- This topic has 60 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
racing is certainly inextricably linked to betting.
but to bookmakers ? not so inextricably, looking around the world.
Irrelevant really, it’s not the same system here as we don’t have a state monopoly (thank God). In this country it’s inextricably linked to bookmakers.
Mike
@ Mike
depends what you mean by bookmaker.
the consultation paper uses that term as shorthand for any kind of betting platform rather than a particular sub-group (eg standing on the high street or in the ring).
in GB racing may be linked to physical high street or ring presences – and to their online clones – but even in GB is that link inextricable (from racing’s standpoint at least)?
there are all kinds of other platforms online.
What is it that bookmakers are doing that is so bad Ricky?
Forget the sound bytes and cliches; what do you actually want them to do and stop doing?
Are you really so naive or just taking the pea?
Supposed to be a highly successful punter but loves his licensed thieves
Bookmakers are poor for racing and poor for punters, the only punters who get on with them are the ones who put money in their satchels.
What do you think the pathetic prize money in this country is due to Gingertipster?
What is it that bookmakers are doing that is so bad Ricky?
Forget the sound bytes and cliches; what do you actually want them to do and stop doing?Are you really so naive or just taking the pea?
Supposed to be a highly successful punter but loves his licensed thieves
Bookmakers are poor for racing and poor for punters, the only punters who get on with them are the ones who put money in their satchels.
What do you think the pathetic prize money in this country is due to Gingertipster?
More cliches.
How are bookmakers "poor for punters" Eddie?For sure, I’d like them to take a bigger bet, and that’s the ones that will lay me a bet at all. But for the majority of punters I can not see why bookmakers are "poor for punters".
Please enlighten me.Value Is EverythingInteresting article by the ever sensible Greg Wood. http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2 … -authority
For sure, I’d like them to take a bigger bet, and that’s the ones that will lay me a bet at all. But for the majority of punters I can not see why bookmakers are "poor for punters".
Please enlighten me.Why do you always ask questions that have been answered in earlier posts?
Why do some bookmakers not lay you a bet at all despite being perfectly fine for the majority of punters, according to you?
Why is prize money so poor in Britain?
Interesting article by the ever sensible Greg Wood. http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2 … -authority
Totally agree,
Although only just noticed an uncanny resemblence. Is Rust actually our own TAPK? Now that would be worrying.Value Is EverythingFor sure, I’d like them to take a bigger bet, and that’s the ones that will lay me a bet at all. But for the majority of punters I can not see why bookmakers are "poor for punters".
Please enlighten me.Why do you always ask questions that have been answered in earlier posts?
Why is prize money so poor in Britain?
Is that it?
Is the sole reason for bookmakers to be "poor for punters" just poor prize money?I can see why poor prize money could be described as poor for owners, trainers and jockeys. But why is poor prize money bad for punters? Please explain.
It’s the opposite of the truth.
Fact is, Bookmakers get
ALL
their money (
profits
) from punters! If bookmakers paid a higher price for their product then they’d have no alternative but to pass that on to the punter through larger overrounds…
…So the
more
a bookmaker pays towards prize money the
less
punters get back… Therefore…
"Poor prize money" is good for the punter
.
Value Is EverythingGinger
hope you get the hump again real soon , as whilst you were gone it was refreshing to stop pulling my hair out at your silly posts
now you are back and I am bald almost
you do talk a load of bullocks permanently
What on earth are you like ???
in GB racing may be linked to physical high street or ring presences – and to their online clones – but even in GB is that link inextricable (from racing’s standpoint at least)?
there are all kinds of other platforms online.
Well it is as we stand, yes. Totally inextricable in fact.
We are used to betting with bookmakers and latterly exchanges. The only model that would improve racing’s finances would be with a racing-based Tote. Well, look at our Tote – it’s just been flogged off for two-and-sixpence to a baldy bloke who has no idea what to do with it.
Unlike many racing jurisdictions, we just don’t bet with a Tote. We’re not used to it and we don’t like it. (Quite honestly, anyone punting via global PM’s with 15-35% overrounds depending on the type of bet needs their bumps felt anyway!)
