Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
http://www.theguardian.com/global/2015/aug/02/betting-horses-gambling-bookmakers-accounts-closed
Show More
Interesting but nothing most of us on here didn't already know...Mafia Granny
It wasn't aimed at most of us on here but a wider audience, this will hopefully go further.
The most significant factor is that the matter is slowly beginning to creep into public consciousness.
Most of the (British) public have an inherent sense of fairness. They will not react well when the matter becomes common knowledge.
No fan of Salmond but I hope he makes some progress.
Most of the (British) public have an inherent sense of fairness. They will not react well when the matter becomes common knowledge.
No fan of Salmond but I hope he makes some progress.
The article:
-- might be wrong about tracking IP addresses, though judging from some of their websites, bookies are so technically inept this cannot be ruled out. It is, or ought to be, a bit more sophisticated than that;
-- says nothing about filthy arbers;
-- is ambivalent about the question of putter-onners and friends' accounts;
-- quotes Barney Curley, whose own ethics when it comes to racing and betting are at best dubious;
-- does not address concerns about bookmakers sharing information;
-- says nothing about FOBT profits underwriting the refusal to take racing bets.
-- might be wrong about tracking IP addresses, though judging from some of their websites, bookies are so technically inept this cannot be ruled out. It is, or ought to be, a bit more sophisticated than that;
-- says nothing about filthy arbers;
-- is ambivalent about the question of putter-onners and friends' accounts;
-- quotes Barney Curley, whose own ethics when it comes to racing and betting are at best dubious;
-- does not address concerns about bookmakers sharing information;
-- says nothing about FOBT profits underwriting the refusal to take racing bets.
Just read the article and we all know punters are getting a raw deal from the bookmakers, also seen this comment underneath:
'Although not perfect, a betting exchange, such as Betfair is his answer.'
'Although not perfect, a betting exchange, such as Betfair is his answer.'
@saddo -- thing is, FOBTs are crucial for two reasons: 1) their profits mean bookies can be trigger happy closing accounts; but from the point of view of public consciousness, is 2) FOBTs are seen as a scourge that take money from addicts and leave babies to starve.
And that (2) is a problem because for most of the public, punters not being able to get a bet accepted will be seen as a good thing.
And that (2) is a problem because for most of the public, punters not being able to get a bet accepted will be seen as a good thing.
The message should be kept simple for the public, winners will not be tolerated. If we cannot force a minimum liability on em they should be made to state that condition on every door.
If the bookies accepted a minimum bet of say £50 on anything then I think most people would be happy with that.....
Given their profits/turnover, I'm sure they would survive just as well with that liability...
Given their profits/turnover, I'm sure they would survive just as well with that liability...
As I have said many times on here, and everyone is no doubt very tired of me saying, the one Achilles heel the bookmaking industry have is that their businesses are founded on total lies - and, for all their 'fair play' PR nonsense, the perception that winning is not actually allowed is kryptonite to their businesses, imho.
This is exactly why they spend millions of pounds a year in advertising and sponsorship they don't actually need to make it as difficult as possible for the racing and betting media to tell the truth...
This is exactly why they spend millions of pounds a year in advertising and sponsorship they don't actually need to make it as difficult as possible for the racing and betting media to tell the truth...
I agree with Dickie...
Hopefully anyone who uses social media can get this out there to more people.
Hopefully anyone who uses social media can get this out there to more people.
Can this get posted on all of the books twitter accounts??
Millhoue - it's the "Ladcrooks LIE"
Millhoue - it's the "Ladcrooks LIE"
Closing winning accounts has now become industry practice as many on here are no doubt aware. Being rational you could accept that they have to have some sort of risk process in place but the level that it's triggered at is so low. That and the blokey PR spin that all are welcome and it's a battle of wits. Either take the bets (even at a moderately low level) or stop with the lie that you're some sort of tradition bookmaker. The massive safety net of FOBT's means they have no wish to take punters on who have half a clue even for small stakes. Just be honest that this is what you do as at the minute they want it both ways.
The odds compilers at these firms are truly clueless when they don't have betfair to guide them.
The odds compilers at these firms are truly clueless when they don't have betfair to guide them.
Interesting article thanks.
The thing I most dislike about the big high street bookmakers is that their representatives are given airtime in order to peddle their lies.
When I started punting seriously in the 1990s, you could win a fair few grand before getting the elbow, nowadays it is just ridiculous.
The thing I most dislike about the big high street bookmakers is that their representatives are given airtime in order to peddle their lies.
When I started punting seriously in the 1990s, you could win a fair few grand before getting the elbow, nowadays it is just ridiculous.
If bookies were forced to accept a bet of £50 on anything, then there wouldn't be anything left to bet on.
