- This topic has 26 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
At the time it seemed to me that 2001 was a great year for punters.
On-course betting tax of 4% gone, off-course 10% tax gone, and the introduction of Gross Profits Tax created a landscape which facilitated the rise of the betting exchange business model.
2001 was a year that created a new generation of professional punters.
Where did it all go wrong?
Because here we are in 2021 and….
The on-course bookies are mostly wired to Betfair, so the days of a collectively Tattersalls/Silver Ring overbroke betting ring are gone, recreational punter sheep queue for identical odds on virtually every board.
Off-course, you are restricted or closed down if you so much as bet on back-to-back shorteners, regardless of whether they win or lose.
And even betting exchanges have tired of professionals winning more off the losers than they make in commission and have introduced the premium charge.
And racing seems almost complicit in this.
The Levy is based on bookmaker racing profits – ie punters’ collective losses – so racing has reason to detest winning punters every bit as much as bookies and even betting exchange operators apparently do.
Racing certainly doesn’t lift a finger to provide reliable data for punters who take betting seriously.
Misleading going reports, confusing (over)watering policy, unlike other countries, the UK punter is not well informed, in fact it’s a deteriorating service.
In a sense I kinda get it – successful professional punters are, by definition, net “takers out” of a game that badly needs “putters in” (net unsuccessful owners and losing punters) to survive.
But if you blatantly kill “the dream” – the notion you can win long-term at betting, won’t that destroy turnover in the long-term?
Is there a solution?
There is, but it would probably require a combination of legislation and racing denying bookmakers and betting exchanges continued data rights to bet on UK racing next time those rights are up for renewal.
Instead, a racing Tote monopoly and maybe a racing exchange monopoly too, though tbh the BHA would be about as keen on the pros winning the lion’s share of the profits via the latter as commercial exchange operators like Betfair are.
But I personally think a racing Tote monopoly might work and be a win-win for all.
It would fund racing properly and professionals could use it unrestricted.
It’s not great if you only keep your head above water by betting fixed odds on the “ricks,” but that’s not a sustainable way to win off bookies long-term and I’d argue you can only make this game pay long-term by identifying value bets on horses that hold their price
However, achieving that monopoly would require huge lobbying in the face of betting industry counter lobbying.
Many would argue the opportunity to launch that ship has long gone.
That’s my verdict on the last 20 years.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"To pick up on one point: misleading going reports are very annoying.
I went to the November Saturday meeting at Aintree about two years ago. The going report was good to soft. I placed a few bets before going to track and chose horses who I thought would appreciate a bit of better ground.
The weather stayed dry in the morning and during the first race. Then when I was watching the runners in the paddock for the second race, an announcement came over the tannoy saying the going had been changed to soft!
Needless to say, the horses I had backed all lost. I doubt I would have backed any of them if the Clerk of the Course had done their job properly and reported an accurate going description.
“the days of a collectively Tattersalls/Silver Ring overbroke betting ring are gone”
What does this mean ID? Excuse my ignorance.
BUY THE SUN
TTC, when I first started going racing in 1977 there were no early prices off course (unless it was a really big race) and the first show would be in the Silver Ring (cheaper enclosure) followed by layers in Tatts (the more expensive Grandstand).
Despite tic tac men watching boards you often got wild fluctuations – eg a horse is 11/4 fav in Tatts and you walk into the Silver Ring and it’s 6/1!
It all evened itself out by the Off but looking at best odds in both enclosures they were often “overbroke” (to a book percentage of less than 100%) and while it wasn’t practical to try to run round backing literally everything it did indicate great value (despite the 4% tax back then) for punters collectively.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Cheers. Sounds great. Another reason to add to the list of why I believe I’d have been better off born 40 years earlier.
BUY THE SUN
I was born in 1963 and every time I watch my dvd of the IMO all-time Classic racing movie “The Rainbow Jacket” I wish I had been born even earlier!
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"I highly recommend it.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"But I personally think a racing Tote monopoly might work and be a win-win for all.
It would fund racing properly and professionals could use it unrestricted.
You only need to look at Hong Kong to see that a Tote monopoly can work. Sure it’s a small country where racing is one of the few legal bets available but from what I have seen some pretty serious betting goes on there with consistently good prize money.
France also has very good prize money compared with here and at a guess racing is probably more niche there than it is here (happy to be corrected).
I wouldn’t put so much as a pound at 1000 on it happening any time soon though, if ever.
The problem with a Tote monopoly, is the monopoly. No competition means no incentive to keep the price down, or in the case of a Tote system, to keep the percentage takeout from the pool as low as possible.