One should never say never, but there is absolutely no sign of this situation changing. It would require a massive sea-change in both punters’ attitudes and current legislation. Racing in the UK has always been, and for the foreseeable future will be, a good deal for punters and private bookmakers and thus a poor one for prizemoney/financing.
Mike
@ Mike
imagine per the consultation paper the Levy has been replaced by the Racing Right licence which a bookie must hold before being able to bet on GB horseracing.
imagine a GB racecourse can choose whether, and to whom, to license out its Racing Right.
imagine the Tote monopoly of Betfred has expired, as have existing pictures / commentary deals.
imagine Jockey Club Racecourses decides to band its crown jewels together with those of a few select friends (Ascot, Goodwood, York, whoever) into a Premier League that establishes and runs its own internet pictures and betting platform (of whatever kind) from which the current bookie landscape is excluded.
how important these days to betting on horses in GB is the bookies’ physical high-street presence ?
if increasingly less important (-note each year the RP sells 4,000 fewer copies per day of its physical edition as folk transition to digital-), then aren’t the traditional bookies suffering erosion of their traditional advantage over new entrants and becoming less and less inextricable to racing ?
Is that it?
Is the sole reason for bookmakers to be "poor for punters" just poor prize money?I can see why poor prize money could be described as poor for owners, trainers and jockeys. But why is poor prize money bad for punters? Please explain.
It’s the opposite of the truth.
Fact is, Bookmakers get
ALL
their money (
profits
) from punters! If bookmakers paid a higher price for their product then they’d have no alternative but to pass that on to the punter through larger overrounds…
…So the
more
a bookmaker pays towards prize money the
less
punters get back… Therefore…
"Poor prize money" is good for the punter
.
You should consider joining a circus and calling yourself Co Co.
You also appear incapable of reading people’s posts before replying to them and giving a straight answer to a straight question
Ginger
hope you get the hump again real soon , as whilst you were gone it was refreshing to stop pulling my hair out at your silly posts
now you are back and I am bald almost
you do talk a load of bullocks permanently
What on earth are you like ???
As I thought Ricky, you can not answer a simple question.All you’ve done is complain. You’re full of sound bytes and cliches (oh, and insults) with no explanation of your opinion what so ever.
Are you and Eddie the same person?
Value Is EverythingWit …just love your post , so refreshing , it proves there are alternatives to the bookies / exchanges and more importantly it shows another way forward ….look at football …
The sooner someone in racing thinks like this , where self help/ self funding is the priority , the sooner our game will prosper again
Its not such a sea change ,,,,bookies are mostly empty nowadays apart from the cartoon and roulette mugs ..
Bring it on , the dinosaurs .of the bookie/ punter era need another option …..
Ginger (or Co Co the clown )whichever suits …..sadly your views are no longer of interest
Is that it?
Is the sole reason for bookmakers to be "poor for punters" just poor prize money?I can see why poor prize money could be described as poor for owners, trainers and jockeys. But why is poor prize money bad for punters? Please explain.
It’s the opposite of the truth.
Fact is, Bookmakers get
ALL
their money (
profits
) from punters! If bookmakers paid a higher price for their product then they’d have no alternative but to pass that on to the punter through larger overrounds…
…So the
more
a bookmaker pays towards prize money the
less
punters get back… Therefore…
"Poor prize money" is good for the punter
.
You should consider joining a circus and calling yourself Co Co.
You also appear incapable of reading people’s posts before replying to them and giving a straight answer to a straight question
I could say the same thing about you Eddie.
I have
explained
my position on bookmakers in this and many other threads. You just moan without giving an explanation of your opinion.. and then when someone asks you to explain you try to turn it back on them. Accusing them of not listening; just so as you don’t need to answer.
Both myself and Mike have given similar answers, but we’re still waiting on you and Ricky. Or is it because you both don’t understand the subject of bookmakers and can only give sound bytes, cliches and insults rather than answer? Come to think of it, I remember neither of you understood overrounds before, that’s probably why you can’t answer. So we’d better end the conversation/thread there.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.