Dead Heats are a con on Betfair - as its person to person betting - not like a bookmaker - so they shouldnt keep half as there is no liabilty on the other winner - all wrong...
Dead Heats are a con on Betfair - as its person to person betting - not like a bookmaker - so they shouldnt keep half as there is no liabilty on the other winner - all wrong...
Industry Standard Our Dead Heat rule gives the same payout as if a customer were to bet in a betting shop or online with a traditional bookmaker. The reason that some backers feel this is not the case is because they forget that in a betting shop, they hand their stake over the counter and the amount returned includes the winning half of the stake. On Betfair, they have not paid the losing half of the stake to the layer up front so their profit / loss shown on the statement needs to reflect this.
Industry StandardOur Dead Heat rule gives the same payout as if a customer were to bet in a betting shop or online with a traditional bookmaker. The reason that some backers feel this is not the case is because they forget that in a betting shop, the
Gerbs - but the bookie takes bets on lots of horses, so has to pay on the other winner too - person to person single to single on here - no other liabilty on other dead heater - its like a tax they keep
Gerbs - but the bookie takes bets on lots of horses, so has to pay on the other winner too - person to person single to single on here - no other liabilty on other dead heater - its like a tax they keep
Stake: £24Price: 16£24 X 16/2 - £24 = £168or if you prefer£24 X 15/2 - £24/2 = £168Stake: £2.50Price: 18.5£2.5 X 18.5/2 - £2.50 = £20.63or if you prefer£2.50 X 17.5/2 - £2.50/2 = £20.63So: £168 + £20.63 = £188.63
think of it the other way around. Yhe LAYER laid 24 pounds at 16. Normally, he wins 24 or loses 360. With a dead-heat, the layer only loses half. So he loses 180 to the succesful half of the dead- heat, but he also WINS the unsuccesful half of your bet, in this case, 12. So, the layer loses 180 minus 12, net loss 168. Half of your bet was a loser, which means half of the layer`s bet was profitable for him.
One or two people on here really should know better.
onthebitthink of it the other way around. Yhe LAYER laid 24 pounds at 16. Normally, he wins 24 or loses 360. With a dead-heat, the layer only loses half. So he loses 180 to the succesful half of the dead- heat, but he also WINS the unsuccesful half o
Delta - sorry if I'm being dumb here but how does the fact that this is p2p make any difference to how the rules should be for dead-heats??
So the layer should payout as a full winner and other layers should payout on the other dead heater?? Why would they want to do that and why should ANY backer expect that?? Liquidity on here if f all as it is so why not put layers off a bit more by having daft rules like that. By the way I'm a backer like most.
Delta - sorry if I'm being dumb here but how does the fact that this is p2p make any difference to how the rules should be for dead-heats??So the layer should payout as a full winner and other layers should payout on the other dead heater?? Why would
Just picked up on this and, altho it's old, thought it worth putting in the official explanation in case someone else like me trawls it up. BF basically follows bookie rules, which I think is unfair on the backers especially at low prices - ie if an odds-on dead heats you will lose money as a backer - even though you 'won'.
From Betfair's rules:
For each bet matched on a relevant winning selection, the stake money is first reduced in proportion by multiplying it by the sum of the number of winners expected (as set out in the Market Information), divided by the number of actual winners (i.e. stake multiplied by (number of winners expected/number of actual winners)). The winnings are then paid to the successful backers on this 'reduced stake' (reduced stake multiplied by traded price) and the remaining stake money is paid to the appropriate layers.
For example, assume there is a dead heat for first place between three horses. 'Client A' has backed one of the winners for a stake of 300 at the traded price of 4.0 and 'Client B' has taken the other side of this bet. When the event is settled, the stake (300) is multiplied by 1/3 (i.e. the number of expected winners (1) divided by the number of actual winners (3)) to calculate the reduced stake (100) and the remainder given to the layer (200). The backer then receives the traded price matched (4.0) multiplied by the reduced stake (4 x 100 = 400). In this example, Client A's net winnings are 100 (400 payout minus the original 300 stake), and Client B's net losses are 100. Alternatively, this can be viewed as the full amount paid to the traded price divided by the number of dead-heaters. In the above example this would be 300 at the traded price of 4.0 (1200) divided by 3; making 400 payout and 100 net winnings.
By way of another example, assume there is an outright winner in a golf tournament but 7 players tie for 2nd place. In the "top 5 finish" market, after settling on the outright winner in the top 5 market there would be 4 other designated winners places available. 'Client A' has backed one of the winners for 300 at the traded price of 4.0 and 'Client B' has taken the other side of this bet. When the event is settled, the stake (300) is multiplied by 4/7 (i.e. the number of expected winners (4) divided by the number of actual winners (7)) to calculate the reduced stake (171.43) and the remainder given to the layer (128.57). The backer then receives the traded price matched (4.0) multiplied by the reduced stake (4 x 171.43 = 685.72). In this example, Client A's net winnings are 385.72 (685.72 payout minus the original 300 stake), and Client B's net losses are 385.72.
Just picked up on this and, altho it's old, thought it worth putting in the official explanation in case someone else like me trawls it up. BF basically follows bookie rules, which I think is unfair on the backers especially at low prices - ie if an