Punters Forum

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?

IDKW is 100% spot on, this punters forum is a complete and utter sham. A list of bookies apologists as long as your arm, that's what it is. Its cringeworthy to watch all the lick arrses pandering to this stevetilley character.
I know exactly what tilley is all about, when he mentions punters bending the rules, that was enough.

yeh comes across as the punters saviour yet all the bookmakers points and excuses are sticking out of his back pocket doesnt he realise the reason punters are bending rules as he calls it is because its the only way they can get on

Some of you people should learn some manners. It's been commented on that the people on this punters forum get their expenses paid for attending. Some of you have not only hung, drawn and quartered them before they have even given a view on the issue but have done so using very insulting terminology.

You don't like what these people are seeking to do for free on your behalf?

Why don't you start up your own punters forum? Ah yes that's right. You're either too self centred wailing like babies because the bookie took your dummy off you or you can't be bothered to put the effort in.

I for one will reserve judgement until all the facts are in. You people can march around sticking your pitchforks in each others backsides for all the good that will do you.

An open hand and kind word will get you a lot further than scowls and abuse.

stevetilley

5. BHA exchange? An interesting idea.

You have come across as playing with a pretty straight bat so I'm assuming this wasn't said sarcastically. It's a suggestion which has oft been mooted on this forum. If, as a regular punter yourself and having mixed with the members of the punters forum you genuinely haven't had this suggested to you it's very puzzling. Given I think the BHA are the driving force behind BHF it is even more surprising.

I'd hardly say this is a revolutionary concept given the difficulties racing faces now and going forward. Not only do we know that an exchange can thrive technologically as has been proven but one run for the benefit of racing would have massive strategic advantages over any other and could make a lot of money for racing.

The  bookmaker argument of multiple accounts these days is extremely flawed in the era of "Know Your Customer" (KYC).   How can a customer be allowed multiple accounts if these checks are being carried out properly.

Yes, in theory you can open an account in another persons name, but given the necessary ID that needs to be provided, this is probably very rare and only probably possible via a spouse. Certainly you cannot likely create 10 such accounts as in your example.

The point still remains that punters shouldn't have to have many accounts to get a reasonable bet on horse racing if bookmakers wanted to accept bets on the sport,but we know they don't.How do trainers,owners,sportsmen/women,tv personalities,racing journalists,creators of Horse Racing websites that have promoted every bookmaker promotion and betting and arbing strategies going,bookmaker affiliated twitter tippers et al get on no problem.There is no fairness whatsoever and it should be asked why the above mentioned can bet freely,when the likes of me have to scrape round day in day out or wait to get the scraps on here come race time.

i know people that have had 20+ accounts

i myself only ones in my name but i did help my girlfriend open one on here for her benefit not mine now closed

Eeternaloptimist, get a life will you please. I couldnt give two fukks about this punters forum because i know what it is, a big heap of shiite.
Bookies nowadays are vermin, they wouldnt pisss on punters, certainly not ones who could give them a run for their money.
How anyone can take this tilley character seriously , is beyond belief. When he starts telling us punters are being unfair then it really is time to take stock.

stevetilley has no obligation to come on here and take this grief, especially as it`s his real name. At least give the chap a chance to succeed or fail and, until YOU ungrateful bast@rds can do better, PHUCK OFF!!!

Seems like a nice guy that mincer ignore him you talk more sense than most on here let's give them a chance I agree

And I`m an indie bookie!

these were my bets today in shop all bog all at wolves prices taken at the time all £25

4.15 cocoa beach 7-4 1st 9-4
4.45 kiwayu 9-2 unp 9-2
5.15 madame barker 4-1 1st 9-2
5.45 dalawah 13-2 unp 7-1
6.15 stocking 3-1 unp 3-1
6.45 foylesideview 4-1 unp 3rd 13-2

so i have 2 winners their sp have beat the bog price
i have 3 unplaced.2 prices same as sp.1 sp better than bog
1 placed sp better than bog

so you could say a bookmaker wouldnt restrict me at prices as i havent beaten sp

but what they will do is they will take bog away as 4 prices at sp have beaten prices taken and 2 level

in shop you may get on ok but online forget it

Paul Haigh - Total Respect 08 Jan 16 12:06 Joined: 08 Aug 07 | Topic/replies: 440 | Blogger: Paul Haigh - Total Respect's blog

Is there a bigger penus on here ...

(spelt like that because he is)

Yawn I have had probably had 2000 banned accounts.

10 new computers and even 50 new IP addresses..