Really? Even in the modern era of copying the betfair markets but chopping the prices in a bit to protect their margins?
fair enough about getting on at the bookies but theres quite clearly no one else who wants to make a book early and lay bets on here at any where near the bookies early prices for more than £2.
and people go on about arbers but there really isnt any coz the bookies cut there prices to keep below and when i do see arbs there there for ages .like what would be considered a massive arb on largisimo was 5/2 with 3 bookies and 3.1 on here for ages and u had to invest about 6k to win 150.
the bookies set there prices they should want to take bets thats meant to be there job but there just petrefied it might go under on here for a second which means nothing as its just traders on here putting the big bets down unless its a massive plunge and the price will just collapse
people who back with the bookies to trade of arnt arbers there way of betting is just backing horses they think are overpriced to try trade.so there really isnt millions of arbers ruining it for people at all and people backing to trade carnt be looked down on and the main arbers are the bookies so its madness them whinging at supposed arbers.
and people go on about arbers but there really isnt any coz the bookies cut there prices to keep below and when i do see arbs there there for ages .like what would be considered a massive arb on largisimo was 5/2 with 3 bookies and 3.1 on here for ages and u had to invest about 6k to win 150.
the bookies set there prices they should want to take bets thats meant to be there job but there just petrefied it might go under on here for a second which means nothing as its just traders on here putting the big bets down unless its a massive plunge and the price will just collapse
people who back with the bookies to trade of arnt arbers there way of betting is just backing horses they think are overpriced to try trade.so there really isnt millions of arbers ruining it for people at all and people backing to trade carnt be looked down on and the main arbers are the bookies so its madness them whinging at supposed arbers.
With Betfair markets so weak until first show, then yes: if forced to accept £50 bets, then early prices would revert to the handful of races that prevailed before Betfair.
There's no way bookmakers could offer prices guaranteed to £50 stakes if those prices are being compiled from a Betfair market offering £2 stakes. THEY would immediately manipulate the market to take the bookies' trousers down.
There's no way bookmakers could offer prices guaranteed to £50 stakes if those prices are being compiled from a Betfair market offering £2 stakes. THEY would immediately manipulate the market to take the bookies' trousers down.
"The Ladbrooks Life"..The Professor thinks he has all the numbers figured out but he can't get his bet on because we've restricted him to winning £20.
really all bookmakers should by law have to accept bets of at least £50 from any individual at advertised prices
if Australia can do it then why not here?
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/01/online-bookies-banned-from-putting-restrictions-on-winning-punters-in-nsw
if Australia can do it then why not here?
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/jan/01/online-bookies-banned-from-putting-restrictions-on-winning-punters-in-nsw
screaming from beneaththewaves
Date Joined: 30 Jan 05
Add contact | Send message
02 Aug 15 23:52
With Betfair markets so weak until first show, then yes: if forced to accept £50 bets, then early prices would revert to the handful of races that prevailed before Betfair.
There's no way bookmakers could offer prices guaranteed to £50 stakes if those prices are being compiled from a Betfair market offering £2 stakes. THEY would immediately manipulate the market to take the bookies' trousers down.
Then what they would do is employ proper odds compilers and play the event rather than the player (you know like a bookmaker should). It's funny how before exchanges in my local Lads they would take numerous 3 to 4 figure bets FROM ANYONE. That was how they MADE A DECENT PROFIT.
Date Joined: 30 Jan 05
Add contact | Send message
02 Aug 15 23:52
With Betfair markets so weak until first show, then yes: if forced to accept £50 bets, then early prices would revert to the handful of races that prevailed before Betfair.
There's no way bookmakers could offer prices guaranteed to £50 stakes if those prices are being compiled from a Betfair market offering £2 stakes. THEY would immediately manipulate the market to take the bookies' trousers down.
Then what they would do is employ proper odds compilers and play the event rather than the player (you know like a bookmaker should). It's funny how before exchanges in my local Lads they would take numerous 3 to 4 figure bets FROM ANYONE. That was how they MADE A DECENT PROFIT.
the bookies don't have to be total slaves to the exchange, they can choose what prices they offer, just because someone is offering £2 at 3.0 it doesn't mean bookies have to offer the same price for amount x
I think if bookies had to accept £50 stakes it would have an interesting knock on affect on the exchange as well.
I think if bookies had to accept £50 stakes it would have an interesting knock on affect on the exchange as well.
Making it a minimum stake would be no good.
It should be something like eg a minimum liability of £1000 or a £50 stake, whichever is greater
It should be something like eg a minimum liability of £1000 or a £50 stake, whichever is greater
Of course, if the bookmakers used the exchanges properly, they'd never need to close a winning account because they'd be making a profit on everything. But they're not because as others have noted their technically inept.
min stake or liability yeah
the two that seem to limit me the most often are the sportsbook and corals
the two that seem to limit me the most often are the sportsbook and corals
There's nowhere near enough liquidity for the major bookmakers to be able to rely on laying bets off on the betfair exchange nowadays.
then they should perhaps run a book properly rather than rely on the exchange, after all bookmakers have existed a lot longer than the exchange
Nothing will change.Bookmakers are a law unto themselves.They can do exactly what they want.
They should but they prefer to take bets from losing customers only and make a big chunk of their profits from the FOBTs etc.
horseracing is becoming a sideshow to the big four,all they want is football betting and fobt's
Magic__Daps:
Then what they would do is employ proper odds compilers and play the event rather than the player (you know like a bookmaker should). It's funny how before exchanges in my local Lads they would take numerous 3 to 4 figure bets FROM ANYONE. That was how they MADE A DECENT PROFIT.
