- This topic has 143 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I doubt that Bookmakers of all people would lose customers inadvertently, they want our money and they are incredibly efficient at pocketing it.
This is exactly what they have been doing for the past 5 years.
Only 1 customer in 200 consistently wins even a modest amount each year.
Each new customer costs up to £900 to attract.
To stop the 1 in 200 winner, they ban 80 in 200 customers mostly long before they have recouped the £900.
Traders do not care, they would rather cut a customer out than get a bollicking for laying someone sharp. Senior management are no longer ex-bookies and do not seem to have a clue as to what is going on in their name.
Betfred announced they have now realised the balls up they have made on restrictions and are easing off.
Corals soon found they made good profits laying everyone on TV races.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?
Before internet betting and when horse racing was the major betting sport these type of restrictions were rare.
You could bet quite large sums in any shop as they hedged money off. If you won you could bet unrestricted the next day and the next day at the same shop – your money was as good as anybody elses. Arbs were as they should be today – totally irrelevant – they could not care less. The bookmaker managed his profits by the over-round, hedging and pushing the SPs down with tiny amounts of money on course. Winners were seen as a good advertisement to attract others in to try their luck.
Bookmakers have decided to get rid of their expert odds compilers and track Betfair prices. They have decided to use over harsh and inflexible banning methods. Pinnacle have not adopted that model and take large bets from anybody and ban nobody.
So the present “me too” method reduces profits by trying to cut out winners or mostly anyone who looks as if he might win.
Betfred are now easing off restrictions and are reopening banned accounts but it has taken them 5 years to realise it was reducing profits, not maximising them.There are alternative ways for bookmakers to make good money without restrictions and these ways have been used successfully since the 1700s. They seem to have no idea of making books anymore.
I doubt that Bookmakers of all people would lose customers inadvertently, they want our money and they are incredibly efficient at pocketing it.
Each new customer costs up to £900 to attract.
To stop the 1 in 200 winner, they ban 80 in 200 customers mostly long before they have recouped the £900.Your stats are miles out, so I’m not sure why I’m even asking. But where did you conjure those figures from? Let’s see some sources.
Also, Pinnacle no longer take bets on horse racing online.
Before internet betting and when horse racing was the major betting sport these type of restrictions were rare.
You could bet quite large sums in any shop as they hedged money off. If you won you could bet unrestricted the next day and the next day at the same shop – your money was as good as anybody elses. Arbs were as they should be today – totally irrelevant – they could not care less. The bookmaker managed his profits by the over-round, hedging and pushing the SPs down with tiny amounts of money on course. Winners were seen as a good advertisement to attract others in to try their luck.I was working in betting shops 40 years ago and there was a folder for managing ‘monitored customers’: it certainly wasn’t as tightly controlled as it is today, but you did not bet unrestricted.
Bookmakers have decided to get rid of their expert odds compilers and track Betfair prices. They have decided to use over harsh and inflexible banning methods. Pinnacle have not adopted that model and take large bets from anybody and ban nobody.
In that case Pinnacle will flourish and the rest of the companies will fade away
So the present “me too” method reduces profits by trying to cut out winners or mostly anyone who looks as if he might win.
Betfred are now easing off restrictions and are reopening banned accounts but it has taken them 5 years to realise it was reducing profits, not maximising them.If that’s the case, then others will use whatever Betfred are using to refine their methods and things should improve
There are alternative ways for bookmakers to make good money without restrictions and these ways have been used successfully since the 1700s. They seem to have no idea of making books anymore.
By hedging? If the only money to be laid off is smart money, who will they hedge with? And if not hedging then what are the alternative ways?
£900 to attract each customer.
I only got a £10 free bet….
Blackbeard to conquer the World
I never knew this thread existed
PP stance on things
” We take a ‘one-for-all’ rather than an ‘all-for-one’ view, so for instance if we’re prepared to lose €2m (£1.5m) on an event, we would much prefer to lose €2,000 to 1,000 different customers rather than €2m to one individual.’
Another account gone 2 days ago. Opened it with £200 in October 2015, never added to it and withdrew the initial deposit. Now with a current balance of £1200 Works out roughly £10 / week profit
They really need to update the banners on the websites ” Gamble irresponsibly ”
Time for the Australian model.
PP stance on things
” We take a ‘one-for-all’ rather than an ‘all-for-one’ view, so for instance if we’re prepared to lose €2m (£1.5m) on an event, we would much prefer to lose €2,000 to 1,000 different customers rather than €2m to one individual.’
