Weird message from Steve Tilley if he is on the hbf panel don't fill me with confidence what exactly does he mean about bending the rules and the bookmakers only want to deal with trustworthy punters the example he gives of someone following price wise is laughable

Hi steve Tilley "Punter who would bend and break every rule to get extra profit" ? could you elaborate on what rules and how, better still obtain a quote from a named bookmaker RE what is acceptable business assuming the customer dares turn a profit or beat an advertised price.Perhaps the head of trading for the BFSB would care to answer for you.

RE The hurt you feel concerning posts about questions RE possible conflict of interest with some HBF members this i can well understand and sympathize with i have already posted on this thread advocating that all backers support and show interest in your efforts on our behalf but all of you having much experience of the subject must have been aware that any connection with a bookmaking firm would be questioned.Personally if they exist i view them as a positive which could help in any negations but complete transparency on this issue would be helpful.

I think much of the cynicism might come from the fact that its generally accepted that the RP is owned at arms length by the bookmakers and as the daily punters paper if they will not help us because of self interest then who will.?

Steve it is very early days for the HBF and you fight a big dragon so progress will be slow but the other thing i would respectfully suggest is that via this thread you keep us up dated RE any possible progress i think many would appreciate this because as you mentioned we do not receive it from the bookmakers either as individuals or collectively.

To everyone else I will keep you posted. Promise.

And as for bending the rules, what about bookies using voice recognition on phones, tracking IP addresses, swapping information with competitors and now being able to tell whether a punter was on oddschecker before they bet with them.
You have some cheek trying to tell us that punters are bending the rules.

Why would you converse with this chap Steve Tilley in such a confrontational way mincer? Us punters complain that we aren't kept in the loop and then somebody who is a part of the one thing which currently could possibly be a force of good for punters has the good grace to enter into dialogue on here and offers to keep us informed and you start behaving like a demented lunatic?

stevetilley

Thanks for the responses aiming to shed some light on some of the issues. I have a couple of issues and questions if you wouldn't mind?

The HBF are well aware of account restrictions and are trying to get things rolling.

Given your minutes have cited the fact that this was the overwhelming concern raised by punters can you clarify what your strategy is to "get the ball rolling" and when we can expect to see a clear statement of your collective views on the issue and recommendations?

The thing that seems to get people's goat most about this issue is the frustration of not knowing why your account is closed or restricted. Clearly some people do know why their accounts are restricted but a sizable number do not.............. But I can see no advantage to a bookmaker from banning or restricting punters and not giving them the opportunity to rectify their ways.

I've abridged the above not to mislead but to get to the point I wanted to raise. I would argue that the poor PR and lack of communication of the bookmakers is an exacerbating factor rubbing salt in an existing wound but the wound which is being alleged throughout this thread is that bookmakers are closing accounts for such spurious reasons as to arguably make a mockery of their licence. For example, if it is true that somebody opens an account and takes a price which then contracts and they are then restricted is there really anything which that punter can do to ameliorate the situation?

The issue doesn't then seem to be one of lack of communication or the punters ability to change his betting patterns. What goes to the heart of the allegation is bookmakers collective aversion to taking bets from all but a select favoured relative few which ties in to my own previous assertions about their current business model. Most of us who have the interests of the game at heart as well as enjoying a bet are concerned about the direction the sport has been moving in for many years and feel this trend is accelerating.

Another problem with punters controlling multiple accounts is that where offers exist perhaps to restricted stakes they hoover up these offers like there is no tomorrow. So is it fair for a punter controlling multiple accounts to get £100 on at early morning prices across his accounts where a single punter can only get £10 on?

Here we get all biblical and ask about splinters being removed from eyes whilst people feel logs sit in the eyes of some leading bookmakers. Yes it is wrong that someone can scrap and scrape their way through illicit methods to a £100 bet whilst someone else gets only a tenner on. But with respect some people may feel far more anger because of tens of thousands of people up and down the country who leave a trail of misery and debt behind them because of their addiction to, for example, bookmakers slot machines. Is there a moral comparison? Many would argue that there is. Bookmakers supposedly have a code of conduct and statements of principle which people allege are routinely flouted causing people to lose thousands.

You said it yourself. The majority of punters are basically straight and just wish to avail themselves of prices as advertised and are happy to accept the slings and arrows which comes from a game where they know that in the long run all but a very small percentage will pay for the enjoyment they get out of the game. At the moment a lot of genuine people feel a situation has developed somewhat akin to Marks And Spencers closing their doors and allowing in only vetted customers because someone stole a cheese sandwich last week.

I would urge you and your panel to use every effort to seek to get the bookmaking industry to give people a fair shake. By all means ask them to be more engaging with their customers and how they bet but also they should accept as a point of principle that racing's and their finances can only rise if they generate a larger customer base. It may be in the longer term but in order to swell the bookmakers take people have to believe they have a chance. 

As a point of principle surely it is feasible to get bookmakers to agree to lay an advertised price to anyone they haven't previously excluded to a reasonable amount and to agree to end the unnecessary restrictions which people are alleging are taking place?

