Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
A reminder (having posted previously on here and elsewhere) that the Horseracing Bettors Forum will be present during racing at Doncaster this Wednesday, with a stall in the Main Exhibition Hall throughout proceedings. The purpose is to meet the public, and for the public to meet HBF members, so that there is an increased awareness of what HBF is/does and what actions the betting public that HBF seeks to represent would like it to take.
A reminder of HBF's website http://ukhbf.org/about/
Hoping to meet some of you at Doncaster.
A reminder of HBF's website http://ukhbf.org/about/
Hoping to meet some of you at Doncaster.
Show More
Anything new to report regarding account restrictions prufrock? Any of the books likely to be addressing the situation or changing the way they profile punters?
Hi Look forward to seeing you there. Perhaps people interested in the issues that we hope the forum is dealing with might like to meet after Racing for a drink and chat. If there is enough interest within this forum then perhaps Prufrock and myself, if he needs assistance, can set this up ?.
One of them has indicated that they will do. Most others refusing to engage. Shortened HBF meeting pre-racing on Wednesday will discuss minimum-bet obligation in the light of Australian developments, with a view to returning to it at the next proper meeting which will be in December.
As stated, HBF has no statutory powers. So what it is focused on doing is raising awareness of the issue, challenging the conspiracy of silence around the issue (progress in both these areas) and seeking to persuade/influence, such as with Gambling Commission, BHA and political figures. What it cannot do - sadly - is wave a magic wand and force commercial bodies to act as it wishes.
First, though, HBF needs to raise awareness of its own existence and gauge public sentiment, both of which it hopes to achieve through Wednesday's exercise.
As stated, HBF has no statutory powers. So what it is focused on doing is raising awareness of the issue, challenging the conspiracy of silence around the issue (progress in both these areas) and seeking to persuade/influence, such as with Gambling Commission, BHA and political figures. What it cannot do - sadly - is wave a magic wand and force commercial bodies to act as it wishes.
First, though, HBF needs to raise awareness of its own existence and gauge public sentiment, both of which it hopes to achieve through Wednesday's exercise.
That's great OliasOfSunhillow. Unfortunately, I may not be able to be at Doncaster for the very end of proceedings as Racing UK has indicated it could be up for a phone-in about HBF that evening. If that happens, I am likely to have to duck out to do that from home (it would be too good an opportunity to pass up). If that does not happen then I will try my best to be available after racing as well as during it. There will be seven other HBF members in attendance, so would it be possible to contact them/me early on to see what can be done? Cheers.
Who are the other members that will be in attendance please
All bar Jason Brautigam (in Rio) from following:
http://ukhbf.org/about/
I will be around for the majority of the day, but there will be some C4 filming and possibly the aforementioned phone-in to RUK to keep me otherwise occupied at times. Hope to see you there.
http://ukhbf.org/about/
I will be around for the majority of the day, but there will be some C4 filming and possibly the aforementioned phone-in to RUK to keep me otherwise occupied at times. Hope to see you there.
"Achieving" something - in terms of changing policy or legislation - is down to others. HBF is an advisory body, with no statutory powers. This point has been made so many times, but it just does not seem to sink in with some.
HBF can only persuade others to change, which it has sought to do tirelessly. To this end, it has heightened awareness of important issues, made numerous recommendations to bodies which do have the power to change things and lobbied influential individuals to do the same. It cannot force anyone to act in any way but it can call out those who fail to cut the mustard.
In the last year, the issue of account restrictions/closures has gone from being brushed under the carpet to being discussed openly, in part due to HBF's activities in this area. Accuracy in providing raceday data for punters has been improved and where it has fallen down it has been highlighted. The dubious practices and pronouncements made by the SPRC have been flushed into the open. The sham that is the non-runner situation has been addressed (and the BHA are now holding a review into the situation). There is plenty more besides.
At the same time, the BHA has consulted HBF regularly about matters that it recognises are important to punters - a function which is arguably the main reason for HBF's existence - and HBF has bust a gut in trying to ensure that the views it conveys reflect the views of the betting public.
This is after four meetings of a voluntary and unfunded body with no statutory powers. Yes, something has been achieved, I reckon.
HBF can only persuade others to change, which it has sought to do tirelessly. To this end, it has heightened awareness of important issues, made numerous recommendations to bodies which do have the power to change things and lobbied influential individuals to do the same. It cannot force anyone to act in any way but it can call out those who fail to cut the mustard.
In the last year, the issue of account restrictions/closures has gone from being brushed under the carpet to being discussed openly, in part due to HBF's activities in this area. Accuracy in providing raceday data for punters has been improved and where it has fallen down it has been highlighted. The dubious practices and pronouncements made by the SPRC have been flushed into the open. The sham that is the non-runner situation has been addressed (and the BHA are now holding a review into the situation). There is plenty more besides.
At the same time, the BHA has consulted HBF regularly about matters that it recognises are important to punters - a function which is arguably the main reason for HBF's existence - and HBF has bust a gut in trying to ensure that the views it conveys reflect the views of the betting public.
This is after four meetings of a voluntary and unfunded body with no statutory powers. Yes, something has been achieved, I reckon.