Obviously as they are likely to get a greater percentage of the money lost back at a much faster rate.
Lostsoldier3 has the ability to make me sign in and comment….
Whenever I read anything this man says on this forum, I want to spit on the ground such is the nasty taste in my mouth. The British bookmaking industry, are the biggest scum bags in gambling. I hold a UK gaming licence, I’m a former highly trained Mayfair croupier. I understand odds and markets. I’ve been trained how to relieve the biggest gamblers at my table, of their hard earned. Taught to cheat, so I can read when someone is cheating at my table. Nothing comes close to these scum bags though. Licensed thieves. I do not understand how they get away with it. A Casino can refuse entry… Try getting in as a trained croupier… No chance. But that is pretty much cheating, so a fair cop. Casinos will not throw you out because you win a few quid. So why do bookmakers? Why are they closing all of these accounts really? It’s the game that got them where they are… The truth is, they are not interested in racing anymore…
Lostsoldier3 and his mob make all of their money, with no risk at all…. From FOB’s.
Licensed thieves, should be stripped of the term ‘bookmakers’… It’s a lie these days.
Nause, I’m glad I make you contribute at least. Maybe you’ll venture into the Big Races section and get stuck in with the chat over there too.
I hope you’ll apologise for some of the personal things you say about me. I hope anyone who reads my posts on the forum or knows me in person can tell that I’m in love with horse racing and sees that I devote so much of my life to the sport besides the working day. You’re entitled to be anti-bookmakers – I’m sure you have your reasons and I’ll try to hear you out. I know I’ve made mistakes on the politeness score myself (especially on this forum) in the past but I’m trying to make my points more gently now. I also want you to show me some decency while we disagree.
I like to think I’m a fairly intelligent person with decent moral standards and courage in my convictions. I’ve worked in the betting industry for three years now and, for all that I love it, don’t think that I have to do what I do. I’ve got a relatively clear conscience and I hope you’ll at least trust that I’ve weighed up the issues, probed the common allegations and made a thought-out decision to defend the bookmakers. A few of my beliefs in brief, just to set out my stall:
1. Closure of betting accounts is hugely exaggerated. Accounts don’t get closed ‘if you win’ (at least not at the firms I have experience with) and those peddling that myth generally know the truth. Especially with the fragile egos of Twitter, a closed account is seen as a badge of honour and I’m sure many insecure users feel the need to pretend. I also think it is in the interests of the arbers and chisellers to paint the picture of unfair practice to try to force ill-informed regulators to make a change that brings them back into play. Truly, if you play straight form-based selections with no dirty angle and beat the overrounds to win on a consistent basis, you are a rare and special breed and it is in any firm’s interests to keep your account open as a marker. If Hugh Taylor would offer to stop writing columns and exclusively bet with us in exchange for some sort of guaranteed lay to lose £X deal, we’d snap him up in an instant. Winning punters have enormous value to a bookmaker.
2. IMO a bookmaker is fully entitled to close an account where the majority of business is arbing, linetracking, angleshooting and bonus abuse. Also if not playing your own money or money laundering. It’s just not cricket and you should have no complaints.
When I was 18, I lost my StanJames for backing palps and arbs. I deserved it.3. The each-way system needs to be scrapped in races with a bad each-way shape. Bookmakers should offer win-only and place-only to solve the problem. Then straight bets would be laid without any angleshooting and bookmakers’ prices could be more competitive against Betfair. TimJames was not in favour of the idea…why?
4. FOBTs – yes, a thorny issue and I must admit that they make me uncomfortable. Like casinos, I suppose they do prey upon people with a poor grasp of game theory. If you sit at a blackjack table or a roulette table, you are making a -EV decision. If you play a FOBT, it’s the same. These things are addictive and non-critical thinkers believe they can beat them. Should they all be blanket banned or are they just a consequence of free will and capitalism in our society? People must be free to spunk their money away if they’re balancing the fun of the game v the risks and deciding that the equation works for them. We (bookmakers, society, government) just need to make sure that everyone is going through that sort of healthy non-addict thought process before they play. I can’t think of a practical way to enforce that off the top of my head, so perhaps the inevitable incoming cap on stakes per spin is the answer. I only hope that other mediums such as online bingo, roulette, blackjack etc are subject to exactly the same restrictions at the same time, otherwise it would be rather unfair.
