There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 217 comments are related to the topic:
Punters Forum
Punters Forum
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 217
|
By:
I have only ever known supermarkets to put any type of limit on customers on 'offers' - which is fair enough. If the books want to offer an enhanced price/offer on a certain selection that is up to them, I have no problem with limits on that at all.
|
|
By:
Regardless of conflicting views regarding the worth of the HBF i feel its important that we try and keep this thread active as is often the case with this topic if people lose interest and stop posting then it will just fade away which would suit the Bookmakers concerned.
One of the stated HBF objectives is to obtain the numbers and extent of restrictions (PN HBF we are talking normal horse race betting) i suspect this will prove difficult but there would be nothing wrong with them publishing the names of the Firms who did cooperate in this respect because this would also tell us who was not.? I have seen the likes of Corals counter by saying "the majority of our customers are not restricted" but this tells us nothing.Specific figs would make for a more informative read. |
|
By:
so if corals have 100 000 customers 49 000 maybe restricted
|
|
By:
As I said before, it needs to be stated how many HORSE RACING punters are restricted with no inclusion of their casino customers who never have a bet. Whatever happens imo, IF they ever published any type of answer I am guessing it just wouldn't be a complete honest answer. Call me a cynic but it would put them in a very bad light and they won't be having that with no spin on it.
|
|
By:
The forum have published their latest output. In response to my query about seemingly lack of any progress in relation to account closures/restrictions (surely the most important issue affecting punters?) the response is (and I quote verbatim)
"No progress to report. Difficult for unpaid volunteers with other commitments to set pace, but is very much still on agenda" Doesn't auger well does it? |
|
By:
whens their next meeting im sure all will be sorted by then
|
|
By:
Do like an optimist
|
|
By:
A representative of IBAS gave a short presentation and Q&A session. Clarification around methodologies and protocols was sought and given. It was felt that there are some areas in which IBAS and HBF could co-operate, such as in submissions to the UK Gambling Commission. There will be a new IBAS website in 2016 which should give better access to the public and visibility about rulings.
HBF intends surveying some of the British horseracing betting public it seeks to represent in the New Year, now that it has acquired a better idea of the issues and possible resolutions involved. HBF does not have the resources or authority to consider individual cases of concern raised with it by the public (non-triers, horses deemed not to have started etc) but will establish a register of these and pass them on to the relevant bodies on a regular and formal basis. The next HBF meeting will be at the BHA offices on the afternoon of Monday, 29 February 2016. |
|
By:
IBAS and HBF could co-operate now theres a thought
|
|
By:
"No progress to report. Difficult for unpaid volunteers with other commitments to set pace, but is very much still on agenda"
WALOFS. The BIGGEST issue affecting Punters and they basically don't want to know. Nothing to see here......let's move on........... I guess they all enjoyed their free lunches and put in their travel expense forms.....what a bunch of wasters!!!!! |
|
By:
As long as owners,trainers,racing journalists/presenters,sportsmen/women,celebrities,people who create Horse Racing websites that give advice on betting strategies(including arbing and making use of bookmaker promotions) and all Twitter tipsters with bookmaker affiliates get on the Horse Bettors Forum and the bookmaking industry are happy.Do owners and trainers not understand or not realise how bookmakers actively discouraging betting on Horse Racing affects the sport.Can you imagine Prescott plotting one up for a big handicap and getting restricted to buttons everywhere,then having to wait til raceday to bet only to find that a series of tipsters have put his horse up and it's a quarter of the price it was.That's what we face day in day out and are treated unfairly compared to those I've mentioned despite not having access to the same privileged info as Horse trainers and owners,I doubt this will ever end.