Not laying early prices on every single race every day they didn't.
There seem to be a lot of newbies on this thread and elsewhere with no idea how bookmakers and betting shops operated pre-Betfair. Early prices were restricted to a maximum of half a dozen difficult and decent-grade handicaps per day. Of course they sometimes laid bets of a few hundred on those races without the Betfair tissue to guide punters.
If you want bookmakers to return to laying those kinds of sums, then you'll have to get used to the idea that all those races about which you moan they currently only lay a fiver will, just as before, no longer have any prices available at all until first show.
Then what they would do is employ proper odds compilers and play the event rather than the player (you know like a bookmaker should). It's funny how before exchanges in my local Lads they would take numerous 3 to 4 figure bets FROM ANYONE. That was how they MADE A DECENT PROFIT.
Not laying early prices on every single race every day they didn't.
There seem to be a lot of newbies on this thread and elsewhere with no idea how bookmakers and betting shops operated pre-Betfair. Early prices were restricted to a maximum of half a dozen difficult and decent-grade handicaps per day. Of course they sometimes laid bets of a few hundred on those races without the Betfair tissue to guide punters.
If you want bookmakers to return to laying those kinds of sums, then you'll have to get used to the idea that all those races about which you moan they currently only lay a fiver will, just as before, no longer have any prices available at all until first show.
screaming
Spot on - a rare voice of common sense in this thread.
Spot on - a rare voice of common sense in this thread.
If you want bookmakers to return to laying those kinds of sums, then you'll have to get used to the idea that all those races about which you moan they currently only lay a fiver will, just as before, no longer have any prices available at all until first show.
Good, ricks will still be there but we might get a bit on before they suss.
Good, ricks will still be there but we might get a bit on before they suss.
Excellent article once again by The Guardian, even surpassing their expose of the fraudster tipster 'Thommo'.
Surprised, though, no mention of proposed legislation in Australia where bookmakers would be forced by law to accept reasonable-sized bets to advertised prices,
Agree with Ramruna that it's a bit rich for Barney Curly to be claiming the moral high ground on betting ethics!
Surprised, though, no mention of proposed legislation in Australia where bookmakers would be forced by law to accept reasonable-sized bets to advertised prices,
Agree with Ramruna that it's a bit rich for Barney Curly to be claiming the moral high ground on betting ethics!
I think it is a good article too and nice to see something in a high profile piece of print. What with this and some mention of account restriction on Britain At The Bookies, word is indeed slowly starting to creep out that winners are not welcome with UK bookies.
Having a fixed liability per customer as now seen in Australia would be a decent way to go over here. £500 to £1000 would be about the equivalent. Books may revert to pricing up less racing early as a result, who knows. Maybe over-rounds would increase on early prices if they were not able to test the waters for a fiver here and there. Maybe the BF market may end up stronger if the books offer less attractive pricing?
One other point not mentioned, but one that we all know, is that this is not only a racing issue. Get your account gubbed and you are usually gone on all other sports too. Try getting a price on plenty of other sports and you have almost no chance. The only caveat is perhaps football at the highest level where even a restricted account may still be able to get several times the stake on a main market like match odds.
Having a fixed liability per customer as now seen in Australia would be a decent way to go over here. £500 to £1000 would be about the equivalent. Books may revert to pricing up less racing early as a result, who knows. Maybe over-rounds would increase on early prices if they were not able to test the waters for a fiver here and there. Maybe the BF market may end up stronger if the books offer less attractive pricing?
One other point not mentioned, but one that we all know, is that this is not only a racing issue. Get your account gubbed and you are usually gone on all other sports too. Try getting a price on plenty of other sports and you have almost no chance. The only caveat is perhaps football at the highest level where even a restricted account may still be able to get several times the stake on a main market like match odds.
Had a 10p yankee on the ante post football referred with one bookmaker lately
ABSOLUTE JOKE!!
ABSOLUTE JOKE!!
Yeah they might go back only offering odds on certain races before the first show but I feel that unless they all operate a cartel it wouldn’t last because things have moved on a lot in the last 15 years in terms internet gambling and potential competition.
But even if they did that with some races would it be a price worth paying if it meant they couldn’t knock people back below a certain liability?
But even if they did that with some races would it be a price worth paying if it meant they couldn’t knock people back below a certain liability?
If any bookmaker priced up every race with a guarantee of either a £50 stake or a £500 takeout, then you'd be a mug for betting with them. They would simply be another Bowmans/Luvbet/Pagebet et al.
Racing does not need bookmakers imo. When baldie's t0te reign is over, introduce an all course, online incl. app t0te with a ca. 7% deduction all pools, with the proceeds funding prize money, improved facilities and cheaper racecourse entry. After the racing right is established, price them out of the market. Start off by buying bookmaker shops after the merger between Joes & Laddies makes shops available.
If you want bookmakers to return to laying those kinds of sums, then you'll have to get used to the idea that all those races about which you moan they currently only lay a fiver will, just as before, no longer have any prices available at all until first show.
