Punter cashes out for £50k win
|
By:
Nice to read a thread with a sensible discussion.
 |
|
By:
It's all on your circumstances....whether you take a cash out or not .....I was not offered one in 2021 so had no choice but to let it run.......if I had been offered 40K I would have took it .........if you do take it , you can't beat yourself up if the jackpot win does happen........
|
|
By:
I disgaree entirely @Cagliari - had the punter given this 5 minutes of thought he could have had a better result with or without the existence of cashout.
|
|
By:
Only by laying longbridge,how else?
|
|
By:
formoftheace Joined: 17 Apr 12
Replies: 757617 Mar 23 09:51 I think there was a scenario not long ago the punter got a call and accepted an offer…..the fav they would have been waiting on fell early at short odds….. ------------------------------ 6 FEnvoi Allen (FR) J: J. W. Kennedy T: Henry de Bromhead, Ireland - 4/9 f chased leaders, fell 4th |
|
By:
I doubt that the punter really believed that the 1st 4 in his EW acca would actually win and for once I agree with glen, 50k was a terrific offer under the circs and I would have taken it all day!
|
|
By:
I agree with Driver and Glen.
Most punters haven’t got a clue what Betfair Exchange is, never mind have sufficient money or nous to be able to lay off for a better profit. Even though the last leg lost I can’t fault him for taking the offer. He probably couldn’t even work out it was poor value nor care. |
|
By:
@CagliariG
"Only by laying longbridge,how else?" Stake the 4-fold rather than - or in addition to - the 5-fold, if you know you will bail after 4 winners for a (poor-value) cashout, why stake the 5-fold in the first place? Or stake both for stakes that will give you the equivalent of a 50% cashout if you want to keep some interest in the last? |
|
By:
He may have had five £5ew singles and thought he’d cover them in a £1ew acca just in case they all placed.
|
|
By:
How many small time punters are going to do that longbridge? Unless the chap had a crystal ball how would he know his first 4 would win,could have been any of the others that lost and it would make no difference whether he had done 4 or 5?
|
|
By:
He’d have probably took the cash out after the third winner then!
|
|
By:
@s.kenbo - fair point, I hadn't considered that it might be an EW acca where the "plan" was to get them all placed and the winners were a surprise.
@Cagliari - No crystal ball required. Assuming it is a straight 5-leg win acca, you know when you stake it how much you would have running onto the fifth leg if the first 4 copped. If that amount is an amount that would make you want to cashout, stake the 4-fold. |
|
By:
It's like deal or no deal.
Make a stupid offer and they take it because 50k is a lot of money. If people thought about it beforehand they would steak their bets better. He's happy, bookies laughing, hey ho. |
|
By:
Why would the bookies be laughing? They've paid out 50k on a losing bet!
|
|
By:
It saves them a lot of money over the long term if punters are prepared to take poor value cashouts.
|
|
By:
@driver2
"Why would the bookies be laughing? They've paid out 50k on a losing bet!" What Jack B said - they just bought something worth £75k for £50k. If you do that often enough, you make a lot of money. The same concept as finding value as a punter - it doesn't matter if some of your bets are losers, so long as you have positive EV over the long-term you make money. |
|
By:
ROFL longbridge,great business model paying out £50K for £4,do that enough times and they go skint!!!
|
|
By:
50 large or wait on Nico surrounded with the big Irish yards hustling him……aye…..50 large please…..ta..carry on Nico….
|
|
By:
Do that enough times and a number of them they'll be paying out £50k and dodging paying out £150k when the last leg comes in and the punter has taken the cashout.
|
|
By:
heard it all now "punters never had it so good" overruns of 135% early prices available in the morning for pennies to p[unters with losing accounts, yeah great!!
|
|
By:
xxxx
longbridge, many years ago I worked for William Hills in their trade department and I can assure you that bookmakers do not make money from hedging. What they do do is reduce their losses by laying off part or all of the liability. In this case they settled the bet at a cost of 50K. Whether or not the horse won is totally irrelevant, the bet was settled and went in their book as a 50K loser. Before Betfair educated the layers, showing them that by allowing punters to "cash out" they could reduce their losses even further, they were forced to hedge with rival bookmakers at the full odds. Some of you have complained that the cash out offered was not enough, but the punter didn't have a gun held to his head and sensibly (imo) took the 50K. |
|
By:
That wasn't me blowing kisses by the way
 |
|
By:
Luccia went off 13/8. So if expected win was 250k and the punter settled for 50k then the effective cash out odds were 4/1!!!
