- This topic has 28 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
Anyone read the story of the man who put an acca on it snowing in about 24 places at xmas? It did but Ladbrokes only accept singles but he didn’t know this. Do they make this clear enough or does he have the right to threaten legal action? Not that he will get far….
Related contingencies would be invoked, and the ‘Palpable Error’ joker would be played.
Yer man has no chance.
- Total Posts 17716
The punter is behaving disgracefully
Sadly these are the sort of folk that get involved in the seedy world of gambling – people who want something for nothing
I’d like to see the miserable wretch birched in an attempt to thrash some moral rectitude into him. And I’d flog him myself, if need be!
The punter is behaving disgracefully
Sadly these are the sort of folk that get involved in the seedy world of gambling – people who want something for nothing
I’d like to see the miserable wretch birched in an attempt to thrash some moral rectitude into him. And I’d flog him myself, if need be!
To be fair, if I thought I’d won £7million and then got a call saying…. ‘Nah mate you’ve won £31’ I think i’d be a little bit f^cked off too!
Even if the bet had been valid he still would not have picked up £7m.
Don’t Ladbrokes have a £100k maximum payout on non-racing bets?
- Total Posts 17716
If I had a Betting Office or two in the North East, I might try to stimulate a bit of betting interest with a novelty market – I might attract a new customer or two
I might offer a market for "will it snow in your town on the first day of Spring, 21st march"
I might offer
7/1 Newcastle
7/1 Gateshead
7/1 South Shields
7/1 SunderlandIf someone were to turn up in my office trying to put this down as an acca – I’d respond by kicking them up the arse.
I’m offering 7/1, as they well know, not multiplied odds (4000/1) that could potentially bankrupt me.
Birch the *******.
- Total Posts 17716
For those of you who are interested, Man City play Blackburn tomorrow
Go into Your local Ladbrokes and try the following in an acca
Result : Draw
Correct Score 0-0
HT/FT: Draw/Draw
First Goalscorer : No First Goalscorer
Last Goalscorer : No Last Goalscorer
Under 2.5 goalsIf you only place a tenner with one of the part timers no-one will notice your acca going through. She’ll get the sack and criticism, not you!
This bloke who’s pressing for this isn’t some hard done by punter who has been ripped off by a big company, he’s trying to stitch Ladbrokes up, and in doing so is trying to blemish Ladbrokes reputation by suggesting that they are welshers – which they emphatically are not!
You people who advocate this make me honk
I don’t know the details of this bet so can’t comment on whether this bloke is trying it on or not. However, we have discussed a few times on this forum the ‘palpable error’ rule (see Wit on Anglo Darren Thread) and have established no punter should simply accept this as an excuse in any circumstances.
On the matter of Related Contingencies I would be interested to know what evidence would be produced to prove a related contingency on it snowing in Edinburgh and London at some time during the same day, for example.
- Total Posts 17716
I’m sure that some historical weather reports for the two cities could be produced if needed
If it were snowing in one of the cities (say London) I would think that the probability of it snowing in the other, Glasgow, would increase. I’m pretty certain that it wouldn’t decrease.
I’m sure that some historical weather reports for the two cities could be produced if needed
If it were snowing in one of the cities (say London) I would think that the probability of it snowing in the other, Glasgow, would increase. I’m pretty certain that it wouldn’t decrease.
If it’s snowing in London it’s not definite to snow in Glasgow.
I think ‘Snow-gate’ is a lot different to your football example.
If there is no goalscorer in a game then it’ll definitely be 0-0 and a draw in both halves.
It’s not DEFINITE to snow in Glasgow or Cardiff or wherever if London has snow.
Paul’s right though. Ladbrokes maximum pay out is £1million so quite where this punter got £7million from is a little strange and that part IS sounding like he’s trying to stitch them up…..unless he placed the bet 7 times!
If it were snowing in one of the cities (say London) I would think that the probability of it snowing in the other, Glasgow, would increase. I’m pretty certain that it wouldn’t decrease.
I not sure what an increase in probability has to do with it. The Related Contingencies rule covers the outcome of one part of the bet directly contributing to the outcome of another.
Therefore, imv unless it can be proven every time in snows in Edinburgh it snows in London how is one part of the bet directly contributing to the other?
- Total Posts 17716
The point I was making about probabilities is that the chance of snow in one place is increased by it snowing in another place. The closer the two places are the more effect it has on the chances – roughly speaking.
