Bookmakers offer an each of two shot as 10/11 rather than evens! Shocking! Who'd have thought they'd build a margin into their prices?
Revelation - Bookmakers are profit making businesses! If you offered Even money on Tails on a toss of a coin, guess what profit you'd make?
In a nutshell basically. If you want to be slightly shrewd use oddschecker but even then with the best odds every time the bookie still wins.Only ever one winner in the long run - the bookies!
Only ever one winner in the long run - the bookies!
In a nutshell basically. If you want to be slightly shrewd use oddschecker but even then with the best odds every time the bookie still wins.
They lure people in with decent odds on certain bets. A couple of examples recently have been the both teams to score and the score and win coupons, both these coupons became really popular and then the bookies chopped the odds on all the games. The odds now compared to what they were originally are ridiculous.
I don't think your being objective.I guess, yeah, if you're looking at it as some sort of eternal struggle between the bookie and the punter. But I think for most people it's just a recreational activity, putting a fiver on a coupon or something. Something to cheer on.
This is gutter journalism at its finest. Taking something that's pretty obvious and screaming "shocking revelation". Usually this Tory mouthpiece, like government, urges people to take personal responsibility for their actions. Its only when it comes to bookmakers that it's always happy to "declare war" like the already heavily regulated industry is somehow rogue and ripping people off.
I don't think your being objective.
If I place 10 winners. They'll limit my bets to 50 quid a go.
If I pick 10 losers they'll let me throw 500 plus per bet.
They already have their margin.
They shouldn't be able to classify punters and offer different odds or max bets depending on how much research you do and ultimately how good you gamble.
They have margin. They set the odds. So everything else should be standardised?
The key to beating the bookies is always to know more about what you're betting on than they do.
If you can do that, you'll win against them long-term.
And those specially created bets are a pile of absolute shite.
Of course they do, but that doesn't mean that if you're betting on something where you have more info than they do, that you cannot win.You will never win long term off a bookie.
They all show a profit
That is a hard fact
You will never win long term off a bookie.
They all show a profit
That is a hard fact
Well it doesn't work like that.No, it's not as simple as that. They'll make an objective decision based on your betting activity. I
If you've had 10 winners on Albanian 2nd division in play, then yes, you might be restricted.
The key to beating the bookies is always to know more about what you're betting on than they do.
If you can do that, you'll win against them long-term.
And those specially created bets are a pile of absolute shite.
It's the only truth in betting.That’s hell of an insight
Well it doesn't work like that.
I'm talking pdc world championship. Premiership football. And bets restricted to 50 quid.
Then to test their resolve try stick 500 on a virtual race even money shot.
Guess what. They accept it and it gets fucked.
Then when you phone customer service to ask why they allowed that bet and not others. As the paper says, they just close your account for winning too much.
With the greatest of respect, you either don't know what your talking about or are a bookie trying to justify fucking people because 5 billion in profit is not enough as they push towards 15 billion.
I know exactly what I'm talking about in this instance, I assure you.
With the greatest of respect, you just sound like a disgruntled punter. Losing £500 on a single then phoning up questioning why it was accepted in the first place. Every individual market will have its own limit. A bet to win £500 for instance. So clearly how much you'll be able to bet will depend on the price.
Show me a bookie in the poor house and I'll faint flat on my back.You will never win long term off a bookie.
They all show a profit
That is a hard fact
I've seen 2 accounts be allowed bets of 500 plus and less than 50 on the same market minutes apart by the so called biggest bookie in UK and Europe.
So you're lying somewhere.
You lied. You said you know exactly what your talking about. And then wrote shit that simply doesn't stand up to either personal experience which coincides with what the paper is saying.I'm lying how?
Different sports have different limits. Different football matches have different limits. The max bet will vary on them for every punter.
And yes, like I've already said above, some punters will have their accounts restricted as a business decision. It's no great secret, that.
You lied. You said you know exactly what your talking about. And then wrote shit that simply doesn't stand up to either personal experience which coincides with what the paper is saying.
In 3 months I ran up 6k in winnings. 2 or 3 bets a day. With a new account.
I'm a winning gambler but that was an extremely hot streak.
You'd expect the biggest bookie to realise this is a streak and wait it out until I inevitably go on a cooler and they get a chunk of it back.
Then all of a sudden in million quid markets on the exchanges they are limiting my bet to a max win of about 40 quid. That means offering 2 quid on a horse etc. This to you is "normal". It isn't, to say its normal is lying. To think its acceptable to a company hitting a billion in profits is stupid. They set the odds, they set their bet limit, there is no reason why they can't lower the odds across the board if they feel people have an edge on the bet. (which, I also suspect they do, but I've no concrete proof so it's for another thread)
If they are going to accept losing gamblers they should be forced to accept winners. It's that simple.
We are talking about a small hit on billion dollar profit in accepting bets.
