- This topic has 63 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 4 days, 2 hours ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Can someone explain to me how this will work.
Let’s say that it comes in and you are only allowed to lose a hundred pounds a week/month.
What happens say if you have won £500 first off, are you then allowed to lose £600 or still just the £100.
Surely this could be the death or racing and to an extent some bookies as i don’t want to be told what I can and cannot gamble. I know it is well intentioned but surely it’s the same as saying you can only buy four cans of lager a week because you may become an alcoholic.
Just a thought as it may well turn me off racing if I am dictated to about what I can or cannot gamble.
Maybe Russia and China are taking over lolWe’ll all have to cave in and invest our money in Gingertipster
he never losesMember since March 2008Lots of bookmakers wont let you lose £100 in case you might win. In fact Bet365 wont let you have a bet if you beat the price 2 or 3 times despite the horses losing. Good to hear that Dave Yates on Racing TV today has suffered the same treatment although he didn’t mention the name of the bookmaker.
My one-stop-shop for all my betting needs is the Betfair exchange. That includes placepots, which I’m a big fan of and once won 2K ish for a stake of £9.60 – tis true – the exchange have a Tote button in case some don’t know that.
Even when there was a 5% (I think) bonus for placing them directly with the Tote, I was happy to stay put. So much easier to do all bets in the one place for a lazy lump like me – imo
Chelmsford Placepot Results for 21st September 2017
Dividend of £11,414.50 to a £1 stake won by 6.70 unitsChelmsford placepot prize fund: £76,477
Race 1 – 5:45 Chelmsford
Distance: 5f Runners: 9 Favourite: 2Place No. Name
1st 2 Encrypted (F)
2nd 6 Emilia James
3rd 10 Brandy Station
Selections remaining after this race:
Tote Placepot: 38068.68
Show how selections ran.Race 2 – 6:15 Chelmsford
Distance: 1m 6f Runners: 13 Favourite: 13Place No. Name
1st 12 Macksville
2nd 8 Nurse Nightingale
3rd 11 Uptown Funk
Selections remaining after this race:
Tote Placepot: 12572.60
Show how selections ran.Race 3 – 6:45 Chelmsford
Distance: 6f Runners: 11 Favourite: 5Place No. Name
1st 9 Harlequin Storm
2nd 14 Bahamian Paradise
3rd 12 Billyoakes
Selections remaining after this race:
Tote Placepot: 3828.60
Show how selections ran.Race 4 – 7:15 Chelmsford
Distance: 7f Runners: 14 Favourite: 10Place No. Name
1st 8 Gold Hunter
2nd 11 Rouge Nuage
3rd 15 Cainhoe Star
Selections remaining after this race:
Tote Placepot: 710.31
Show how selections ran.Race 5 – 7:45 Chelmsford
Distance: 1m Runners: 10 Favourite: 2Place No. Name
1st 3 Enigmatic
2nd 6 Swiss Vinnare
3rd 11 Yogiyogiyogi
Selections remaining after this race:
Tote Placepot: 17.95
Show how selections ran.Race 6 – 8:15 Chelmsford
Distance: 1m Runners: 16 Favourite: 1Place No. Name
1st 1 Chetan (F)
2nd 13 Prince Jai
3rd 14 Dukes Meadow
4th 6 Captain Hawk
Selections remaining after this race:
Tote Placepot: 6.7096 lines @10p. had 2 lines come up in one leg – so ended up with 20pence worth of the over 11k pot. I place laid Dukes Meadow in the last leg to guarantee myself a hundred quid or so. Would have been a sickener to have ended up with nowt as I was following it and knew it would be a bumper payout
Well done, Tank. Maybe you should start your own Saturday’s Placepot thread. That’s something missing on this forum I would say.
You want me to weaken my payout!
Or maybe you mean a placepot competition? Not really much into competitions and never bother with them. Sorry if that makes me sound a misery.
