Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
EXCLUSIVE: How to beat the bookies! Punter fighting Coral for £15,000 World Cup winnings is told to take the bookmakers to court - by blackjack player who won payout from Betfred after they refused to pay £1.7m
Liam Manifold, 30, said he had put a 1495/1 treble on at his local Coral branch
But bookmakers said his three bets could not be combined and refused to pay
Now Andrew Green, who took Betfred to court for £1.7million, has spoken
He has suggested Mr Manifold may want to contact his lawyers for advice
By DAN SALES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 11:19, 4 January 2023 | UPDATED: 11:31, 4 January 2023
Mr Green landed his huge sum accumulating chips playing Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven game on his phone in January 2018.
But the bookmakers said there had been a software glitch and withheld his payment.
It took Mr Green three years in a legal fight which ended with High Court judge Mrs Justice Foster ruling in April 2021 Betfred had to pay out.
Speaking exclusively to MailOnline from his Lincoln home today, Mr Green said of this latest problem: ‘If he knows he has got a concrete case – he should take them all the way with it.
Liam Manifold, 30, had planned how to spend the cash when Coral said it would not pay out
+5
View gallery
Liam Manifold, 30, had planned how to spend the cash when Coral said it would not pay out
The betting slip which Mr Manifold had expected to fetch him winnings of nearly £15,000
+5
View gallery
The betting slip which Mr Manifold had expected to fetch him winnings of nearly £15,000
‘What I found the most difficult was finding someone who would take my case on a no-win no-fee basis.
‘I never could have won my case without my lawyers Coyle White Devine.
‘I would urge him to speak to them. These betting places all have heard of my story and heard who my solicitor was.
‘If they have offered him money to settle they may know they are partially to blame.
‘In my case, as soon as they offered me some money, I knew I was in the right and had to carry on.
How one punter bagged a '£2MILLION' payout after taking Betfred to court over unpaid bet... but others weren't so lucky
In 2021 a blackjack gambler won a landmark High Court battle against Betfred after the online betting firm refused to pay out his £1.7million jackpot.
Father-of-three Andrew Green spent three years fighting to get his hands on the seven-figure prize he won by accumulating chips while playing Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven game on his phone in January 2018.
Though he was congratulated by a member of staff from Betfred on his winnings, the betting shop said just five days later it would not pay out the sum, claiming he only won because of an alleged software glitch.
Andrew Green successfully reclaimed around £2million from Betfred after a three-year legal battle
Andrew Green successfully reclaimed around £2million from Betfred after a three-year legal battle
Betfred claimed a malfunction had prevented the game from resetting properly, meaning Mr Green, a single parent from Washingborough, Lincolnshire, would have seen his money grow exponentially had he continued playing.
Instead, the bookmaker allegedly offered Mr Green a £60,000 'goodwill gesture' on condition that he remained quiet - a deal the father-of-three turned down before launching a three-year legal fight to reclaim his winnings.
In 2021, rugby league fans Gary Smeaton and Kris Shenton complained of missing out on more than £20,000 after a 'human error' in a bet they placed with William Hill
In 2021, rugby league fans Gary Smeaton and Kris Shenton complained of missing out on more than £20,000 after a 'human error' in a bet they placed with William Hill
High Court judge Mrs Justice Foster ruled in April 2021 that Betfred had no grounds for withholding payment from Mr Green. The judgment meant he was awarded the payout plus interest, estimated to be around £2million.
Betfred apologised to Mr Green for the delay in paying out, and said it would not appeal against the judgment.
In 2021, rugby league fans Gary Smeaton and Kris Shenton complained of missing out on more than £20,000 after a 'human error' in a bet they placed with William Hill.
The pair were celebrating when Salford Red Devils' Jackson Hastings was named rugby league's Steve Prescott MBE Man of Steel after a wager they placed in January.
They thought they were in line to scoop £23,400 after a £100 double bet of Hastings winning the Man of Steel and Salford finishing in Super League's top five came in.
But bookmaker William Hill refused to pay out, insisting they are separate bets and should never have been allowed - though they admitted it was a human error on their part.
Mr Smeaton took the bookies to the Independent Betting Adjudication Service (IBAS), which offers an impartial adjudication on disputes between customers. He and his friend were awarded £4,000 each due to the 'inconvenience' they had endured.
Mr Manifold had expected odds of 1,495/1 after correctly predicting that Argentina would be crowned overall winners of the World Cup in Qatar, Lionel Messi would be named player of the tournament and France would also make the final.
But when the delighted maintenance engineer rushed back to the betting shop in Horninglow the day after the final he left empty-handed.
Coral said the bets could not be combined into a treble because the three events were closely related to each other. It also claimed Mr Manifold wrote the odds on the slip himself.
A spokesman for the bookmakers said the events were 'closely related to each other so the prices offered on them individually could not be included in a multiple bet'.
