- This topic has 25 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
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.You strike me as one of life’s ‘upholders’, a believer in rules not a questioner. You may believe that they can’t take a slightly bigger hit but I don’t. Bookies whine more than smackheads, it’s all baloney.
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.You strike me as one of life’s ‘upholders’, a believer in rules not a questioner. You may believe that they can’t take a slightly bigger hit but I don’t. Bookies whine more than smackheads, it’s all baloney.
Tell that to the Aster Group, they’d laugh their heads off.
Have a dispute about my sewage tank lasting years. It’s all sxxt.I question everything. Would’ve thought you’d have learnt that by now.
Do you understand over-rounds Prof? It wouldn’t be a "slightly bigger hit" they’d have to do it for every punter, on every non-runner, it adds up. It’s not my "belief" it is a
fact
.
Say Big Buck’s did not take part in the World Hurdle. He was odds-on antepost. All other horses were at big prices because he took out over 50% of the book. You are effectively asking them to keep to prices given
With Big Buck’s
in the
Betting Without Big Buck’s market
. They would be bound to make a loss unless drastically reducing the over-round (prices of every horse).
Value Is EverythingProf,
I understand you are not a fan of ante-post rules, so two questions:
1) Why did you bet ant-post
2) Do you think ante-post betting should be scrapped altogether
Antepost bets are bigger prices because you are effectively betting a double bet – one bet for the horse to take part and another for it to win – that is why the prices are bigger, we all know that.
I don’t understand why anyone would place an Antepost bet if they think the price is about what it will be at the off as you are effectively taking a shorter price, with the increased risk.
I don’t like AP bets either as on the rare occasions I do them they never take part, but I can’t moan as that’s the point of them. I have a few quid at silly prices on something for the national and if it takes part I will have 5 to 6 times the likely SP, that’s the point of AP bets.
We could change the rules but if AP bets were to be refunded they would be lower prices and bookmakers would likely then offer 2 AP markets – one with a run and one without – so if this happened, would you take the 9s without a run or 7s with a run?
You can’t have it both ways, they’re not registered charities and the deal is we pay them to indulge in our hobby.
I got 9/1 about Robemaker and he would have been about that in my opinion.
Forgive me, but I may be spotting a teeny flaw in your ante-post strategy here…
Mike
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?
Oh yes I think we’ve got the message that you don’t like the rule and I understand that. What I don’t understand is, why, if you don’t like the rule, you placed the bet ? No one forced you too. What is even more hard to understand is, if you thought it would be about that price on the day why did you not wait ?
As has already been stated, if the bookies returned money on AP bets then they would have a rule 4 deduduction. This means the prices of horses that do run would have been cut so defeating the object of AP betting.
As for my signature it refers to something a while back on here.
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?
Oh yes I think we’ve got the message that you don’t like the rule and I understand that. What I don’t understand is, why, if you don’t like the rule, you placed the bet ? No one forced you too. What is even more hard to understand is, if you thought it would be about that price on the day why did you not wait ?
As has already been stated, if the bookies returned money on AP bets then they would have a rule 4 deduduction. This means the prices of horses that do run would have been cut so defeating the object of AP betting.
As for my signature it refers to something a while back on here.
Sorry for late repy on this.
I was taking a girlfriend to Brighton and didn’t want to miss my chance at placing the bet. I don’t usually bet ante-post because I don’t know any jockeys or trainers.strange thread,,,I expected something along the lines of them not accepting a decent bet or closing your account if you are a winner. Not about them laying someone who backed a horse early to try and secure better odds griping because it didn’t run or was beat.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.