Yes I would be happy with that if they layed a decent bet. You cannot even get a decent bet on an Antepost selection nowadays, last year I got turned down for 25ew on the National 2 weeks before the race.
All they want is machines, machines, more machines and online casino/machine mugs. They will close or restrict an account, but you always get the email/phonecall stating "this does not affect our other products that are still on offer to you".
Yes I would be happy with that if they layed a decent bet. You cannot even get a decent bet on an Antepost selection nowadays, last year I got turned down for 25ew on the National 2 weeks before the race.
All they want is machines, machines, more machines and online casino/machine mugs. They will close or restrict an account, but you always get the email/phonecall stating "this does not affect our other products that are still on offer to you".
Coral has gone one step forward on that front, 2 years ago they let me register and I've placed some bets, a week later I couldn't log in and got a message to call them.. after 5 minutes of trying to give them my name and account they said they don't allow betting from outside UK residents. Then I said ok, I requested a refund for the funds left and logged in again to discover a new popup to enter on their CASINO. I called them again to say hey you made a mistake you're still accepting money from me in the casino, I tweeted them as well, and of course they couldn't offer any explanation for why they only allow me in their casino but offered no bets on any market...
oh and I was losing overall so they gave me no chance, they mugged me then they blocked me.. Now, which legit organization in this world does this? only criminals. Reporters are paid to keep their mouths closed and when they do ask them something they give a pathetic reason of able to choose their customers, what a load of bollocks, they're choosing their victims just like criminals/terrorist do when they seek vulnerable targets. If they are legit and capable of BOOKMAKING then they should allow bets from anyone and the overround will make them profit by default. Force thm to accept bets from anyone, online/shops of minimum 100 quid and thn they can keep their license, if they can't do it then they should be in another industry.
oh and I was losing overall so they gave me no chance, they mugged me then they blocked me.. Now, which legit organization in this world does this? only criminals. Reporters are paid to keep their mouths closed and when they do ask them something they give a pathetic reason of able to choose their customers, what a load of bollocks, they're choosing their victims just like criminals/terrorist do when they seek vulnerable targets. If they are legit and capable of BOOKMAKING then they should allow bets from anyone and the overround will make them profit by default. Force thm to accept bets from anyone, online/shops of minimum 100 quid and thn they can keep their license, if they can't do it then they should be in another industry.
I'm just preparing some ammunition to send to El Presidento to get the wheels turning on this one.
I've had three accounts restricted in the last few months.
I've had three accounts restricted in the last few months.
Went in for e50 on an Even money shot in the SuperBowl in January with Ladcrooks.
Was delighted they allowed e25....
Was delighted they allowed e25....
Boyle stopped my 10p lucky 15 a-thon on outsiders. Quite clearly sick of me losing on them every day.
Oh, but i did put £20 on a horse once that had the price smashed into later. Absolute disgraceful way to treat a customer. I am going to write a blog about my experiences with online bookmakers and try to bring it to the attention of more people.
Oh, but i did put £20 on a horse once that had the price smashed into later. Absolute disgraceful way to treat a customer. I am going to write a blog about my experiences with online bookmakers and try to bring it to the attention of more people.
incidentally, i was told, you can still use our online casino games. That did make me LOL
I've just sent my information to my MP to pass on to El Presidento.
Skybet closed my account after 23 losers on the spin! Beat that.
Hills sent me an email this morning cutting my BOG and other "promotions". They limited my stakes a couple of months ago. That's after a good few years of relative success to small stakes with them. I'm surprised it took them so long to suss me out.
Like the rest of us my options are very limited nowadays.
Like the rest of us my options are very limited nowadays.
On the 'Britain at the Bookmakers' programme on BBC - featuring CORALS.
CORALS ran a promotion - "5/1 Man U to get a corner (at home) to QPR"
MAX Stake £5 - NEW Customers ONLY ... Promotion closed after they got 10,000 NEW Accounts opened .... which they did, in next to no time.
Wonder how many of those NEW Accounts are now Restricted, or even alive...
On the other hand - perhaps plenty are still punting away to their hearts content - as the format of the Promotion just shows who they are trying to attract.
CORALS ran a promotion - "5/1 Man U to get a corner (at home) to QPR"
MAX Stake £5 - NEW Customers ONLY ... Promotion closed after they got 10,000 NEW Accounts opened .... which they did, in next to no time.
Wonder how many of those NEW Accounts are now Restricted, or even alive...
On the other hand - perhaps plenty are still punting away to their hearts content - as the format of the Promotion just shows who they are trying to attract.
how many of those were accounts run by formerly restricted clients under friends/family names...
What is the situation in Australia now?
Does anyone have a link to their regulations?
Does anyone have a link to their regulations?
does the totepool ever bar anyone?
When the Tote's pool monopoly expires, it would not be surprising to see the big bookies running their own pools. No need to ban or limit punters then.
When the Tote's pool monopoly expires, it would not be surprising to see the big bookies running their own pools. No need to ban or limit punters then.
