wish it's p*iss poor.
Report Percentages1 January 2, 2012 12:01 PM GMT
Who's using bots, how many? A select few people? Bots sound like they are for people very much into Betfair, would a bot user only have a float of 1'000???
Report guinness2dear January 2, 2012 8:20 PM GMT
Hooof
Report Anaglogs Daughter January 2, 2012 10:02 PM GMT
Thousand percentage there are thousands...Just put Betfair Bot into Google or You Tube and you'll get a fair idea how may are on site.
Report Happy Valley January 2, 2012 10:35 PM GMT
percentages1 - yes i instinctively find this very suspicious. anyone with the brains to have a bot working on their behalf would surely have a betting bank far in excess of a grand
Report Baphornet August 4, 2019 8:41 PM BST
some old familiars on here. Did anyone ever get any recompense?
Report Eddie Batt August 4, 2019 10:58 PM BST
I believe Powers never had Mr Smith priced as a runner in the 2:45 at Galway today.-20 minutes after he won the race the shops couldn't put up the full result on their screens.Needless to say Powers are doing the right thing for themselves and telling punters to fcuk off.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 4, 2019 11:24 PM BST
They still do it to this day Eddie on here - spoke to Willie about chasing fc bets up when a late n/r resulted in bets being voided - if you backed a winning f/c its always voided but a losing one 9/10 times settled as a loser and you spend a day or so chasing it up as per their rules to have it correctly settled .

All the main betting companies have accounts on here - a business within a business- and thats one of the main reasons that Betunfair started charging PC IMO of course - but this very thread showed up "what was going on in the background" CryCryCry
Report elise August 4, 2019 11:40 PM BST
someone asked about this not long ago bap, a considerable time after the event I got a credit of a few hundred maybe 5-600 ish perhaps, I can't rem the exact amount, I also can't rem how much I stood to take out of vlv but is was a fair bit more than a few hundred
Report smirnoff2therescue August 4, 2019 11:52 PM BST
hows health wiv g/f elise - hope shes doing ok wiv treatment

stay positive cos thats half the battle

re this fiasco i was just voided on every bet and was around the time i lost my "shearer" status due to red tape LaughLaughLaugh
Report elise August 4, 2019 11:55 PM BST
cheers smirf, yes ok just drags on a bit but we'll get there, trust you're ok too?
Report elise August 4, 2019 11:59 PM BST
re the vlv thing, the biggest regret was that I knew it wouldn't pay out as it was happening, but the opportunity lay elsewhere because the cross matchers were screwing up daq and I never hit it hard enough, if i'd ditched bf and just done it all through daq i'd have bought a small island
Report mouse muldoon August 5, 2019 12:02 AM BST
Off Zodie?
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 12:02 AM BST
was playing on no news is gud news theory but had a recent blood test for type 2 diabetes and results were all ova the place so checked on results from Nuffield - a private hossy from up here - and no report has yet been made some 3mths later ShockedShockedShocked - spoke to my surgeons secretary who is now chasing up ffs ShockedShockedShocked

gotta phone back Thurs

ps Stevies a gud lad as im sure ya know and he does respect ya even if ya give him stick for his pink porch LoveLoveLaughLaughLaugh
Report elise August 5, 2019 12:06 AM BST
steve's sound, he just doesn't like chancers and tbh nor do i
Report elise August 5, 2019 12:06 AM BST
even if he does drive a girls car
Report elise August 5, 2019 12:09 AM BST
anyway, gl with the results, going to get some kip as we're hoping to get away tomorrow if heathrow don't screw it up
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 12:12 AM BST
mouse - had this argument wiv Stevie regards forum these days

you and him were regulars on Zodies threads and othas were on Marts threads

we are creatures of habit and we always go back to where "it happens" if ya get my drift

i seem to hav become embroiled in a spat btwn you and Denz where he now has me as enemy number 1 but as long as........LaughLaughLaugh

itsme/denz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7n53nIBb3g
Report Baphornet August 5, 2019 12:23 AM BST
sorry elise i was busy elsewhere. I too wish you both the very best & love to all. As for VLV,  i'm glad you got something mucker, i was in contact with Rollo for a good while & i know there was legal steps taken by some including Zay. I got zilch, just an apologyLaugh Betquack was a godsend for me though
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 12:24 AM BST
smirnoff you must be fishing/sh!t stirring this is beyond embarrassing how many times have you done this now?
Surely a stranger can't genuinely be niggling you this much,why are you making up spats with people please?
Very poor,imagine if I was posting this sort of shyte to you who are you trying to kid?