And still cannot get a bet on...

The likes of that freak paul haigh campaigns for some bluffer that cannot read and write...And wants a few quid in compensation because some fraud will not pay him a couple of hundred quid...

Get with the big picture...

As far as im concerned he has had his chances, when he comes out with guff like that then its clear to see its just another  bookies lapdog.
Ive seen enough on this thread to make up my own mind.

Well go away, then, and take that painfully self-obsessed homefortea with you. Close the door on the way out, thanks.

Eeternaloptimist, get a life will you please. I couldnt give two fukks about this punters forum because i know what it is, a big heap of shiite.

So disinterested are you that you've told us all several times and very loudly mincer. Is that what you do in you every day life? Up early waiting for the 7-11 and as soon as they open the door, "I don't want any fuccking milk and you can shove your bread up your ar5e" and off back to the bedsit for a well earned rest so you don't exhaust your brain cell?

Wow. Just...wow

I have seen betfair forumites..

Not understand the issues at hand
Ignore the issues at hand
Overclaim their knowledge in a field
Claim to be a representitive of punters
Defend bookmakers for discriminating against punters who win
Attack punters who can win as a criminal minority who will do anything to make money
Aftertime about winnings
Tell others how easy it is to win
Tell others how easy it is to win while ALSO being fair to bookmakers

I have never seen a formuite..

Not understand the issues at hand, ignore the issues at hand, overclaim their knowledge in a field, claim to be a representitive of punters, defend bookmakers for discriminating against punters who win, attack punters who can win as a criminal minority who will do anything to make money, aftertime about winnings, tell others how easy it is to win AND tell others how easy it is to win while ALSO being fair to bookmakers.

Great work

And you got all that from reading this chaps posts?

I don't suppose you can substantiate your claims?

Sorry

* imo

Unless you'd just plucked your thoughts out of the air you'd need to have based them on evidence from what he said. Otherwise you'd just look foolish. Wouldn't you agree?

A poster advocates a BHA run exchange with a fair fixed deduction and no additional charge on anyone who dares turn a profit i think this could work for the benefit of all.Certainly an idea worthy of being on the agenda for a future HBF meeting.Do any other members have thoughts on this.?

I think it`s a bit ambitious at this stage. Plenty of start-up costs, with zero guarantees that it would be able to steal the necessary liquidity from here, (which is, after all, a one-stop-shop for most punters who also play non-racing markets). Others with deeper pockets have tried. And failed.

eeternaloptimist every one is entitled to theyr own opinion and from what ive read on here i have no confidence in this so called punters forum hope they prove me wrong but there are too many statements that are very concerning its one thing coming up with all these ideas and foundations that are talked about but what can they do to change it feck all

Numbers below are simplified to make a simple point:

Punter has £10 bet with bookie. Horse lost. Bookie makes £10. Return to racing @10% is £1.
Punter has £10 back bet on exchange. Horse lost. Exchange makes 50p.  Return to racing @10% is 5p.

Any suggestions?

Yes, that argument is simplistic. The example does not allow that the supposed £1 is reduced by the extent of winning bets, which on a single race, could make the outcome negative to racing.

Wake up Sir!

The Headmaster

what about the commission from the punter who had the winning bet at the odds (whatever they were) and then exchange's commission

Of course they are bruno but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask people to back up assertions if they appear to have misrepresented someone. Like you I also have reservations. The punters forum can only look into things and make recommendations. Even if these are first class and ground breaking they themselves won't have any power to enforce them. Still, from tiny acorns. Before what did we have? Now what do we have? What could we have in the future is the next question?

In some Australian states it is now the law that any bookmaker must lay a horse to win a min 500 dollars to all customers.My understanding is that this came as a result of UK Bookmakers buying Aussie sports books and quickly following the same MO as in this country which as we know for some means being offered tiny amounts.

The HBF have identified this as the main topic of frustration for punters and i would ask their members are they considering negotiating with the Bookmakers to achieve the same and if so do they a fig in mind.?

I would also be interested in reading other members thoughts on this.

A guaranteed liability to early prices from Bookmakers is what the Punters Forum should be pushing for.
What sum would be acceptable? 1K?........£500?.......anything less would be pointless.

Will Bookmakers in this country enter into a voluntary agreement? NO CHANCE

The ONLY way of achieving such a goal is to bring this issue into the mainstream press.

Either shame the filth into laying to a minimum liability, or better still, let's have it as condition of granting a license that a minimum liability is agreed.

