Bet 365 keep all money in void race market

But they all lost so it's not a void market. They are not Betfair.

surely if there's no winner there can't be a loser

Did they have a 'No finishers' price? Otherwise it's like the zero at the casino. You don't think Denise got rich by playing fair?

Sportsbook did the same. mopped up all the tricast money for themselves. they've no shame

Discussed this with bookies regarding accas. I wanted to state on the ticket 'stop at limit'. You have an e/w acca and 6 win , it puts you on the payout limit with 1 to run. The 7th selection will lose you the lot but win you nothing. But the bet stated an acca so they must ALL win. You place a bet to win in a market (such as w/o favs) and it doesn't, it's a loser , irrelevant of what happens to other runners in the race. They have all bases covered.

agree swifty. limit reached so that should be that. wonder how much that's saved them over the years?

upthecity, the acca thing's a bit tricky because stated off times may change so the running order may not be as stated on the ticket, delay at one meeting etc. But still doesn't feel right.

wonder how much that's saved them over the years?  nothing from me sadly ,never quite got that far!

surely the time of the weigh in would determine when a leg of the bet is completed.never happened to me neither. trebles are about as far as I go in multiples

Their argument would be they haven't time to check facts like that, if you put X selections in the acca all must win.

yeah they'd try to wiggle out of it somehow

Agree about limits why should you be able to place if you’ve hit their limits

I struggle to see the problem here tbh

You have bet without the first 2 home in a race so imo the only way the race can be void is if both of these horses you are betting without do not finish

You effectively had a bet in an 8 runner race because you were betting without the 2 favourites. There were no finishers in your race. There is absolutely no doubt that it has to be a void race with your stake refunded.

harry, are you allowed to fish on Sundays?

Kerry boy the bet still involves the horses you bet without, they are still in the race you are betting in so are part of the bet?

I’m not fishing swifty I think people are wrong to question this outcome unless their are no finishers to the race

harry,

You have bet without the first 2 home in a race so imo the only way the race can be void is if both of these horses you are betting without do not finish

explain this.

Well looks like I’m wrong these are bet 365 rules so OP is correct my apologies...

personally I would of thought all bets stand as the 2 horses who you are betting without are part of the bet and they have finished, anyway here are their rules so you should of got your money back

Betting Without
Dead-heat rules apply. Where we offer prices on an event without a nominated selection(s), for settlement purposes the finishing position of the ‘without’ selection(s) will be ignored.

In the event of a non-runner(s) a Rule 4 deduction will be applied based on the price (in the specified ‘without’ market) of the non-runner at the time of withdrawal. In the case of a non-runner(s) leaving only one quoted runner in a ‘without’ market, then our Walkover rules will apply and bets will be void.

Where there are no finishers in a race, excluding the ‘without’ selections then all bets will be void.

Any Each Way terms advertised are settled on the actual number of runners who take part in the race, excluding the ‘without’ selection(s).

If a race is voided, all bets must be refunded, irrespective of why the race was voided.  This is why bookies refund all stakes when a race is voided.  I imagine they wouldn't do this if the race was not voided despite there being no finishers, because that is the way they are.
However, the race in question was not voided, so the bookies wriggled out of refunding stakes.  In my opinion, if they treated punters fairly, they should refund the stakes in the without favs market.  But in the real world they won't.

I stand corrected now that Harry Callaghan has quoted Bet 365 rules

Glad we cleared that up

harry,

You have bet without the first 2 home in a race so imo the only way the race can be void is if both of these horses you are betting without do not finish

I've not a clue what this means, please enlighten me.

Swifty,

Discussed this with bookies regarding accas. I wanted to state on the ticket 'stop at limit'. You have an e/w acca and 6 win , it puts you on the payout limit with 1 to run. The 7th selection will lose you the lot but win you nothing. But the bet stated an acca so they must ALL win. You place a bet to win in a market (such as w/o favs) and it doesn't, it's a loser , irrelevant of what happens to other runners in the race. They have all bases covered.

I’ve not a clue what this means please enlighten me.

You first.

To be honest I think mine is pretty self explanatory.

Marksman explains it perfectly

harry, I was wondering what this meant..

You have bet without the first 2 home in a race so imo the only way the race can be void is if both of these horses you are betting without do not finish

It's total gobbledygook!

re. the actual rules , VOID  is the correct ruling unless they had a 'none to finish' price.

Which firm has ever offered a none to finish price? in a without market bet swifty nifty?

Can’t say I’ve ever seen this...

my problem was both horses who were in this particular bet, both finished the race.

harry , I was confused by your statement

you have bet without the first 2 home in a race,

obviously you've no idea who the first 2 home will be unless you had tomorrow's paper today.

And then...

so imo the only way the race can be void is if both of these horses you are betting without do not finish

Anyway I think you were getting your words in a twist.

The two horses stated as 'without' could finish first, last, wherever, they are ignored in a w/o market.

Why all the debate and confusion?

It is simple,the betting regarding the "Without" as the OP has posted has been settled correctly.There was no void market as he suggests,the 1st and 2nd fav finished 1st and 2nd,any bet on any other runner is a loser.Just because they did not finish the race has no bearing on this actual bet in the same way as if the OPs or anyone elses selection had not finished either 1st,2nd or 3rd it was a loser.Simple.