Hope your potential diabetes improves drop all animal products and all fats for starters that will help.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 12:46 AM BST
Denz as ive said elsewhere in a pm you are easy to smoke out cos you hav followed me about

im sure you are aware of following comment
"
on it like a car bonnet " cos thats wot you are wiv me

giv ya sel a tick for that

as for being obsessed about Mart well heres the thing - me and him go back 10 yrs on here at very least - ive even spoken to the nutter on the phone so please divnt embarrass yasel anymore as to who is obsessed  cos its him who thinks im a barney putter on in his own words - you pull me up for questioning the dog bet - did you not think for a minute that i knew wot odds the dog was but "like you" i cant get a penny on wiv the books - his behaviour ova last mth suda cottoned ya on to wot he is and if ya think those fodo shopped bets from greggy are real then i doff my cap  ydc LaughLaughLaugh
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 12:48 AM BST
you are 2 yrs old on here and trust me its much calmer waters nowadays.......

but i stand to be corrected as always

CoolCoolLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 12:54 AM BST
You never stand corrected,all things to all men one minute then somebody points out your error and you go off,that is fact it is still on here.
After which you go on about stalking,cancer,past forumites etc. why?
You could've just looked and said 'aye the price is there but I think it's bolox'.
As I put on another thread but now it's every day mentions,fake spats and allsorts of bolox to a stranger,you aren't kidding anyone you know it I know it and anyone who's read the other threads know it.
Your ego is damaged if you want it this way that's fine but stick to truths rather than making things up.
You haven't been pulled up like you could've been because you have been out of line from day dot on this one that is fact that can be retrieved and posted.
FWIW my ego doesn't stretch to being bothered about arguing with strangers on anonymous forums it doesn't have much effect but waste time,life's too short but suit yourself no doubt you'll give me a mention to retaliate to again.
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 12:56 AM BST
Almost forgot any news on the made up spat?
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 12:58 AM BST
We need a few more rucks on here, especially since Grimmy was last seen sneaking into the lifeboats on the Titanic with the women and childrenLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:06 AM BST
Well Richie some find it easy to make them up once their ego takes a rattle which says plenty,they seem to think others are equally bothered by strangers online hence lines like;

smirnoff2therescue • August 5, 2019 12:48 AM BST


you are 2 yrs old on here and trust me its much calmer waters nowadays.......

It is cringeworthy that a grown man would post this to a stranger online.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:06 AM BST
you are all ova me like a rash as is swad ova Stevie

i divnt lie on here bonny lad

was called out by the daddy and answered affirmative

i get it that gamblers hav egos but how can you that twists about getting on wiv books hav a go at someone that cant get on wiv the books and yet support a dreamer that mekks up on the spot - i assume you have read the recent MD posts - a lad i know well- regarding how PP works - i will say once again HE DIDNT TELL ME OR GLASGOW TO GET ON DOG FOR CHAMPION HURDLE UNTIL SEMI FINAL COS HE DIDNT EVEN KNOW IT WAS RUNNING -VARIOUS PMS WILL SUPPORT THAT FACT HTH ShockedShockedLaughLaugh

Surely you aint that thick are ya - well clearly ya are cos you were burkoed ShockedShockedShocked
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:09 AM BST
and wot happened to Grimy Kod LaughLaughLaugh

who was right and who was very wrong in all ways

ooooooossssssLaughLaughLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:11 AM BST
i divnt lie on here bonny lad

That is a lie there

i get it that gamblers hav egos but how can you that twists about getting on wiv books hav a go at someone that cant get on wiv the books and yet support a dreamer that mekks up on the spot - i assume you have read the recent MD posts - a lad i know well- regarding how PP works - i will say once again HE DIDNT TELL ME OR GLASGOW TO GET ON DOG FOR CHAMPION HURDLE UNTIL SEMI FINAL COS HE DIDNT EVEN KNOW IT WAS RUNNING -VARIOUS PMS WILL SUPPORT THAT FACT HTH ShockedShockedLaughLaugh

