Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Its illegal and its happening on a weekly basis at Wolverhampton and Kempton,tonights example being Fashion Line Bsp 6 and returned at 5/2 by the so called oncourse bookies, Are there no racing journalists out there looking for a story?
Show More
Why should the on course bookies set their prices according to the Betfair market? If they're taking money on course, that's what they make their book from.
I agree with Coffee. There are those on course bookies who do act as nothing more than brokers who lay off on BF via their laptop but we shouldnt assume that there aren't at least a few old fashioned bookies about.
It's definitely not illegal... That's like saying that Ladbrokes (for example) are acting illegally when they're 9/4 at the off and other bookies are 3/1 and the industry SP is 5/2.
It's up to backers to shop around if they want value.
It's up to backers to shop around if they want value.
This has nothing to do with taking money from oncourse punters,this is taking bribes from the off course books to depress the price paid to the thousands of shop punters.
Would be bad if that's happening mamma ..
If they're taking money on course, that's what they make their book from
with that reasoning , shouldn't we see it the other way round ?
5/2 here 5/1 on course
with that reasoning , shouldn't we see it the other way round ?
5/2 here 5/1 on course
you have to choose your words carefully these days,
naming names and mentioning bribery does not sit too well with lawyers
naming names and mentioning bribery does not sit too well with lawyers
Bribery and collusion and it is illegal.
PRICE RIGGING
Also known as collusion or price fixing, price rigging occurs when a group of people or businesses agree to set the price for something.
Price rigging is illegal because it interferes with the natural market forces of supply and demand and harms consumers by inhibiting competition.
PRICE RIGGING
Also known as collusion or price fixing, price rigging occurs when a group of people or businesses agree to set the price for something.
Price rigging is illegal because it interferes with the natural market forces of supply and demand and harms consumers by inhibiting competition.
Normal market forces here would have seen Fashion Line returned at 4/1 or 9/2 .
You're talking rubbish. Bookies have always legally layed off liabilities with other bookies. Betfair made up of 1000's of backers/layers taking a view. If people are laying it at 9/2 on here that's up to them (or you, or me)....If you fancy it, then back the thing, if not, oppose it. On course/industry SP is IRRELEVANT.
Why should the on course bookies set their prices according to the Betfair market?
This a joke? They see fit to chop their prices as soon as the price dips under on here, they want it both ways and it takes the p!ss.
It's up to backers to shop around if they want value.
You are having a laugh. Shop around, look for value sees your accounts closed and barred out of the shops.
Malaysian Boleh in the 21.00 for example.
This a joke? They see fit to chop their prices as soon as the price dips under on here, they want it both ways and it takes the p!ss.
It's up to backers to shop around if they want value.
You are having a laugh. Shop around, look for value sees your accounts closed and barred out of the shops.
Malaysian Boleh in the 21.00 for example.
For your information coffeedodger these days there is very little laying off between books nowdays it all goes to exchanges..
never get a balanced argument on here ... not one person even mentioning you can have as much as you like in the FOBT
mmmalushka 20 Feb 14 20:19
This has nothing to do with taking money from oncourse punters,this is taking bribes from the off course books to depress the price paid to the thousands of shop punters.
-----------
The - "thousands of shop punters." - won't even notice -
They are all too busy playing the FOBTs ....
- and the Commentary is just an annoying noise in the background - if it is in one the shops that still play the commentary.
This has nothing to do with taking money from oncourse punters,this is taking bribes from the off course books to depress the price paid to the thousands of shop punters.
-----------
The - "thousands of shop punters." - won't even notice -
They are all too busy playing the FOBTs ....
- and the Commentary is just an annoying noise in the background - if it is in one the shops that still play the commentary.
coffeedodger its time you woke up and smelt the coffee.mmmalushke is entirely correct in what hes saying.
Why was Barry Dennis in Hills box at Highbury . . . . .
'there is very little laying off between books...'
Either there is or there isn't.
So anyway, tell me what's 'illegal'?
Either there is or there isn't.
So anyway, tell me what's 'illegal'?
We have no Big Mac to stand up for us and Tanya isn't big enough.
I go to small meetings like Brighton and Plumpton. A uniform line of bookies all showing the same prices. It's not much better at the lesser meetings at Goodwood.
Racing journalists know the score but who would rock the boat. Journalists in other areas are not much better. There was a corruption issue in a major city that cost many people a lot of money. I contacted a councillor who was trying to publicise it. He asked me to write to a Panorama producer on how it had effected me. The producer phoned for more details but said that if he broadcasted it he would be sued.