Anyone else had any worthwhile payouts for a small stake? Next best for me would be on the Scooop 6 where I managed to win a grand on the place part of it – that was for a layout of £32- and that sort of layout can soon add up and wipe out profits, so you need a half-decent pick up now and then
droffats it’s a £100 net loss, meaning it’s a £100 above any winnings (I think)
Anyway it’s all about problem gamblers and trying to stop them, which in theory is a good idea however I think most gamblers who control their gambling habits like you and me would be pissed off (to say the least
). Cruddace think it’ll cost the industry £100M and thinks it’s a mistake, according to RP.British racing faces losing as much as £100 million if strict affordability checks on betting are introduced, with Arena Racing Company chief executive Martin Cruddace warning such a move is “simply a mistake”.
Senior figures in the sport had put the annual loss at closer to £60m but Cruddace stated on Sunday that such estimates were conservative and that up to 70 per cent of punters on horseracing would reject having to prove they could afford a net gambling loss of £100 a month.
Cruddace, a former Betfair executive, warned that the Gambling Commission needed to be careful not to “throw the baby out with the bathwater” with its consultation into remote customer interaction, with racing potentially damaged as an unintended consequence.
Cruddace said: “We need to do everything we can to protect problem gamblers but we need to be very careful to effectively not throw the baby out with the bathwater with the detriment of horseracing as an unintended consequence of the affordability consultation.
“The headline is six or seven out of every ten horseracing punters will not go through these affordability checks. [Therefore] I think it’s probably more likely to be £100m [financial loss] and it’s basically a reduction to the levy on a pro rata turnover reduction, as well as a reduction to media rights which are charged to turnover as well.
“I’ve done those calculations and £60m is the absolute conservative figure if we are right that 60-70 per cent of people betting would not go through the affordability checks.”
A Gambling Commission consultation is being undertaken separately to the UK government’s review into the 2005 Gambling Act, and among the toughest actions mooted is imposing a threshold on net monthly gambling loss at as little as £100, which would lead to customers having to provide evidence they could afford to lose more.
Professional punter Neil Channing warned this week that such checks were an “existential threat” to racing, adding: “I think horseracing literally might not exist because of this.”
Racing figures have also been mobilising in an attempt to express their concerns for the sport’s finances if strict affordability checks are brought into place, with MPs who have racecourses and racing interests in their constituency contacted by the sport to alert them to racing’s concerns about the consultation.
Chancellor of the exchequer Rishi Sunak, who has Catterick in his constituency, has contacted his cabinet colleague Oliver Dowden, secretary of state for the Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, which oversees gambling and racing, as a result.
Cruddace believes the focus of the Gambling Review and the Gambling Commission’s consultation needs to be on slowing the speed of play and also ensuring the unregulated black market does not gain a larger foothold in the UK betting market.
Speaking on Sky Sports Racing, he said: “There does need to be intervention at some stage and affordability is one way, but to look at the blunt instrument of affordability in isolation is simply a mistake.
“For me, speed of play is a really key thing and you have to look at that as a marker of harm, and that’s what the Gambling Review should look at. There is an argument that there’s a difference between a sports bet with intervals where you study the form and have a view compared to a fast speed of play product.”
Drawing a distinction between betting on sport, such as racing, and online casino games was also highlighted by Carolyn Harris, Labour MP for Swansea East and chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Gambling Related Harm.
“I love a bet on the horses, I’ve not got a problem with it, and I would say the gambling industry owes the horse sector because without them they would not have a sector,” she told Sky Sports Racing.
“I am not a prohibitionist. I just want to make sure those who are extremely vulnerable, and children, are protected from the dangers of addiction. The vulnerable and children have to be protected.”
I’m of the opinion that Problem Gamblers will just gamble on something else.
We live in a world where the Founder of Bet365 could give literally everyone in the UK £100 and still have personal wealth of £900 million yet I and countless others can’t get on with Bet365.
And in my experience (and I am only a small stakes punter having a bit of fun) they were one of the better ones – I was £8,000 up with them by the time I was red carded.
With Paddy Power it was only £600 and BetFred closed me even before I had won off them, simply because I backed a few that shortened in price.
I have now had 12 accounts closed or restricted to the point of worthlessness inside two years.
In theory, we in the U.K. ought to have the best betting choice on the planet what with fixed odds on or off course, betting exchanges and spread betting.
But for those of us who can’t get on anything that’s likely to shorten we might as well have a Tote monopoly and bet blind into a pool.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.