I never said I supported anyone over anyone else or the likes,all I showed was the date when the market went up and bookmakers were betting on it THAT IS IT.
It was you who took a personal offence your posts changed very quickly which as was said was a surprise and you've continued since,read the posts back as I keep saying they are all there it is you who is at me which is undeniable.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:12 AM BST
Denz i read practically every thread on here -its my facebook/instagram woteva - -i retired in 2012 b4 illness got me

wots your story LoveLoveLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:12 AM BST
Who mentioned Paddy Power? the only 'proper' bookmaker showing on Oddschecker priced on that date was Coral,as has already been established on that day.
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:13 AM BST

Aug 4, 2019 -- 7:12PM, smirnoff2therescue wrote:


Denz i read practically every thread on here -its my facebook/instagram woteva - -i retired in 2012 b4 illness got me wots your story


Is that a deliberate deflection because the truth is certainly doing you no favours.

Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:15 AM BST
as i said various pms wiv Burkey will confirm ydc LaughLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:16 AM BST
How am I a dc for pointing out you were wrong and still are on the date betting was available for a race?
Surely I should be calling you names.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:17 AM BST
Denz every "cartoon put up previously" was from Paddy and bet 356 - wot aint ya getting here LoveLoveLove
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:19 AM BST
bet he put up was from when he was telling us it was gona win grand national

ps i actually bet so i knew wot price was but cudnt get more than a fiver on at 20s in a shop hth dc
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:21 AM BST
You've said that several times it's irrelevant he didn't post a b356 or PP bet receipt it was one I hadn't seen but still irrelevant as you said there was no market when there was that's it - what aren't you getting?

Why are you still calling me names? The betting for that market came up on the 4th July Coral were 25/1 what's the GN got to do with Coral pricing up a dog event on 4th July.
Has Forrest Gump hijacked your account?
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:21 AM BST
anyway ive proved me point so tara for now LoveLoveLove

#obsessedLaughLaughLaugh
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:23 AM BST
Denz i actually had a bet in the competition - wot are you not getting LaughLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:24 AM BST
Yes you are and once agin haven't proved any point,you are off again as I continue to make you look foolish you aren't very good at this having to resort to name calling when your lies aren't getting you anywhere.
No doubt you'll give me a mention later as I'm so far under your skin it's cringeworthy.
What's your bet got to do with Coral's betting on the 4th July - what is it you don't get about this already established fact,you'd be better served stopping you've embarrassed yourself further tonight.
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:25 AM BST
What he says about the old days, DenzilPenberthy, is true, I think. There was a lot more nutters back then, though I don't get involved personally/with PM's cos racing isn't my main interest.
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:26 AM BST
Can't comment too far back cos I wasn't 18 when it started up.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:27 AM BST
Denz has got my number KOD - Sad thing is he doesnt know who KOD is LaughLaughLaugh

funny though LoveLoveLaughLaugh
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:28 AM BST
As for Grimmy, the only surprise was that it took so long for the £5k thing to unravelLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:28 AM BST
Yes Richie can imagine that being the case if the levels of lies and blatant ignorance smirnoff is showing is anything to go by and he tells me he's one of the straight posters.
Hard to imagine why straight people will try this with anonymous strangers what do they get out of it?
King Of Dubai he's an internet sensation.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:29 AM BST
the class of 2017

hav it

LoveLoveLoveLove
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:30 AM BST
smirnoff had you tagged as this type you've been wrong so much in your dalliances with me it's gotta be hurting you a bit as the unnecessary name calling says it is.
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:30 AM BST
*never had you tagged
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:31 AM BST
and who was it that got pelters for 2 yrs or so for telling lues etc again KOD