I go to small meetings like Brighton and Plumpton. A uniform line of bookies all showing the same prices. It's not much better at the lesser meetings at Goodwood.
Racing journalists know the score but who would rock the boat. Journalists in other areas are not much better. There was a corruption issue in a major city that cost many people a lot of money. I contacted a councillor who was trying to publicise it. He asked me to write to a Panorama producer on how it had effected me. The producer phoned for more details but said that if he broadcasted it he would be sued.
Coffeedodger You're way wide of the mark to suggest on course bookmakers make their book from bets struck on course. Firstly there's barely two dozen punters at some of these all weather tracks, and are you suggesting that if money comes for a horse on the exchanges that they wont follow suit? Watch how a horse will shorten dramatically in the final minute before the off at these all weather meetings, 5/2, 9/4. 2/1,returned 7/4, when its 10/3 on here. This is done to cream thousands of sp bets up and down the country, day in day out.
Pop all you want at the on-course lads re the SP's on course / returned SP's etc etc versus the prices on here. You are not comparing apples with apples. The on-course lads are the ones that pay the extortionate racecourse fees day in day out and have invested £000's in their businesses, whilst the whingers on here pay a pittance in comparison and yet want the Betfair prices on course. Get real, or better still set yourself up on course and then you might realise how hard it is to make a living as an on-course book. There are plenty of pitches for sale!
its all to do with B.O.G.
nobody in the whole thread has mentioned it, beggars belief.
a couple of thousand tops in lumpy bets with the sample will move Malaysian Boleh from 4/1 to 5/2 with the right books.
you work out how many punters have backed it at 5/2 11/4 online earlier and have been ripped off.
Fashion Line was 3/1 10/3 early doors, should have returned 9/2 but the fact it drifted meant the oncourse reps had to back it in.
Always happens at Kempers and Wolvers, legalised theft imho.
nobody in the whole thread has mentioned it, beggars belief.
a couple of thousand tops in lumpy bets with the sample will move Malaysian Boleh from 4/1 to 5/2 with the right books.
you work out how many punters have backed it at 5/2 11/4 online earlier and have been ripped off.
Fashion Line was 3/1 10/3 early doors, should have returned 9/2 but the fact it drifted meant the oncourse reps had to back it in.
Always happens at Kempers and Wolvers, legalised theft imho.
eg Ladbrokes take 300 bets online worldwide on Fashion Line at 3/1 B.O.G.
the Book was approx 113% about 2 mins before the off, yet Fashion went 9/2, 4/1, 7/2, 3/1, 5/2 in those 2 minutes. Book on the off was a massive 127%.
SP 5/2f Tracked leader, led 2f out, ridden over 1f out, joined on line opened 4/1 £1200-£300(x4) £1400-£400(x3)
Sporting life report above, only £2400 in repoted bets shifted the beast in two full points.
You do the math
the Book was approx 113% about 2 mins before the off, yet Fashion went 9/2, 4/1, 7/2, 3/1, 5/2 in those 2 minutes. Book on the off was a massive 127%.
SP 5/2f Tracked leader, led 2f out, ridden over 1f out, joined on line opened 4/1 £1200-£300(x4) £1400-£400(x3)
Sporting life report above, only £2400 in repoted bets shifted the beast in two full points.
You do the math
needs to be a BHA enquiry into this rigging of prices by the online books oncourse.
yet the same ****s shut you down or restrict you to peanuts for having the audacity to back a live one.
yet the same ****s shut you down or restrict you to peanuts for having the audacity to back a live one.
You'vegotit No-one is suggesting we should get the same price on course as a 100% book on betfair, but to have a horse trading 10/3 on betfair and 5/2 on course, then see it chopped to 7/4 in one minute just before the offis pure theft. It happens every day at these all weather meetings, theres barely any punters there, certainly no serious punters, this is done to save the industry up and down the country thousands on any sp bets.
BOG bets Cooper online, shops also with SP admittedly, tho I imagine a fraction of the bets in the shops would have sp taken
they do the rigging in the last race, whereby most have done their conkers on the machines or hoping for that "last chance saloon" to retrieve losses. I can read Ladbrokes and Hills like a book, that's why they ******g hate me with a passion
It could be classed as market manipulation, bribery or even blackmail.
The large firms know which bookmakers are used to return SP. They will bet with them, ONLY on the understanding they will cut the price. Fashion line was trading oncourse at 3/1. So Ladbrokes have £1000 on. It is cut again to 5/2... why? The oncourse bookies has it all back on here at 6.0 and so should still be happy to lay 3/1 and have even more back on here.