It added it had made a 'very fair and generous offer for the settlement of the bet' – said by Mr Manifold to have been just £660.
He was planning to buy his disabled dad a new mobility scooter with the money, as well as put some away for the future.
Mr Manifold said the firm should pay up as his treble bet was accepted without any issue.
He said: 'I went to cash in the bet and they said it shouldn't have been placed and offered me £660 for it.
'I've gone through their complaints system, there's no leeway. I've gone to an independent complaints committee and I'm waiting to hear back from them.
'I've since had different companies contact me saying if that was their company, they'd pay out.
'When I placed the bet the guy behind the counter said it was absolutely fine. They're now saying it's a related bet.
'It's now two weeks after the final and I don't seem to be getting anywhere. If there's an error it's their fault for accepting the bet. It's very frustrating.
'Just under £15,000 for a big betting company is pennies for them, but for me it's a life-changing amount of money.
'My dad's disabled so I was going to buy him a new disability scooter and keep the rest in savings.'
A spokesman for Coral said: 'If Argentina and France have made the final, then the odds of Argentina winning it are clearly much shorter than they were at the outset.
'If Argentina have then won the World Cup, the chances of Messi being player of the tournament will be long odds-on.
'So we have settled the bet in the fairest way possible, paying out on the event with the biggest price, an Argentina v France final, at 22/1, and then on the basis that that had happened, we applied the price of Argentina winning the final which was 10/11 before the game.
'And then on the basis that Argentina had won the cup, we applied an over-generous price on Messi to be player of the tournament at 1/2, as the odds on that happening should Argentina have won the World Cup would have been much shorter.
'The prices on the slip had been written on by the customer not the member of staff.
'We have settled the bet in line with our terms and conditions, and we have made a very fair and generous offer for the settlement of the bet that exceeds what would have been the odds of such an eventuality had a customer asked for rush specific treble on December 11.'
Coyle White Devine Solicitors told MailOnline it would be happy to listen to details of Mr Manifold's case, but said often the cost of legal action could be prohibitive.
Partner David Sheahan said: ' Every case is different. We would be more than happy to speak to him if he wanted to get in touch.'
Liam Manifold, 30, said he had put a 1495/1 treble on at his local Coral branch
But bookmakers said his three bets could not be combined and refused to pay
Now Andrew Green, who took Betfred to court for £1.7million, has spoken
He has suggested Mr Manifold may want to contact his lawyers for advice
By DAN SALES FOR MAILONLINE
PUBLISHED: 11:19, 4 January 2023 | UPDATED: 11:31, 4 January 2023
Mr Green landed his huge sum accumulating chips playing Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven game on his phone in January 2018.
But the bookmakers said there had been a software glitch and withheld his payment.
It took Mr Green three years in a legal fight which ended with High Court judge Mrs Justice Foster ruling in April 2021 Betfred had to pay out.
Speaking exclusively to MailOnline from his Lincoln home today, Mr Green said of this latest problem: ‘If he knows he has got a concrete case – he should take them all the way with it.
Liam Manifold, 30, had planned how to spend the cash when Coral said it would not pay out
+5
View gallery
Liam Manifold, 30, had planned how to spend the cash when Coral said it would not pay out
The betting slip which Mr Manifold had expected to fetch him winnings of nearly £15,000
+5
View gallery
The betting slip which Mr Manifold had expected to fetch him winnings of nearly £15,000
‘What I found the most difficult was finding someone who would take my case on a no-win no-fee basis.
‘I never could have won my case without my lawyers Coyle White Devine.
‘I would urge him to speak to them. These betting places all have heard of my story and heard who my solicitor was.
‘If they have offered him money to settle they may know they are partially to blame.
‘In my case, as soon as they offered me some money, I knew I was in the right and had to carry on.
How one punter bagged a '£2MILLION' payout after taking Betfred to court over unpaid bet... but others weren't so lucky
In 2021 a blackjack gambler won a landmark High Court battle against Betfred after the online betting firm refused to pay out his £1.7million jackpot.
Father-of-three Andrew Green spent three years fighting to get his hands on the seven-figure prize he won by accumulating chips while playing Frankie Dettori's Magic Seven game on his phone in January 2018.
Though he was congratulated by a member of staff from Betfred on his winnings, the betting shop said just five days later it would not pay out the sum, claiming he only won because of an alleged software glitch.
Andrew Green successfully reclaimed around £2million from Betfred after a three-year legal battle
Andrew Green successfully reclaimed around £2million from Betfred after a three-year legal battle
Betfred claimed a malfunction had prevented the game from resetting properly, meaning Mr Green, a single parent from Washingborough, Lincolnshire, would have seen his money grow exponentially had he continued playing.
