- This topic has 37 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 12 months ago by
.
- Posts
"Why should the whole of the nations bets be decided on the whim or sometimes just a handful of bookmakers betting on the All Weather tracks"
I remember this being said, in almost the same words, to me when I was doing the training offered by the bookmaker I was working for.
On that occasion the Area Manager was giving us an argument as to why there should be "industry prices"!!
On my only visit to an all-weather track, Wolverhampton, earlier this year, there were four bookmakers there for the first, one for each punter
, but one of those disappeared before the end of racing, reportedly "he was on a promise" .
Colin
Paul Kealy followed that remark by saying: "I shouldn’t need to spell it out."
I think he should spell it out. You get markedly better value on betting exchanges than with SP on the whole.
Is this the value that dare not speak its name?
What Kealy fails to say is that SP is important because it is the default price – the price that greenhorns get. It’s like saying ‘Who cares about those cafes on the main drag where they sell carp food, short change customers and add on outrageous service charges? Us locals know a nice little place down a back alley where we can get a decent meal.’
On course shows are the sport’s shop window for anyone in a bookies or watching from home. What impression do they give when they are like they were at Great Leighs last night? The same impression BAGS dogs racing gives I suggest. In my youth I took one look at the BAGS prices, laughed and never gave the sport a second thought after. Judging by dog racing’s decline I couldn’t have been alone.
Simon Rowlands in the Post suggested an each-way bet on the winner of the 7.50 as it was a dead eight. Despite all eight standing their ground, punters were still betting to over 4% a runner on the win and over 9% on the place at SP! That’s just brutal.
If anyone doubts that this isn’t the way to go, just look at how bookies treat new customers and what sort of margins they charge on the products they really do want to get them betting on long term – free bet introductory offers and margins of around a tenth of SP horse betting.
I misread the shape of the race, thinking that a couple would be much shorter than they ended up being, but certainly learnt a lesson.
I had not realised (but should have, clearly) that an invitation-only meeting at Great Leighs would result in such daylight-robbery margins.
It might seem as if Glenn is a scratched record at times – and his delivery seems calculated to offend more than to convert – but the points he makes are often good points all the same. IMO.
there are, normally, about 20 vacant pitches at A/W tracks on most occasions, please.PLEASE, some of you who are concerned about sp’s that you never bet on, but have the need to protect those "mugs" that do.
,
please come and join me making fortunesWhat a fatuous remark.
Do you actually understand the implications of what is being discussed?
there are, normally, about 20 vacant pitches at A/W tracks on most occasions, please.PLEASE, some of you who are concerned about sp’s that you never bet on, but have the need to protect those "mugs" that do.
,
please come and join me making fortunesBarry,
Risking being shouted down here.But do you think if persons in the betting public eye (Big Mac) were to explain to normal punters the table of odds and chances and its significance. Nobody would want to back SP anyway?
Or do you think it would mean less people will bet less money?
You can PM me if you like and i guarantee not to make your answer public.
Ginge
Value Is EverythingAs you understand overrounds, at least, perhaps you could give me your view of the consequences of betting to 128% rather than 114% on the following:
The short-term profits of those who settle bets at SP.
The short- and long-term satisfaction and "profitability" of those who bet at SP, however foolish they are to do so.
The long-term welfare of the betting industry, on which you and I depend for a living.
I see no point in blaming on-course bookmakers for the fiction of SP. What punters in the ring take bets at SP?
It’s always fixed-price betting where I go.
If people are prepared to bet without taking a price – as this is what SP punters must be doing – how is that the fault of the bookies on-course?
The reality is that it is the Exchanges and their biggest players, the Big4 off-course books, who are ruining the whole game.
None of these care, as they have plenty more profitable betting media that will still be on go, when horseracing has become extinct.
The only thing the real bookies did wrong, imo, was allowing the Machine on-course. It hasn’t helped.
Btw, percentage overround per race is not the same thing as bookmakers’ profit margins. I’d have thought that those who reckon that their livelihood depends on the betting game would know that.
In fact, I’m sure they do.
Bookmaking is a business, not a public service.It is, but good job thet do their job. Wouldn’t it be boring without them on course?
Can’t see how bookies are ruining the sport anyway Sean, whether on or off course.
To my mind we have more choice than ever and a bigger chance to profit than ever. Thanks to people like Barry putting their money where their (loud) mouths are.
Percentages may not be the same thing as profit margins but am sure they are linked.
Sundays and Bank holidays I do find on course bookies working to a bigger percentage. but the average punter there, does not bet as big as other days.
Ginge
Value Is EverythingAgree with your post Sean, on course bookmakers at the all weather tracks are only making a living.
Thats why the article in the Racing Post annoyed me so much yesterday, absolutely no mention of off course involvement. Usual big headline stuff with nothing but lip service underneath.
Still I suppose I learnt something by reading that Lord Donoghue is a punter
Rubbish newspaper.
Gingertipster, perhaps you could ask that on-course bookmakers display the %s they are betting to as a matter of course, though there’s no chance of that happening voluntarily and regrettably little chance of its being imposed upon them by the Gambling Commission.
lumpy shrewd punters on-course invariably beat sp anyway.
advertising % overound wouldn’t have any influence on majority of fun punters.Irish horse racing seems to be flourishing (same as GB) record attendances, does their sp ruin anything ??
repeat once again the levy depends on the big 3, not betting exchanges.
the levy funds horse racing .
lumpy shrewd punters on-course invariably beat sp anyway.
Obviously.
advertising % overound wouldn’t have any influence on majority of fun punters.
How about giving it a go then?
Irish horse racing seems to be flourishing (same as GB) record attendances, does their sp ruin anything ??
The SP overrounds on Irish racing have always been excessive (whereas UK ones are climbing): it is to be wondered how things might have been otherwise. Many more Irish punters bet on UK racing than vice versa, and I wonder why.
repeat once again the levy depends on the big 3, not betting exchanges.
the levy funds horse racing .
Well, it depends on them both, but I’m not sure what point you are trying to make. Perhaps you would agree with me that racing should avoid situations whereby the golden goose (the punter) is killed (turned off racing) by excessive overrounds if you and I want a sport worth betting on in the future.
The excessive overrounds are not necessarily the "fault" of those bookmakers who stand at the course. But the situation whereby a punter – especially those in betting shops who could easily turn elsewhere – repeatedly gets paid out 7/2 for a 9/2 winner should be avoided
Just to clarify, as there seems to be a few crossed wires:
On behalf of any fellow on-course punters, I am trying to defend the ON-course bookmakers here.
My grievance is with the Big4 off-course shop books who control both SP AND the Exchanges.
Barry is basically correct: it is the losing shop punters who provide the bulk of the Levy funding for the racing game, or, perhaps, more accurately, I should say THAT big, losing punter, who was mentioned recently.
Glenn is absolutely spot on, Lord D and the new cut-throat SP mechanism will ruin racing in the long term. We have and will debate this topic on here until it is sorted out because it is so important and unfair.
There are plenty of other ways to increase payments to the levy, like increase the bookmakers contribution from 10% to 15% for example. They are only middle men who by themselves contribute nothing, a bit like a car salesman or old financial advisor.
Apart from posting on a forum what other voice does the punter have?
, but one of those disappeared before the end of racing, reportedly "he was on a promise" .
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.