Betting Lab

"Words to that effect"

Didn't he basically say you can make free money taking up offers IF you are prepared to mess around with multiple accounts.

Seriously, are the only people he knows that cant get on arbers? He cant know many decent punters then, if that's the case.

"Didn't he basically say you can make free money taking up offers IF you are prepared to mess around with multiple accounts."

Yes - but not being a pro.  Wake up and listen.

"Seriously, are the only people he knows that cant get on arbers? He cant know many decent punters then, if that's the case."

Mates with Tony Bloom.

You couldn't write it

Precisely Duncan. Clearly has no concept that successful punters cannot get a bet on with bookmakers.
Anyone who says the game is much easier than it used to be is either a fool or a liar, sorry.

"If I focus on loss leading promotions with bookmakers, I'm gonna win" - Good luck with that, mate.

He just said he can get 4 figures on no problem

on a Saturday

What gutter did they drag this guy out of? rofl

It seems that the condition on which he is able to draw his fee for attending the studio is to refrain from stating (on a bookie sponsored channel)the bleeding obvious, which is you cant get on if you win.

he just might have mentioned it!

starfish and coffee 18 Feb 15 18:56 
He just said he can get 4 figures on no problem

Channing had his own poker skin, on I-Poker, with hundreds, maybe thousands, of recreational punters on it. The logistics of him getting on are quite easy to work out.

Last time he was on he said he often backs horses that a mate of his has told him to back. He maybe a good poker player or sports punter,pound to a penny he is fecking clueless at backing horses

It is a sad fact that the majority of people in the racing media do not tell the truth about the bookmaking industry.

Feb 18, 2015 -- 6:54PM, Barton Bank wrote:

Precisely Duncan. Clearly has no concept that successful punters cannot get a bet on with bookmakers. Anyone who says the game is much easier than it used to be is either a fool or a liar, sorry. "If I focus on loss leading promotions with bookmakers, I'm gonna win" - Good luck with that, mate.

lol do you have listening comprehension problems or are you just a wa nk?

No, and no.

I don't doubt him Daryl. The point is, not everyone is that lucky. He knows this

Feb 18, 2015 -- 7:04PM, Barton Bank wrote:

It is a sad fact that the majority of people in the racing media do not tell the truth about the bookmaking industry.

He has said at least 3 times if you put bets on in such a way that the bookies think you are shrewd, they are going to tell you to gtf.

Who is he? who did he bet as Loper?

Not listening..... As usual....

Only want to hear what they want to hear - so the can puke their spurious negative bile on here.

Can't help some mugs.

Yes tbf to him he has try to explain that you need to be more creative if you want to get on with the bookmakers. ie back a few losers with them as well.

never heard so much utter rubbish

Spurious negative bile! Haha, very good. Whereas labelling anyone you disagree with as a loser isn't negative at all?

Factuality through despair.

I give up tata

Good riddance, fool.

ribero1
18 Feb 15 19:10
Joined:
08 Mar 03
| Topic/replies: 7,106 | Blogger: ribero1's blog
Who is he? who did he bet as Loper?

His name is Neil Channing, Ribero. He bought some pitches at some time after the dead mens shoes rules were abolished. All in the south, not your part of the world.

I'm sure Screamingfrombeneaththewaves or Freebooter will put me right if I'm wrong.

I think he traded under his own name.

really Barton go to your doctor for some tests, if you aren't just trolling you have some sort of comprehension problem

plenty of people have backed plenty of losers with the bookies and still had their accounts closed...no-one i'm thinking of is a fav backer let alone an arber/bad EW player...they are just value punters backing their own fancies...and THEY CANT GET ON

Thanks loper,only just turned it on,i sort of recognised him but don't know the name,cheers.