I can't understand why they don't allow winning accounts to continue, within reason as they must be a pointer and give an advantage to bookmakers who accomodate them. SJ closed my account almost immediately, Bentway wrote to me saying I could only bet with them "recreationally," whatever that means, even though I was losing with them, restricted to £25 with BetDim and no BOG or any promotions that might be advertised, Ladcrooks come up with stupid stakes like £2.91, even when I try to have £20. When I try to place a bet with Boils, comes up something like, "a risk assessment has rejected your bet." Bets often get referred to traders with Co*ral, but incredibly, their "beaten a head" money back offer has been increased to £500 on my account! Occasionally get knocked back with BV & 365 but for the normal amount I want to bet(£50-£100)I can get usually get on. Wish I didn't have to use bookies, but it's hopeless on here. No liquidity on early prices & the horses I want to back invariably shorten & the drifters just don't seem to win.
Had an account with Joke Orals for 5 years. Just betting £25 horses on Saturdays, £50 football bets (well down on the horse bets, up by a negligible amount on the football) So imagine my surprise when I was invited to join the priority club and received this mail in June:
All eyes of the racing world descend on Epsom Downs this weekend where the most viewed flat race of the year takes place & we have two AMAZING money back offers to make it even more of a spectacle!
Free Bets for Winners – Up to £500 *
• Stake £100+ on any horse at our selected meeting of the day
• If your selection wins at odds of 3/1+ we will match your stake with a free bet of up to £500!
• Available until 12th June 2015.
I staked 6 £100 bets on the first day and they all lost. Had a couple of winners the second day and was given the free bets for the day after. One of the free bets won and I was then quickly limited to £5 on sports so i couldnt actually use the second free £100 bet.
My point is this, the offer was made to get a small stake losing punter to up stakes (even as high as £500!) with the thinking that they could easily go through the Epsom meeting without a single winner (plenty did!). When the opposite happened they effectively
closed my account and reneged on a free bet.
All eyes of the racing world descend on Epsom Downs this weekend where the most viewed flat race of the year takes place & we have two AMAZING money back offers to make it even more of a spectacle!
Free Bets for Winners – Up to £500 *
• Stake £100+ on any horse at our selected meeting of the day
• If your selection wins at odds of 3/1+ we will match your stake with a free bet of up to £500!
• Available until 12th June 2015.
I staked 6 £100 bets on the first day and they all lost. Had a couple of winners the second day and was given the free bets for the day after. One of the free bets won and I was then quickly limited to £5 on sports so i couldnt actually use the second free £100 bet.
My point is this, the offer was made to get a small stake losing punter to up stakes (even as high as £500!) with the thinking that they could easily go through the Epsom meeting without a single winner (plenty did!). When the opposite happened they effectively
closed my account and reneged on a free bet.
Just been on the site - How do you post as a non supporter of mass immigration..
Oops I have just read the following...
"This discussion is closed for comments."
An advertiser for that massive collective of left-wing t wats must have pulled the plug..
The Guardian is for free speech what Jeremy Corbyn is for the real World...
"This discussion is closed for comments."
An advertiser for that massive collective of left-wing t wats must have pulled the plug..
The Guardian is for free speech what Jeremy Corbyn is for the real World...
I once had a new and unconnected account with nobet£3.65 and lost £3000 in ten days...
Max return £25 was the result...
I know that I was the first one banned by the rancid inbred Stoke minimum wage payers but that did take the rise...
You are not allowed to win because the alleged "traders" are in fact half-wits that are clueless..
If you saw the alleged "Corals Trading Team" on the BBC then you would now why...
I am not sure why anyone would invest in such a firm when those "traders" would dance around the most expensive offices in the World and admit that they would gamble on anything..
Max return £25 was the result...
I know that I was the first one banned by the rancid inbred Stoke minimum wage payers but that did take the rise...
You are not allowed to win because the alleged "traders" are in fact half-wits that are clueless..
If you saw the alleged "Corals Trading Team" on the BBC then you would now why...
I am not sure why anyone would invest in such a firm when those "traders" would dance around the most expensive offices in the World and admit that they would gamble on anything..
screaming from beneaththewaves 03 Aug 15 20:42 Joined: 30 Jan 05 | Topic/replies: 8,043 | Blogger: screaming from beneaththewaves's blog
If any bookmaker priced up every race with a guarantee of either a £50 stake or a £500 takeout, then you'd be a mug for betting with them. They would simply be another Bowmans/Luvbet/Pagebet et al.
Not sure if you should be allowed back into sheltered accommodation tonite fella...
Surely an "alleged" Bookmaker should have to lay anything advertised on the site to a certain amount of money...
If a takeout of a Monkey is beyond them they should not be allowed to trade..
I would suggest a minimum payout of say £5k per advertised price as they all have systems in place that would only get one punter get a bet on before the price was changed...
If any bookmaker priced up every race with a guarantee of either a £50 stake or a £500 takeout, then you'd be a mug for betting with them. They would simply be another Bowmans/Luvbet/Pagebet et al.
Not sure if you should be allowed back into sheltered accommodation tonite fella...
Surely an "alleged" Bookmaker should have to lay anything advertised on the site to a certain amount of money...
