- This topic has 15 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 18 years ago by
.
- Posts
Bonus’ starting price at Lingfield yesterday was 6/4. He was available at 3.65 on Betfair at the off. The bookies’ over-round on the 11-runner race was 33%.
Why would anyone want to "come racing"?
Whether it is just my imagination or not, but this seems to be happening more often. Surprised it took place at a southern course though. Saturdays, I often notice on TV, half the horses shortening in the betting with only one or two at most lengthening. Surely if the bookmakers are keeping their overound the same an equal amount should be going out. The overound ought to be getting less nearer the off, not more. Think it might have something to do with what those bookmakers think they can get away with. If it is a holiday crowd then daylight robbery.
Value Is EverythingThe current SP system is nothing short of a con and the big bookmakers are guilty of insider trading. They con thousands of mug punters to bet at SP and then easily manipulate the market to minimise their liabilities.
If an insurance company or stock broker tries this kind of con, consumers have a case to complain to the FSA. Punters have no similar course of action open to them.
I wonder why the journalists in this cottage industry called horse racing decide not to make an issue of this and start a campaign against the con merchants?
They do have a course of action to take Wallace.
Don’t take Starting Price.
Value Is EverythingA couple of times recently I have thought that the returned SP (on the favourite) at Lingfield looked on the low side, compared to what I could see on the Boards just before the off. I got 3/1 Baylini just before the off on the 9th, 5/2 was then generally available, but the SP was 9/4!
I didn’t particularly notice the price of Bonus on Saturday though, but 33% is a tad excessive for a competitive handicap.
They wouldn’t Sean but a lot of punters in betting shops still have their fiver yankee at SP and are being systematically short-changed.
What I can’t understand is why the course books don’t just keep laying the off-course firms and arbing back on Betfair without changing their price-money for nothing surely?And wouldn’t it be easier still for the Big3 to play directly on the Exchanges, when they need to shorten one?
Imo, they do this already. I often see just one rep on course.
I agree that shop prices are terrible, but this isn’t something new, is it? As Ginger may have found out by now, few shop -players care much about the Table etc.
Picking the winner and, as a result, feeding the ego, seems to be more important than making a profit to many people who like racing.They do of course hedge on the exchanges, but especially on a Saturday like yesterday there would have been a lot of multiple bets running onto Bonus after a good few favs won earlier. If you can shorten a horse like that up on-course which might take a few grand, it can reduce your countrywide liabilities by fifty times that.
I don’t think I quite understand the problem; why would an on-course punter take SP?
I think Sean the original question was about percentages, not particularly SP’s. You know percentages, true odds, value and all that. Sorry, you would not understand the problem would you.
Value Is Everythingcarvillshill, there is a group of on course bookmakers playing the game and going along with the office money from the Big3. A great earner for them to take a few grand, shorten the odds offered and hedge into Betfair for a nice profit. If a prominent on course firm did not cooperate and continued to offer "fair odds" they would be left out of the loop next time.
This is insider trading and market manipulation and should not be allowed.
The solution is to drop the on course market from the SP returns and use an industry SP comprising exchanges, Tote and odds offered by online firms.
might be a bit off topic but when at the races still gives you more information of a horses ability and can teke more formand general well being of a horse than any other indications
Apart from the costs, I think that going racing has many advantages, but then, I love it, so I’m biased.
Personally, I don’t see too much evidence of the Table at the races ( not that I don’t understand it, Ginge, I do!) and, even the few on-course arbers that are left, don’t seem to be frantically working out percentages any more.
What does happen is that most people with phones or computers are taking a lot of heed of the Exchanges. When there’s only one Big3 rep, he too is just following the instructions that come over the phone.
Looking around, it is often the case that bigger prices are available than the ones reported, or, the ones mentioned over the tannoy by the commentator.
I would agree that the whole charade is a bit of a nonsense, but then, this is the gambling industry, and not a concert for charity.The majority of those who take SP couldn’t care less even though they are never done moaning about how terrible it all is etc.
I can see that this may affect the returns for those who have invested in multiples, but that’s the risk they have been prepared to take, I suppose.
- Total Posts 17716
What I can’t understand is why the course books don’t just keep laying the off-course firms and arbing back on Betfair without changing their price-money for nothing surely?
What, and ruin the cosy relationship that lines all their pockets – do turkeys vote for Xmas?
Have to agree with Gus & Wallace on this one. It’s not so much that the SP was tight, it was the price ended up at a totally unrealistic level. I can’t believe many punters would have wanted to back Bonus at 6/4. So I would assume alot of it was office money which forced the price to that level.
Where I agree & also disagree with Wallace, is that it is market manipulation, but if the offices are doing it to cover their shop liabilites, why shouldn’t they?. After all, why should an on-course market at Lingfield dictate what price tens of thousands of off-course bets are settled at. I’m suprised the big firms aren’t more vocal about this, it seems such a logical case, & I’m speaking from the punters side.
Finally on Bonus. You can argue he was well over-priced in the morning anyway, around 5/1-ish I think. He was the best horse in the race (imo) and to a degree, you were betting on whether he was going to get a good pace & a clean run. So I feel he should have been shorter than that, but don’t think he was a 6/4 shot.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.