I'd like to offer a few words in support of prufrock, who I know has devoted a great deal of time and effort into HBF.
It's so easy in this world to moan about the way things are, and expect others to something positive to improve them.
Simon is one of a number of people who are trying their best to get punters a fairer deal, so rather than being constantly negative, why can't some people show some support for the work being done on behalf of others?
The issue of bet restrictions, as pointed out, is now being widely discussed, unlike 12 months ago, and in my opinion it is perfectly possible that something similar to what has happened in New South Wales and Victoria in Australia could happen here in the not too distant future.
The UK Gambling Commission and IBAS cannot ignore the issues we are raising much longer, and there are already signs that changes are on the way.
It's a long road we are on, but progress is definitely being made.
It's so easy in this world to moan about the way things are, and expect others to something positive to improve them.
Simon is one of a number of people who are trying their best to get punters a fairer deal, so rather than being constantly negative, why can't some people show some support for the work being done on behalf of others?
The issue of bet restrictions, as pointed out, is now being widely discussed, unlike 12 months ago, and in my opinion it is perfectly possible that something similar to what has happened in New South Wales and Victoria in Australia could happen here in the not too distant future.
The UK Gambling Commission and IBAS cannot ignore the issues we are raising much longer, and there are already signs that changes are on the way.
It's a long road we are on, but progress is definitely being made.
Well said Paul/Simon, you will find that many of the moaners have done nothing to try and change anything. The same sort of people probably didn't even fill in the survey or ask anyone to either. Easier for them to just say "what's the point", nothing will change.
Thanks above: appreciated.
"What has been achieved?" is not an unreasonable question. But answering it on each and every occasion, and countering repeated misunderstandings, is taking up a lot of time. That is one reason why Wednesday's event was organised - with the considerable assistance of Arena/Doncaster and the BHA - and I hope some who read this will come along and interact with HBF members on the day.
"What has been achieved?" is not an unreasonable question. But answering it on each and every occasion, and countering repeated misunderstandings, is taking up a lot of time. That is one reason why Wednesday's event was organised - with the considerable assistance of Arena/Doncaster and the BHA - and I hope some who read this will come along and interact with HBF members on the day.
Pleased to second the positive and supportive posts above. Progress will be slow and frustrating but arguing amongst ourselves and /or losing interest is exactly the responses what many Bookmakers anticipate and wish for.Prufrock is correct wider awareness is growing and anything which maintains or increases this is worth having.Lets not forget just how powerful some of these firms now are ,there PR and spin is first class and they buy back door influence not just via the racing media.
Re account closures it is our apathy which enables this to continue what we should be seeking is to make all punters take note of what might await them.
Re account closures it is our apathy which enables this to continue what we should be seeking is to make all punters take note of what might await them.
Visited the stand today and had good chat with Steve Tilley about the stats behind withdrawn horses. It seems the numbers back up the idea that the main culprit is 48 decs. When we have them for Sunday NH racing the graph spikes convincingly. On the subject of 8 down to 7 I am afraid he feels that the numbers do not back up the conspiracy theorists. I would like to check this myself before commenting further but if Steve says its so it generally is when it comes to stats.
Interesting chat with an Aussie guy (apologies for forgetting the name). He filled me in on the difference between getting the Aussie lay a minimum liability system to work over there and getting it to work here. The big difference is that the Racing authority over there effectively manage bookmakers licences in that bookmakers apply to them to operate a book on their sport. This means that the Aussie 'BHA' can say 'these are the new rules, like it or lump it'. Over here councils give out off course licences and provided they pay the levy (based on profit not turnover ....groan!!), they can go ahead and operate. The Aussie board would favour the tote so are quite happy to screw the bookies when they can or should I say need to.
Had a chat with Tanya. To be fair she did acknowledge that as the obvious candidate for being labelled 'bookie mole' she could have done more to make it clear that she was representing punters. She did not help matters however by replying to my suggestion that she could have at least Tweeted to her many followers that the forum was up and running, with a response that beggared belief. Her claim was that the account is owned and run by ATR ( I think it was ATR or one of the channels) and when I asked do they administer the tweets she said yes. I then said 'are you saying that you do not have tweeting access to an account with your name and photo' she backed down somewhat and admitted that she does. She is a very pleasant person and took my probing questions as I hoped she would but I came away with the view that she is a bookmaker and that means the question of conflict of interest remains.
Did not have much time to chat to Simon Rowlands other than to advise him to lose some weight :), but as a now Sheffield man and from my old neck of the woods I hope to buy him a pint up there some time in the near future. If you can get up to Donnie go along and ask some questions of your own, they are doing a good job but difficult job of representing you all.
Interesting chat with an Aussie guy (apologies for forgetting the name). He filled me in on the difference between getting the Aussie lay a minimum liability system to work over there and getting it to work here. The big difference is that the Racing authority over there effectively manage bookmakers licences in that bookmakers apply to them to operate a book on their sport. This means that the Aussie 'BHA' can say 'these are the new rules, like it or lump it'. Over here councils give out off course licences and provided they pay the levy (based on profit not turnover ....groan!!), they can go ahead and operate. The Aussie board would favour the tote so are quite happy to screw the bookies when they can or should I say need to.
