Kelly,

Your billybigballs act does not impress me.,

10,000/100 is hot air as you know well BF can't verify confidential information.

Anyone that mentions amounts of money on here loses any remaining ounce of credibility with me.

What does the above quote mean?

It seems to suggest that we know each other outside the forum or that you have previously being able to confute a previous assertion made by me.

You have consistently aftertimed on here and this is one for the worst,claiming to have backed a leader at 350/1 when he's trading at short odds.

I absolutely confute the accuracy/veracity of your posts on a number of grounds.

It started last year when you started a thread claiming that Dublin were a fantastic price at 1.2 to beat Donegal. You later claimed to have traded out at 1.15 despite there not being a fleeting mention of trading out and the tone certainly suggested that this was the furthest thing from your mind.

You claim to be profitable on here with 13 years but have avoided paying the premium charge by laying back huge amounts on Tiger years ago. This assertion is mathematically nonsensical and fraudulent and to be frank a child wouldn't believe that concocted bull. The variance in the times that you laid back and the amount of times you profited/lost on the exchange would relatively balance itself out and certainly wouldn't provide a buffer against 13 years of profit.

You're forever claiming to be consistently profitable on here which is unusual in itself imo and contradictory to anyone that is successful. Your posts on here are full of cliches and old yarns which might impress a few old stagers on bar stools. There isn't any post you have ever made that would allow me to think you have an edge in any sport. Your posts on racing resemble that of a novice directly translating form without being able to even acknowledge the variance in conditions.

I believe Kelly in this instance.
He got irked when he was questioned but he wasn't able to put up his bets unlike Callitasucit who I also believe.

Kelly did however offer brilliant odds for those who disbelieve him,if I was in that camp I would have me hundred quid in hand and be heading for the Slieve Donard.

How can mentioning amounts of money lose you credibility,surely it makes your bets verifiable.
I'm not computer literate and know my limitations but by mentioning my bets I am exposing myself to being caught out if the bets aren't there.

The best bluff called here was done by Limestone Lad.
Kingrat said such and such a horse had no chance and he would lay it at 4 or 5/1,Limestone Lad said he would take 3/1 and put up 2000 to back at that price,it remained there in all its glory untouched,result spoofer exposed.

dj876 , will you take the bet ?

If not , shut up , and stop trying to put people down .

I find Kelly a honest guy and would find no reason to disbelieve him, i say well done to him and Callit for picking the winner; lets leave it at that.

Thanks you frank60 . To be honest the only reason I had an interest in the event ( given that I attended on Tuesday , Wednesday , Thursday , and Friday --which excluded me from my normal betting essentially ) was because my sister in law was stewarding for the week at RCD and she badgered me into doing a few bets between us  , just for interest .

Kjeldsen and Wood ( my selection on here) were joint leders after 2 rounds , I always trade out keeping some up my sleeve . I posted that on here at the time , without mentioning the names . There's many a slip twixt cup and lip .

I will take that as a climbdown dj876 .

The reason they closed my accounts is because I won money off all of them . Not sure why bookies close accounts , cant always be  because people are nicking the odds  . If someone nicks the odds and keeps losing , why would a bookie act ?  JP never closed accounts , he fed off them , which in my opinion is cleverer .

Anyone who does not arb when the opportunity presents itself is an idiot . The bottom line in any business is profit , if you figure out a legitimate way to make money only a fool would pass it up . Every business in the world lives on trade , betting is no different .

Badges of honour belong to the medieval ages , often associated with religious  and political crap . Profit is paramount , about the only topic on which Margaret Thatcher ( Lord rest her) and I would agree .

Well whatever about anyone else Kelly , I'm not climbing up or down . I've seen your type many many times , the ones that never lose. The geniuses who never cease to tell you how it's done. I don't believe a word you say regarding betting , not a syllable in fact.

mincer , anyone who has not figured out how to use the exchanges is wasting their time . I was a punter for nigh on 50 years before the exchanges came about . A selective punter though , non addictive , disciplined , and bookies were refusing some of my bets before the exchanges arrived .  Win only , or SP for instance .

I dont regard myself as a punter nowadays though , generally I look for something to lay , its easier to pick losers than winners . Not available through previous 50 years . And they also dont give out badges of honour for picking losers . Its low profile .

As with some of your other posts dj876 , I find myself scratching my head as to what you mean . the last sentence in your 23.23 post is "Always take the quick , unsustainable profit even if it closes your business " . Another fantasy / invention of yours re my posts ? What does your post mean ?