|
|
By:
IDKW 15 Jan 16 12:56 Joined: 19 Nov 09 | Topic/replies: 1,766 | Blogger: IDKW's blog "No progress to report. Difficult for unpaid volunteers with other commitments to set pace, but is very much still on agenda" WALOFS. The BIGGEST issue affecting Punters and they basically don't want to know. Nothing to see here......let's move on........... I guess they all enjoyed their free lunches and put in their travel expense forms.....what a bunch of wasters!!!!! I've replied to them suggesting that saying that the matter is the highest priority but that has been no progress is somewhat oxymoronic.... |
|
By:
WALOFS is right, where is that clown eeternaloptimist now i wonder ?
|
|
By:
Difficult for unpaid volunteers with other commitments to set pace,
WTF? Why the hell apply/take up a position on this forum, if they consider their "OTHER COMMITMENTS" far too important to bother with issues affecting the very punters they are there to represent? I'm sorry, but anyone who wants to "get behind" this bunch of time wasters is sadly deluded. Any comment eternaloptimist? |
|
By:
Parispike, do you have the contact email address for the Punters forum please?
|
|
By:
They werent long going from being the punters saviours to unpaid volunteers with other commitments.
|
|
By:
I contact them on twitter IDKW.
'HbfBritain |
|
By:
Found it
BettingForum@britishhorseracing.com |
|
By:
Hmmmm, i'm not a twitterer
 Thanks anyway |
|
By:
Ahh, thank you
 |
|
By:
Maybe we should all start tipping websites on twitter and become bookmaker affiliates it seems a surefire way to get on what you want
|
|
By:
I applied. Unsuccessfully obviously.
Why appoint people who can't give the forum the support and time it needs because of their other commitments? Unless of course those appointed are there precisely because they have those other commitments....... Now there's a thought. Call me a cynic if you like. |
|
By:
Difficult for unpaid volunteers with other commitments to set pace
Not a positive comment yet understandable.Perhaps the group members underestimated the amount of time needed over and above the monthly meetings.My understanding is that this is a BHA initiative but its not BHA staff who are dealing with responses to punters e mails and meetings with Bookmakers.? If the BHA is not viewing the whole thing as just a cosmetic exercise then perhaps they should consider proper payment above just expenses for the extra work done by the HBF members. I don't use or get twitter but i note there does not appear to be much happening on there site.More detail from them would be helpful and a thread such as this a good place to start interacting.Some good and relevant questions have been asked and it would not take the "volunteers" too much time to post some thoughts on these and any progress updates in between the monthly meetings. |
|
By:
Greenhill, why on earth would you want to give payment to these bookmaker cronies ( which many of them are ) to clearly disregard the major gripe that those they claim to represent are complaining about.
Save the expenses and lunch monies, and disband this useless bunch now. |
|
By:
Hi IDKW I also feel disappointment that so far with one exception the HBF members (who i suspect are all aware of this thread) have not answered some of the questions (or accusations) but as a punter i am fed up with the treatment i receive from many bookmakers and do not see any alternatives available to help.So yes i would advocate paying them for their time and efforts.I can well understand some members frustration RE current lack of progress but there was none prior to the HBF and if paying them for their time expedites matters then its money well spent.
If this proves otherwise then the problem just increases.The Bookmakers want us to argue amongst ourselves then people get fed up lose interest and they continue as they are. |
|
By:
Who the hell do you think should pay these prixx ?
|
|
By:
Think we are f---cked as I always suspected
|
|
By:
In summary
1. Bettor's forum announced August 2015 2. Composition of forum members causes some disquiet - many with links to off course bookmakers 3. Single most raised issue according to forum - account restrictions/closure 4. As at mid Jan 2016 forum advises "no progress to report" (their exact words) despite it being accepted that the matter is "priority". Is it any wonder there's a deal of cynicism around? |
|
By:
Not sure where you freaks are coming from but my ideas have become mainstream...
The punters forum are a bunch of complete nomarks that could not settle a bet.. |
|
By:
I stand by my earlier comments mincer. You people can't see that this could be a useful channel for getting information but if I was on this committee I wouldn't waste my own time responding to some of the no marks on here bawling, shouting and insulting. Nobody with any sense argues with idiots.
|
|
By:
All the evidence is there to prove the bettors forum is nothing but a sham, yet the legal eagle refuses to accept it.
eternaloptimist, your condescending manner is best left to your Courtroom. |
|
By:
Eeternaloptimist, the problem is that this bullshiite punters forum is littered with no marks but you cannot see that.