So, Nause, point taken and generally agreed about the FOBTs. That’s personally speaking, all views mine etc.
The view that bookmaking is dead and that firms operate risk-free is wide of the mark, though. In-house compiling teams still exist, back their judgement, take big positions and lay large bets. I see big red numbers on my screen every day.
PP stance on things
” We take a ‘one-for-all’ rather than an ‘all-for-one’ view, so for instance if we’re prepared to lose €2m (£1.5m) on an event, we would much prefer to lose €2,000 to 1,000 different customers rather than €2m to one individual”
As Paddy Power are never best price on horses what if 1000 different customers don’t want to avail themselves of backing a horse to win 2 grand but only a handful do. Do both Paddy Power and the levy miss out on all that extra money they would have had if laying it to less individuals, for more?
Whenever I see that Paddy Power interviewed on tv the first thing that comes into my head is “What a slimeball”
A red herring I’m afraid from PP, you’d be lucky to get a fiver on with the cowboys.3. The each-way system needs to be scrapped in races with a bad each-way shape. Bookmakers should offer win-only and place-only to solve the problem. Then straight bets would be laid without any angleshooting and bookmakers’ prices could be more competitive against Betfair. TimJames was not in favour of the idea…why?
Rather than asking why Tim James is not in favour shouldn’t you be asking Clare or Stevens why bookmakers are not in favour?
The present system continues solely for the benefit and want of the bookmakers. As you point out the bookmakers win odds in races with a bad each way shape are a half, a third, a quarter etc of whats available on Betfair, because of course those odds are taken only from bookmakers who are betting each way at the track. A scam if ever there was one as most bookies at the track will be betting win only.Even then at the vastly restricted odds I would imagine you would still struggle to get a decent each way bet on with the scum most of the time.
Then you get clowns like Naughton on RUK going on about thieving each way bets, most of which finish out of the frame.The system continues because bookmakers end up returning vastly lower prices for horses than they should be. Why would they want to change that? And they don’t.
Lostsoldier3, I give you credence too although I may not have shown it so far, the reason you wind me up… Is also a reason you should be applauded… I’ve never seen a representative of the British bookmaking industry, try to justify the unjustifiable before, not in public.
As a serious punter, who tends not to embrace the exchanges… Corals are the very worst ‘bookmakers’ going. They all have their periods in time of refusing bets… But Corals are without any shadow of a doubt, the very most gutless of the lot on a permanent basis. You do not want to take bets, from anyone who you deem to have ANY clue at all about horse racing. That is a cast iron fact lostsoldier3. I know it, every single other serious punter on this forum knows it too. You can sing on about arbers till the cows come home… It falls on deaf ears as we all live with the reality on a daily basis… And it’s getting worse.
Ten years ago… I could walk into any bookmakers in London… As an unknown… And get £2-300 on a horse to win with no trouble apart from a phone call to head office. Every bookmakers in the area I lived, may have had A4 pages with a funny little name on for me under the counter… Some including Corals may have done other strange things… Like allow me to get my money on… As long as I was at the shop 15 mins before opening time… But then along came the internet.
I win no more or no less these days than I did back then… But I’ve not had a bet in my name for ten years now. I cannot get a bet on online in my name. I’ve never ‘arbed’… I’ve never ‘bonus abused’… I do not back E/W. I run a very successful internet based business of my own… I don’t have the bloody time! Yet it is near impossible for me to get my money on… I have to do it in £50’s… Not with Corals… You lot will not take a £50 bet from anyone… Unless they are a loser. With the advent of FOBT’s… You lot have lost all need or will, to even posses a pair of kahonnoas. This is why you should not be called ‘bookmakers’ anymore…
Comparing a random roulette wheel, to a FOBT… How quaint. So Fred puts £5 on number 17 at the casino… If the ball drops into 17, Fred gets paid out at 35-1. There are 37 possible outcomes. Like to truthfully break down the FOBT’s and Freds chances? In a casino there are clued up punters… Long term winning punters… They can watch a weak dealer spin patterns… And walk up to the table at the right time with the info of where that ball is going to drop. It’s part of the game, it’s not cheating… It’s the casinos duty to ensure they stay ahead of these punters.. By removing weak dealers from the floor, the moment they walk in. It’s all part of the game called gambling. When you stack the odds so far in your favour, and then only accept losers… Expect flack. You need to wake up you lot as an industry. You’re killing it, you’re making everyone hate you more than they ever did. You’re strangling horse racing, and the very life blood of it. You’re destroying communities with your shiny little shops full up with machines, designed to do real damage…
One day a strong government will destroy your little venture… But you will have alienated the entire UK horse racing industry by then. As an example… When looking to put a wager on… I do not even look at Corals price on Oddschecker… It will normally be the biggest. But it’s a joke, it’s a totally unattainable thing these days… Unless you have proved over a period of time that you are a loser. That’s not bookmaking Lostsoldier3…
These days, you get accounts closed not even for winning money!! You get them closed just for beating SP on a regular basis. A strong government needs to get hold of you lot, and shake you right up. Please do not make out in public that you want FOBT’s sorted, you’ll get the sack if they see you muttering that. I would not want that.