Instead, the bookmaker allegedly offered Mr Green a £60,000 'goodwill gesture' on condition that he remained quiet - a deal the father-of-three turned down before launching a three-year legal fight to reclaim his winnings.
In 2021, rugby league fans Gary Smeaton and Kris Shenton complained of missing out on more than £20,000 after a 'human error' in a bet they placed with William Hill
In 2021, rugby league fans Gary Smeaton and Kris Shenton complained of missing out on more than £20,000 after a 'human error' in a bet they placed with William Hill
High Court judge Mrs Justice Foster ruled in April 2021 that Betfred had no grounds for withholding payment from Mr Green. The judgment meant he was awarded the payout plus interest, estimated to be around £2million.
Betfred apologised to Mr Green for the delay in paying out, and said it would not appeal against the judgment.
In 2021, rugby league fans Gary Smeaton and Kris Shenton complained of missing out on more than £20,000 after a 'human error' in a bet they placed with William Hill.
The pair were celebrating when Salford Red Devils' Jackson Hastings was named rugby league's Steve Prescott MBE Man of Steel after a wager they placed in January.
They thought they were in line to scoop £23,400 after a £100 double bet of Hastings winning the Man of Steel and Salford finishing in Super League's top five came in.
But bookmaker William Hill refused to pay out, insisting they are separate bets and should never have been allowed - though they admitted it was a human error on their part.
Mr Smeaton took the bookies to the Independent Betting Adjudication Service (IBAS), which offers an impartial adjudication on disputes between customers. He and his friend were awarded £4,000 each due to the 'inconvenience' they had endured.
Mr Manifold had expected odds of 1,495/1 after correctly predicting that Argentina would be crowned overall winners of the World Cup in Qatar, Lionel Messi would be named player of the tournament and France would also make the final.
But when the delighted maintenance engineer rushed back to the betting shop in Horninglow the day after the final he left empty-handed.
Coral said the bets could not be combined into a treble because the three events were closely related to each other. It also claimed Mr Manifold wrote the odds on the slip himself.
A spokesman for the bookmakers said the events were 'closely related to each other so the prices offered on them individually could not be included in a multiple bet'.
It added it had made a 'very fair and generous offer for the settlement of the bet' – said by Mr Manifold to have been just £660.
He was planning to buy his disabled dad a new mobility scooter with the money, as well as put some away for the future.
Mr Manifold said the firm should pay up as his treble bet was accepted without any issue.
He said: 'I went to cash in the bet and they said it shouldn't have been placed and offered me £660 for it.
'I've gone through their complaints system, there's no leeway. I've gone to an independent complaints committee and I'm waiting to hear back from them.
'I've since had different companies contact me saying if that was their company, they'd pay out.
'When I placed the bet the guy behind the counter said it was absolutely fine. They're now saying it's a related bet.
'It's now two weeks after the final and I don't seem to be getting anywhere. If there's an error it's their fault for accepting the bet. It's very frustrating.
'Just under £15,000 for a big betting company is pennies for them, but for me it's a life-changing amount of money.
'My dad's disabled so I was going to buy him a new disability scooter and keep the rest in savings.'
A spokesman for Coral said: 'If Argentina and France have made the final, then the odds of Argentina winning it are clearly much shorter than they were at the outset.
'If Argentina have then won the World Cup, the chances of Messi being player of the tournament will be long odds-on.
'So we have settled the bet in the fairest way possible, paying out on the event with the biggest price, an Argentina v France final, at 22/1, and then on the basis that that had happened, we applied the price of Argentina winning the final which was 10/11 before the game.
'And then on the basis that Argentina had won the cup, we applied an over-generous price on Messi to be player of the tournament at 1/2, as the odds on that happening should Argentina have won the World Cup would have been much shorter.
'The prices on the slip had been written on by the customer not the member of staff.
'We have settled the bet in line with our terms and conditions, and we have made a very fair and generous offer for the settlement of the bet that exceeds what would have been the odds of such an eventuality had a customer asked for rush specific treble on December 11.'
Coyle White Devine Solicitors told MailOnline it would be happy to listen to details of Mr Manifold's case, but said often the cost of legal action could be prohibitive.
Partner David Sheahan said: ' Every case is different. We would be more than happy to speak to him if he wanted to get in touch.'
Show More
him to win his case againgst corals,
absolutely no chance whatsever.
he would have more chance of winning the lottery ten weeks in a row
absolutely no chance whatsever.
he would have more chance of winning the lottery ten weeks in a row
@ramruma - what were Messi and Mbappe's goal totals before the final, given the 1/2 price quoted is in the eventuality of Argentina having won?
Lionel Messi would be named player of the tournament
@longbridge -- Golden Ball is Player of the Tournament; Golden Boot is top scorer.
Messi and Mbappe were equal on goals before the final, where Mbappe scored a hat-trick and Messi only two.
