- This topic has 118 replies, 28 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
Seriously though Barry,
I bet on BF only (well 99% of the time). Therefore I have to take a price, sometimes I’m better than SP and sometimes I’m worse. If I had confidence in the make-up of the SP market, I’d definitely move away from BF and bet at SP more often, especially if I felt that the SP market was efficient and reflected fairly the chances of at least those at the head of the betting..
I admire your defence of your customers. Do they ever complain about the SP market or do they mostly take a price? Have you see a move from racing to other sports or even to FOBTs? You’re at the coalface, Barry, and have a reputation as a bookie who’ll stand a decent bet. So do you think that the current SP market is a rip-off for genuine punters? Where will the indys be if the big 3 can form their own SPs off-course?
If you dont like it bet elsewhere the betting shop punters couldn’t give a flying f..k about your opinions, dont come racing who cares, racecourses aint gonna miss your custom. for crissake get off your soap boxes and get on with your own life<br> barry dennis Posted on 7:39 pm on Dec. 21, 2006
<br>.. you should be paying 15% of your profit to the levy and not 10%. The new SP system is nothing short of legalised theft, you’ll be the first one on the telly whinging when you’ve finally ripped the ar$e out of it and you’ll be amazed how many people wont care!
The days of no on course bookmakers are now closer. Before that actually happens insudtry SP’s will be introduced, the firms will not need to put money back to the track and the bookies will rip off the mugs again.
if any person wants a head to head with any of my UNWASHED punters , bring it on , forgotten more than you’ll learn the rest of your life about horse racing.<br> barry dennis Posted on 7:39 pm on Dec. 21, 2006
<br>:laugh:
Barry Dennis,<br>You have come from a ‘back row fiddler’ to be seen as some as some guru regarding betting thanks in the main to C4 and the ‘Bismarks’ idea.<br>You have used this to good effect in promoting yourself.
You have also in the past used topless girls on your joint again to grab the attention.
However it only takes one ill judged quote to follow the path of Gerald Ratner. <br>He basically lost a high street jewellery chain with that infamous quote of his.<br>You have just the 1 shop.
We have discussed this on here before but I used to be a decent customer of yours (on course) before I got a max £100 limit. <br>(Remember Broadnard that Pam Sly horse at 50/1when you was at Plumpton betting away ;) <br>I’d go head to head with you over a month or so if you wish.<br>
- Total Posts 17716
Excellent piece by Paul Kealy in the back of today’s RP about shop punters needing protection, after this week’s debacle over the Lingfield sp.<br> Makes much better reading than some bookie defending his ‘unwashed punters’ on the one hand, whilst picking their pockets with the other.:biggrin:
Couple of paragraphs from RP website article ( Industry section)
<br>Members of the Starting Price Regulatory Commission will study statistical evidence collated from the betting ring after two months of the new operation and consider some of the criticism levelled at the system
The SPRC will meet and our chairman Lord Donoughue wants to discuss what has happened so far since there has been some fairly strong criticism. I’ve been asked to produce some figures and comparisons.
(Edited by empty wallet at 10:10 am on Dec. 23, 2006)
About time .. if nobody says anything and just leaves things to the sharks we’ll end up like dog racing.
I got my yearly diary and letter from Totesport today .. they are offering 1% per runner between Boxing Day and New Year on every race. According the the opinions of some of the bookies on here are they just ‘shouting at the telly’. I dont think they are, I think they know that punters are more savvy than they give them credit for .. hence the offer.
Any of my horses that Favourite will be getting bet with Totesport during this period .. better value then 5% commission.
The sorry trail of corporate-to-corporate ownership is vitally important to this debate. For example: with SP clearly being screwed over, who exactly is pulling the strings?
And empty wallet scores a bullseye with:<br>“IF the SP is supposed to represent "the market" at the off,  then it should include all the players in that market, this should include, exchanges, tote, on course, off course markets
â€ÂÂ
Quote: from AlanRidley on 6:51 pm on Dec. 23, 2006[br]The sorry trail of corporate-to-corporate ownership is vitally important to this debate. For example: with SP clearly being screwed over, who exactly is pulling the strings?
And empty wallet scores a bullseye with:<br>“IF the SP is supposed to represent "the market" at the off,  then it should include all the players in that market, this should include, exchanges, tote, on course, off course markets
â€ÂÂ
Quote: from AlanRidley on 6:51 pm on Dec. 23, 2006[br]The sorry trail of corporate-to-corporate ownership is vitally important to this debate. For example: with SP clearly being screwed over, who exactly is pulling the strings?
And empty wallet scores a bullseye with:<br>“IF the SP is supposed to represent "the market" at the off, then it should include all the players in that market, this should include, exchanges, tote, on course, off course markets
â€ÂÂ
When posts were getting too close to the truth, Barry Dennis let rip with his “UNWASHEDâ€ÂÂ
I think we are talking about credibility Alan.
Barry & David still have some despite their rants.
Quote: from AlanRidley on 2:36 pm on Dec. 24, 2006[br]Then, shooting his mouth off, DavidBrady loses good thread momentum with the following:<br>“**** Off AR – you had your chance and blew it.
This on a post offering “an opinion and decent argumentâ€ÂÂ
I have just read the story of the review to be held into the new SP system .. what a load of cobblers!<br>
"I would imagine £20,000 was invested with us bookmakers in the dying minutes so we didn’t get a chance to change the other prices.â€ÂÂ
When I’m on political boards, I don’t make nice at all with posters whose views I consider sociopathic and vile.
But for the life of me, I’m baffled how you lads can work yourselves up into a state of what sounds like real acrimony and rancour.
If you can’t be a "band of brothers" in this dire do-or-die game, I reckon it’s a great shame. So mutual goodwill gorn oot the windee for reasons that are probably as mysterious to you as to me. ÂÂÂ
We must expect bookies and their pals in the administration to work against the punters’ interests, and fight them like ***. But you wouldn’t expect a polar bear or a tiger to be cuddly, and same with bookies and their minions it seems to me.
Or have I missed zummit? And I’m talking through my hat?
(Edited by Grimes at 12:29 am on Jan. 1, 2007)
Grimes Posted on 12:24 am on Jan. 1, 2007<br>I’m baffled how you lads can work yourselves up into a state of what sounds like real acrimony and rancour.
<br>.. it is quite important Grimes. In my humble opinion anyway.
The Racing Industry want to raise more funds for the Levy, no-one would argue with that. The method by which this extra funding is raised is the talking point.
Some people think that fleecing punters is the way to go about it, others think bookies should pay up more of their turnover, than their miserly 10%.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.