The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

Fred Done problems (again)

Home Forums Horse Racing Fred Done problems (again)

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #6304
    Seagull
    Member
    • Total Posts 1708

    IBAS have only recently ruled on this complaint.
    A local punter went into Fred Dones during the Football Euro qualifing matches.
    Dones had priced up Croatia to beat England at 15/2.
    They also offered 15/2 that Russia would not get into the finals.

    The punter had a £120 win double on Croatia winning and also that Russia would qualify for the finals and the staff wrote the prices down.

    After Croatia had beaten England and Russia had beaten Andorra he calculated he had won £8,700.

    Betfred refused to pay out saying the bets were related as if Croatia had beaten England then Russia would not be 15/2 to get to the finals.
    Russia still had to beat Andorra and although the chances were slim they still could have lost.
    ( Non league Havant beat league side in the F.A. cup replay this week so these turn ups do happen.)

    They also stated that they cannot be expected to check all bets when they are placed. (Although they seem to check them pretty good afterwards if it means them paying out)

    Betfred gave an example to IBAS that who ever wins the Golden Boot (top goalscorer) in World Cup finals normally comes from the winning side. So one cannot back golden boot footballer and winning side in doubles and expect to get paid as the bets again were related.

    The punter has appealed on this as he checked the results and they show out of the last 11 World Cup Finals the player who won Golden Boot came from the winning side on only 4 occasions. So bets can not be expected to be related on the example Dones gave.

    IBAS ruled punter could not expect shop staff to check every bet.
    They agree with Dones that the bet was taken by mistake. Punter has no right of appeal against an IBAS ruling.

    #136123
    davidbrady
    Member
    • Total Posts 3901

    I’d have to side with BaldFred here Seagull

    The 15/2 about Russia qualifying for the finals was effectively a double on Croatia winning and Russia winning (as this was the only scenario whereby Russia would qualify I think)

    So doubling the 2 options you gave is the following bets

    Leg 1 – Croatia winning
    Leg 2 – Croatia winning & Russia winning

    For example, United play Chelsea in the last game of the season this year. If both of those sides needed to win the match to win the league, no bookie would take a double on, say, United to beat Chelsea and United to win the league.

    Don’t know what Fred is on about with the top goalscorer thing though!

    #136127
    davidjohnson
    Member
    • Total Posts 4491

    Quite clearly that bet falls foul of the related contingencies rule. Baldy is is right on this one.

    #136129
    cormack15
    Keymaster
    • Total Posts 8966

    Betfred 100% correct on this one. Both outcomes related and therefore cannot be douibled at those odds. The goalscorer contingency is also clearly related. You would need to ask for special odds for those doubles.

    They cannot reasonably be expected to check all bets when the bet is placed and I’sd agree with teh general rule that it is the punters responsibility when placing his bet to familiarise himself with their rules, not Betfred’s.

    I would suggest they probably don’t check each and every winning bet in detail either and I’d wager that a few punters have been paid out over the years on bets which were probably incorrectly settled or were contrary to their rules. We don’t tend to hear about those though.

    #136186
    Friggo
    Member
    • Total Posts 1593

    Yes, BetFred are absolutely right on this one, as everyone has said, under the related contingencies rule. However the shop staff need shooting, as they will be taught to notice such things and will have definitely have had to inspect such a bet before putting it through, making this mistake inexcusable (as much as the punter was almost certainly chancing his arm!).

    #136224
    johnjdonoghue
    Member
    • Total Posts 994

    What has this thread got to do with Horse Racing?

    JohnJ.

    #136232
    Smithy
    Member
    • Total Posts 720

    Friggo has hit the nail on the head for me. Baldy is right that this is a related contingency, but if they employed people who had any idea about sport and betting, it wouldn’t happen.

    #136243
    Tony25
    Member
    • Total Posts 327

    Sorry but this is a “no brainer“, the rules are very clear and it`s more than likely that the punter was trying it on

    However,if we give him the benefit of the doubt i would say that they should at least pay out on the Croatia win , that part was clear!!

    I think decent bookmakers would find a medium,then again, Betfred wouldn`t come under my idea of being decent!!