It’s not 100% certain that if it snows in Brighton it snows in Hove, but the chances are dramatically increased if it does snow there
Are Zen has this bang on
We are not dealing with certainties here: ‘definite’ ‘will’ ‘will not’ ‘infinity/1’ ‘1/infinity’ but how the outcome of one event affects the probability (possibilty) and chance (odds) of another happening.
It strikes me as plainly obvious that if it snows in one city the chance (odds) of it doing so in another is altered, just as the winner of the King George has its chance of winning the Gold Cup altered – the related contingency
Therefore before the events:
say it was 7/1 to snow in London and 5/1 to snow in Edinburgh
say it was 7/1 to win the KG and 5/1 to win the GCIt snows in London and horse wins the KG; by implication this increases the chance (reduces the odds) of it snowing in Edinburgh and the horse winning the GC
Doesn’t mean it will ‘definitely’ snow or win
Which is why no bookmaker would (or should) offer you the full-cover double of 48/1 (7/1×5/1) it snowing in both or horse winning both
If requesting the double you would be offered say 25/1 (4/1×4/1) or in the case of strongly inter-dependent events such as snow in x and y, singles only
An ‘unrelated contingency’ (two independent events) would be 7/1 snow in London 5/1 x to win the GC. The full-cover double of 48/1 would (or should) be laid by the bookie
Personally I wouldn’t birch the punter who attempts to get away with related full-cover multiples, just report him for attempted fraud.
However, that Ladbrokes allowed such a glaring example to slip through beggars belief
If bets are now to be enforceable by law also means the punter must abide by the law too, and face the full consequences if breaking it
Even if the bet had been valid he still would not have picked up £7m.
Don’t Ladbrokes have a £100k maximum payout on non-racing bets?
The payouts vary by sport ie. it’s much higher for Premiership football compared to Bowls or Snooker.
The max payout on Special bets is £10,000.
Drone, the ruling to void bets has nothing to do with the odds it’s about one event directly contributing the the outcome of another event, for example, if I place a double on a football match;
Correct score 0-0 & No Goal Scorer – what I have done is place a double (two events happening) on one outcome – one part of the bet ‘directly contributes’ to the other and this is clearly a related contingence.
In the case of placing a double on it snowing in Edinburgh and London on the same day where does one ‘directly contribute’ to the other to make the bet void?
To use your KG & GC example – would there be a related contingence to make the bet void if I placed a double on a horse winning the Derby and the following years Cheltenham Gold Cup?
These rules are taken from Sean Graham Bookmakers site:
Related Contingencies
Multiple bets are not accepted where the outcome of one part of the bet contributes to the outcome of another. If taken in error the stakes will be equally divided where they clash. Example: £10 Double, Henman to win by 3 sets to 1 and to win the match outright is settled as 2 x £5 Singles.However, where the related parts of the bet are resolved at different times the bet will be settled as instructed, with the price for the second or subsequent legs being determined at each individual stage.
Example: £10 Double, Henman to win Semi-Final @ 3.50 with Henman to win the tournament outright @ 3.00, is settled as a £10 Double, Henman to win Semi-Final @ 3.50 with the price for Henman to win outright being the odds on offer after winning the Semi-Final. In the event of Henman losing either the Semi-Final or Final, the bet is lost.
I think the punter in question has tried to pull a fast one.
However, it does not always follow that because snow falls on the rooftops of Glasgow, for instance, on a given day, that it will inevitably fall on the plush mansions of Edinburgh.
Even so, I put it to you m’lud, that common sense, if not full proof evidence, points to this geezer being somewhat of a … if I may, chancer !
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
I could just see me writing £5 accumulator on the following 24 cities to have snow land on them on xmas day-.
Derby,Nottingham,Leicester,Coventry,Lincoln,Norwich,London,Edinburgh,Aberdeen
,Glasgow,Manchester,Birmingham,Coventry,Cardiff,Sheffield,Newcastle,Doncaster,
York,Northampton,Milton Keynes,Penzance,Exeter,Inverness,Dundee!The cashier then has to put 7/1 on every town,put it through the till,watch it come out the machine like a fiver thats been left in your trouser pocket and gone through the washing machine,so you cant read anything now because its too small,then when you cash it in,your told the bets void because Cardiffs in Wales and that doesn"t count! Not only is this guy a Chancer,the cashier who took the bets a liability!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.