Don't do trolling. I have listened to most of what he has said and I am not impressed. Some people might be, that is their prerogative.

quite happy for you to disagree with him, but he most def did not say you can live off bookies offers or that bookies didn't refuse bets, which seems to be your basis for disagreement.

duncan idaho 18 Feb 15 19:20 
plenty of people have backed plenty of losers with the bookies and still had their accounts closed...no-one i'm thinking of is a fav backer let alone an arber/bad EW player...they are just value punters backing their own fancies...and THEY CANT GET ON

the only reason losing punters get accounts closed is if the bets are 'live'  ie the prices shorten pre race....anyone can bet horses if they are not live.

He didn't say that bookies don't refuse bets but he did say that people shouldn't have any problem getting on. Which is at best naive and at worst an outright lie as far as I am concerned.
I also didn't hear him say anything which made he think he knows much about Horse Racing, so either he doesn't or he wasn't prepared to give anything away. I can understand if it is the latter but not much point in him being on there if that is the case.

If he's saying that he believes the bookmakers will transact freely with all punters, he's either a total mug or a bookmaker plant...

He effectively said he doesn't pay the premium charge.

He's not said that, Millhouse.

Some people believe in him , as he has a tipping site and hes charging £200 for Cheltenham info , last year I believe was a lot cheaper , but he owns the site with another high profile poker player , so they probably have a perfect database from their poker companies .

I have little to no respect for anyone who operated a tipping site tbh. If you can make it pay as a punter, you don't need to do it and if you can't you shouldn't be doing it.

Should have been operates not operated, fwiw.

Have they ever had a genuine punter on RUK?

They all seem to be promoting themselves either as journalists, bookmaker lackies or selling tips?!

I agree totally Barton , I know its easy money to run a tipping site , but if you are decent enough to make a proper living at the game, why arse about with all the hassle of it.

studious_1 off here went on there once or twice loper, must be 3 or 4 years ago though

And there's the rub, Loper. I know some punters like to combine their work with being on TV but no serious punter worth their salt is going to go on to the Betting Lab on a one-off basis and reveal their methods for the fee on offer unless they have another reason for wanting the exposure.

World weary cynicism is wearing me down.

Sorry, I'm not helping!
I suspect I would be less cynical if I had chosen a different career tbh.

he will prob get by on his £2million poker winnings

That's impressive, but why run a tipping site?

think its a new venture, he had a staking site for pokeras well as poker site but didnt work out, he posts on blonde poker quite a bit (or used to).put alot of his own money into it, dont think he is a clueless mug

I wasn't suggesting he was a mug. But if he has an in depth knowledge of Horse Racing he was keeping it very much to himself.

bit like all the trainers owners and jockeys they have on then !

i wasnt talking about losing punters, roida...far from it

Did some of you watch a different programme to me? I saw the whole thing from the start and I thought he was saying that winning by taking offers, free bets, bad each-way and tracking prices as they change was really easy but that it would be no good to you if you wanted to be a professional punter as the bookmakers would not stand for you for too long and it would be impossible to get enough on. He then repeated that about four times over the hour or so I watched and said that he bet quite big by betting on Saturdays after 11am, on big race days, on liquid markets like football and NFL and on golf majors.

He said those things were easy enough to get on.

Did I miss a massive chunk of it where he was saying the absolute opposite?

I only tuned in because I remember him from the races. He used to lay our firm some pretty big bets. He bet as Steve Todd.

What is betting lab?

I enjoyed listening to him. (kept Willow) quiet!

I found him both eloquent and objective.

You watched the right programme leftit.

Your observations are correct.

Ignore the haters. They're just hating.