Had a chat with Tanya. To be fair she did acknowledge that as the obvious candidate for being labelled 'bookie mole' she could have done more to make it clear that she was representing punters. She did not help matters however by replying to my suggestion that she could have at least Tweeted to her many followers that the forum was up and running, with a response that beggared belief. Her claim was that the account is owned and run by ATR ( I think it was ATR or one of the channels) and when I asked do they administer the tweets she said yes. I then said 'are you saying that you do not have tweeting access to an account with your name and photo' she backed down somewhat and admitted that she does. She is a very pleasant person and took my probing questions as I hoped she would but I came away with the view that she is a bookmaker and that means the question of conflict of interest remains.
Did not have much time to chat to Simon Rowlands other than to advise him to lose some weight :), but as a now Sheffield man and from my old neck of the woods I hope to buy him a pint up there some time in the near future. If you can get up to Donnie go along and ask some questions of your own, they are doing a good job but difficult job of representing you all.
Good post Olias.
Any chance of HBF having a similar event at a jumps track down South?
Any chance of HBF having a similar event at a jumps track down South?
One other suggestion Simon. When you re recruit for the forum, try and get a member on board who has
a) Marketing skills especially modern marketing skills
b) Is young and is in synch with the above
c) Obviously interested in racing but that would come after a and b
Its great that Simon has come on here but I am sure he has trouble fitting that in time wise and this only one small forum. One young techy savvie person who's primary responsibility is to grow the community of punters interested in punter representation would be invaluable. I visited a large on line organisation in Manchester a couple of weeks ago and they had a room full of about 6 people who's sole job was product awareness via the web. In other words Twitter, Facebook etc etc
a) Marketing skills especially modern marketing skills
b) Is young and is in synch with the above
c) Obviously interested in racing but that would come after a and b
Its great that Simon has come on here but I am sure he has trouble fitting that in time wise and this only one small forum. One young techy savvie person who's primary responsibility is to grow the community of punters interested in punter representation would be invaluable. I visited a large on line organisation in Manchester a couple of weeks ago and they had a room full of about 6 people who's sole job was product awareness via the web. In other words Twitter, Facebook etc etc
Regarding 8 to 7 runners; could it just not be that the averages take in handicaps as well as the 'filthy 8?' Are there seperate stats for the 2? Just a thought.
Thanks for one of those suggestions at least, OliasOfSunhillow ;-)
It is true that we do not have an obvious "marketing" type on our Forum (though we do have a trained lawyer and three with statistical nous, all of which is proving useful).
James Prosser is only just old enough to bet and shave (OK, 24 or something).
What you have identified is what seemed to escape a lot of people at the time of the creation of the Forum: namely, that it was better to have people with contacts and transferable skills than just to choose individuals randomly.
Having got established, I would hope those skills could be diversified and that more recognisably "ordinary punter" types will get involved (I approached a couple, one of whom pulled out at short notice). The Forum will be having a turnover of members in the years ahead: that is something which we confirmed as part of our constitution at the pre-race meeting.
I have a slightly lukewarm offer of doing something similar at Ascot, parispike, which I hope to pursue, but not immediately, for this was quite tough to arrange and ate into the time Forum members can devote to things.
Nothing would have happened without contacts, and without the good will of Arena (who I did some work for in the past), Doncaster Racecourse and the BHA. Coverage on Channel 4 (including when HBF was created) and on RUK would not necessarily have come automatically, either.
You should know where to find us now.
SDR
It is true that we do not have an obvious "marketing" type on our Forum (though we do have a trained lawyer and three with statistical nous, all of which is proving useful).
James Prosser is only just old enough to bet and shave (OK, 24 or something).
What you have identified is what seemed to escape a lot of people at the time of the creation of the Forum: namely, that it was better to have people with contacts and transferable skills than just to choose individuals randomly.
Having got established, I would hope those skills could be diversified and that more recognisably "ordinary punter" types will get involved (I approached a couple, one of whom pulled out at short notice). The Forum will be having a turnover of members in the years ahead: that is something which we confirmed as part of our constitution at the pre-race meeting.
I have a slightly lukewarm offer of doing something similar at Ascot, parispike, which I hope to pursue, but not immediately, for this was quite tough to arrange and ate into the time Forum members can devote to things.
Nothing would have happened without contacts, and without the good will of Arena (who I did some work for in the past), Doncaster Racecourse and the BHA. Coverage on Channel 4 (including when HBF was created) and on RUK would not necessarily have come automatically, either.
You should know where to find us now.
SDR
Hi prufrock your point concerning better to have those with contacts and transferable skills may have proved as much hindrance as help because some stood accused of not utilizing those opportunity's.? This may have been unfair or inaccurate but did create plenty of negativity. It has taken time but what I am now seeing when you post on here is a far more positive response on balance. It is good that in future you intend to include panel members who are without these contacts also some of these may have the time and inclination to increase awareness and interest via posting regular up dates on this forum and elsewhere imo this would prove a win - win for all concerned.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539