The likes of eternaloptimist ( an apt moniker ) can object as much as he wants, but "negotiating" with Bookmakers is not the way forward, especially when we have the likes of stevetilly and his beliefs on our side.

Either shame the filth into...

What kind of language is that to using on a forum about an industry that it doing nothing outside of the law.

Filth doesnt even come close to describing bookies nowadays.

After reading Mr Tilley say punters who want to win are "doing wrong" and the bookmakers should offer him " the chance to rectify his ways" I think we know what to expect, not very much.

IDKW

I'd suggest you read my thoughts more carefully instead of waving your willy around. It's cold at this time of year. There's an old legal doctrine that a man who comes for equity should come with clean hands. You cant shame someone who feels no shame so good luck with that. Such things as we are hoping for in terms of guaranteed liabilities are in the hands of people who make the law and if you want to convince them to change the law then you need to be far smarter than just knocking peoples pints over.

First you negotiate. It doesn't matter if the bookmakers don't play ball because hardly anybody, including myself, believe they will do anything much. The point is you've laid the foundations for winning the propaganda and PR war which follows. It is that which might see the changes many of us crave but if you don't do the ground work there are few politicians who will listen. They may still not listen but if you're going to war at least make sure you've got a good plan for giving yourself the best chance of success.

So in my view the punters forum are doing the right thing if not quickly enough. Consultation with people and finding out what the punters grievances are is a better way of starting their preparation than simply making demands which may make them seem like loose cannons or not having a researched brief.

any success has to be based on a very simple argument ...for starters

say

bookmakers licence revoked if you do not lay a bet to lose £100 , as a minimum requirement


ie £20 on a 5/1 shot


failure to comply must surely prove they do not warrant a licence to operate especially with all the other free money spin offs they have concessions for.


this type of clause needs to be legislated for and is not for the ''pro-punter'' but for the massive majority who want a small bet , and the ability to choose where they want to bet .

The sooner the better .

Dr Crippen

There are things that the bookmakers are doing that are the equivalent of stuff that the bankers have been fined (heavily) for*. Momentum is needed to get the betting industry subjected to the same rules as apply to the rest of the financial services industry. It WILL happen I am sure; it has to. When is the issue.

*Barclays fined $150M fine by NY stock exchange for using "sophisticated computerised trading software that prevented foreign exchange orders being accepted  from its customers that would lose money for the bank". In principle I don't see any difference between that behaviour and what off course books are doing.....

I would not presume to tell bookmakers how to run their business but i often wonder how much these restrictions might cost them in the longer term.? Amongst todays winning and restricted punters will be many who will or would lose on balance given the opportunity to continue.It's a question which cannot be answered but perhaps one which should be asked by shareholders.?

It appears to myself that proper traders with an understanding of horse race betting are being replaced with computer programs to flag and dictate the restrictions.? Stevetilly made mention of the additional frustration of those penalized in this way not being given explanation perhaps this is why.?

Parispike makes a good point. In any other industry they simply could not get away with it.


Imagine if you went to Sainsburys every day and just chose the special offers etc. 

Then Sainsburys issued a limit to what you could spend in the store , because you are not a profitable customer.

It would be front page news , and the Directors would be fired .

Don't start mentioning a supermarket selling goods and using as an analogy as how a bookmaker should work, it goes straight over the Doctors head.

Supermarkets can and do put limits on customers despite the fact that they are guaranteed to always "win" with any customer.

Bookmakers also allow some to bet even though they are GUARANTEED to lose from those customers as I have mentioned more than once on this this thread which is what is really wrong.One rule for some and one rule for others not based in any way on financial profit and loss.

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.

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.

so if corals have 100 000 customers   49 000  maybe restricted

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.

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?

whens their next meeting im sure all will be sorted by then

Do like an optimist

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.

IBAS and HBF could co-operate now theres a thought

"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!!!!!

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.

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....

WALOFS is right, where is that clown eeternaloptimist now i wonder ?

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?

Parispike, do you have the contact email address for the Punters forum please?

They werent long going from being the punters saviours to unpaid volunteers with other commitments.

I contact them on twitter IDKW.

'HbfBritain

Found it

BettingForum@britishhorseracing.com

Hmmmm, i'm not a twitterer
Thanks anyway

Ahh, thank you

Maybe we should all start tipping websites on twitter and become bookmaker affiliates it seems a surefire way to get on what you want

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.

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.

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.

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.

Who the hell do you think should pay these prixx ?

Think we are f---cked as I always suspected

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?

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..

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.

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.