I wouldnt pisss up on this shower, i'd do more punting in a week than they would do in two lifetimes. the reason they are on this sham committee is taht they are a whole load of yes men and women. |
|
By:
Eternaloptimist
You're not concerned that a forum set up to represent punters interests has made "no progress" on the issue they themselves state has generated the most correspondence in the 4 months since it was instigated? Not limited progress; not talks are ongoing; not "we have made representations", just "no progress". |
|
By:
Sounds realistic to me. The punters forum needs to get to the bottom of how widespread the problem is. Then convince the BHA how serious it is. And then the bookmakers need to be persuaded to take action. Anyone expecting owt else is living in cloud cuckoo land,,,
|
|
By:
Hello all,
"Home for tea" - you really shouldn't be allowed to comment on here, your replies and comments, are so bullying and spiteful / nasty I believe strongly that you shouldn't have somewhere like this to voice your opinions unless you can do it sensibly and constructively. I refer to your great suggestion of There is a green hill and it should be faraway.. Feck off you complete t osser.... which was aimed at Greenhill. At least that member is always constructive No doubt you will probably reply to this comment with a **** *** also ? if so, please just don't bother. you will waste your own time typing it and others time having to read awful posts again. If you don't like / agree with other members comments say so, but don't lower yourself to the gutter with name calling, bullying, and derogatory comments about other members. |
|
By:
Incredible homefortea hasnt been banned I agree with Lexi. Spoils every thread with juvenile, drunken rants.
|
|
By:
Couldn't agree more with the comments about homefortea seems a very nasty piece of work
|
|
By:
1. Every account starts off with all the extras like best odds guaranteed, lucky 15 bonus etc and has a factoring of 100. So if a bookmaker has liability set to £2000 on that event you can get £2k on an evens shot.
2. At sign up flash cookies are put on the hardware to assess the client. Any website with affiliate marketing visited can link the visit to hardware. E.g. oddschecker, attheraces etc. Images can also be stores locally on your machine will one pixel a slightly different RGB value (e.g. 254 instead of 252. On a 500 by 500 pixel image (25000 pixels) you will not notice this. This can be linked to you next time you access a website even if you wipe all normal cookies and flash cookies. 3. After the first bet the results an assessment of the account origin using a service that links devices through interactions with a lots of different companies. Has any of the hardware being used been used in the past for 'fraud'? Digital finger printing give results in a score for the new account. 4. The account can then be restricted if required. For instance the account could be factored to 50. So the above bet could be reduced to a max of £1000 at evens. BOG can be removed. 5. As betting continues the factor for the account is continuously assessed. If you have the pattern of a loser the factoring will increase up to 150-500. At 500 you could get £10000 on the even money shot above. You could also get free bets and other incentives. If you are a dangerous account you will eventually go to a factor of 1 giving you a max of £20 on the even shot. All offers will be removed from the account. Every account is factored. Every single account if affected in some way by this. It is not just a few winning accounts. |
|
By:
Oops seems that yet again I have been proven correct and the alleged "bookmaker" apologists that admittedly seem to consist of ..
Lexi The Fear and nijinsky01 that seem to crawl out of the woodwork every time that a similar thread is on here are yet again wrong (however these are three new freaks that are paid to tell lies)... You creatures should get a proper job that pays above minimum wage instead of being paid casual internet trawlers.. You do realise that once the FBI gets on the case the people that tell the lies when the "bookmakers" take bets will be extradited and wearing yellow jump suits in prisons that are rammed full of enormous black inmates that will split you in half.. Just a thought...  |
|
By:
Lexi have you been in a coma for the last few years because if you are lucky you plant you may emerge in 2036...
Where do they get them from... |