What about ya king

How's things mate? Was of the drink there for 6 weeks. Had weekend on it but back of for a while again hopefully

leftit, yes, he did say that...he started by saying people moaning about bookies closing accounts etc are dinosaurs...then by blathering on about Pricewise and bad EW races for an hour he skated around the main issue- that punters WHO ARE NOT LOOKING FOR THOSE CHEAPSHOT PROFITS are also routinely knocked back and closed if they show any capability...he seemed happy enough that the only way he can get decent amounts on is by playing in the markets the bookies wanted him to eg Saturday TV races, Prem football, Tennis + Golf majors etc...very magnanimous of him but i wonder if he would be so accepting of the situation if he was a horse racing only punter generally betting in Northern handicaps or suchlike?

the one situation the bookies are keen to keep quiet is the FACT that winning punters get sent packing, because all their advertising glorifies the possibility of winning...if it became common knowledge amongst the hoi polloi that the bookies only want regular losers to bet with them, it would be a disaster for the bookies...judging by the way the media ignores this and by half the contributors on this thread, the bookies clearly dont have much to worry about, as even those within the sport arent bothered by this FACT

I got the impression that he regretted the fact that he could no longer get on many hours before a race but accepted that bookmakers had a right to do this. I haven't bet with bookmakers for years so have no first hand experience on this and only know what people say on here.

Duncan...I'm not sure how the fact that he didn't spend an hour moaning about how people can't get exactly what they want on in midweek racing makes him a bad person. They asked him what he does as a punter and he explained it. He seemed to be saying that you can choose between betting on things which you get restricted on and not being able to bet enough to make a living or you can bet on things that you can get on and you'll be able to bet the amounts you need to be able to win, it'll just be harder to win at the same rate so you'll have to stake more.

You seem upset with the bloke for not leading a campaign against bookmakers. I thought it was just a programme about how one pro-punter works.

Do you think he is lying when he says he can get on fairly easily on Saturday races, golf majors, Asian handicaps and whatever he was talking about? I have never had a problem with those kind of bets but perhaps I'm a mug. He did say at least twice that he can't bet in his own name.

one thing he can do is talk for England

Weekend at Bernies was a good one. Bern? Bern?

I agree with leftit - but I have a question - perhaps it shows my naivety - but these accounts with which he bets in the Saturday hcaps - presumably he's significantly up on them (or most of them) over a year or so - don't the firms notice that and close/restrict them? He seemed to be saying that because he had a bunch of losers amongst the occasional winner on them (obviously, if he's betting at 8/1+), the firm aren't notricing that the account is a winning one. How is that so? Do they not check the account 'balance' - or even the 'horse racing balance' - over a longish period?

I suspect that he is so blase and magnanimous about the bookmakers not honoring the terms of their licenses because he is no longer a serious punter, relying on his poker winnings for his income.

Judging by the type of betting he still indulges in and the fact that he can get bets on he would appear to be a recreational punter only on horse racing these days.

He appeared acutely aware that openly criticising the bookies for their questionable methods was a no no on a bookmaker sponsored channel.

watched ruk until about 7pm wasnt was glad to switch over, what a waste of time NC was, really annoyed me that he seemed to think he would be below the bookmakers radar by betting on big saturaday handicaps and also seemed to suggest that you can bet what you like on premier league games, the bookmakers software is very sophisticated and a winner on anything is quickly found and restricted

*was glad to switch over

You have to remember that RUK will have thousands of subscribers that have no desire to be a professional or even win significant money. That's different from many Betfair customers and especially ones that post here.

There's no way any pro is going to come on tv and give you the exact methods he uses. Having said that people that say he is not a horse pro may be right.

The best point on this tread was that bookies don't want live bets. If you keep backing 8/1 shots that go 4/1 you will get your account closed it they all lose.

The best point on this tread was that bookies don't want live bets

What exactly is a LIVE BET?

If the books don't want to take early money then simply don't put your prices up early. I long to go back to the days when only a few tough handicaps were priced up in the morning

a live bet is when you use oddschecker to get the best odds

I'm with IDKW. The model is flawed but such is the supine nature of (almost) all of the racing media that because they are seemingly unaffected personally nothing is said.

be great if neil highlights any bookmakers that derestrict his accounts since his tv appearances started and will now take a bet providing he keeps quiet

Cretin on ATR now from Coral sums up the Bookmaking Industry just perfectly.