Cos ive forgotten....LaughLaughLaugh
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:32 AM BST
you musta missed it denz
LaughLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:33 AM BST
Is this what you think being right and winning pretendee forum spats is - telling lies,not accepting the truth,mentioning posters on unrelated threads,name calling,nonesensical emojis this doesn't make sense.
Glad I missed it doesn't sound like something to be proud of.
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:33 AM BST
Truly one of the most shameless things I've seen on the internet - bragging about his wages and inviting people on golfing holidays abroad whilst knocking his mate on a bullseye a week debt repaymentLaugh
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:34 AM BST
After he spunked the 5 large in 1 go, on the 1st betCryLaughCryLaugh
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:35 AM BST
ova to you KOD  i think ive tipped the kid ova the edgeLaughLaughLaugh

after all he .......knows it all LaughLaughLaugh
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:36 AM BST
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKAa20ukR-s
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:36 AM BST
hey but denz thinks i lie re mart and am obsessed LaughLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:38 AM BST
Don't think you lie regarding mart have never said such a thing ever,you definitely could be classed as obsessed you crave his attention on various threads why is that?
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:39 AM BST
an apt one in circumstances

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWutmIaNv-o



ooooossss
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:39 AM BST
You've lied to me though in these interactions the past few weeks.
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:40 AM BST
That's a good one for you smirnoff follow it with Real Gone Kid,Dignity and Why.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:41 AM BST
repeat LaughLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:42 AM BST
Think you are trying to convince yourself not many outside your forum mates would be convinced.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 1:44 AM BST
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag8XcMG1EX4

ooooossssss

LoveLoveLoveLaughLaughLaugh
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:50 AM BST
Mart is a bit of a conundrum. He's always been friendly to me and he's mentioned some disabilities, so I don't like it when people gang up on him. He doesn't have a monetary agenda, as far as I know, either, so he's pretty harmless. I guess he's been given a lot of "advice" and not taken it, which is frustrating. Embarrassing yourself online is OK, but you have a chance to learn for free and not taking that chance is a pretty huge error imo.
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 1:52 AM BST
It's a balancing act at the same time cos you don't want to encourage bad habits. I'm likely guilty of that, maybe out of naivety/stupidity rather than menace.
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 1:55 AM BST
Thought it was wrong a couple of days ago when they were posting his PMs trying to take the p!ss that was poor which I posted don't think people should be going that far regardless.
Report Richie_Burnett August 5, 2019 2:00 AM BST
Yes, I agree with you 100% - that was bang out of order from the usual suspects.
Report mouse muldoon August 5, 2019 8:55 AM BST
Report top2rated August 5, 2019 9:22 AM BST
SAID NO ONE
EVER
Report ItsMeSwaddle August 5, 2019 9:34 AM BST
Yes im all over him.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 10:48 AM BST
like a bad rash LaughLaughLaugh

ps re the PMs thread i dont think i even posted on it nor do i on most of his threads these days and yet im accused of being obsessed wiv him - this place gets more chicken oriental by the day tbh CrazyCrazyCrazy
Report ItsMeSwaddle August 5, 2019 11:07 AM BST
Give it a rest mate.
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 2:04 PM BST
Wink
Report DOUBLED August 5, 2019 2:15 PM BST
anyone signed a non disclosure agreement ?
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 2:18 PM BST
smirnoff2therescue • August 5, 2019 10:48 AM BST

ps re the PMs thread i dont think i even posted on it nor do i on most of his threads these days and yet im accused of being obsessed wiv him - this place gets more chicken oriental by the day tbh CrazyCrazyCrazy


Nobody said you did that was a separate unrelated (to you) conversation.
This ego issue isn't doing you any favours you're that bothered you'll do anything to get a bit mart and now Denzil related attention,please read the posts of other forumites and these embarrassments can be avoided.
Are you an only child?
Report DOUBLED August 5, 2019 2:22 PM BST
be glad when the children are back at school
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 2:33 PM BST
Yes DOUBLED completely agree being wrong about a basic checking of a betting market,throwing a wobbler at the person who politely shows the mistake,posting instigative comments on unrelated threads,telling lies about what's been posted,telling lies about spats with other forumites,calling people names for no reason and making every effort to keep it going day after day is a bit childish.
Fortunately none of these threads have been removed.
Report smirnoff2therescue August 5, 2019 2:40 PM BST
LaughLaughLaugh
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 2:43 PM BST
You're welcome
Report greenteethnarrabacktroutmoy August 5, 2019 2:59 PM BST
this thread for liars and children only?
Report DenzilPenberthy August 5, 2019 3:03 PM BST
No not at all but in this case the liar and the child are the same poster as evidenced.
Report greenteethnarrabacktroutmoy August 5, 2019 3:11 PM BST
hi5
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com