There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 480 comments are related to the topic:
Farewell to BF
Farewell to BF
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 480
|
By:
"One horse further down"
I do ofc mean one house further down. Made me laugh  |
|
By:
I don't know if the point has been made before but ACs are going to disproportionately affect betting on horses, because horse racing betting has a much older traditional clientele, who will have more assets, less income, and are more more inclined to walk away out of principle. Younger people, who are easily the most vulnerable from an affordability pov, are more ambivalent about checks.
|
|
By:
Invasive, and a complete nuisance to a generation bought up on privacy and personal responsibility.
As you'll know, the specials game is all but dead anyway so my personal betting cash cow has significantly dissipated (along with not being able to bet with firms), but this is my position. No way on God's green earth am I going to disclose personal financial information to a betting company, begging for them to do me the great service of taking a bet/deposit off me. I don't know where the line is generationally, but I've not reached my half century as yet. |
|
By:
I won't be either Cider
|
|
By:
Last out switch the lights off….
Shambles |
|
By:
as said very very few of the over 25s will want to disclose financial details and many wont want to fill that form thing out for fear of triggering an alert ........the only solution is to keep winning it seems ,shouldnt be too hard as everyones a winner on the forum . seriously tho for many the only avenue is the exchanges so its worrying .
|
|
By:
foyleswar, If it was a case of just the exchanges then fine no problem.
|
|
By:
shops are a possible for me but as said who want to to back an 8/1 shot in shops that is 12-14/1 or bigger on here ? and you wont last long in the shops if you have half a clue .
|
|
By:
Agreed but the exchange punters are threatened with all of this just as the bookmaker punters are.
|
|
By:
nobodys taking proof of income or bank statements or credit checks when they go for a day out at the races so is it game over for the on-course bookies and the racecourse tote offices ??
|
|
By:
If you are an addict, I think it's very unlikely you drive for an hour to go to Fontwell (or wherever) races personally.
|
|
By:
The salami slicing involves getting rid of physical money.
|
|
By:
And driving
 |
|
By:
One customer was allowed to lose £70,000 over a 10-hour period just a day after opening their account, the Gambling Commission said.
Another was only subjected to controls to ensure they were gambling safety after losing £10,000. The next interaction did not occur until four months later when the customer had deposited £323,715 and lost £69,371. £70k in 10 hours, deposited £324k in 4 months ?? we're talking massive amounts here. and yet Anorak has to pack up for having a couple of quid on ?? this is an issue for the bookies, everyone shouldn't be getting involved in this. employ adequate people to look out for this, devise adequate programs to flag it up. 99.9% of punters aren't losing £70,000 in 10 hours or depositing £324,000 in 4 months ...  |
|
By:
Those numbers mean nothing without context. And you could easily go through £70K on a high profile day at the racecourse.
If someone has £70K and wants to chuck it all on red, it's up to them. Isn't it? |
|
By:
There are plenty of idiots willing to burn £700 pcm on a £70K car that they don't own. Who will then pipe up on twatter because their mortgage or rent is 'unaffordable'.
Where the bookmakers fall over is allowing someone to bet with them, taking deposits, if they have self excluded (and not trying to disguise their identity) |
|
By:
100%
also like to know where these vast losses are from. suspect it's not even from horse racing as their traders would be all over it. probably from roulette, casino, all that nonsense. so horse racing bettors are getting drawn into a massive issue which i suspect revolves around the advent of the FOBT. |
|
By:
FOBT addict opens account and loses £70k in 10 hours playing Lucky Vegas Fortunes
Anorak wants £5 on the first favourite at Ascot. Need to show us you can afford it. |
|
By:
Massive data collection ,just like health data
Limit processed junk , Restrictions on salami When all is said & done The systems will decide |
|
By:
So, so, so, so listen up 'cause you can't say nothin'
You'll shut me down with a push of your button? |
|
By:
Hi *****, here`s how much you can bet:
Main Wallet Exposure Limit: £-5,000.00 Exchange Games Wallet Exposure Limit: £-100,000.00 |
|
By:
The WP specifically says it’s intention is to bring online inline with online (my words, forgot how they phrase it)
So they don’t care about disparities with oncourse betting. For now |
|
By:
Inline with offline ffs
|
|
By:
It's just the low hanging fruit to begin with.
It amazes me, even after the covid saga, 'three weeks to flatten the curve' that lasted three years, people still have no concept of salami slicing. The end game is a Chinese style social credit system, where the behviour of the vast majority of us is controlled by the central state. 'They' make plenty of mistakes along the way, for example the covid passport flop. But they will learn the lessons and come at us again. And if, as looks likely, there is majority elected Labour HoC, a liberalist HoLs, judiciary, all institutions, regulators etc, civil service, the stars will be aligned for them, and we will be royally fecked. |
|
By:
Lydia Hislop Retweeted The Winning Edge @mindmodeller · 55m Replying to @mindmodeller Today Alan Potts professional punter has left betfair according to the forum due to the requirement of bank statements. Killing turnover, killing profits, killing horse racing. |
|
By:
The whole Horse Racing Industry has been too lackadaisical from the very start when they should have been vocal about separating the sport from the catch all proposals of the GC.I said this long ago as it was obvious what was going to happen,why the BHA et al have been mute is puzzling, ultimately they will be responsible for the potential massive loss of revenue to the sport.