Who killed Lucy Beale ffs

leftit, i've never said he was a bad person...and i dont doubt people (inc. him) can get on with the bookies if they stick solely to the events the bookies WANT you to bet on. But to devote practically the whole show to talking about bad EW races and arbing, as if they're the only reason a bookie would ever knock you back, just seemed bizarre to me...everyone knows about those avenues and that the bookies will be onto you sharpish if that's your game (which is fair enough). Old news...nothing to see here...waste of an hour.

think it's a bit insulting to be honest if you are going to go around calling someone who isnt pulling any strokes whatsoever a 'dinosaur' for actually thinking the bookies might want to lay a bet at an advertised price or keep your account open beyond 2 winners...these racing channels implore us to come join the Ladbroke Life or to 'stick one on it' all day long...forgive me if i'd like a bit of balance

i think another point he was trying to get across was ,that bookmaker have been doing this for near 10 plus years ,its time for people to stop crying about it ,its a simple fact of life .this is how it is .with the close down of accounts ,yet ever week some one is on here crying about the same crap .It really is time to move on from this subject ,yes its not right and i dont agree ,but its simple ,this is how it is now and its not going to change .

I'm an old person and I've changed my betting habits a lot, and I'm always looking to change again. But I strongly disagree with the idea that just because things are the way the are that people should put with it. That's exactly how people get trampled on by governments and big companies - who rely on fuss dying down after a while to do what the hell they want. I don't moan about the closing of accounts, but I wish more power to the people that do, and I wish the racing press were more vociferous about it, though I understand the points Neil Channing was making about why should a business take on unprofitable business - but they should be shamed about it - publicly - loudly and often = don't give up!! - ever!!!!

this is how it is now and its not going to change


the reason it wont change is only that it is accepted, even by pro punters obv...if instead, every single person who was thinking of 'joining The Ladbrokes Life' and opening their first betting account was made aware, very clearly, that this fun new pursuit of yours is only going to last IF YOU LOSE (and 90-odd% of you ARE GOING TO LOSE), the bookies would have to totally reassess how they make money, and they may actually have to go back 20+ years to being proper bookies again, instead of being feral capitalist leeches trying to induce the unsuspecting with free bets etc then steering them towards arcade, bingo instead

but the truth never stands a chance against corporate marketing budgets, as the younger generation keep reminding us

the trouble with having a sport mainly followed by older people is that they're almost unable to cope with change.





Most of the young I have met think betfair is a bookmaker and have no idea what an exchange is.

The old are the new revolutionaries. The young have been brainwashed by the phone companies, and have coalesced into an amorphous lump by facebook and twitter - they're all mindless morons now.

We are not new revolutionaries ged. We were already that in the 60s

It really makes me laugh to hear them going on about "Cash Out". They probably think that's revolutionary.

Now you're talking sparra. If I wasn't worried about me false teeth falling out I'd have a good laugh about that one.

If you didn't laugh about it ged, you would probably have to cry.

I know its annoying when you get accounts closed, but there is no law saying they cant do it, and bookmakers are in it to make money.
its all very well saying people should be told they will only be able to continue betting if they lose, but do you think that will stop people from betting ? get real of course it wont to the majority.
They advertise on **** it kills you, people still buy them, they tell you sugar and salt is bad for you, people still eat it.

****   = cigarettes

You'd die if you didnt eat suger & salt. FACT.

Unfortunately you'll die even if you do loper. FACT.

'When the ONS (Office for National Statistics) started collating figures in 1974, 45% of Britons smoked...in 2013, it had dropped to 18.7%'

But the brainless young'uns are vaping and giving back all that hard won ground to the big corps!

But I think punters/viewers would feel an awful lot better if every time a bookies rep appeared on TV, they had to hold up a placard which said, in big letters, "Customers are not allowed have a winning account". Firms could still advertise, they'd all be on the same footing, so none would have an edge over their competitors, and punters/viewers would feel better - they still wouldn't get all they wanted, but they would at least get some satisfaction, and the truth would be told. If cigarette packets have to declare the facts about the risk of death, and foodstuffs have to declare calorific/ingredient content, why not the less-than-pleasant, but not-so-obvious fact about bookmaker's business? All it needs is the TV companies to have some principles.......ah, I see the flaw.