If a takeout of a Monkey is beyond them they should not be allowed to trade..
I would suggest a minimum payout of say £5k per advertised price as they all have systems in place that would only get one punter get a bet on before the price was changed...
I would suggest a minimum payout of say £5k per advertised price as they all have systems in place that would only get one punter get a bet on before the price was changed...
How would that work in practice? In the ring, we'd form an orderly queue and you'd get the price before I (next in line behind you) would see the price change.
But online, or in one of 1,000 shops? We both enter our bets and press the button at the same time, mine reaches the bookie's server a nanosecond before yours, so my bet is laid and the price cut. And that means you would see that you entered the bet at the advertised price and been refused, so you'd think they'd broken the rules because you can't see my bet.
How would that work in practice? In the ring, we'd form an orderly queue and you'd get the price before I (next in line behind you) would see the price change.
But online, or in one of 1,000 shops? We both enter our bets and press the button at the same time, mine reaches the bookie's server a nanosecond before yours, so my bet is laid and the price cut. And that means you would see that you entered the bet at the advertised price and been refused, so you'd think they'd broken the rules because you can't see my bet.
Surely a Betting Firm with traders could achieve that fella..
Trouble is they have clueless Clowns such as Corals on that BBC TV Programme....
Been there done the trading and laughed at Management...
Trouble is they have clueless Clowns such as Corals on that BBC TV Programme....
Been there done the trading and laughed at Management...
"How would that work in practice? In the ring, we'd form an orderly queue"
Online the same, you have a button, press it, you'd have to wait 10 seconds and if the odds have changed in those 10 seconds you'd be required to confirm/deny the change of odds and thats it. The bookmakers, the real ones, won't have a problem as they'll play the game and will make profit from the overround. Otherwise what they're doing is criminal activity by selecting vulnerable targets which they can rob. How is Pinnacle doing without closing any account? Because they play the odds not the players.
Online the same, you have a button, press it, you'd have to wait 10 seconds and if the odds have changed in those 10 seconds you'd be required to confirm/deny the change of odds and thats it. The bookmakers, the real ones, won't have a problem as they'll play the game and will make profit from the overround. Otherwise what they're doing is criminal activity by selecting vulnerable targets which they can rob. How is Pinnacle doing without closing any account? Because they play the odds not the players.
"herge's adventures of tintin"...
Feck off fella a ten second pause would mean that the cleaner from Pinnacle could drop the hoover pick up her knickers and change the price...
WHERE DO THEY GET THEM FROM...
Feck off fella a ten second pause would mean that the cleaner from Pinnacle could drop the hoover pick up her knickers and change the price...
WHERE DO THEY GET THEM FROM...
lol.. pinnacle has even a simpler system in place.. they can do anything if they really want to or if the law forces them..
@homefortea if someone will force them to they will do it.. if they really want to they can do it.. pinnacle has even a simpler system in place, no waiting, but the odds change faster depending on the money that comes in.
How long has Pinnacle been about? I've only just heard from them. American outfit by the looks of their website (times for football at weekend seemed to be West Coast times).
How does their model work if they promise to offer tightest overrounds and highest limits?
I think one of the issues here is the lobbying power of the big bookies is huge and there's no comparable organisation for ordinary punters. I do think if the issue is brought to light in the public sphere then you'd see a shift - we do tend to have a fairly good grip of "fairness" in this country and the legislative climate is influenced by that to a degree. But then again how many members of the general public are going to give a Jim Ross about successful punters?
How does their model work if they promise to offer tightest overrounds and highest limits?
I think one of the issues here is the lobbying power of the big bookies is huge and there's no comparable organisation for ordinary punters. I do think if the issue is brought to light in the public sphere then you'd see a shift - we do tend to have a fairly good grip of "fairness" in this country and the legislative climate is influenced by that to a degree. But then again how many members of the general public are going to give a Jim Ross about successful punters?
Pinnacle ? 10-15 years maybe ? never heard of any closed/restricted accounts.. and lets not mention their API is second to none, even betfair's.
Err, don't think they take horse racing bets do they?
if in UK you cant bet at pinnacle yourself there are ways round it via agents but would you trust your money with them the agents
other than that pinnacle were the best bookie you could use in the uk the next best now is matchbook
other than that pinnacle were the best bookie you could use in the uk the next best now is matchbook
"don't think they take horse racing bets do they?"
I forgot which one, but an asian bookie said its going to accept horse racing bets.. don't know if its still on with that new law that forced Pinnacle out of GB.
I forgot which one, but an asian bookie said its going to accept horse racing bets.. don't know if its still on with that new law that forced Pinnacle out of GB.
New South Wales system is needed here. But in Britain we seem to just accept that bookies can do what they like. The execs running the firms are just after their next bonus and the footsoldiers working for bookmakers are clueless. In the UK betting is supposed to be a bit of fun.
Punters who win here are generally so scared of revealing who they are (as they will be even less likely to get on) that we do nothing.
In Australia punters got organised and caused real change. NSW racing backed punters and the the NSW government followed. Unfortunately it is only for Australian based customers. Bet3.65 refused bets from me for NSW as I do not live in Australia.