The only hope is that Government will reel in the GC and veto their proposals, the White Paper being the lesser of two evils.Go back over 30 years when Fruit machines were first allowed in Betting Shops and the writing was on the wall.I had an article published in the RP before the machines were sanctioned and pointed out that Manny Bernstein,the main instigator and his cohorts should give up bookmaking and become casino operators. Lo and behold that is exactly what happened and ultimately is why we are where we are. |
|
By:
All forms of gambling is frowned upon by most of the population,punters don’t stand a chance in hell….
|
|
By:
Like I say last out switch the lights off….
|
|
By:
Virtually all legislation will be stalled now in the hope of a Labour gnvt, with Tone pulling the ropes.
The lamentable, gutless Tory politicians are ultimately to blame for allowing unelected people way way too much power, abdicating responsibility for anything. Now they just get pushed around like total buffoons, and there's pretty much nothing that they can do about it. Certainly nothing that we can do. |
|
By:
...but it all started with BLIAR in the first place. Can't believe the FKIN **** is pulling the strings. Most disgraceful politician in my lifetime even just edging out that other FOOKER Johnson. They really are all **** and I wish I was eloquent enough to put it in a politer way.
|
|
By:
It was Labour who established the Gambling Commission!!
|
|
By:
should have distanced itself from FOBT's asap. crack cocaine of gambling and a complete sh!tstorm waiting to happen.
we're now at the position where if you want to bet on a horse you have to jump through hoops because people have become addicted to the fobts and have lost a fortune on them. fobt's shouldn't be in bookies, should be in a separate casino / arcade type outlet and if you wish to play, given their addictive nature, you are obliged to take a quick affordability test with the cashier on entering the premises. |
|
By:
Vulnerability has to be clearly defined using figures, how else can a regulator hold license holders to account for not imposing it?
And for those who have it imposed who by any sane person’s standards are clearly not vulnerable to have an avenue of redress. Anything less is banana republic level. |
|
By:
The GC are clear enemy number 1 here
Absolute lap dogs who changed their tone from initially saying it was fobts only, to then saying ah but some sports betting is out of control too, to now saying winnings are unimportant. A horrendous body who should be nowhere near the industry. |
|
By:
'Vulnerability' is subjective. It can't be defined.
|
|
By:
That’s their problem, they are the ones attempting to force a square peg through a round hole.
At some point those imposing rules have to make a move, until now it’s all been threats and blame. How can a sector continue indefinitely without clear guidance? What really p1sses me off about the GC is that the very emphasis of gambling is about trying to win God knows it’s difficult enough with all the pitfalls, but even if you do manage it, for them to then say, arhh you shouldn’t have won, we will put a timer on those winnings and they won’t be counted in the great scheme of things in short order. |
|
By:
It makes sense once you wrap your head around the 'new' establishment culture.
Up to circa year 2000. We're all capable but there are some idiots we need to mitigate against doing some serious harm (eg have reasonable speed limits). Post circa 2000. We're all idiots, liable to some serious harm at any given time. So we need to be micromanaged by the intelligentsia, regardless of any collateral damage (eg force everyone to drive @ 20mph). I still don't believe that many people are aware of what's happening, and where we will soon end up. It's like thinking of the BBC in the times of Paxo, Fawlty, Del Boy, David Brent. And not what it has become. Another analogy is the boiled frog one, I guess. But who would have thought the British, after coming out the right side of two world wars, defending freedom, would be cowed into hiding away from a virus, and destroying the economy and the lives of children. |
|
By:
Makes no odds which party wins power now, they have pretty much merged into the same thing.
Nothing gets done any more, all red tape and decisions by consensus. Cant even build a new railway, road or runway. Country is ****. |
|
By:
There is a difference. For all the Tories' multiple faults, there is still a caucus of sensibility. Not enough to swing day to day policy alas, but moderate it from absolute disaster. It's only that caucus that prevented Whitty forcing the country into a lockdown for the third Xmas. They basically told Johnson if he did it, he would be gone.
That's the ultimate fear, if Labour do win a big majority. There will be nothing to stop it, no such emergency break. That caucus should not have allowed the emergency powers, and ruling by the 'quad' without the need for parliamentary scrutiny in the first place. One of them did force a sunset in the powers handed over, and JRM was instrumental in keeping the HoC running, and forcing a return to physical voting etc. The next election will of course wipe some of them out, some are leaving anyway, and CCHQ ensures not many new ones get through the filters. They are already smeared as right wing nutters by the mainstream media. |
|
By:
Central bankers and the most influential transnational organisations tell you EXACTLY what future they want us to have and things like this are going to be more and more commom. Repeat what these people say though and you're a conspiracy theorist. They're good. They'll come after everything, they'll get it all and it will happen quicker than you think.
|