Ged, I have said that for a long time.

You are bang on.

His own words

The worst times started in 2003 and went on into 2005. I was making lots of money from everything – poker, horse racing and I also had a day job working in betting. I was at the races all the time, playing poker as much as I could and working – I never slept. My bankroll got as high as £980,000 and I felt I was untouchable. Then it all started going wrong in the middle of 2003.

I was betting around £4,800 every day on horses and had a bad run for four months where I lost every day, and was spending more and more money on pitches at the racecourse – me and my partner invested £600k in that venture before it collapsed and we eventually sold them on for just £30k. And just if I didn’t have enough things to gamble on at that time I lost £100k on the stock market! I was watching all my life savings go away.

My £1 million was no longer there. I’d lost it all and now owed 36 people a lot of money! The only way I thought I could get out of it was to gamble some more.

Will you post a snippet from his autobiography at the same time everyday, buzzer?

Should be an interesting read.

i agree with what people are saying ,but it has all ready been said ,plus if any of you were big shareholders in one of these firms ,i wonder how much of a charity u would be then ,pappy power share price and dividend has grown alot over the last 6 years or so ,and if i had invested there post 08 ,i would be saying this business model is great ,i also agree that people still bet regardless of known there account will be closed down if its a winning one ,but guest what lads ,most people are not trying to make a liven from it ,if bob lose's 50pounds this sat on the footie and then wins 50 pounds next week ,as far as he's concerned he up 50 pounds...............and a bloody legend

charity ...they are bookies ffs, there's supposed to be some f00kin risk...if i open up a restaurant tomorrow, there's a 50% chance it will have gone out of business within 3 yrs...why should bookies have a licence to print money?

i have no problem with them cutting odds if 300 punters all come out of the woodwork at the same time to back Hugh Taylor's tip..i have no problem with them taking evasive action with those who merely play bad EW races...but at least do what it says on the job description and be a f00kin bookie

The point is they are supposed to be bookmakers; that is make a book which over time will enable them to make money. They have, largely by deskilling their operations (I think they call it "efficiency savings") got themselves into a position where they are so "frit" that anybody with even the slightest ability is knocked back to derisory  amounts. The FOBT development has in effect allowed this as it has allowed the off course chains a risk free cash cow that requires no skill nor ability.

The game to survive needs to offer the prospect that by diligent study, discipline and skill it is possible to make money.

The BHA by getting into bed with the big off course chains and being dependent on punters.

The only solution to this impasse is for a racing owned tote with huge pools to operate off course with on course bookmakers complementing this on the track.

Won't happen of course.

**The BHA by getting into bed with the big off course chains and being dependent on punters losing is complicit in destroying this possibility.

The FOBT's are on the way out parispike,I've been looking in a fair fews shops recently and they aren't anywhere near busy. Several times all 4 machines unused. Perhaps the addicts have done their dough? It wouldn't surprise me, the pit was never bottomless. Now the shareholders will still want a dividend from somewhere and perhaps the bookies will have to employ decent odds compilers to get an edge on the sheep and maybe start taking a view again.Shops are undoubtedly going to shut over the next 18 months probably 25% maybe a third. The retail estate is far too large just to take bets if the cash cow is stopping production.

i agree 100% about the tote bit ,were racing is healty and the price money good ,there is usually a tote monopoly ,but then would u all not give out about the price .but as a casual punter and racing lover ,i would love the tote monopoly

Ten years ago I would have been strongly against at Tote Monopoly. Now, if the takeouts were fair and it was not run by Fred Done I would be perfectly happy with it.

Think the "Scruffy One" mentioned how he kept the traders sweet.
Backing 5 horses e`w in big Saturday handy races.
4 accounts would be losers.

Never mentioned the staking plan.