Messi and Mbappe were equal on goals before the final, where Mbappe scored a hat-trick and Messi only two.
Apologies both -you can see why Football is not my betting medium of choice!
Settled very fair to me , can't see how anyone can dispute £660 not being fair and certainly a lot fairer than the application of their rules as single wins.
We move on
We move on
By bookies rules to the letter he should have been on 3 3.33 singles. End of. Very rare you can praise a bookie but in this instance giving him 660 the punter got a right result.
golden boot,golden gloves matters of fact
golden ball someone/pundits opinion
golden ball someone/pundits opinion
What I am alluding to Longbridge is that when he placed his bet on 11th Nov not a ball had been kicked and therefore the true odds for each outcome as a separate entity were the prices on his betting slip. The ampount of possible outcomes of those 3 bets for the whole comp would have run into many thousands of different combinations.
What the bookies seemed to have done is pay him on the 2 finalists and then settled the other 2 bets as if placed on the day of the final which is totally unjustified IMO.
What the bookies seemed to have done is pay him on the 2 finalists and then settled the other 2 bets as if placed on the day of the final which is totally unjustified IMO.
And if you believe "Fairest way possible" quoted by the bookies then you are living in cloud-cuckoo land IMO...!
"true odds for each outcome as a separate entity were the prices on his betting slip"
Agreed.
But the true odds for the double of (the finalists being Argentina and France) and (the winner being Argentina) are not the product of the odds for those two singles at the start of the tournament.
Agreed.
But the true odds for the double of (the finalists being Argentina and France) and (the winner being Argentina) are not the product of the odds for those two singles at the start of the tournament.
I agree with that Longbridge but the bookies have given him the absolute shortest prices IMO..
A good way to wipe out the £660 would be to go to court. solicitors fees are ridiculous , and has no chance of winning the case. Fairly settled if
you understand betting to a reasonable level.
you understand betting to a reasonable level.
I don't know about the player of the tournament thing, but it seems they gave him the price for Argentina/France that was true at the start of the tournament, and then the price that was live for France to win once that first bet had gone in.
That seems fair to me - as others have said, they could have stood behind their Rules and settled 3 * £3.33 singles, rather than aiming to go back in time and price up the treble he shoudl have asked for.
Maybe the £660 is fair value - maybe it should have been £500 or £1000 - but there is no way he is entitled to or has a chance of seeing £15k. IMO
That seems fair to me - as others have said, they could have stood behind their Rules and settled 3 * £3.33 singles, rather than aiming to go back in time and price up the treble he shoudl have asked for.
Maybe the £660 is fair value - maybe it should have been £500 or £1000 - but there is no way he is entitled to or has a chance of seeing £15k. IMO
their not paying out on treble,once they,ve decided that as he only staked £10 he has 3 x £3.33 single bets
£3,33 on a 11 to 2 winner
£3.33 on around a 50,s winner messi golden ball /argentina
£3.33 on argi v fra final at 22,s
£660 a right result imo
£3,33 on a 11 to 2 winner
£3.33 on around a 50,s winner messi golden ball /argentina
£3.33 on argi v fra final at 22,s
£660 a right result imo
Agree he'll never get 15K but I think they have given him the absolute bare minimum..
Having worked for said firm many moons ago this was always the policy they adopted and a lot of their rules could be very ambiguous.
Having worked for said firm many moons ago this was always the policy they adopted and a lot of their rules could be very ambiguous.
in his defense the bookies are now all pushing these build a bet ,bets on football games which are really all related bets
The punter needs to go on social media asking if anyone else did related bets on the world cup which lost, ie) France lost the final. Tell them to go into their bookies and see if they have any returns due as they should, if not and in many cases i think they may be amongst the losing bets then he has a case, would probably need video evidence of staff sorting bets from the losing pile though!
How many others do you think were thick enough to do related bets and expect to get paid out as if they were unrelated stew? Hopefully this thread is not a reflection otherwise the percentage of problem gamblers will rise steeply i.e clueless!!
Simple really, the minute the bet goes through the till and is captured on their system, the bet stands.
@CagliariG
Do you think the punter is as clueless as he claims? Could be a nice little scam:
- your treble comes off, and bookie is clueless - land twenty times value as a payout
- treble comes off, and bookie is not clueless but PR-savvy - get fair (by bookie standards) treble odds
- treble comes off, and bookie doesn't care about PR - get fair (by boookie standards) three singles
- treble fails, but one or more legs cop - quote bookie rules for related contingencies and demand settlement of the winning leg(s) as singles
- all three legs fail - admit you have actually lost or chance your arm at a stake refund on the grounds the bet shouldn't have been taken as written?
