- This topic has 143 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 8 years ago by
.
- Posts
“But aside from the legalities, strip it back to basics: if you ran a business, any business, and you were able to prevent a customer damaging/potentially damaging your profits, would you do so?”
I wouldn’t disagree with that statement.
As there are now several “betting exchanges” available at least people have other options.
Lost Soldier – why are arbers ‘scumbags’? Bookmakers ALWAYS try to bet with percentages in their favour why does a punter trying to do the same become a ‘scumbag’?
On closing of accounts – bookmakers are not obliged to accept bets from anyone. It is frustrating and annoying when they restrict/close accounts but, as some have pointed out, it is their prerogative to do so.
They obviously want losing bettors, mug punters, who’ll play casino games, bingo, etc, and are particularly attracted to lower income personnel who’ll pump money into FBOTs. The stuff you’ll see on TV today (the PR lads and lasses talking about £50k bets at Ascot) is just window dressing, back of the shop are number crunchers weeding out margin from the unwitting.The UK Horseracing Bettors Forum are getting involved in this topic here
I remember I bet in a corals a few years back
Was doing big bets and won quite a lot over the course of a few months
came in and tried to stick 300 on and was told I was restricted to only betting 25 quid a race, manager said it wasn’t his fault but area manager had told him to put this restriction on
so you can see it’s hardly just arbers who get restrictions put on
Bookies love handing it out but when you give them a bit back they dont like it.
Ironcially probably cost them a small fortune as I went and bet somewhere else and my luck well and truly turned at that point
yeats/stilvi –
Since you immediately stooped to name-calling and misguided personal attacks against me (not the first time) then I can’t give you that much credit. I presume you’re much older than I am so why do I have to tell you how a debate works?
Is there a particular reason you keep confusing me with stilvi?
Doubt you need many lessons with name calling looking at your posts here referring to “scumbags” and that you doubt even 2% of respondents were “straight” without a shred of evidence.
If 2% of bookmakers were “straight” it would be a start
steeplechasing needs to look at the bigger picture rather than always from the bookmakers and their profits point of view.
As the HBF article points out what untold damage to the sport is being done by bookmakers attitude of turning off punters from the sport by only accomodating losers. British horse racing can’t continue to haemorrhage punters and people who just like to follow horse racing and have the odd bet.
As Rust is in supposed denial about the problem it’s more than likely he realises he’s incapable of doing anything about it so feels it’s best to bluff his way along.Bookmakers bad for punters, bad for racing and don’t forget both main exchanges are owned by non ABP bookmakers.
yeats, Rust set up the HBF which produced those accounts closure stats.
Would you care, for once, to answer my question? What would you do if you owned the business?
steeplechasing,
I know Rust initiated the HBF, it doesn’t mean he has to agree with any of it’s findings or censor what they look at. He has previously been interviewed about the issue a few months ago on RUK and said he didn’t see any problems regards it.
It’s irrelevant what I or anyone else would do, that would not make it right. What untold damage are bookmakers doing to British horse racing by turning people away from the sport. They just want losers and their FOBT’s, something that should never have been allowed in betting shops in the first place
It’s not irrelevant. This whole debate is driven by emotion and self-interest (among punters). I’m a punter. I’ve been restricted, but I’d never complain because I’d do the same as they are doing.
If, in the bookie’s position you would do things differently, say so. If you would do the same then you’re being hypocritical in your criticism of it.
From what I’ve seen on here steeplechasing, I definitely would not be banning or restricting you in any way
Think you’re misguided if you think most are driven by self-interest. Is that why you think Simon Rowlands & Co have addressed the issue on the HBF? Some can see the long term damage it is doing to horse racing as well as to punters.
It’s not irrelevant. This whole debate is driven by emotion and self-interest (among punters). I’m a punter. I’ve been restricted, but I’d never complain because I’d do the same as they are doing.
If, in the bookie’s position you would do things differently, say so. If you would do the same then you’re being hypocritical in your criticism of it.
