- This topic has 118 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
if? big 3 reduced price of fav from 6/4 to evens on off , average price would be greatly reduced, under present system those reduced prices would be excluded from sample
Quote: from barry dennis on 7:39 am on Dec. 4, 2006[br]racing depends on levy,  levy is 10% of bookmakers UK horse-racing profit.
low margins, less profit, less levy as has happened last 2 years eventually no funding so no UK horse-racing.<br>
So for racing to prosper, the bookmakers must make profits? There is something not quite right about that.<br>
My point wasn’t about the SP system (what would I know about that?).
My point was that McCririck doesn’t understand the new system … because it’s all done on "magic machines".
So, his whining about one price is meaningless. It’s jsut one price.
If he really cares about this subject, he’d find out what’s going on.
But, despite his claims to be "the punter’s friend in the betting ring", he hasn’t been willing to put the effort into understand it.
As for SP, if I had my way, I’d ban bookies SP and replace it with the tote returns (with a 10-15% takeout).
And, if the bookies want to manipulate the prices in the tote, they can put money into the pools.
Steve
Barry
would the big 3 be reducing the price due to demand or for manipulation ?
If it’s the former, then that is fair
If it’s the latter, the big 3 are manipulating the market without any bets being struck and should be investigated
(Edited by empty wallet at 10:58 am on Dec. 4, 2006)
Quote: from barry dennis on 7:39 am on Dec. 4, 2006[br]racing depends on levy,  levy is 10% of bookmakers UK horse-racing profit.
low margins, less profit, less levy as has happened last 2 years eventually no funding so no UK horse-racing.<br>
This argument only holds if demand for betting is inelastic. Surely the recent betting revolution, with the surge in demand for low-margin products from FOBTs to exchanges has shown us that demand is actually elastic.
Therefore the actual relationship is more likely to be:
high margins, less profit, less and less levy and the decline of horse racing.
This is the reality and this is the real reason the big bookies want high margins – so they can kill off racing as a betting product and wheen punters onto non-leviable, more easily controllable products.
If everybody stopped betting at SP and took a price, what general effect would it have on the bookmakers’ profit margins?
If your a layer on the big exchange and you know what your doing their is massive value at present, the twilight meetings at Kempton in particular are a small goldmine so I’m definatley not complaining. The only people getting ripped off are the mugs, it has always been so and will always been so. Racing exists on a daily tidal wave of mug money. Long may it continue!
Racing exists on a daily tidal wave of mug money. Long may it continue!<br>Cavelino Rampante Posted on 11:11 am on Dec. 4, 2006
<br>That’s the problem it won’t .. the way things are going, anyone striking a bet at SP will be a mug, because the price for no reason other than fleecing punters will be cut back in.
How many yankees and lucky15’s had Saturday’s favourite in it .. was it the best backed horse of the day .. 1/2 to 4/9 is massive.
So why change the way SP’s are returned anyway? Who said there was a problem? What not increase the levy from bookies?
What do we mean by funding racing? Prize money for low grade racing that can’t get any sort of sponsorship? Big posh offices in London for the old boys club? Shouldn’t they be looking more inward at their own costs and take-out before they decide to start blatantly fleecing punters?
Then dont bet at SP simple as that. You can get a 102% overround on every race every day of the year elsewhere. Punters punted at much bigger overounds for decades before the coming of the exchanges and nobody complained too much. Even with bigger overrounds a magin 0f 1.75% – 2% per runner is much better than it used to be and these margins only exist because punters punt at those prices. You do have a choice these days but try explaining percentages to a betting shop mug! If your willing to accept a rip off price from a Big bookmaker thats your problem not theirs, all their doing is facilitating you. Its all about market forces and what punters are willing to accept. If punters dont bet at odds offered by the Big 3 you’ll see them react accordingly. Bookies know most punters are mugs and will accept anything and I for one dont blame them for that.
Quote: from FlatSeasonLover on 8:59 am on Dec. 4, 2006[br]I whinge about this becuase it happens regularly. In a 10 runner race the opening show is 112% and it stays like that until 2 minutes beofre the off when the front 3 shorten. It usually goes along the line of (from my experience)
15/8 drifts to 5/2<br>4/1 shortens to 3/1<br>5/1 shortens to 9/2<br>10/1 drifts to 12/1
which is fine but 3 min before the off
15/8 – 5/2 then (allegedly well backed) to 7/4<br>4/1 – 3/1<br>5/1 – 9/1<br>10/1 – 12/1 – 14/1
Perhaps they think we don’t notice but the SP book is often 10% bigger than the opening show. It looks like a bookies prift maximising procedure to me which comes at the expense of punters.
Having said all of that, no-one forces a punter to take SP.<br>
I hate to throw a spanner in the works, but could it not be that the majority of the money is taken in the few mins before the race?
Let the Big3 have their own SP’s and ignore whats happening on course. The oncourse market would then represent punters money as the Big3 would not be interested in pumping money to manipulate the oncourse market.
They filled their boots at Lingers today
12.40 .. run 6 .. TOTAL SP 113% .. 2.16% per runner<br>6/5 joint favourites <br>
I tend to agree with Cavelino Rampante’s points about how punters have enjoyed a fairly brief halcyon period since betting exchanges came on the scene. Prior to that, there were still plenty of punters prepared to bet at SPs much less generous than they are now, even paying tax at up to 9%. Of course, these punters are dying off and being very slowly replaced by a different breed who are a little bit better informed. But this will take a long time and there are still plenty of mugs around to accept what they are given.
People on this forum are (rightly) indignant when bookmakers attack their profitabilty, but in the grand scheme of things, we can take it or leave it, because we haven’t got enough clout in the market.
I think its also a fair point that today’s favourable climate for punters was brought about by the abolition of betting tax and exchange betting. In other words a fairer market for punters.
For some to suggest that mugs will back at SP anyway is not born out by the lessons of recent history. Just because they have tried to sneak this change in quietly doesn’t mean its small or unnoticed.
Quote: from Racing Daily on 1:51 pm on Dec. 4, 2006[br]
Quote: from FlatSeasonLover on 8:59 am on Dec. 4, 2006[br]I whinge about this becuase it happens regularly. In a 10 runner race the opening show is 112% and it stays like that until 2 minutes beofre the off when the front 3 shorten. It usually goes along the line of (from my experience)
15/8 drifts to 5/2<br>4/1  shortens to 3/1<br>5/1 shortens to 9/2<br>10/1 drifts to 12/1
which is fine but 3 min before the off
15/8 – 5/2 then (allegedly well backed) to 7/4<br>4/1 – 3/1<br>5/1 – 9/1<br>10/1 – 12/1 – 14/1
Perhaps they think we don’t notice but the SP book is often 10% bigger than the opening show. It looks like a bookies prift maximising procedure to me which comes at the expense of punters.
Having said all of that, no-one forces a punter to take SP.<br>
I hate to throw a spanner in the works, but could it not be that the majority of the money is taken in the few mins before the race?<br>
They take so much money it forces them to cut the top 3 in the market? If they are still making 12% anyway why do they need to shorten the book further? Why can they not push the runners odds that are not supported outwards instead of keeping them stationary? (I hope thats the right stationary, I don’t want a staple gun)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.