Do you think the punter is as clueless as he claims? Could be a nice little scam:
- your treble comes off, and bookie is clueless - land twenty times value as a payout
- treble comes off, and bookie is not clueless but PR-savvy - get fair (by bookie standards) treble odds
- treble comes off, and bookie doesn't care about PR - get fair (by boookie standards) three singles
- treble fails, but one or more legs cop - quote bookie rules for related contingencies and demand settlement of the winning leg(s) as singles
- all three legs fail - admit you have actually lost or chance your arm at a stake refund on the grounds the bet shouldn't have been taken as written?
Jan 4, 2023 -- 3:33PM, now wheres that switch!!! wrote:
Simple really, the minute the bet goes through the till and is captured on their system, the bet stands.
The fraudsters would love that, get a member of staff on your side and fill yer boots.
Impossible for that to work,
1st time poster04 Jan 23 15:08Joined: 25 Dec 05 | Topic/replies: 50,226 | Blogger: 1st time poster's blog
in his defense the bookies are now all pushing these build a bet ,bets on football games which are really all related bets
I know zero about soccer but plenty about betting , looking at the build a bet offers they give one price for the entire build so that argument will do him more harm than good , should he pursue this madness.
now wheres that switch!!!04 Jan 23 15:33Joined: 10 Sep 09 | Topic/replies: 2,533 | Blogger: now wheres that switch!!!'s blog
Simple really, the minute the bet goes through the till and is captured on their system, the bet stands.
Come on switch you really haven't thought that statement through before posting , the repercussions are pretty obvious.
Really can't believe this thread is still running , i'd have snapped their hands off for the £660 and ran but having said that wouldn't have been daft enough to place the bet in the first place.
in his defense the bookies are now all pushing these build a bet ,bets on football games which are really all related bets
I know zero about soccer but plenty about betting , looking at the build a bet offers they give one price for the entire build so that argument will do him more harm than good , should he pursue this madness.
now wheres that switch!!!04 Jan 23 15:33Joined: 10 Sep 09 | Topic/replies: 2,533 | Blogger: now wheres that switch!!!'s blog
Simple really, the minute the bet goes through the till and is captured on their system, the bet stands.
Come on switch you really haven't thought that statement through before posting , the repercussions are pretty obvious.
Really can't believe this thread is still running , i'd have snapped their hands off for the £660 and ran but having said that wouldn't have been daft enough to place the bet in the first place.
let me put 1 in hes nut and he can give me 20 pounds so i can get 4 pints of beer bottoms up
no repercussions at all, are you telling me they dont have a system that has the current prices for what they are translating available.? If their system doesnt flag it up at the point of translating ie, it accepts the bet into system at the prices translated then its the books fault and they need to upgrade their systems.
Then becomes palpable error now wheres that switch!!!
agreed, that would be a better argument than the one being persued.
However not really, as their system should calculate and offer the price for the translated bet before the customer hands over the money for said bet. If it went into their system at the prices he wrote without the system picking up the error, then that liability falls on the company.
If the bet was never translated and put into the wasted pile to be settled at a later date, then he is struggling, but of translated through their system, he might have a shout
I don’t know the mechanics properly of what goes on in shops. Does the bet get get put on instantly and then translated when the staff have time? We’ve all placed bets in shops on a race that is about to go off. Go back ten minutes later to collect and it hasn’t been translated. They then click a few buttons and pay you out.
Waiting for a bet to be translated before paying sounds like a long wait. Especially if there’s a few being put on. Doesn’t sound feasible.
Waiting for a bet to be translated before paying sounds like a long wait. Especially if there’s a few being put on. Doesn’t sound feasible.
CagliariG04 Jan 23 15:31
How many others do you think were thick enough to do related bets and expect to get paid out as if they were unrelated stew? Hopefully this thread is not a reflection otherwise the percentage of problem gamblers will rise steeply i.e clueless!!
The thing is Cagliari that the World Cup is only every 4 years and many people who don't normally bet and aren't as clued up as most of us on here, will have a bet, not understanding that these are related bets, and would throw their ticket away if one on the legs was beaten, ie) If France had won the final, or not even got to it.
How many others do you think were thick enough to do related bets and expect to get paid out as if they were unrelated stew? Hopefully this thread is not a reflection otherwise the percentage of problem gamblers will rise steeply i.e clueless!!
The thing is Cagliari that the World Cup is only every 4 years and many people who don't normally bet and aren't as clued up as most of us on here, will have a bet, not understanding that these are related bets, and would throw their ticket away if one on the legs was beaten, ie) If France had won the final, or not even got to it.
Rare I support a big chain bookie. but they were generous in their 660 offer here. The punter in question should be glad of it.
@monarch
I'd say PR-savvy rather than generous, but yes, he could have been a lot worse off and shouldn't be whining.
I'd say PR-savvy rather than generous, but yes, he could have been a lot worse off and shouldn't be whining.