That is not how it works the oncourse bookie knows if he doesnt cut the price, the firms will not back with him again, and he just loves this free money each evening.
In a poor evening market with hardly any punters, the oncourse bookie is always going to play the game. Evenyone wins, the big firms, the bookies... oh, except the punters.
The large firms know which bookmakers are used to return SP. They will bet with them, ONLY on the understanding they will cut the price. Fashion line was trading oncourse at 3/1. So Ladbrokes have £1000 on. It is cut again to 5/2... why? The oncourse bookies has it all back on here at 6.0 and so should still be happy to lay 3/1 and have even more back on here.
That is not how it works the oncourse bookie knows if he doesnt cut the price, the firms will not back with him again, and he just loves this free money each evening.
In a poor evening market with hardly any punters, the oncourse bookie is always going to play the game. Evenyone wins, the big firms, the bookies... oh, except the punters.
New starting price system hits punters' pockets
Greg Wood
The Guardian, Wednesday 13 December 2006
The cost of betting has increased sharply since November 1 and continues to rise, following changes to the system used to record starting prices which were implemented at the start of last month. The first month-to-month comparison of SPs returned under both the old and new procedures shows a rise in the profit margin of bookmakers from 1.59% per runner to 1.8%, while the steady upward trend suggests that the figure could pass 2% per runner within weeks.
The changes to the system used to calculate SPs were introduced at the recommendation of the Starting Price Regulatory Commission, which was chaired by Lord Donoughue.
When the revised procedure was published, Lord Donoughue insisted that the SPRC was concerned with the "integrity" of SPs, rather than the size of their inbuilt profit margin.
However, plans to include a greater number of on-course bookmakers when calculating SPs, and to allow greater input from the on-course representatives of major off-course betting shop chains, seemed certain to result in a poorer deal for punters, a prediction that is borne out by the early figures.
The great majority of bets placed in Britain's betting shops are settled at SP, and while most ordinary punters will notice little difference on a day-to-day basis, the implications of a sharp and continuing rise in the over-round per runner could have a signficant effect on the profits of off-course bookmakers.
In all, there were 687 races staged in Britain in October, with 7,830 horses taking part. The following month, there were 773 races, with 7,898 horses. There is thus a significant amount of data on the margin per runner even at this early stage of the new SP procedure, while it is also possible to compare the returns at no fewer than 35 tracks which staged meetings in both October and November.
The margin per runner increased from October to November at no fewer than 27 of those tracks, with the largest rise coming at Ayr, where the over-round jumped from 1.25% to 1.88%.
The data also suggests that the new regime is having a disproportionate effect on races with relatively small fields. Nationally, the margin per runner in races with 10 horses or less rose by 0.27% from October to November, while the difference in races with 11 runners or more was a more modest 0.15%.
Prior to the introduction of the SPRC's changes, the profit margin in starting prices was at a historically low level. The arrival in the market of betting exchanges has provided strong competition for the on-course betting ring, where prices have edged towards the odds on the exchanges.
This has had a knock-on effect for off-course bookmakers, who rely on the on-course market and the SPs it generates to settle so many of their bets.
While it appeared inevitable that the swing in favour of the punter could not continue forever, though, it now appears that the intervention of the SPRC has not simply slowed its momentum, but thrown it into reverse.
Margins can vary significantly from one day to the next, and from course to course. Kempton's new all-weather track, for instance, has offered a relatively poor deal to punters since it re-opened, and frequently produced books with a margin of as much as 2.66% per runner even before the new rules were introduced.
It is not difficult, though, to find a straight, upward line through the peaks and troughs of the daily margins over the last two full months which would reach an average daily over-round of 2% per runner in the first two weeks of January. If and when that point is reached, the price of betting at SP will have risen by a third in less than three months.
What cannot be guessed, though, is whether the gains for bookmakers - and the racing industry, which receives Levy payments calculated as a percentage of the bookmakers' gross profits - would be anything more than relatively short-term.
As the cost of betting increases, the odds offered by the online exchanges - where the margin on the entire field at the off is typically less than 1% - become ever more attractive.
It would appear that the SPRC have stopped the punters' bonanza for the time being. If the long-term effect is to drive backers away from betting shops and onto the internet, however, it may not feel like a victory for very long.