The point is as I said in my earlier post in a lot of cases restricting punters can end up costing a bookies profit anyway.
it could just be that the punter is having a good run of luck.
you are right to say they are running a business so the only people they need to answer to are shareholders, not the punters.
however their attitude winds people up. for example I did a winning bet a few months ago. Payout was 650. The cashier spent about half an hour on the phone checking that it was the right price when I placed the bet, no doubt desperate to void the bet. On the other hand they are more than happy to take your money when you lose. When you win it’s an effort even getting paid out.
If the bookmakers treated their customers with a bit more respect then they wouldn’t turn them off and would probably attract more business and make larger profits.
Lost Soldier – why are arbers ‘scumbags’? Bookmakers ALWAYS try to bet with percentages in their favour why does a punter trying to do the same become a ‘scumbag’?
Bookmakers are businesses: the overround is a necessity to make money. That is not the same as arbing, which is quite literally theft. Arbers exploit an imperfect system to steal money from bookies and exchange players alike.
Quite aside from that, it’s not in the spirit of the game. As a straight punter, I want to make money from my own insights, research and efforts. Being consistently profitable is a sacred goal that you can only reach through years of hard work. Bookmakers (who rely on human traders with their own opinions and principles, don’t forget) are quite right to stamp out the arbing chancers who try to scrounge their way into the black.
‘Theft’, ‘scumbags’, ‘scroungers’ and ‘Spirit Of The Game’. I’ve heard it all now. That’s rich from someone who works for a bookmaker that bases a major part of its business overseas to avoid paying into the sport it uses for its own gain (and avoiding tax of course). Talk about sponging.
LostSoldier, I can see no difference between arbers and bookmakers here; both are using technology to get an edge. To say arbers are not businessmen is to misunderstand that many of them are indeed very astute businessmen making a good living.
thejudge – yes bookies will be barring punters who would have contributed to their profits. But that is obviously acceptable collateral damage caused by the algorithms. Eventually they’ll refine those algos to get as close to perfection as possible. They have huge resources behind this.
From a personal viewpoint, I like it no better than anyone else. But complaining is like moaning about someone being barred from a pub when all he ever does is buy one pint then breaks fifty glasses. Now, if he bought five cases of champagne on every visit, he could probably break as many glasses as he likes.
Bookmakers are no different from anyone else trying to run a business. It’s daft to suppose they are, which, in this case is exactly what many are doing.
thejudge – yes bookies will be barring punters who would have contributed to their profits. But that is obviously acceptable collateral damage caused by the algorithms. Eventually they’ll refine those algos to get as close to perfection as possible. They have huge resources behind this.
From a personal viewpoint, I like it no better than anyone else. But complaining is like moaning about someone being barred from a pub when all he ever does is buy one pint then breaks fifty glasses. Now, if he bought five cases of champagne on every visit, he could probably break as many glasses as he likes.
Bookmakers are no different from anyone else trying to run a business. It’s daft to suppose they are, which, in this case is exactly what many are doing.
It’s not the same thing. You are doing something wrong by damaging glasses you are doing nothing wrong by winning bets. That is the business bookmakers are in. If they only accept losers that’s bordering on theft given the nature of their business.
Bookmakers should accept that they will lose at the hands of some punters and set REASONABLE restrictions.
Even I don’t expect them to go bankrupt but banning winning punters is disgraceful practice and to me it isn’t even debatable given the nature of the business they are in.
Yeah as IB above me said the difference is that punters are encouraged through advertising to place winning bets, just seen some Ladbrokes ad where Kamara and McCoist were applauding a guy for putting on a good European football bet because the guy “knows his European football”. Yet when you do win (long term) you get your account restricted.
Just complete hypocrisy imo and the whole art of being a bookie is to take risk, if these firms don’t want risk then they should open another venture.
What a surprise Lostsoldier defending bookies!!
This is the same man who defends Corals (his employers) when they blatantly mistreat customers.
We all have tales to tell regarding bad treatment by bookies but most of us realise that circumstances are never going to change and “play the game” to try to get on.
What is wrong with punters playing the game as well as bookies???
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.