On a not entirely related note - apart from unjustified whining - does anyone recall the Green Seal Service in the old broadsheet Sporting Life?
I used to buy the SL at the station every morning in the 90s and read on my commute to the City.
Green Seal was the forerunner of IBAS - but offline and in a print newspaper.
Some lad complained that he had placed a Trifecta bet with a bookie who offered Tote odds on a race that the Tote wasn't offering Trifecta betting on, and the bookie had settled it as a perm of 6 * Exactas with one winning, but he wanted payout at bookie Tricast odds. The thing ran for weeks/months in the papers, until a short paragraph reported that on providing proof of ID when meeting the Green Seal team at the Life offices, he had inadvertently proved he was 17 at the time of placing the bet - he got return of stake and a lifetime ban. :)
I used to buy the SL at the station every morning in the 90s and read on my commute to the City.
Green Seal was the forerunner of IBAS - but offline and in a print newspaper.
Some lad complained that he had placed a Trifecta bet with a bookie who offered Tote odds on a race that the Tote wasn't offering Trifecta betting on, and the bookie had settled it as a perm of 6 * Exactas with one winning, but he wanted payout at bookie Tricast odds. The thing ran for weeks/months in the papers, until a short paragraph reported that on providing proof of ID when meeting the Green Seal team at the Life offices, he had inadvertently proved he was 17 at the time of placing the bet - he got return of stake and a lifetime ban. :)
How could they enforce a lifetime ban from shops back in those days though?
No idea, but that was the verdict (presumably to look as if they were keeping their noses clean from underage gambling)
shops should have machines now and what bets are taken are what should be paid out. whats the point now to have people taking bets?
obviously this customer is wrong just to clarify my stance
- but thats the point its related and wouldnt happen if bet was done via the web interface of machines
- but thats the point its related and wouldnt happen if bet was done via the web interface of machines
@racing6699
I make you dead right but - if the people who use high street betting shops were happy to use machines (SSBTs) to place their bets, where this issue would not arise, they'd be about as happy to bet from their laptop or phone, ditto - but that seems not to be the case and the shops still cater for the remaining technophile refuseniks.
I make you dead right but - if the people who use high street betting shops were happy to use machines (SSBTs) to place their bets, where this issue would not arise, they'd be about as happy to bet from their laptop or phone, ditto - but that seems not to be the case and the shops still cater for the remaining technophile refuseniks.
if they are technophiles they are unlikely to be refuseniks.
Realise the conversation has moved on a bit now but wasn't Messi about 1/4 on here the morning of the final for Golden Ball? So giving him roughly 1/2 that part seems the fairest bit of the lot. Seen quite a few quibbles on here and on social media about the settling of that part of the bet
"I don’t know the mechanics properly of what goes on in shops. Does the bet get put on instantly and then translated when the staff have time? "
Yes this is exactly what happens
Yes this is exactly what happens
@Flemenstar -- yes, I've just checked the Racing Post for final day and Messi was generally 1/5 with the books, including Coral, so yes. Tbh I'd have expected him to be longer, and still suspect that if Messi had got the Golden Boot for top scorer instead of Mbappe (Messi was ahead after his first goal) then Fifa would have looked elsewhere.
Corals bet 1/5 Messi, 9/2 Mbappe and 12/1 Griezmann.
Corals bet 1/5 Messi, 9/2 Mbappe and 12/1 Griezmann.
Flemenstar
The bet will have not been translated it will have been put into the alien it would be manually settled when the event was over. sad to say you would of thought one of the shop team would have realised it was related .
Ronnie.
The bet will have not been translated it will have been put into the alien it would be manually settled when the event was over. sad to say you would of thought one of the shop team would have realised it was related .
Ronnie.
Ronnie - I bow to your expertise on these things, of course
"The bet will have not been translated it will have been put into the alien it would be manually settled when the event was over."
Does that mean the bookies can be running up tens or hundreds of thousands of liabilities in their shops with no idea at head office / "trading" that they are doing so?
"The bet will have not been translated it will have been put into the alien it would be manually settled when the event was over."
Does that mean the bookies can be running up tens or hundreds of thousands of liabilities in their shops with no idea at head office / "trading" that they are doing so?
Manoleeds
An alien is when the bet cannot be translated so its put as an Alien and after the event is manual settled.
Longbridge
99.9% of bets will be translated, the only liability they may have is a football acca on all the league winners before the seasons starts, there is a few of them that wont be in the system but they will be settled after the event is over.
An alien is when the bet cannot be translated so its put as an Alien and after the event is manual settled.
Longbridge
99.9% of bets will be translated, the only liability they may have is a football acca on all the league winners before the seasons starts, there is a few of them that wont be in the system but they will be settled after the event is over.
Thanks Ronnie - not sure I completely follow but will give thought to your answer, thanks again.
