- This topic has 11 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
Other than in the lounge, I haven’t formerly introduced myself to the forumites yet so please take this as my way of saying hello. I’ve read through many pages of threads on here and I’m incredibly impressed with the quality of discussion and politeness on show.
My name is Steve, I’m 39-year-old and I’ve been a racing fan for as long as I can remember really. I also love tennis, golf, athletics and football so it’s pleasing to see a General Sport forum on here which I’m sure I will frequent regularly.
My forum name is my nickname in real life. I lost an eye as a child in a freak accident and wore an eye patch for many years. Now, I’m happy to say that I have a false eye so no patch needed
(can someone please invent a smiley with an eye patch on).Anyway, on to my discussion topic, and I’d love to know people’s views on 1.01 shots on Betting Exchanges. When would you get involved, why would you get involved, is it an insane way of trying to make a profit, is it a quick way to the poor house? All these questions regularly go through my head when, as has just happened in the 3:00pm at Sedgefield, something gets beat having touched the minimum odds.
A horse, just a length up with 20 yards to go, half a length up with 10 yards to get etc shouldn’t be backed at 1.01 when the horse in second is finishing strongly. This is just my view obviously and no disrespect is meant to anyone who punts this way. But when you consider people have to risk £500 just to win £5, or say £50k to win £500 then is the risk really worth taking? Given the exact same circumstances as the Sedgefield race, out of every 100 races the horse in front will get caught 4 or 5 times at least – is that fair to say? If it is, then the horse in front shouldn’t really touch less than 1.2.
Another example of crazy punting is last night’s PGA Tour golf event. A player (I forget his name) who has never won before stands on the tee with a three shot lead. He is about to play the toughest hole on the course (water hazards galore) under the most intense pressure he will have ever been under. He gets matched at 1.01 before dumping his tee shot into the water, making a mess of his third shot, and eventually making triple bogey. He loses in a play-off and the 1.01 backers are despairing. Again, given the exact same circumstances a golfer will make triple bogey four or five times out of a hundred and shouldn’t be backed at anything shorter than 1.2.
I feel for these people who get done at 1.01 sometimes, and I know gambling is about risk and reward, but my view is that in most 1.01 scenarios the risk far outweighs the reward and should be stayed well clear of.
I’d love to know other people’s views.
Welcome to the forum OneEye.
If you look though the system’s section of the forum at the bottom of page 2 nearly page 3(sorry dont know how to link) there is a thread called 1.01 losers by Yossi and there is a good web page by the authour there aswell about 1.01’s.
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
Thank you very much Nathan.
Note to self: type 1.01 in Search Forum bar before posting
Hi OneEye
1.01 shots?
No thanks! I’m sure there are people who make money from this but it must be tough going! In a horse race I would never contemplate such a bet.
You could possibly make more of a case for it in tennis maybe, when say someone like Federer or Nadal is serving for the match against a lesser opponent but there is so much that can go wrong in a horserace that I couldn’t imagine 1.01 being ‘value’ at any stage….
Me neither Ben, which is why I posed the question as I’d love some insight as to what circumstances someone would consider a bet.
I guess as long as the market is still open then there’ll always be an element of risk in backing a 1.01 shot, but some are surely a lot safer than others.
Yes, I’m sure there are some that are very safe, but not 100% safe or you wouldn’t be able to back them!
Does anyone know any punters that are regular 1.01 backers? Can’t say I have ever met one.
Have you ever been tempted OneEye?
Welcome aboard Steve, OneEye…
I wouldn’t touch 1.01 couldn’t afford to but no
doubt oy could, arguarbly suit some big-hitters.As for general sports, I see you’ve mentioned you like
Golf, I do aswell (mainly from the punting point of view), you
may like to check my thread in general sports referring
to the US Open and give us your reply/views.Anyway, welcome along
Matthew
If you look on Betfair there is always a substantial amount of cash already laying 1.01 in every racing market when it opens. There is an organisation who has come to an arrangement with BF to seed all these markets from a server able to place the bets before anyone else. When you hear that 1.01 was matched chances are most of it will be taken by this mysterious crew who make steady regular profits.
They are as safe as asking Robert Garrigus to make no worse than a six the 18th hole on the last day of the St. Jude Classic. He traded at 1.01 when he stood on the tee last night, a lot of people must have got burned. I personally don’t back at 1.01 and never will!
JohnJ.
… there is so much that can go wrong in a horserace that I couldn’t imagine 1.01 being ‘value’ at any stage….
Not even after it has crossed the line in front in a race with no incidents (in terms of possible stewards)? I’d take 1.01 there is no objection by the clerk of the scales.
What you have to remember with thse 1.01s is that a lot of them have already won when the bet is matched, as the SIS delay they use to supsend is longer than the in-running delay.
Check out the terestrial races at Royal Ascot this week. You won’t see 1.01s in any last gasp finishes as you do on the stuff they suspend form SIS.
1.01’s and in-running legalised thievery… part of the reason the dreaded Premium Charge was introduced, which paradoxically, is also legalised theivery.
I was told of an amusing incident about a student who ejaculated £4,000 of his Student Loan ‘in-running’ on the Fulham v Juventus Europa League match this year (with Fulham needing to score four goals without reply in over an hour or something) and then tried to claim that it was nothing to do with him and some friend or other had played a prank on him. Not sure if they were 1.01 but that would have been value!
Anyway, surely it’s 0.96 after commission?
Thank you very much for all your replies people.
Ben, no I’ve never been tempted by a 1.01 shot and never will. Tiger Woods stood on the 17th tee once with a four shot lead and was available to back at 1.01. The two holes he had to play were straightforward holes, no hazards etc. Tiger probably hadn’t made more than a handful of double bogeys in his life up to that point so it was a billion to one chance that he was going to make two in a row, or a triple-bogey and then a bogey. That is proably the safest 1.01 shot I’ve ever seen, but still I would never have backed it. Tiger tee’d off, found the rough, and the market was suspended. He eventually won by five
Carvills. Thank you for that insight, I wasn’t aware of that. So in a lot of cases people aren’t backing 1.01 shots as the race/event happens, they’ve already put their corn down pre-event, willing to back something once it touches 1.01. Sounds even more crazy, but they must be making some sort of profit.
(can someone please invent a smiley with an eye patch on).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.