Greg Wood
The Guardian, Wednesday 13 December 2006
The cost of betting has increased sharply since November 1 and continues to rise, following changes to the system used to record starting prices which were implemented at the start of last month. The first month-to-month comparison of SPs returned under both the old and new procedures shows a rise in the profit margin of bookmakers from 1.59% per runner to 1.8%, while the steady upward trend suggests that the figure could pass 2% per runner within weeks.
The changes to the system used to calculate SPs were introduced at the recommendation of the Starting Price Regulatory Commission, which was chaired by Lord Donoughue.
When the revised procedure was published, Lord Donoughue insisted that the SPRC was concerned with the "integrity" of SPs, rather than the size of their inbuilt profit margin.
However, plans to include a greater number of on-course bookmakers when calculating SPs, and to allow greater input from the on-course representatives of major off-course betting shop chains, seemed certain to result in a poorer deal for punters, a prediction that is borne out by the early figures.
The great majority of bets placed in Britain's betting shops are settled at SP, and while most ordinary punters will notice little difference on a day-to-day basis, the implications of a sharp and continuing rise in the over-round per runner could have a signficant effect on the profits of off-course bookmakers.
In all, there were 687 races staged in Britain in October, with 7,830 horses taking part. The following month, there were 773 races, with 7,898 horses. There is thus a significant amount of data on the margin per runner even at this early stage of the new SP procedure, while it is also possible to compare the returns at no fewer than 35 tracks which staged meetings in both October and November.
The margin per runner increased from October to November at no fewer than 27 of those tracks, with the largest rise coming at Ayr, where the over-round jumped from 1.25% to 1.88%.
The data also suggests that the new regime is having a disproportionate effect on races with relatively small fields. Nationally, the margin per runner in races with 10 horses or less rose by 0.27% from October to November, while the difference in races with 11 runners or more was a more modest 0.15%.
Prior to the introduction of the SPRC's changes, the profit margin in starting prices was at a historically low level. The arrival in the market of betting exchanges has provided strong competition for the on-course betting ring, where prices have edged towards the odds on the exchanges.
This has had a knock-on effect for off-course bookmakers, who rely on the on-course market and the SPs it generates to settle so many of their bets.
While it appeared inevitable that the swing in favour of the punter could not continue forever, though, it now appears that the intervention of the SPRC has not simply slowed its momentum, but thrown it into reverse.
Margins can vary significantly from one day to the next, and from course to course. Kempton's new all-weather track, for instance, has offered a relatively poor deal to punters since it re-opened, and frequently produced books with a margin of as much as 2.66% per runner even before the new rules were introduced.
It is not difficult, though, to find a straight, upward line through the peaks and troughs of the daily margins over the last two full months which would reach an average daily over-round of 2% per runner in the first two weeks of January. If and when that point is reached, the price of betting at SP will have risen by a third in less than three months.
What cannot be guessed, though, is whether the gains for bookmakers - and the racing industry, which receives Levy payments calculated as a percentage of the bookmakers' gross profits - would be anything more than relatively short-term.
As the cost of betting increases, the odds offered by the online exchanges - where the margin on the entire field at the off is typically less than 1% - become ever more attractive.
It would appear that the SPRC have stopped the punters' bonanza for the time being. If the long-term effect is to drive backers away from betting shops and onto the internet, however, it may not feel like a victory for very long.
You can read the latest annual report from the Starting Price Regulatory Commission here:
https://www.turftv.co.uk/downloads/SPRC_Annual_Report_2012.pdf
https://www.turftv.co.uk/downloads/SPRC_Annual_Report_2012.pdf
I remember Barry Dennis proudly describing on the Morning Line how, with the advent of Betfair, he would take a bet off one of the off-course reps and say 'ok, you can have that', and leave the price unchanged, and then watch the rep's face.
I guess things soon changed.
I guess things soon changed.
When the revised procedure was published, Lord Donoughue insisted that the SPRC was concerned with the "integrity" of SPs, rather than the size of their inbuilt profit margin.
PMSL
PMSL
It appears that the whole thing is messed up by each way betting.
Each way betting is such a stupid and inefficient market. The sooner they get rid of it and replace it with win and place betting the sooner the prices will be better for every one.
You could still have 'each way' betting. Just give the punter one bet at win odds and one bet at place odds. Deriving the place odds from the win odds is just ridiculous in this day in age.
Each way betting is such a stupid and inefficient market. The sooner they get rid of it and replace it with win and place betting the sooner the prices will be better for every one.
