- This topic has 25 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
…and why this game is doomed unless they stop being *****
The only sport I know where you can lose three days before the event.
Result
Time of bet: 28/03/2012 00:49:58
Selections
No.
Selections
Event
Event Date
E/W Terms
Odds
1
Robemaker
William Hill Lincoln
(Win And Each Way)31/03/2012
4 Places
1/4 Odds12/1
Lost
well, part of the bet was that the horse will run. Can’t hare bookmakers just because you lose a bet.
Surely the point of all of this sort of betting is that a bet is a gamble placed by a chancer and AP bets are therefore bigger gambles placed by more optimistic chancers, hence the inflated odds?
Judging by the bookies increasing profits, we love ’em and I’m not sure but would guess AP bets rank second behind FOBTs for paying the wages.
‘Why people hate Bookmakers’……’Why people hate Trainers’…..
‘Why people hate Trainers that inform Bookmakers their horse isn’t running but let punters continue to back it’…..I’ll just keep taking 75’s,65’s,60’s,55’s 50’s about a 12/1 shot for the Grand National until I’m told its not running…….Whenever that may be!
Have you backed the wrong horse again Prof?
Tell you what I’m going to do with you next jumps season, ginge. I’m going to make you a bet that I come out ahead of you to level stakes on bets put up on here. A magnum of veuve. Up for it?
Have you backed the wrong horse again Prof?
Tell you what I’m going to do with you next jumps season, ginge. I’m going to make you a bet that I come out ahead of you to level stakes on bets put up on here. A magnum of veuve. Up for it?
You may be a successful punter for all I know Prof, just seem to moan a lot and blame others when things don’t go your way.
I just can’t see the problem. From what I see you backed antepost in the hope of getting a better price. You know the risks Prof. It didn’t pay off this time. So why blame the bookmakers?
I don’t bet to level stakes and have many savers too. But if you wish to start a thread in the Daily Lays And Plays section, I’ll join you in putting up tips and keeping them to level stakes.
After entering a competition on another forum where the person (a so called "professional gambler") put up a good prize, and scarpered immediately it was clear I was going to win… You’ll have to forgive me Prof, not taking you up on that kind offer. No need for any prize, just winning is incentive enough.
Look foreward to the challenge.
Value Is EverythingHave you backed the wrong horse again Prof?
Tell you what I’m going to do with you next jumps season, ginge. I’m going to make you a bet that I come out ahead of you to level stakes on bets put up on here. A magnum of veuve. Up for it?
You may be a successful punter for all I know Prof, just seem to moan a lot and blame others when things don’t go your way.
I just can’t see the problem. From what I see you backed antepost in the hope of getting a better price. You know the risks Prof. It didn’t pay off this time. So why blame the bookmakers?
I don’t bet to level stakes and have many savers too. But if you wish to start a thread in the Daily Lays And Plays section, I’ll join you in putting up tips and keeping them to level stakes.
After entering a competition on another forum where the person (a so called "professional gambler") put up a good prize, and scarpered immediately it was clear I was going to win… You’ll have to forgive me Prof, not taking you up on that kind offer. No need for any prize, just winning is incentive enough.
Look foreward to the challenge.
I think if a horse is taken out of a race the bookie should give you your money back. It took no part in the race. It’s a swiz, it’s sharp practice, as is taking your money when a horse refuses to race. If it doesn’t come out of the stalls it hasn’t raced. If I had a pound for every time I hear obscenities directed at bookmakers for their tricksy catchpenny rules I would be very rich. All you are really saying is: these are the rules. I already knew that. I am complaining about the rules. They are wrong in my opinion.
It will all have to change if they want to turn heads away from the FOBTs. Believe me.Have you backed the wrong horse again Prof?
Tell you what I’m going to do with you next jumps season, ginge. I’m going to make you a bet that I come out ahead of you to level stakes on bets put up on here. A magnum of veuve. Up for it?
You may be a successful punter for all I know Prof, just seem to moan a lot and blame others when things don’t go your way.
I just can’t see the problem. From what I see you backed antepost in the hope of getting a better price. You know the risks Prof. It didn’t pay off this time. So why blame the bookmakers?
I don’t bet to level stakes and have many savers too. But if you wish to start a thread in the Daily Lays And Plays section, I’ll join you in putting up tips and keeping them to level stakes.
After entering a competition on another forum where the person (a so called "professional gambler") put up a good prize, and scarpered immediately it was clear I was going to win… You’ll have to forgive me Prof, not taking you up on that kind offer. No need for any prize, just winning is incentive enough.
Look foreward to the challenge.