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.

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".

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,,,

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.

Incredible homefortea hasnt been banned I agree with Lexi. Spoils every thread with juvenile, drunken rants.

Couldn't agree more with the comments about homefortea seems a very nasty piece of work

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.

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...

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...

i'd do more punting in a week than they would do in two lifetimes.

Mug compulsive punter in giving it out and making no sense shocker.

paris

Of course I'd like the bookies to roll over but it isn't going to happen. It will take time, effort and cunning.

Eeternal,

When was the last time we heard account restrictions raised on CH4 racing or RUK, therein in lies one of the problems.

If I said to my boss at work I'd made no progress in 4 months I know what the answer would be.

I do't expect them to roll over eternal. My observations were directed at the progress, or rather lack thereof, of the bettor's forum

* don't

4 posts in 12 years sounds dreamy to me, homefortea.

Not tempted at all?

No the Headmaster and were you not inclined to only have your wicked way 4 times in 12 years...

Just a thought...

I have that many emails saved from the knockers that have introduced "cookies" into my many computers there will not be a "trader" left on this side of the "pond"...

Just a thought..

Matt Bisogo replied to one of my tweets sayiing "welcome your suggestions on how to move this forward. In short it's a very very very difficult area".

I suggested lobbying for legislation.

A deafening silence has ensued.

I'm increasingly cynical about the motives of many of those appointed to the bettors forum. Increasingly I'm inclined to believe that there is no real desire to change anything for the ordinary punter who is affected by the issue. Of course the fact that "racing" benefits by excluding anyone who has the temerity to reduce or even threaten to reduce the b/m profits is no more than a coincidence ........

Eeeternaloptimist, you are an  obnoxious know all who knows fukk all. You dont know anything about this topic, and you dont know anything about me either. I wouldnt wipe my harris with your opinion about anything.

it is a sad indictment that they wont lay a horse to lose a £100 to  great many punters.

Perhaps they could improve profits by  doing some homework and actually being a bookmaker.

Bookmakers could use the ensuing extra custom to their advantage surely , with a little bit of knowledge and inside info.

They have all become far too lazy and want it all on plate with no risk and no strings attached . It is about time someone spoke up for punters .

I doubt any of the firms know how to take bets and make a book though, easier option is to have mugs placing recreational bets and losing it all back over time.

As the HBF will all be reading this thread, maybe Tanya can explain what the longterm future is for punters on the morning line, and maybe ask the question to Simon Clare/Fred who tend to get plenty of airtime promoting their prices (that hardly ANYONE on here can take?

What's happened in essence is they sacked/de skilled the odds compilers at the time the overnight liquidity on here was massive relying on the tissue provided free here.

Aside from major events, as we know the pre race liquidity here has vanished and the odds compilers are so poor that their bosses are not prepared to stand by their judgement. In fact the term "odds compiler" is a misnomer; Betfair market monitor a more accurate job title.

At the same time the FOBTs now generate massive, in effect risk free, profit so the need for racing related turnover has been removed.

And the BHA supported the FOBTs......

Tanya should also ask simon clare why the staff can not tell the punters who have sleepers

jollie 18 Jan 16 13:46 Joined: 08 May 10 | Topic/replies: 25,384 | Blogger: jollie's blog
it is a sad indictment that they wont lay a horse to lose a £100 to  great many punters.

HOW MUCH....

It is a sad indictment of many posters on here that they seem to think that you can win £100.

Where do they get them from as "max stake £0.00" is the norm and then you are lucky as you can access your account..

Most of the liars simply close you down and make you  beg for your balance...

Of course industry "leaders" nobet£3.65 let you win a pony but link your accounts so that if you have five the cheats will let you win a fiver on each..

They encourage this because when that family have finally decoupled they can claim that they have x millions of active accounts and are "World Leaders" despite never having published accounts and never paying anyone more than £6.70 per hour....

I got talking to a friend of mine today that bets in fivers and tenners..

He HAD an account with that son of cheat Geoff Banks and had it recently closed as he he liked backing a bit of value..

As is par for the course he was accused of being an arber....

WHY BET ANYWHERE ELSE...

ronnie rails 18 Jan 16 19:54 Joined: 25 Oct 09 | Topic/replies: 848 | Blogger: ronnie rails's blog
Tanya should also ask simon clare why the staff can not tell the punters who have sleepers

Tanya is an enormous waste of time and thankfully she will not be "working" for ITV as the camera operators are paid to be closer to the talent and wide screen shots are not available...

Time for Tea...