- This topic has 29 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
no f@ckin seats in tatterstals f@ckin 33 pounds f@ckin 7 hours a disgrace never mind over round
Governments only get involved in markets under a limited set of circumstances, usually when there is abuse of monopoly power or serious social consequences ensuing from not intervening.
I cannot see the government helping out the beleaguered punters by legislating a fair SP mechanism. Bookmakers do not have a monopoly, although I would say they often act as a cartel, which might at some point attract the attention of the Monopolies Commission. Also, there are no discernable social problems caused by increasing the price of a bet, so not much point lobbying on that issue.
I can understand people’s frustration at being shafted by the unfair market conditions, but it won’t change. Either we accept it, or we move on to something else. If enough people lose interest, market competition will drive prices down(in this case, better odds). But you will have to shop around. SP betting has little or no interest for the serious player these days, if it ever did.
The point Artemis makes about educating punters still using bookmakers is the best we can do and we should never miss an opportunity to do so. After spending most of my working life within bookmaking I am now exclusively a Betfair punter. It’s about four years since my last bet with a bookmaker.
The current SP system will probably survive another few years before industry SP’s are adopted for betting shops. The Big 3 cartel will achieve this goal. When this happens the on course bookmakers (who are mainly commission agents hedging on Betfair) will finally be on the way out. The Big 3 will no longer need to pump money into the market to manipulate the odds with the cooperation of the on course books.<br>
Pardon my youthful ignorance, but I’ve never quite grasped how the ‘over-round percentage’ figure is calculated along with its significance. Can someone explain it please?
Cheers<br>
Artemis, the government did change the way SP’s are returned to suit the bookies, that’s no their job. They are supposed to serve the public interest. How boosting the share prices of the Big3 is in the public interest beats me.
Racing will become less popular because of this and in time will be damaged. Banded racing was dropped because they were only getting 60% of the turnover on it that they forecast they would. It was the worst value for money racing imagineable, from a punters point of view. Betting shop punters will eventually catch on in a year or two and then what?
Anzum, the overround is the bookmakers theoretical profit on every runner in a race. It is calculated in the following manner.
A 2/1 shot has one chance of winning and two chances of losing, out of three chances. Therefore it’s chance of winning is 1/3 = 33%
The prices are calculated for each runner in the race in this manner. You then add all of these percentages together and subtract 100%. This is the bookies profit on all of the runners, divide this amount by the number of runners and you get the overround per runner.
The overrround is important because it’s the difference between getting a fair run for your gambling pound and not getting a fair run for it. If you had £10 bets on horses where the overround is say 114% in a ten runner race, you should expect to lose 14% of your stake over a long series of bets .. this is the bookies edge that you have to over come to break even, without studying anything.
If the government and the bookies collude to return shorter prices and the overround mysteriously becomes 120%, on the same races, then you have to get even luckier to break even.
These prices are compounded in multiple bets. Betting for most people is about the speed by which you lose your money. An ebb and flow of stake money at 1.4% per runner last much longer than one at 3% a runner. At 3% Joe Mug is losing his stake money twice as fast as he was in the past.
Artemis Posted on 8:16 am on April 16, 2007<br>I can understand people’s frustration at being shafted by the unfair market conditions, but it won’t change. Either we accept it, or we move on to something else.
<br>.. moving on is a distinct possibility, I know at least two people who have chucked it since Christmas.
Dave,
I didn’t realise it was the government that had changed the way Starting Prices are returned. Was it one of the Quangos? I take little interest in racing politics and assumed that it was mainly bookmakers and the BHB that introduced the changes.
I, too, have considered moving on. I’ve had a break from betting for three months except for a ‘flutter’ on Saturdays. I don’t buy the RP now and use the website for form and data. The coming months will be a test: if I can’t get excited about Newmarket, Chester or York, I may just give it a longer break.
Yes Artemis, Lord Donaghue and the government appointed ‘gambling commission’ .. laughably independant of the racing industry.
Populated no doubt by "chums" of the racing industry no doubt…
Consumers have no voice in these issues unless a truly indpendent regulator is introduced. Given the negative press the sport gets you would have thought this would have happened already!!! Yeah right…
Ever since betting exchanges have come in, the govt have probably been trying to "make friends" again with the big bookies to keep them sweet.
Quote: from rory on 8:28 pm on April 14, 2007[br]Not a debate I like to join in generally, but mug punters are being treated like……um, mug punters.<br>
:giggle:<br>
I refer members to my earlier ‘“Racing industryâ€ÂÂ
Well spoken, Alan. The quote from Thucydides shows (again) that all we need to know about what is to come has already been written, probably several times, in history’s dusty pages. Characters come and go, but plots are as old as the hills.
Have you the whiff of misdeeds? A hint, pray?<br>
Tom Segal devotes 1/3 of his Weekender to the overround in the National, calling it "… disgusting teatment the general public gets from the bookmakers" and "no-one can honestly believe that there was a wholesale gamble on Monkerhostin".
His last paragraph sums it up really:
"Yes, I know the once-a-year punters don’t really care and don’t know how the betting market works but that sort of exploitation wouldn’t be allowed to happen in any other walk of life. In my opinion it cast a shadow over the day’s proceedings"
Edited to add:
Dave Edwards (RP Topspeed) also uses his column to have a go at Aintree officials and the moving of the rails each day without informing punters of any change in distances raced. By his calculations, at face value, Albertas Run’s win on Saturday is 35lb (or half a furlong) superior to Mighty Man’s on the Thursday. While acknowledging that other factors are involved (races were run at different speeds, going etc), he reckons the main reason is officials moving the rails inwards each successive day, thereby making the courses significantly shorter on Saturday when compared to the Thursday.
(Edited by davidbrady at 8:33 pm on April 19, 2007)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.