They would have had £100k running onto the final leg, so this cash out was the crime of the century. Pity the punter didnt have the cash to lay some of it off on the pink button. oh well. |
|
By:
I'm sure the punter doesn't think his pay out is the crime of the century, he just got £50k for a losing bet.
I don't like cash outs, your damned if you do damned if you don't. they are undoubtedly poor value and in the long run only one party benefits but I can't see why bookmakers should offer more money, the ball is in the punters court, take it or leave it. |
|
By:
Why would the bookies be laughing? They've paid out 50k on a losing bet!
If they had your excellent hindsight/aftertiming ability they would doubtless have let it run. They've settled a 200k debt for £50k of course they are laughing, it's bookmaking. |
|
By:
Concur with Driver.
I use to hedge down to the business model threshold and certainly a million miles away from making it green , always remembered i was a layer not a backer but always aimed to stay with the business model parameters , never had to cross my fingers to justify anything. As for the decision to hedge the £50k it'll always be an individual choice against personal circumstances , i've no idea who this guy is so couldn't have a clue what to advise. Math's is never a consideration or what's perceived as value for money because if they were part of the decision criteria there wouldn't ever be cash outs as nobody would take them , no different to deal or no deal and can only be measured against your own personal financial state and bottle , we're all different as punters and risk takers. The cash out amount is set as bait and like DOND the onus is on the punter , cuckoo land to expect anything different from a business. Good luck today all |
|
By:
As the dealer says.....Take it or leave it as you have the choice.
|
|
By:
"If they had your excellent hindsight/aftertiming
ability they would doubtless have let it run." They've settled a 200k debt for £50k of course they are laughing, it's bookmaking." They didn't settle a debt of any kind, let alone 200k. You can't seem to get it into your thick head that the bottom line is that the bookmaker lost 50k! Maybe they would have laughed if the last leg won as they would have saved a packet, but they would still have LOST 50k, this was inevitable once the punter took the cash out. Where in this discussion have I aftertimed? If I had been the bookmaker I would have done the same thing and if I had been the punter I would have tried to cash out half of the bet, but if that wasn't on the table I'd have taken the 50k. I used to read Wilbur Smith's novels and one of his characters was teaching her son how to play the stock market. I have never forgotten her words, "remember son, you'll never get poor taking a profit!" |
|
By:
It didn't work out in the bookmaker's favour on this occasion but one individual bet is insignificant over the long term. Bookmakers offer cash out on most bets these days because it saves them money over the long term. It really is as simple as that.
|
|
By:
I think we've covered that Jack. Yes, quite simply they reduce their losses, but they are LOSSES all the same. How could it have worked in the bookmakers favour on this occasion? FFS don't you get it either? Once the punter takes the cash out they've lost 50k, surely that's end of story! A different result wouldn't have changed a thing financially. They may well have slept better, but they would still be out of pocket! Anyway, that's me done on this thread, I could never be a special needs teacher, I haven't got the patience!
|
|
By:
driver
|
|
By:
99.6% of punters who plaice these £2 bets aint got a clue of the logistics of gambling..unless the 50k means absolutely fck all of course 99.99% are gona snap it up.
|
|
By:
If the horse had won they would have saved themselves a bundle when the punter took the cash out, but the horse lost and they ended up paying out 50 grand, therefore it did not work out in their favour on this occasion. Individual results are irrelevant over the long term.
|
|
By:
Someone said earlier about if you're going to cash out don't put the 5th leg in.
Well in this case there is every possibility that if they didn't put the 5th leg in they'd probably have cashed out after the 3rd leg. |
|
By:
If you know you're going to cash out then don't include the 5th leg many have said , does that mean doing a 4 fold you don't put the 4th leg in , how about a treble why not make it a double , maybe a double and not including the 2nd will confirm you're a singles backer.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Is it not also a dream result for the puntwr though, £50k for a losing bet,
|