Real change will only happen here if people campaign for it to happen. If we got together and formed something like this changing will happen.
http://fairwageringaustralia.com/
Punters who win here are generally so scared of revealing who they are (as they will be even less likely to get on) that we do nothing.
In Australia punters got organised and caused real change. NSW racing backed punters and the the NSW government followed. Unfortunately it is only for Australian based customers. Bet3.65 refused bets from me for NSW as I do not live in Australia.
Real change will only happen here if people campaign for it to happen. If we got together and formed something like this changing will happen.
http://fairwageringaustralia.com/
I can't help but think that being forced to accept bets would mean you would only get 5-10 races priced up a day and bigger overrounds on the priced up races. That's not going to put off the folk who sit in the shops all day because they would bet on anything, virutal, dogs or machines. Coral guarantee to lay any horse up to £5k on the Channel 4 prices but I can imagine that they are fairly conservatively priced as a result. Has anyone had any trouble getting on? I assume its win only aswell?
Mate of mine has no clue about form, just throws a few even money/odds-on shots in a multiple most days, to see if he can click a few quid. He won a few hundred over the past month and he went on to Paddy Powderpuffs online to put his multiple bet on today. No multiples allowed......
What chance have you got???
What chance have you got???
I think competition these days would curtail them doing that to a degree
if ladcrooks etc stopped offering prices until first show would no one fill the void?
"But there is still a number of large foreign corporates who believe their bookmaker’s license is an entitlement, and they shouldn’t be saddled with the competitive forces that every other business in Australia faces. A bookmakers license is the privilege of framing a market with the percentage in your favour, and going about laying every runner to make your margin. This seems to have been forgotten"
thanks for the link @frog2
thanks for the link @frog2
Looking at the odds for tomorrows racing at Randwick (where min bets rule applies) and Flemington (where it does not) there are no differences in the overrounds being offered at this stage.
The minimum bet rule comes in at 9am on day of the race (2pm for night racing). To lose a min of around £1000 for city meetings and £500 for small meetings to all punters at advertised prices. Some tried to offer winners worse prices but that was soon exposed and stamped out.
What changes would a rule like this make in the UK?
1. Probably no more fantasy prices for maiden races so less races priced up.
2. The end of the fantasy best odds guarenteed offer for serial losers.
3. Slightly higher overrounds for the races priced up.
At the moment bookmakers have to make crazy offers and close accounts to compete. That is the business model. Any bookmaker not closing accounts cannot compete with making offers. This means all the losers go to bookmakers who close people down. A bookmaker will struggle with no mug account.
If a rule like the one in New South Wales came in and it was followed with an outright ban on discrimination of offers just to losers all bookmakers would compete on level playing field.
The positive thing for the industry is no one would be closed down. When they say 'only' 2% are restricted they are talking about tens of thousands of punters being restricted. These are not all going to be long term winners from racing. Most will lose. Racing is losing levy as a result of thousands of punters being locked out of betting on the sport.
The minimum bet rule comes in at 9am on day of the race (2pm for night racing). To lose a min of around £1000 for city meetings and £500 for small meetings to all punters at advertised prices. Some tried to offer winners worse prices but that was soon exposed and stamped out.
What changes would a rule like this make in the UK?
1. Probably no more fantasy prices for maiden races so less races priced up.
2. The end of the fantasy best odds guarenteed offer for serial losers.
3. Slightly higher overrounds for the races priced up.
At the moment bookmakers have to make crazy offers and close accounts to compete. That is the business model. Any bookmaker not closing accounts cannot compete with making offers. This means all the losers go to bookmakers who close people down. A bookmaker will struggle with no mug account.
If a rule like the one in New South Wales came in and it was followed with an outright ban on discrimination of offers just to losers all bookmakers would compete on level playing field.
The positive thing for the industry is no one would be closed down. When they say 'only' 2% are restricted they are talking about tens of thousands of punters being restricted. These are not all going to be long term winners from racing. Most will lose. Racing is losing levy as a result of thousands of punters being locked out of betting on the sport.
Perfectly put, Frog2.
However, when I expressed the same points via email to RUK on the Wednesday night 'Betting Lab' last year, Lydia Hislop & Steve Mellish on reading out my points called me naive, despite having spent 27 years as a pro gambler. That shows you how the 'gravy train' merchants in the media will not let this issue become open to public debate.
However, when I expressed the same points via email to RUK on the Wednesday night 'Betting Lab' last year, Lydia Hislop & Steve Mellish on reading out my points called me naive, despite having spent 27 years as a pro gambler. That shows you how the 'gravy train' merchants in the media will not let this issue become open to public debate.
Did Hislop and Mellish discuss it in the context of the NSW rules?
Its naive to think one bookmaker would do it alone. It would only work if it was industry wide. The corporate bookmakers will still be making a profit in NSW probably with a bigger turnover and lower margin.
The UK corporate bookmakers think they can do what they like and get away with it. Part of the reason is because we, as punters and the media, seem to just accept it.
