Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Good work getting a 28/1 winner, I was happy enough getting my money back on my losing correct score cos it ended 0-0
I was actually really pleased for Ronaldo. I know he gets a lot of stick (guess he brings it on himself to an extent) but he is a phenomenal player and it was sad to see him go off injured.
It doesn’t matter who said it, but surely this is clever rather than stupid.
If the price shortens then the deduction is higher, meaning less payout. Or have I got it my ass and elbow mixed up?
One of the oldest tricks in the book isn’t it?
I finally abandoned my ‘not backing outrights when England are involved’ policy and had a bit of 12s Italy during the group stage. Long way to go but I’d fancy them to go all the way if they can get past Germany.
(aforementioned policy cost me the forecast in the last World Cup, about 25/1 I think it was, so it had to go)
For me it’s disgusting they are allowed to bet at such margins. The scary thing is they’ll take a lot of money at these horrible prices.
Can’t say I blame them, seems like good business sense to me. People are free to take their money to Betfair or wherever but seemingly enough are happy to bet at bookies odds to keep them going. Not paying money owed that has been honestly won (assuming that is the case) is however a disgrace.
If those are the full facts of the situation then thats pretty shoddy treatment and she’ll presumably have little trouble in court (not that it should come to that). Although our esteemed media have never been ones to let facts get the way of a good story so who knows?
‘So, how do you make money? We only get rewarded by our bookmaker partners so, don’t worry, we are always on your side.’
Not the point you are making I know but just noticed that on there. Am I being thick (it’s been known
) or does that not quite compute?‘I believe everyone is extremely against it’
Apart from perhaps the residents of Catalonia and the Basque Country…
I wouldn’t call laying an evens shot at long odds on for weeks foolish. Obviously they were giving 3s or 4s on the other evens shot but evidently weren’t taking stacks on it.
As I remeber the last general election it was a take your pick affair for Next PM the day or two before but 1/20 or so Cameron at 10pm polling day when the experts were all saying it was a toss up still. Of course nobody saw the Con majority coming.
Supposedly all UK+Ire races up to £200, singles only. They do, of course, reserve the right to withdraw the offer from ‘selected customers’ at any time
Forgive my ignorance here (my business, whilst modest, is more than welcome at any firm I’m sure) but if a punter usually beats the price then what difference does BOG really make? Clearly nobody can beat the price all the time however well informed they are but I’m sure there are plenty who manage it most of the time. Is it simply a case of them doing what they can to reduce a shrewd punter’s edge?
Bookmakers are not exactly shining beacons of integrity but then again neither are many trainers, jockeys, owners or punters so what, really, do you expect?
Two places on three and four runner races is nothing shy of absurd. I’m all for fairness but it works both ways. I’m not hugely familiar with the complexities of bookmaking mathematics but surely forcing bookies to pay at those terms can only be harming the win only punter which is what is being offered off course. Also presumably the vast majority of those on course would prefer better win only odds.
The 92% figure is approximately what it is for the slot games (which it is also entirely possible to do your brains on but roulette is where the problem comes from, we all know that) sorry, crossed wires. Either way, you will lose on machines. Of course the vast majority lose on horses/dogs/sports but the fact is people can and do win, but not even Mr Curley himself can make a roulette number come in 10 times in a row.
I should add that I genuinely enjoyed my time there. Like I said I was in a small town, we had a decent group of regulars, some of whom I still count as friends, and little trouble. The staff were also good and knowledgeable, we had most sports covered between us. Sadly more of an exception than a rule. Someone mentioned London, I tried getting a boxing bet on last time I was there. Would have had more chance jumping in the ring myself
I soon left and used my phone.Long time listener first time caller here. Former betting shop deputy manager of over 5 years, one of the major high street firms. I wont mention which as there really is little difference between them past the name above the front door. I’m also a relatively small staking punter and have used FOBTs (although very much not any more in the case of the latter).
A very good and interesting piece. Sadly, for once, I don’t think the article is particularly exaggerating or making things up. I was lucky enough to work in a shop in a small town and most of the time I enjoyed it, we had a good group of regulars and the staff all got on too. I can’t say I’ve witnessed much of what is described in the article first hand but I have little doubt that it does happen exactly as described.
I know this is hardly a groundbreaking revelation but there is something about FOBTs that is different than all of the over the counter gambling. We never had machines smashed up but people do quickly get incredibly angry and respectable looking adults can make themselves look very childish when losing on machines. Certainly far more than when the same happens on horses and dogs. I think deep down we (I include myself in this as I have played, and of course lost more than I should have, on machines) know that there is only one person to blame for our machine losses and it certainly isn’t Mr Hill, Mr Coral, Fred or the poor sod behind the counter. The ease and speed with which money can be lost of course only adds to the problem. Sadly some people take their anger too far and take it out on the wrong people and these awful events happen.
I think the difference with over the counter betting is that it is of course a slower process. Even if you are compelled to gamble on every horse/dog/virtual race it’s nothing like the two or three spins a minute you can do on roulette. Also you can (sometimes legitimately) blame the jockey, the pea-brained dog or the clown who missed an open goal to chin your football acca. Even when people did get angry at such things, it was far less severe and died down much quicker. The belief that it was not us at fault but someone else is much easier to take.
As I said before, it may only be deep down or sub-concious, but at the end of the day we know machine losses are our own fault and ours alone. Of course outwardly everybody under the sun is at fault bar us. What sort of rational being walks up to a machine with their hard earned, reads the 92% payout message and piles it in regardless?
Thanks for reading my poorly structured waffle, hope you somehow find it relevant. Happy to answer any questions about my time behind enemy lines although from my lurking I know there a few current or former employees about.
I soon left and used my phone.