    #136254
    davidjohnson
    Member
    • Total Posts 4491

    Going back to my days as a shop manager, which is only 3 years or so ago, if a cashier had accepted said bet without my knowledge, I’d have settled it as 2 split stakes singles, £30 Croatia win, £30 Russia to qualify for the finals. There is no excuse for Betfred not doing this.

    #136264
    MikkyMo73
    Member
    • Total Posts 1789

    Just to agree with everyone else, IBAS made a 100% correct decision in coming down on Fred’s side.

    The bets were totally related.

    So what happened? Was the best void, was the punter paid out on just one of the bets?

    Mike

    #136275
    LetsGetRacing
    Member
    • Total Posts 1147

    There can be no complaints as regard the ruling provided by IBAS, but I agree that some sort of ‘middle ground’ should have been established, as the punter in question wasn’t (necessarily) to blame and had picked out two winning bets. And I don’t think betting shop operators can be expected to check the details of every single bet in full as time just doesn’t allow it, especially when people are queueing to bet on the endless stream of BAGS races.

    I do, however, think they should be made to check a slip whenever a price is to be taken (scanning a slip to check a price isn’t too taxing, or time consuming). I can’t count the number of times when I have checked the price of a horse on a bookmaker’s website just before leaving work, dashed into the shop in my way home and filled out the slip, only to be settled at SP because ‘we weren’t offering that price at the time’.

    In terms of taking the price, as soon as the slip is scanned and my money taken I expect to be paid out at whatever the ticket says. The processing of that slip, in my eyes, is an agreement to settle the bet at whatever terms are described and if the bookmaker is particularly worried about people pulling a fast one (not that I would), they should be more vigilant.

    I should add that I always make the operator aware if I have written a price on the slip.

    As an aside to the above, I was in my local Totesport the other day and a member of the shop’s staff had a day off and was in the shop betting. He decided to have a fun each-way bet on a 50/1 chance, but as he got to the counter the price changed to 28/1. Being a member of staff he was still given 50/1, so had anyone else gone to back the same horse at that time should they have been able to get on at that price too?

    #136278
    cormack15
    Keymaster
    • Total Posts 8966

    LGR – on the one hand you say that betting shop staff don’t have the time to check every bet and then state that they should check every slip to see whether a price has been taken. Doesn’t compute. You should be checking the current price when you are in the shop and about to place the bet in any case, not expecting to get the price the horse/dog was when you left the office.

    It is up to anyone placing a bet to ensure that the bet/price is correct and within the rules of the shop/firm (their rules are usually on display and will be available if you ask). It is NOT the responsibility of the shop to ensure you’ve done so.

    I’m all in favour of punters rights but it’s a two way street.

    #136279
    davidbrady
    Member
    • Total Posts 3901

    What has this thread got to do with Horse Racing?

    JohnJ.

    JohnJ – based on your previous contributions to the forum, you have more to offer than that sort of comment.

    You are correct – the thread isn’t about horse-racing but Seagull is a regular contributor so could be given some slack in this matter.

    #136281
    LetsGetRacing
    Member
    • Total Posts 1147

    Corm, there is a difference between taking a second or two to scan a slip to see if a price has been taken (something my local Corals do very well), and taking upwards of a minute to decipher the illegible handwriting of someone placing doubles, trebles and each-way singles, on different sporting events, on the same slip.

    The fact is bookmakers want it all they’re own way even if punters try their best to make everything as transparent as possible. My dad placed a bet of £60 with another Totesport shop close to us, and checked that he had provided the correct stake when the cashier gave him £10 back. They assured him everything was OK, but when he came to collect his winnings he only received 5/6 of the return because of her error. He’d filled out the slip properly, had questioned the operator to ensure the money taken was correct but was still worse off for it.

    #136283
    Khotso Moabi
    Member
    • Total Posts 36

    LGR if a member of staff is betting in their own shop then thats a sackable offence. you might like to have a quiet word in their ear, suggest he settles a couple of your bets at 50/1, otherwise tongues might start wagging…

    quite why anyone would want to spend their day off in their shop is beyond me…

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 22 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.