Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
ouch
26 Oct 18 20:14
Joined:
Date Joined: 02 May 09
| Topic/replies: 35 | Blogger: ouch's blog
Before I start, I am not crying here. I was heavy red on Lewis, and I wanted to lay it off today. I noticed this morning and into the afternoon, that there was some decent sized money coming in against Lewis. I took about half my red out against the money. However, it all looked wrong to me.
Lewis was free and clear. He had 40+% of the vote according to the polls and some of the most committed fans. They had already stated no more game changers, implying no more evictions. His odds should have been narrowing, not widening.
Why was this money coming in against Lewis so soon before an announcement? I want those accounts looked at. Were they new accounts. Was this unusual money? If all the money was legitimate
What just happened looked wrong. The trading today looked to me like insider knowledge. I want it to be looked into. If it was just people with massive green taking profit, I have no problem, but if it was insider knowledge, I want it looked into. How should I move this forwards?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 47
By:
Henry VIII
When: 26 Oct 18 20:19
"I was heavy red on Lewis, and I wanted to lay it off today."

How can you lay off a red?

The layers never went above low 2s.
By:
bearcub
When: 26 Oct 18 20:21
No more Gamechangers didn't imply no more evictions
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 20:23
Maybe I used terms you don't like. I was backing Lewis to remove the red, if you prefer that.
By:
blank
When: 26 Oct 18 20:23
I thought he drifted from around 2.1 to 2.5 until he suddenly shot out in minutes when the news broke. Is that what you saw?
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 20:24
"No more Gamechangers didn't imply no more evictions" - debatable, but there was no reason for the movement that I could see. And now we can see a very good reason for it. If the accounts all look normal, and the bets, I would not care. I want it to be looked at. I follow markets closely. This felt wrong to me.
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 20:26
"I thought he drifted from around 2.1 to 2.5 until he suddenly shot out in minutes when the news broke. Is that what you saw?"

Pretty much, but there was some decent money coming down. I am sure it could be nothing, but I was watching it thinking this is odd. It suited me so I didn't question it too much, however now I am wondering. Did the account, pushing the money know this was coming?
By:
timbuctooth
When: 26 Oct 18 20:28
I didn`t see it, couldn`t say if it was suspicious or not, but you`ve got no chance, it`s all part of the game.  The racing markets, for example, are formed entirely with insider knowledge, so if betfair were to look into every example of dodgy betting patterns, across all their markets, there`d be no betfair left!
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 20:29
He slightly drifted coz akeem and Cameron had market support today
Nothing suspicious at all imo
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 20:30
And I watch big brother markets every waking second
By:
Henry VIII
When: 26 Oct 18 20:35
I don't think I agree with that Tim. If there's clearly insider dealing why not check out the accounts involved.

However in this case I don't think there was. I think blank is right. I've just checked. There were lumps waiting to back Lewis in the mid 2s up until 16:53 (I have no record immediately beyond then). Then at 17:32 (no record immediately before that) the news was already public.

ouch if someone uses terms in an Alice and Wonderland nonsense way I ask them to clarify. Don't take it personally.
By:
Henry VIII
When: 26 Oct 18 20:37
There was also money waiting to lay Akeem in the mid 3s, but not so conclusive as with Lewis as only smaller amounts were visible.
By:
five leaves left
When: 26 Oct 18 20:45
I trust army on this matter Cool
By:
Henry VIII
When: 26 Oct 18 20:47
I can now say that the early bird hit BF at 17:23 which appears to be just after the twitter announcements.
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 20:47
Love
By:
Cider
When: 26 Oct 18 20:57
Betting on a show where the highlights are out of date, you should be aware that info can leak that is not in the public domain. Rule #1 of the majority of rtv betting. People will know the xf finalists before the judges' houses show is aired for example. Caveat emptor. Plus why would you match dodgy cash, and moan about it afterwards.
By:
bearcub
When: 26 Oct 18 21:16
Marathon bet just emailed me

Your bet on Cameron @11/2 has been reduced in price to 2/1


Do what they like these shysters....Angry
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 21:32
@Cider, I started with "I am not crying". This is a fun market to me. Buyer beware on these market, and I was more than happy to close out my bets at those odds. Doesn't mean illegal bets should not be investigated.
By:
Cider
When: 26 Oct 18 21:41
Yep you said you weren't crying in your first sentence, and then proceeded to cry for the rest of it!

I took about half my red out against the money. However, it all looked wrong to me.

So you sensed it was insider money, but took the risk anyway, and now it didn't work out you're crying foul Plain
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 21:42
"if someone uses terms in an Alice and Wonderland nonsense way I ask them to clarify. Don't take it personally." - I take nothing personally. I do however work in trading and we use 'lay off' to mean any form of reducing a risk position. So if someone has a positive or negative position on anything from pork bellies to FX Vega, we would say that you can lay off your position by taking a trade in the opposite direction. I am more than happy to agree that in betting, as opposed to trading, the term 'lay off' has a more specific negative bet meaning, so I bow to your crown, and hope you will not behead me as one of your wives.
By:
bearcub
When: 26 Oct 18 21:44
lol
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 21:44
"you sensed it was insider money, but took the risk anyway," - I thought it was weird. I had no idea it was insider money. It only occurred to me later that that was a possibility. I never cry about bets. It's only fun money.
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 21:47
Your’re funny, I would welcome more post Mr ouch Love
By:
Cider
When: 26 Oct 18 21:47
The trading today looked to me like insider knowledge

Was that before or after the announcement that Lewis had been booted Laugh
By:
five leaves left
When: 26 Oct 18 21:48
Stick to trading pork bellies would be my advice, ouch
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 21:53
dont trade with eddie murphy though Scared
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 21:54
"Stick to trading pork bellies would be my advice, ouch" - probably sage advice sir. However, in the round I did quite well out of it. I only managed to lay off half my red, meaning I am now stuck with plenty of green on the remaining housemates, so through more by luck than judgement, the milky bars are on me.
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 21:57
"dont trade with eddie murphy though" - Eddie Murphy always corners the market in pork bellies and frozen orange juice.
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 21:58
Cool quality film, one dollar bet LaughLaugh
By:
bearcub
When: 26 Oct 18 21:59
Works at McDonalds   NAP
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 22:01
says the man who got 2/1 about an 11/2 shot LaughLaughLove
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 22:02
any chance of another oner at 5.50 Mischief
By:
bearcub
When: 26 Oct 18 22:04
I'd say my book was better than yours Cool
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 22:04
btw, did u notice that the two tramps that Eddie Murphy gives a bag of cash to in Coming to America are the same two businessmen he destroyed in Trading Places?
By:
mach
When: 26 Oct 18 22:05
Shocked
By:
armagnac
When: 26 Oct 18 22:09
yes ouch, clever that was
By:
mach
When: 26 Oct 18 22:12
I watched Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and missed all the fun Sad
By:
ouch
When: 26 Oct 18 23:29
I told you there would be no more evictions. So... why was the favourite lengthening?
By:
Henry VIII
When: 27 Oct 18 00:09
Because people foolishly don't wait for your advise. (I said the same as you btw.)

There were convos on here saying he'd be evicted, convos talking up Cameron who was shortening. The majority view was that there would be an eviction.
By:
bearcub
When: 27 Oct 18 00:14
And there would have been if Lewis hadn't been ejected

They didn't want him winning imo and took the chance to get rid
Page 1 of 2  •  Previous 1 | 2 | Next
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com