You could still have 'each way' betting. Just give the punter one bet at win odds and one bet at place odds. Deriving the place odds from the win odds is just ridiculous in this day in age.
EW, one of our only edges frog, they cant have it all their own way, or can they ?
when i lived in telford used to go all the time and always put my bets on before hand.and the bastards are still at it
The great majority of bets placed in Britain's betting shops are settled at SP
Whose fault is that?
Anser: MUG PUNTERS > They deserve to lose imo.
Whose fault is that?
Anser: MUG PUNTERS > They deserve to lose imo.
ged
21 Feb 14 09:42
Joined:
09 Jan 03
| Topic/replies: 6,075 | Blogger: ged's blog
I remember Barry Dennis proudly describing on the Morning Line how, with the advent of Betfair, he would take a bet off one of the off-course reps and say 'ok, you can have that', and leave the price unchanged, and then watch the rep's face.
I guess things soon changed.
aint they just
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The great majority of bets placed in Britain's betting shops are settled at SP
Whose fault is that?
Anser: MUG PUNTERS > They deserve to lose imo.
err yeah and if you take a price and beat them then you are restricted to s/p time to wake up fella.
21 Feb 14 09:42
Joined:
09 Jan 03
| Topic/replies: 6,075 | Blogger: ged's blog
I remember Barry Dennis proudly describing on the Morning Line how, with the advent of Betfair, he would take a bet off one of the off-course reps and say 'ok, you can have that', and leave the price unchanged, and then watch the rep's face.
I guess things soon changed.
aint they just
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The great majority of bets placed in Britain's betting shops are settled at SP
Whose fault is that?
Anser: MUG PUNTERS > They deserve to lose imo.
err yeah and if you take a price and beat them then you are restricted to s/p time to wake up fella.
I do belive the bookie profit margin fro the SP has increased.Also take a look at the DOGS where in some bags races the outsider is 9/2 in a 6 dog field.
Where are the NGRC?Where is the investigation.Race after race we see that if you was a bookie at these tracks you could make money by laying at higher prices
with a smaller margin but gain great volume of bets.
But it seems like the casino bankers who are left to do as they wish the bookies also are able to do the same.
Same problem as the financial crisis we see impotent regulators.
We need body set up to investigate the regulators be it online poker regulators,ngra,hra,Gambling commission.
It appears ever man and his dog knows tha games bent just cannot prove it due to lack of will from the regulators.
Where are the NGRC?Where is the investigation.Race after race we see that if you was a bookie at these tracks you could make money by laying at higher prices
with a smaller margin but gain great volume of bets.
But it seems like the casino bankers who are left to do as they wish the bookies also are able to do the same.
Same problem as the financial crisis we see impotent regulators.
We need body set up to investigate the regulators be it online poker regulators,ngra,hra,Gambling commission.
It appears ever man and his dog knows tha games bent just cannot prove it due to lack of will from the regulators.
Bookies merely reacting to changing times. Betfair has ruined on course betting. 'Bets Odds' online offers have to be paid for by someone...that's the SP mugs imo.
It is about time we had a real investigation into alleged market manipulation by the bookmakers.
Then we can have a police investigation into any fraud taking place against the punter.
Then we can have a police investigation into any fraud taking place against the punter.
With the magic sign owning Daq,it isn,t necessary to place any money oncourse,just shorten it on the exchange,and EVERY book follows without registering a bet.That is the current state of play in 2014,and it is allowed.
"alleged market manipulation by the bookmakers"! Bookmakers have always manipulated the market.It's THEIR market.
^^^^^No it aint, its weight of punters money that determines markets it always has done
Its OUR Market
Its OUR Market
It's THEIR market. They sell odds. You don't HAVE to buy them.
Your point is stupid. It's like saying ASDA food is OUR food....yes, but only after we've paid for it! And in a free market, that's a choice not an obligation.
Your point is stupid. It's like saying ASDA food is OUR food....yes, but only after we've paid for it! And in a free market, that's a choice not an obligation.
SO PUNTERS DONT FORM MARKETS THEN???
ARE YOU MAD
ARE YOU MAD
Feb 21, 2014 -- 6:09PM, unbiased wrote:
With the magic sign owning Daq,it isn,t necessary to place any money oncourse,just shorten it on the exchange,and EVERY book follows without registering a bet.That is the current state of play in 2014,and it is allowed.
and the less liquidity in the exchange the easier it is to do it presumably.
coffeedodger, it's a free market but won't all but the apathetic vote with their feet eventually? and the books will end shooting themselves in their own.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539