If bookmakers are unable to engage in a fair and open way I fully appreciate there may be little your forum can do on the matter. Prior to your mass resignation on a point of principle I would hope you would unanimously encourage the BHA to open its own betting exchange so that punters who do have racings interests at heart can more directly contribute to safeguard the sports future. Alternatively explore the issue of a form of paramutuel system similar to that which currently exists in France.

Who knows whether at that point you may find a more amenable partner in the existing betting industry?

Please don't wait until the patient is on life support.

Thanks Steve for keeping us up to date, we do think you guys are doing your best for us who else gives a monkeys.

Cheers for your replies Stevetilley.Your 4] I am assuming you refer to Corals and my understanding is 5k take out for selected TV races and 2k for class 4 or above other races but only in their shops to cash.I have not as yet attempted to use this but was wondering if any other members have and what their experience has been.? If Corals are honoring this to ALL customers then they deserve praise and positive publicity but my own experience with them on line does make me wonder if all cash customers will be served in this way to all of the amount or even a smaller part of.

Steve can you consider the case of in-running punters at some stage? At home in-running players are at the mercy of the people supplying the pictures as to whether they have a fast enough feed. In my opinion SIS, ATR and RUK should be strongly encouraged to supply fast enough pictures for everyone who wants them. Some racecourses frown on people betting at the track but the alternative is slow pictures. We need every betting penny we can staying in the game. Thank you.

I'm surprised Hong Kong hasn't moved into the authority-owned betting exchange. Those clued up punters would love in-running.

Spot on TheFear.

And, of course, once in running became a proper revenue stream for the Sports that were being staged, you may be tempted to imagine we'd suddenly see them taking much more interest in leveling the playing field, servicing all punters with 'live' pics and boosting turnover....rather than trousering a few grubby pounds by flogging a box to some courtsiders.

I personally think there is not enough meetings and not enough time to get anywhere in the near future, by the time you go through any progress of the last meeting it must be game over, personally think they would be better having them fortnightly/monthly and pay (to a degree) the people on there (although the ones who are getting paid by their own betting firms/sponsors should have it as part of their working hours).

I quote MD above and feel this is fair comment and most valid.I recently received a reply from an HBF member who made mention of the large amount of there own time which is being used to respond to e mails from punters.I suspect that many of us having felt frustration for some time now seek fast action which while unrealistic is understandable and might be helped via HBF members being paid for the additional work they are attempting on our behalf.?

Yes it would be nice to bet on the International races but even the run of the mill stuff is quality at Sha Tin. I suppose they'd have to have a higher commission rate - otherwise why give up their Tote retention for 5% or less on an exchange - but it would still be worth it. Plus imagine having all those crazy HK punters betting on our racing!

Thank you.

SLACK?

attempted to place a £ 30 win @ 2/1 with joke coal at 8.30 am trading 3.15 on here was offered £ 10 at sp
3 hours later said horse still 2/1 & 3.2 on here
sums it all up imo

Bending the rules.... accounts under false names, opening accounts as new customers having already had an accounts etc.The problem with some punters bending the rules it gives the bookmakers every excuse to restrict or close accounts as they try to "catch" rule bending punters.

The principal reason many people are having to open new accounts, under family members names etc, is precisely because their accounts have been restricted in the first place.

I think I've made my support for HBF fairly clear on a few threads about the subject.

I've had direct contact with Steve Tilley and have found him to be extremely helpful, and I have no doubt he has the best intentions of punters at heart.

I can understand people's frustrations regarding the current climate in the betting industry, and indeed I share that frustration, but the fact is that at this stage HBF offer the possibility, however remote it may turn out to be, that positive changes can be made.

To dismiss it out of hand, as a few have done, is rather disrespectful to those who are showing a willingness to tackle some of the issues faced by punters today, in my opinion.

SLACK is a collaborative software package.

Greenhill : I have now ended up doing most of my betting as spread betting and some exchange stuff mainly for the liquidity and restriction reasons you have all alluded to. As back ground there are only a few spread betting firms and I have run profitably for the last 8 years. This means if I get accounts closed I'm stuffed. Luckily for me spread betting firms still have market makers to set up their spread quotes. By being sensible and helpful on occasion rather than trying to tear them apart I have so far survived. This is where I get my ideas of a relationship between firm and client becuase that's worked for me. Because I've talked with the spread betting firms I know that some markets are weak, distances at Lingfield today? whereas some are strong Cheltenham in March. I know I can't lump on Lingfield today but if I'm sensible I can play more in March. It is the difference between farming and hunting, I farm my firms adapting to reduced stakes in some events even rejection because I know I can make a profit in the long term. Hunting would be only hitting when the mark up's hugely in my favour for big amounts This would get me shut down. I do appreciate the big differences between spread betting and current bookmaker practices but this is what underlies my way of thinking. I do "get" where you are coming from.

ffs.............can you understand this stevetilley

THE VAST MAJORITY ON HERE DO NOT HAVE ANY ACTIVE ACCOUNTS!!

Therefore, the luxury of picking and choosing how you bet on certain markets is not an option.

Is there any chance that I, or maybe another forumite, could be invited down to your next " punters forum meeting" , and tell it LIKE IT IS?