1. Closure of betting accounts is hugely exaggerated. Accounts don’t get closed ‘if you win’ (at least not at the firms I have experience with) and those peddling that myth generally know the truth
Would the truth be that whilst few accounts are actually closed, many more are restricted to the point of de facto closure
Truly, if you play straight form-based selections with no dirty angle and beat the overrounds to win on a consistent basis, you are a rare and special breed and it is in any firm’s interests to keep your account open as a marker
Well, I’ve long thought that should be the case, so to hear it from the horse’s mouth, as it were, one can only assume this wholly sensible practice is true
As an aside, you somewhat hardened Young Fella, are Credit Accounts still available and existing ones usable? I must still have about ten that’ve lain dormant since the millennium was young
I think it’s a very big price that you believe this, Nause (I’ll probably buy at 16/1!) but I must have had more than 50 shop bets of 3, 4 and 5 figures referred to me yesterday. Granted, it was Goodwood, but I approved every single one.
The most common reason I have for knocking something back is arbing – it’s the truth. It’s incredible how often a shop punter’s diligent form research suddenly makes them find the one that dips under on Betfair at that exact moment.
Rather than asking why Tim James is not in favour shouldn’t you be asking Clare or Stevens why bookmakers are not in favour?
Hi Yeats, I did ask the higher-ups about this. Coral actually introduced place-only before my time (circa 2010 I think) but we only took peanuts on it and it wasn’t worth keeping alive. Each-way is just so deeply etched into the public mind – it’s what they know and what they like, even if it is a wonky system.
Maybe with better marketing it would stand a chance.
The internet has killed it. It has allowed the ‘games’ to become computerised. It’s not just FOBT’s. If you think that in an online gambling casino, the randomness of the game is the same as it is in a real life casino… You’re so very naive.
Why take lots of money on a more random outcome… IE horse racing… Things have moved on now… They (bookmakers) put all their eggs in the basket of the computerised games… Why? Because their profits have boomed since these things came along with the internet. The games have changed… The ways for them to make their money risk free, at a much faster rate have superseded horse racing.
In the old days of shops… They could only keep tabs on the very high stakes winning punters… It was impossible to keep tabs on everyone. Now they do… Now programs analyse every single punter… They can pick and choose who they want to ‘play’ with.
Never underestimate how many scumbags will rush down to their local betting shop first thing to try to back a small arb at Roscommon.
Regular punters aren’t really affected in these stories. Perhaps a few are caught in the crossfire when they inadvertantly get on an arb, bad e-w or palp, but (as always) the message from the other side is that anyone who bets straight and can beat the overround deserves their money.
Personally I am cynical about how many supposedly enraged punters are telling the truth here. As Matron’s article revealed, a minute number of punters are actually affected by restrictions, with many probably being multi-accounters. Pride and ego play a huge role in betting and social media, so I suspect that many of those whining about restricted accounts are actually straight unrestricted losing punters trying to play the part of downtrodden winners. It’s hard to admit you’re not good enough to beat the game, especially if you’re a forum/Twitter secondlifer who feeds on likes and followers.
Not so much with horse racing, but if you know your greyhounds at specific tracks (I’m a Romford specialist), and can access the early prices, you won’t last a year.
Bet365 for the Friday weekly open meeting genuinely have know idea. So often they open up greyhounds in the morning at 11/4 that by the race that night, are going off 11/10. If you are shrewd and have down the card a few days before and know what price you want and wait for them to come out about 11am, you can get the huge odds.
Even if the greyhound is beat, do that 20 times and beat SP so easily, account will be shut down.
Getting a bet on the earlier for the dogs is a mission in itself for many.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.