So they are a business. And you feel they should be able to do what they like? That's fine. Papers and forums like this should be able to put their own little dent on that by sharing the truth. Not have liars telling them it's not happening.
No, it isn't.Worked in Germany for a couple of years for their Government bookmaker. We had to lay each account a bet to take out 500 euros. Got totally filled in one day on Tour De France as the lad compiled a 1/4 shot at 7/2. Lol,cost about 5k from various account. Was in store terminals that like, basically you could only bet in the way you would put on a lotto ticket.
What you say about taking in winners I agree with to an extent - certainly for high grade events etc... but there’s far more to it. Like I say it’s not a nice industry.
You lied. You said you know exactly what your talking about. And then wrote shit that simply doesn't stand up to either personal experience which coincides with what the paper is saying.
In 3 months I ran up 6k in winnings. 2 or 3 bets a day. With a new account.
I'm a winning gambler but that was an extremely hot streak.
You'd expect the biggest bookie to realise this is a streak and wait it out until I inevitably go on a cooler and they get a chunk of it back.
Then all of a sudden in million quid markets on the exchanges they are limiting my bet to a max win of about 40 quid. That means offering 2 quid on a horse etc. This to you is "normal". It isn't, to say its normal is lying. To think its acceptable to a company hitting a billion in profits is stupid. They set the odds, they set their bet limit, there is no reason why they can't lower the odds across the board if they feel people have an edge on the bet. (which, I also suspect they do, but I've no concrete proof so it's for another thread)
If they are going to accept losing gamblers they should be forced to accept winners. It's that simple.
We are talking about a small hit on billion dollar profit in accepting bets.
So they are a business. And you feel they should be able to do what they like? That's fine. Papers and forums like this should be able to put their own little dent on that by sharing the truth. Not have liars telling them it's not happening.
The same folk telling us it's all fair game.
Do you feel the same with fag companies when they face compensation claims? Or boozers who serve people who are already legless?
Made thousands doing this banned from almost every bookies account between me and my MrsYou can if you lay bets and manipulate the odds in your favour. Lad I know does very well out of this, he’s a poster on here.
My old man has been doing coupons for 50 years and from a young boy he alwys drummed into me the bookies always win
I dont disagree with him
No, it isn't.
I think people should be wise to the fact that the bookies will simply treat you poorly if you win.
And anyone suggesting otherwise is being disingenuous.
Then you get the "it's a business" crew.
If a bear came on here with a story, went into a famous Gers pub, I got absolutely shit faced and fell asleep, when I was told to wake up I ordered a bottle of champagne and a round for the whole bar, the barman took the grand from my wallet and I fell asleep, so the bouncer took me out and left me round the corner skint.....
Would you have 20 replies telling us all, "well, it's a business, the guy knew the potential consequences when he went into the pub, hell mend him etc, well done the businessman clever enough to make a grand from a sleeping guy instead of sending him home in a cab 10 mins earlier.."
It rightly wouldn't happen, and if it did, the business would be condemned.
I have to say, I think anyone claiming otherwise is clearly trolling.
That's not what he said at all. The phone call in his example was about the £50 bets being declined.I know exactly what I'm talking about in this instance, I assure you.
With the greatest of respect, you just sound like a disgruntled punter. Losing £500 on a single then phoning up questioning why it was accepted in the first place. Every individual market will have its own limit. A bet to win £500 for instance. So clearly how much you'll be able to bet will depend on the price.
Interesting last point. There's more of an acceptance of personal responsibility when it comes to alcohol and smoking. There wouldn't be an outraged Daily mail article blaming a brewer or distiller for the woes of alcoholics. And smoking is now universally accepted as a lethal habit.
I guess with drinking, for most people its a sociable, pleasurable activity. For a small minority its ruinous. I'd say likewise with betting, most people can do it in moderation and for enjoyment. For those reduced to fury and rage and conspiracy theories, I'd suggest it's not the pasttime for them.
That's not what he said at all. The phone call in his example was about the £50 bets being declined.
In your other posts it looks like you skimmed a couple of sentences and completely missed the point of the article.
Are you being this obtuse on purpose?
They lure people in with decent odds on certain bets. A couple of examples recently have been the both teams to score and the score and win coupons, both these coupons became really popular and then the bookies chopped the odds on all the games. The odds now compared to what they were originally are ridiculous.
By the odds I take it you mean the overround? What was it? 102% and now 107% or something?
Can remember betfred being daft by never changing yes on the combo coupons years ago on certain matches (when no wasn’t an option on them) so in reality certain matches would be 1/2 yes but Fred was 5/6 yes if it was done as a treble. Stupid thing to do from him full stop.
The btts for instance, the odds were even money, 11/10 etc. Now you are lucky to see anything better than 8/11 for a btts. Obviously there are exceptions, but generally the odds have been cut.
Is this where NO is not an option? Basically you can only bet YES?