I think if a horse is taken out of a race the bookie should give you your money back. It took no part in the race. It’s a swiz, it’s sharp practice, as is taking your money when a horse refuses to race. If it doesn’t come out of the stalls it hasn’t raced. If I had a pound for every time I hear obscenities directed at bookmakers for their tricksy catchpenny rules I would be very rich. All you are really saying is: these are the rules. I already knew that. I am complaining about the rules. They are wrong in my opinion.
It will all have to change if they want to turn heads away from the FOBTs. Believe me.You knew the rules so why make the bet ? Simple solution if you don’t like the rule is to have waited a couple of days and bet after final declarations have been made.
I think if a horse is taken out of a race the bookie should give you your money back. It took no part in the race. It’s a swiz, it’s sharp practice, as is taking your money when a horse refuses to race. If it doesn’t come out of the stalls it hasn’t raced. If I had a pound for every time I hear obscenities directed at bookmakers for their tricksy catchpenny rules I would be very rich. All you are really saying is: these are the rules. I already knew that. I am complaining about the rules. They are wrong in my opinion.
It will all have to change if they want to turn heads away from the FOBTs. Believe me.If it is an antepost bet, it is an antepost bet. You’re getting a bigger price because there’s a chance it won’t run. You can’t have that bigger price and still expect your money back.
For every punter who loses money through a non-runner in an antepost race, every other punter who’s backed another horse is getting a better price about his/her selection. Should other punters be forced to pay for your loss? It can’t be done. The Rule 4 favours punters. At the moment there is no R4 at 20/1+ (16/1+ in some lists). With so many 20/1+ horses non-runners in antepost lists they’d add up to a significant part of any book. So there’d have to be a rule change to enable bookmakers to use R4 at bigger prices. Do you want that?
When there’s a horse who "does not take part", by "refusing to race"… IF punters always get their money back there also has to be a Rule 4. Punters of the winner and placed horses will have to pay the losing punter from their winnings. Why should any punter who’s studied the form and worked out a horse is temperamental and should be avoided – pay for punters who haven’t studied the form?
To think it’s bookmakers who are ripping punters off when there’s a non-runner is extremely naive.
Value Is EverythingI think if a horse is taken out of a race the bookie should give you your money back. It took no part in the race. It’s a swiz, it’s sharp practice, as is taking your money when a horse refuses to race. If it doesn’t come out of the stalls it hasn’t raced. If I had a pound for every time I hear obscenities directed at bookmakers for their tricksy catchpenny rules I would be very rich. All you are really saying is: these are the rules. I already knew that. I am complaining about the rules. They are wrong in my opinion.
It will all have to change if they want to turn heads away from the FOBTs. Believe me.If it is an antepost bet, it is an antepost bet. You’re getting a bigger price because there’s a chance it won’t run. You can’t have that bigger price and still expect your money back.
For every punter who loses money through a non-runner in an antepost race, every other punter who’s backed another horse is getting a better price about his/her selection. Should other punters be forced to pay for your loss? It can’t be done. The Rule 4 favours punters. At the moment there is no R4 at 20/1+ (16/1+ in some lists). With so many 20/1+ horses non-runners in antepost lists they’d add up to a significant part of any book. So there’d have to be a rule change to enable bookmakers to use R4 at bigger prices. Do you want that?
When there’s a horse who "does not take part", by "refusing to race"… IF punters always get their money back there also has to be a Rule 4. Punters of the winner and placed horses will have to pay the losing punter from their winnings. Why should any punter who’s studied the form and worked out a horse is temperamental and should be avoided – pay for punters who haven’t studied the form?
To think it’s bookmakers who are ripping punters off when there’s a non-runner is extremely naive.
I got 9/1 about Robemaker and he would have been about that in my opinion. As for Should other punters be forced to pay for your loss? I think you;re framing the question wrongly. I am asking if it is right that antepost bets not refunded if the horse is taken out. I say it’s wrong, you say it’s god’s plan for us all. I want the bookmaker to take a bigger hit. He can afford it.
You knew the rules so why make the bet ? Simple solution if you don’t like the rule is to have waited a couple of days and bet after final declarations have been made.
Look, this may be hard for you to grasp but I think the rule is wrong. Do you understand that?
By the way, what is the meaning of your signature about Chamberlain?
I want the bookmaker to take a bigger hit. He can afford it.
No he can’t.
In competitive markets there’s only a certain amount of profit per race for any bookmaker. Therefore, if you get what you’re asking Prof, they’ll go broke in no time. Either that or drastically shorten prices available, betting to a far bigger over-round; which defeats the object of antepost betting.Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.