How long before all the various members of the alphabet soup were clamouring for an increased takeout to fund higher prize money?
And none of those asking for more would want to recognise that the higher the takeout, the quicker the punter loses his money, and the less likely the high stakes players are to keep playing. This is exactly what happened in the US – if you have a copy of Beyer On Speed, read pages 174 – 178.
The French system depends almost entirely on the money bet on the daily Tierce, as opposed to what goes into the win and place pools. I once placed a win bet of 1000 francs (then about £100) on a 16/1 shot and thirty seconds later, the price was 6/1. And that was a Group 1 race at Longchamp.
Hong Kong is the ultimate monopoly, with the racing the only (legal) game in town and they openly welcome large syndicates betting direct into their system. Hard to imagine anything run by the racing authorities in this country not being overwhelmed by that type of player!
Hong Kong is often put up as the gold standard for an optimum tote system for government / bettors but it’s quite unique in regards the small data set (fixed pool of horses, jockeys, racetracks etc), appetite for gambling amongst the public and administration of the jurisdiction by the jockey club there.
What the optimum Eco system between exchange / bookmaker/ tote is I don’t know but there are positives and negatives to all. If you bet into a tote or betting exchange what proportion of the money in the pool is seeded by syndicates receiving kick backs in the form of a rebate from the operator for example? Is there a liquidity issue / penal takeout issue as in the French example above ? If you bet with a bookmaker will they shut up shop once they realize they cant win or use the information they have from the a/c to generate an edge on their side?
The one thing which is consistent no matter what jurisdiction you look at and which will always be a constant is whats in it for the government to license betting
Tatling, there was a big survey done recently and taking into account many factors 1960 was the best year to be born which happens to be when I was born. Everything about racing and betting was better in the 70/80s. I remember telling my mate to back swain at 20/1 in the king George and he got a holiday out of that. So much easier then to shop around and get decent prices. Only time you get decent prices now is when the bookies get it totally wrong unfortunately.
Back then, ante-Post betting was so different.
No way would any 2yo winning a maiden – no matter by how far or in what time – have been less than 33/1 for a Classic.
And El Gran Senor was 8/1 for the 2,000 Guineas AFTER winning the Dewhurst.
Ditto Shergar, 8/1 for The Derby AFTER winning at Sandown by ten lengths as a 3yo.
Salsabil was 20/1 for the 1,000 Guineas AFTER winning the Group 1 Prix Marcel Boussac.
Nowadays I reckon you’d briefly get 3/1, 3/1 and 6/1 after such performances and you see Maiden winners quoted at less than 20/1 for Classics having never even run in a Pattern race.
Bookmakers weren’t all run by accountants back then and a few took pride in a fearless reputation.
That’s all long gone now.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Galileo won his maiden by 14 lengths and was quoted at 25/1 for the Derby afterwards.
What price would an O’Brien horse which won a maiden by a similar margin be quoted at today?
When I first started going racing, the betting ring was an exciting place to be. Now it is almost dead. I can only assume some bookmakers have private wealth and just do it as a hobby, because they cannot be making a living on a handful of £2 and £5 bets.
It’s all guesswork, but I would estimate a 2021 Aidan O’Brien-trained 14-length 2yo maiden winner by Galileo would be quoted at an absolute maximum of 10/1 for a 2022 Classic afterwards and very possibly shorter.
It would be assumed to be Group 1 material – even though the race it had won was several levels below that – and plenty of modern-day punters would be happy to buy into that assumption.
I hardly ever bet long-term ante-post any more – the value dried up years ago.
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"Would he really be as big as 10/1?
When High Definition won his maiden last year by about a neck after staying on strongly in the final furlong from a poor position, I am sure he was quoted around 12/1.
He has not won a race this year and was beaten out of sight when favourite for the Irish Derby, albeit after a stumble in the early stages.
Funnily enough, after my post, I googled High Definition as a contemporary case in point.
Apparently he was a top-priced 12/1 immediately after narrowly winning the Beresford subsequent to his maiden.
I couldn’t find a report on his maiden win.
But I think we are in broad agreement and the 10/1 I suggested was a maximum.
We should start a “Shocking Classic Ante Post Quote Watch” thread for modern-day maiden winners – we won’t be short of material!
I am "The Horse Racing Punter" on Facebook
https://mobile.twitter.com/Ian_Davies_
https://www.facebook.com/ThePointtoPointNHandFlatracingpunter/
It's the "Millwall FC" of Point broadcasts: "No One Likes Us - We Don't Care"
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.