In Australia people stood up to them and got a change in policy. I think the tide is changing here. The government has brought in the point of consumption tax after they renegged on the deal to be based in the UK after the turnover duty ended. The government is also taxing FOBTs and allowing councils more choice on licencing. This in part is due to the excellent campaigning against FOBTs here.
We just need an organised campaign to bring in fair gambling here.
Its naive to think one bookmaker would do it alone. It would only work if it was industry wide. The corporate bookmakers will still be making a profit in NSW probably with a bigger turnover and lower margin.
The UK corporate bookmakers think they can do what they like and get away with it. Part of the reason is because we, as punters and the media, seem to just accept it.
In Australia people stood up to them and got a change in policy. I think the tide is changing here. The government has brought in the point of consumption tax after they renegged on the deal to be based in the UK after the turnover duty ended. The government is also taxing FOBTs and allowing councils more choice on licencing. This in part is due to the excellent campaigning against FOBTs here.
We just need an organised campaign to bring in fair gambling here.
I never thought I would say this but I don't think High Street bookmakers bring much to the table any more. A Tote monopoly with reduced deductions with profits going to racing looks a better alternative.
The High Street chains "interest" in racing is merely a necessary evil.
They have to keep the racing show on the road to prevent the notion that their shops are no more than mini casinos gaining further traction.
They do this by putting money into sponsorship claiming that these are vast sums (which they are to racing, because "racing" has proved particularly inept at generating income from them, but are but a drop in the ocean compared to the money generated by keeping the shops open and permitting the cash cow that is the FOBT.
Trading Dept's have been dumbed down (Betfair odds checkers would be a more apt description) thus they simply do not have the confidence to lay anyone who is not a proven serial loser. Of course in adopting this policy they have excluded people who would lose long term but in the context of the FOBT income this is of no consequence.
Truly they are F****d when the FOBTS are banned or restricted..
All the energy goes into protecting this myth that they are racing's friend, lay huge bets and represent a fair opponent with whom one can have a fair bet.-.The BHA of course fall hook line and sinker for it.
The most scorn of course should be reserved for the media gravy trainers who utter not one word of criticism - supine and shameless.
They have to keep the racing show on the road to prevent the notion that their shops are no more than mini casinos gaining further traction.
They do this by putting money into sponsorship claiming that these are vast sums (which they are to racing, because "racing" has proved particularly inept at generating income from them, but are but a drop in the ocean compared to the money generated by keeping the shops open and permitting the cash cow that is the FOBT.
Trading Dept's have been dumbed down (Betfair odds checkers would be a more apt description) thus they simply do not have the confidence to lay anyone who is not a proven serial loser. Of course in adopting this policy they have excluded people who would lose long term but in the context of the FOBT income this is of no consequence.
Truly they are F****d when the FOBTS are banned or restricted..
All the energy goes into protecting this myth that they are racing's friend, lay huge bets and represent a fair opponent with whom one can have a fair bet.-.The BHA of course fall hook line and sinker for it.
The most scorn of course should be reserved for the media gravy trainers who utter not one word of criticism - supine and shameless.
All it will take is a gambling politician to be restricted and we could have the New South Wales betting programme in in no time.
Surely a huge % of punters can't get more than £20 online on at this rate, if even near that....
Surely a huge % of punters can't get more than £20 online on at this rate, if even near that....
Apart from Pinnacle, mentioned earlier, is there any bookies that will stand their ground & accommodate winning punters? (Within reason, say stakes up to £100.)
no is the simple answer.if you show any modicum of intelligence youll be restricted sharpish .only way is cash in shops where your not known.
and as far as i know pinnicle dont do racing.they are a very fair sports betting company.though the amount of id you need to get started with them is unreal.
So how do shrewd operators like Eddie The Shoe, Mellish, Nevison & other so called pros/experts that are supposed winners conduct their betting? Is it all done on here?
Just to be clear we are not talking about people that want to have a massive plunge to win 5 figure sums getting their bets taken without question.
It is just a wish for the bloke who wants £50 on 10/1 shot in the main race of the day not to be locked out betting on racing because some of the horses he backed in the past had a shorter sp. I do not see why the RUK crew think it is naive to expect that.
Are Coral still honouring their offer in the shops to lay all Channel 4 races to lose £5k to any punter?
It is just a wish for the bloke who wants £50 on 10/1 shot in the main race of the day not to be locked out betting on racing because some of the horses he backed in the past had a shorter sp. I do not see why the RUK crew think it is naive to expect that.
Are Coral still honouring their offer in the shops to lay all Channel 4 races to lose £5k to any punter?
There is not a single alleged "Bookmaker" that will keep a winning account open to the normal punter who does not work in the media or the "Racing Industry"..
Indeed there is not a single alleged "Bookmaker" that will keep open a losing account if you do not lose at the "required rate"...
Sad but true.
Indeed there is not a single alleged "Bookmaker" that will keep open a losing account if you do not lose at the "required rate"...
Sad but true.
the year kevin blake(irish journalist) wrote his v good book(it can be done) about making it pay over a year.he got on no problem with ladbrok wasnt knocked back once..
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539