Yes agree Ronnie this bet would have gone in the aliens as the system wouldn't let it be able to translate
but just explaining any normal bet has to be translated for the system to be able to settle it
there's no system clever enough yet to be able to read handwriting and then spot that something is related, in real-time, to relay back to the Staff yet
but just explaining any normal bet has to be translated for the system to be able to settle it
there's no system clever enough yet to be able to read handwriting and then spot that something is related, in real-time, to relay back to the Staff yet
Flemenstar: "there's no system clever enough yet to be able to read handwriting and then spot that something is related, in real-time, to relay back to the Staff yet"
Probably true but there could be, and if bookies were forced to stand any bets once accepted and paid for, there would be. Computers can read handwritten text these days. Certainly in this case, there is nothing hard to read on the bet; handwriting and intentions are clear (even if wrong). Sure, there'd be some slips that are unreadable but they could be rejected and bounced straight back to the customer. Greater use of betting terminals and pre-printed slips would help as well.
Probably true but there could be, and if bookies were forced to stand any bets once accepted and paid for, there would be. Computers can read handwritten text these days. Certainly in this case, there is nothing hard to read on the bet; handwriting and intentions are clear (even if wrong). Sure, there'd be some slips that are unreadable but they could be rejected and bounced straight back to the customer. Greater use of betting terminals and pre-printed slips would help as well.
Betting terminals are great if you want
to use a betting terminal, but often the
prices offered are different to those available
at the counter.
... But then is your bet accepted? Find out
when you go to collect.
Make a fuss getting your bet properly accepted
and you've drawn attention to yourself...
to use a betting terminal, but often the
prices offered are different to those available
at the counter.
... But then is your bet accepted? Find out
when you go to collect.
Make a fuss getting your bet properly accepted
and you've drawn attention to yourself...
why would they have the bets refunded? The bet was paid out at the appropriate odds.
Jimnast
they will just be added to the long list of sleepers that each shop has. and take it from me its a long list and more important a very very costly list for the punter.hope you are well and a happy new year to you.
Ronnie.
they will just be added to the long list of sleepers that each shop has. and take it from me its a long list and more important a very very costly list for the punter.hope you are well and a happy new year to you.
Ronnie.
Anyone who did a similar treble and got two right probably don’t know they’ve got two winning singles. I wouldn’t be surprised if they handed their ticket over only to be told it was a losing treble though.
yes kenbo that is a major issue and that rule is clearly unfair. However, in this case corals have acted fairly.
The person taking the bet was at fault, I have never worked in a betting shop before, but surely
the hand written prices should have alluded the staff to at least LOOK at the slip ? Then maybe
even take a minute and explain the rules regarding related bets. ? Not too much to ask, maybe the
person serving was in a hurry to get back to the slots.
the hand written prices should have alluded the staff to at least LOOK at the slip ? Then maybe
even take a minute and explain the rules regarding related bets. ? Not too much to ask, maybe the
person serving was in a hurry to get back to the slots.
Most people write their own prices down, Glasgow. The cashiers don’t care what is written on a slip, they just want the stake.
It’s down to a punter to write and stake his bet properly l
It’s down to a punter to write and stake his bet properly l
... Not been in a shop for a few years but I was always of the opinion that it wasnt ok to write your own prices ? Maybe something that has appeared more recently, just happy to take any slips !
Actually recall seeing someone chastised for writing their own prices.
Actually recall seeing someone chastised for writing their own prices.
Good morning and a happy new year to you Ronnie
There was a situation after commander in chiefs derby where a young lad got the trifecta up with the magic sign both the placed horse were huge prices ,the magic sign some how found out he was under 18 and refused to pay although if I remember correctly and small payment was made as a good will gesture.
I remember thinking back then that everyone who had placed a bet under the age of 18 and most of us did it would be entitled to refunds going back years.
There was a situation after commander in chiefs derby where a young lad got the trifecta up with the magic sign both the placed horse were huge prices ,the magic sign some how found out he was under 18 and refused to pay although if I remember correctly and small payment was made as a good will gesture.
I remember thinking back then that everyone who had placed a bet under the age of 18 and most of us did it would be entitled to refunds going back years.
Glasgow
What use to happen and I think still does the cashier checks the price and circles it.
What use to happen and I think still does the cashier checks the price and circles it.
If a staff member is new or if its a busy time with punters wanting to get their dog bets on at the last second, it would be pretty hard for the employee to read through the bet and think "Nah -can't have that".
That’s true manoleeds but we are now in a time where they have systems to stop many unwanted bets so although clueless myself about technology there should be a system to stop these getting through,as Rico says the punter has no chance in court
Manoleeds: "If a staff member is new or if its a busy time with punters wanting to get their dog bets on at the last second, it would be pretty hard for the employee to read through the bet and think "Nah -can't have that"."