Profit is  alwaysdesirable , unless overheads outweigh it .  And being greedy often results in disaster , Celtic Tiger stuff . I have never been greedy .

I played golf every Sunday with Sean , Vubiant  , along with another bookie friend . And we talked betting for 4 hours or so in between shots .

Sean talked about" betting for the book " , he seldom if ever bet himself , at heart he was a layer . But a clever one as instanced in your post . And he hated anyone who bet each way , in fact the first bookie who ever refused me a bet was Sean himself when he was working for his uncle Matt in Townsend Street pitch . I did not know him then , but our paths crossed when I started to work in Dublin and he was betting through PF .

What I cannot figure out is how Kelly has trading by the short ones yet cannot figure out copy and paste?

All the one to me and anyone else on here Kelly whether you had the bet on. It’s the constant after timing that grinds peoples gears. It’s to no ones benefit. That along with the “re-inventing the wheel” jabber wouldn’t be long rubbing people up.

From what I can see, your MO is buy low, sell high. I’m sure anyone involved in trading had those sentiments in their mind when they joined betfair.

When I joined Betfair , Telltheking , the attraction was better odds , ability to lay , and limited in running availability . Other options became obvious to all but the blind , I advised any fellow punters I knew about the options . Few jumped the fence , guess it came down to an assertion my uncle always made--" Dont ever forget , 90% of people are lazy and will take the easy way out" . Inaction often the easy way out .

Betfair was based on the stock exchange matching principle . Guess who makes money on the stock exchange every day --the traders ! Whether it goes up or down generally . Some would find the stock exchange boring , I dont touch it myself , but if it makes you a few bob , why not .

Sharp minds on BF.

This is what remedial classes with Wonks and Kelly must have been like at school.

Good night Mr.Soros

Sean Graham was charismatic and innovative and Vubiants story captures him in a nutshell.

It also captures the present problem with gambling.
All seem to want risk free gambling.
Racecourse bookmakers nowadays just want to retail your money,the old idea of me against you is anathema to these gentlemen.

Its why Des Fox is still missed.
Its also why I am old fashioned in hating taking profit,you've had your bet just let it run.

Very good story Vubiant. Simple, but brilliant.

I wouldn't call many, if any, of the on course layer actual bookmakers anymore. Basically traders. And traders that are in the majority seriously lacking in balls.

" off course firms stuck money on horses to shorten them to reduce liabilities,now they stick money on horses that they know well cannot win "

Surely its your opinion they cannot win.
The statements are not contradictory as shortening the price is their aim.

One of those " cannot win " ones won,Alvaro in Dundalk I'm sure there are plenty of others.

Not fancied does not mean can't win.

Have any of them ever won ?

Am I wrong about Alvaro ( Mick Halford trained horse in green colours ) ?

Just a little note for DJ,in his book High Probability Trading, Marcel Link, states on page 13. I've have known people who have completely blown out $5,000 $25,000 $50,000 $100,000 and $5million accounts and everything in between; NO ONE IS IMMUNE. Except DJ it appears.

Fantasy again dj876 . Nowhere would I have said you should always take a profit shortsighted ( whatever that means) because simultaneous arbitrage is always shut down . I wouldn't even know what that was about  , it sounds like stock market speak .

What I have  said is that I invariably trade out when I see it is sensible , but it is on my own decision regarding odds . So with the referred to Dublin decision . Purely on basis that there is many a slip between cup and lip , and I am happy with some profit as against major winnings ( major winnings do not apply to a 1/5 shot before there is any comeback on that ) .

I back about 4 horses a year , have stated that many times . The fewer bets you have the more likely you are to win , people who bet in every race are the punters the bookies want , they want addictive gamblers in their shops despite the public stance . Numbers games should not be allowed in bookies shops . Put them in casinos or the like , and make them dress up to attend , we see that daily in the movies where people always win big . I wonder who sponsor the movies .

People world wide like to gamble in various scenarios . But they also need protection , and should not be ripped off odds wise as they are in certain countries . Our bookies make up their own rules , their own odds , they rely on addictive behaviour to make profit .  I dont mind if they give the punter a fighting chance , increasingly though they keep shutting doors and increasing the restrictions beloved of the bean counters .

Thank goodness for the exchanges , at least punters can see exactly whats on offer and for how much .  The bookies must hate the exchanges .