True, but if these bets were enforced, it would not be long before bookies found ways of checking bets before taking payment (or even trained their staff better). The basic technology is available, such as placepot-style slips, terminals, or handwriting recognition (and AI could be added to check bets are reasonable).
True, but if these bets were enforced, it would not be long before bookies found ways of checking bets before taking payment (or even trained their staff better). The basic technology is available, such as placepot-style slips, terminals, or handwriting recognition (and AI could be added to check bets are reasonable).
How name world cup bets were taken in shop?
How many were there a problem with ?
It's unfortunate and some will argue one is one too many but in the grand scheme of things imo it isn't a massive issue.
In this case imo also its pretty clear to even a novice punter that one selection affects another.
How many were there a problem with ?
It's unfortunate and some will argue one is one too many but in the grand scheme of things imo it isn't a massive issue.
In this case imo also its pretty clear to even a novice punter that one selection affects another.
When the terminals came in, there was a massive resistance to them, with punters preference still the paper coupon. I would say know 90% of football bets are through the terminals, in the next couple of years paper coupons will disappear all together.
They will then move their attention to horse racing and before long everything will be through some sort of terminal.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
Not sure about that Dealer, I imagine the World Cup attracting many first time punters ( 18-20 )
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. ! HNY.
year olds Gagging for a bet, the Related bet issue is not one many would of thought of imo.
Just a quick glance at the slip before accepting would suffice. !
HNY.
HNY
Hills tills now in corporate a smart hub terminal, which means every bet available on the Internet is available in shop. So looking for Messi golden boot Argentina to win world cup would be easily found in the world cup bets available section. These are the same as what the punters use.
18 to 20 year old are tech savvy, even those coming into shop will have looked online.
I really don't think related contingency bets was a problem during the world cup but its unfortunate that for whatever reason a few slip through the net
Hills tills now in corporate a smart hub terminal, which means every bet available on the Internet is available in shop. So looking for Messi golden boot Argentina to win world cup would be easily found in the world cup bets available section. These are the same as what the punters use.
18 to 20 year old are tech savvy, even those coming into shop will have looked online.
I really don't think related contingency bets was a problem during the world cup but its unfortunate that for whatever reason a few slip through the net
The problem with the terminals (and I’ve only used Baldies) is that the prices are at least 20% worse than what is easily available online. I see people loading hundreds if not thousands onto them sometimes. I never know if they’re clueless or whether it’s their only way of getting a bet on.
@kenbo
Isn't it the case (it's been a while since I read up on this) that some of the bookies run their own SSBTs linked to their own book (I think PP and WH?), whereas others license the machines in from a third party operator and just take revenue share? Is it the latter that offer poor value?
Isn't it the case (it's been a while since I read up on this) that some of the bookies run their own SSBTs linked to their own book (I think PP and WH?), whereas others license the machines in from a third party operator and just take revenue share? Is it the latter that offer poor value?
A few companies lads/ Corals not sure about baddies, pay a rental for an outside companies terminals, so prices may well be that out. Hills have there own terminals and although prices do vary, they aren't to the extent of the others.
In 1990 I told 2 workmates I had backed German at 6/1 at the staart of the tournamnet
.They supported them all the way to the final.
They told me to put a fiver on them to win that final.
They were over the moon when they won.
As they were evens (ish) to win that was the bet I put on for them.
They wanted their £35 thinking they were 6/1 still.
They thought I had conned them.
.They supported them all the way to the final.
They told me to put a fiver on them to win that final.
They were over the moon when they won.
As they were evens (ish) to win that was the bet I put on for them.
They wanted their £35 thinking they were 6/1 still.
They thought I had conned them.
I wasn’t sure how the rental side of these terminals worked. I’m surprised that the bookies pay for these machines. If I owned a bookies then I’d be charging them rent for being in my shop, not the other way around.
Lads and Corals are tied into a contract, I would imagine they will be gone and replaced with their own as soon as its up.
They were the only terminals available at the time, in hindsight a poor business decision, considering how much they make weekly
They were the only terminals available at the time, in hindsight a poor business decision, considering how much they make weekly
I’m surprised at how well they have took off but it seems to have taken a long while. There’s always more people on them now than the fobts.
They have live in-play football odds for most games so the technology must be good. It’s just the poor prices that put me off. Too uncompetitive.
They have live in-play football odds for most games so the technology must be good. It’s just the poor prices that put me off. Too uncompetitive.
They were a real slow burner kenbo, punters hated them. They do around 300 bets on a Saturday now where I am and around 150 to 200 on weekdays, during the footie season obviously, they are used by people of all ages. It 8s odd to see a 70 plus putting his score and win bet on a machine.
The second covid lockdown probably helped, people got used to the technology side of the phone apps.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539