My working day is far from normal but I love every minute of it.Study form and price up all the meetings myself from 8am-12pm then put tips and blog out,do another blog about 3-4pm for the evening racing and updates too. Plus I watch every race run everyday either live or recorded and cover all British and Irish meetings. Do pay tax/NI on income earnt from tipping line and writing I do for other websites. Yearly figures all that matter to me so can't let yourself get caught up in good and bad single days,weeks or even months. Mind you not many jobs you work 6-10 hours in a day and see money go out of your account instead of in and that's where you need to be mentally strong.
Did some free bits on Racing To Profit and Race Advisor a while back but now on a paid site with Betfan. Maybe doing something with Proofed Tipsters soon but don't know too much about them or if it will happen just yet as exchanging e mails at the moment.
Did some free bits on Racing To Profit and Race Advisor a while back but now on a paid site with Betfan. Maybe doing something with Proofed Tipsters soon but don't know too much about them or if it will happen just yet as exchanging e mails at the moment.
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
So you don't think the bookmaker should have the right to decide whether or not to take a bet?
Yes we are quick to spot sharps, one of the reasons we are as successful as we are. But the bet£3.65 tag is long gone - we take the biggest bets in the industry, seriously.
I did hear a story of a South African horse betting syndicate on bet365 a few years ago.
e.g. back horse at starting price of 16/1, everybody else would then back the horse down to 4/1 or a price that was significantly less than 16/1 which enabled a good cashout before the race even started.
Only worked for a couple of weeks maybe a month before they cottoned on. Ended up being banned and every time the user create an account be it in family members name or whatever, it doesn't take them long to ban again.
Friend of mine setup his own syndicate stealing customers from another syndicate. This guy found out who he was and called his employer, my mate lost his job for gambling at work.
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
So you don't think the bookmaker should have the right to decide whether or not to take a bet?
Yes we are quick to spot sharps, one of the reasons we are as successful as we are. But the bet£3.65 tag is long gone - we take the biggest bets in the industry, seriously.
Sorry my wording was poor. I think the answer is a tough one. I certainly don’t think it’s fair to simply restrict a betting account because a punter took value and won a bit. I think Australia agrees because it changed their laws.
In my case, when I was getting up at 8.30am to pile on Pricewise’s tips which were guaranteed for 15 minutes then I had no complaints when I was eventually restricted.
As for the £3.65 tag being gone, i think that’s rubbish, I see it regularly.
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
So you don't think the bookmaker should have the right to decide whether or not to take a bet?
Yes we are quick to spot sharps, one of the reasons we are as successful as we are. But the bet£3.65 tag is long gone - we take the biggest bets in the industry, seriously.
Sorry my wording was poor. I think the answer is a tough one. I certainly don’t think it’s fair to simply restrict a betting account because a punter took value and won a bit. I think Australia agrees because it changed their laws.
In my case, when I was getting up at 8.30am to pile on Pricewise’s tips which were guaranteed for 15 minutes then I had no complaints when I was eventually restricted.
As for the £3.65 tag being gone, i think that’s rubbish, I see it regularly.
I see it all!
Our business model is however based on volume - lots and lots of smaller stake bets rather than fewer larger stakes and consequently (in old parlance) our stake per slip is lower. But that's a much more sustainable and less riskier model.
The Australians didn't get it right - bookmakers have to lay to a certain amount on specified races, and consequently the odds on those races are much less competitive. Allowing sharp players to play acts as a detriment to the betting of the average Joe who just wants a flutter.
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
So you don't think the bookmaker should have the right to decide whether or not to take a bet?
Yes we are quick to spot sharps, one of the reasons we are as successful as we are. But the bet£3.65 tag is long gone - we take the biggest bets in the industry, seriously.
Sorry my wording was poor. I think the answer is a tough one. I certainly don’t think it’s fair to simply restrict a betting account because a punter took value and won a bit. I think Australia agrees because it changed their laws.
In my case, when I was getting up at 8.30am to pile on Pricewise’s tips which were guaranteed for 15 minutes then I had no complaints when I was eventually restricted.
As for the £3.65 tag being gone, i think that’s rubbish, I see it regularly.
I see it all!
Our business model is however based on volume - lots and lots of smaller stake bets rather than fewer larger stakes and consequently (in old parlance) our stake per slip is lower. But that's a much more sustainable and less riskier model.
The Australians didn't get it right - bookmakers have to lay to a certain amount on specified races, and consequently the odds on those races are much less competitive. Allowing sharp players to play acts as a detriment to the betting of the average Joe who just wants a flutter.
Appreciated, but your also bias! I’m not going to argue with just how much your now labelled “Bet £3.65” but it’s definitely not gone.
The Australians may not have, but they recognised what bookmakers were doing was unjust and that’s a point I agree with. I don’t think bookmakers should be made to accept all bets, but I don’t think they should be able to apply the restrictions they have either. I appreciate how that is policed is very tricky because you have to find perfect middle ground.
I probably wouldn’t put Bet365 into this category from what I know, but I think the whole Gambling industry had it easy for a long time and really took the piss out of punters. I’m glad to see this is slowly changing and the Gambling Commission taking action. If your a decent bookie it won’t affect you but that’s why we are seeing plenty leaving the UK market and some bigger fines produced.
They are filthy scumbags who knock and don't pay out .
Can't believe they're still going , I was knocked back in 2013 , they paid small dribs and drabs back but eventually just ignored everything ... this wasn't even winnings it was money put in to the account .
"gambling debts and gambling monies connected to gambling were not recoverable at law under Section 36 of the Gaming and Lotteries Act 1956"
proper scam "For example, if you deposit £1000, we will credit your account with a £1000 bonus"
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
So you don't think the bookmaker should have the right to decide whether or not to take a bet?
Yes we are quick to spot sharps, one of the reasons we are as successful as we are. But the bet£3.65 tag is long gone - we take the biggest bets in the industry, seriously.
Sorry my wording was poor. I think the answer is a tough one. I certainly don’t think it’s fair to simply restrict a betting account because a punter took value and won a bit. I think Australia agrees because it changed their laws.
In my case, when I was getting up at 8.30am to pile on Pricewise’s tips which were guaranteed for 15 minutes then I had no complaints when I was eventually restricted.
As for the £3.65 tag being gone, i think that’s rubbish, I see it regularly.
I see it all!
Our business model is however based on volume - lots and lots of smaller stake bets rather than fewer larger stakes and consequently (in old parlance) our stake per slip is lower. But that's a much more sustainable and less riskier model.
The Australians didn't get it right - bookmakers have to lay to a certain amount on specified races, and consequently the odds on those races are much less competitive. Allowing sharp players to play acts as a detriment to the betting of the average Joe who just wants a flutter.
Appreciated, but your also bias! I’m not going to argue with just how much your now labelled “Bet £3.65” but it’s definitely not gone.
The Australians may not have, but they recognised what bookmakers were doing was unjust and that’s a point I agree with. I don’t think bookmakers should be made to accept all bets, but I don’t think they should be able to apply the restrictions they have either. I appreciate how that is policed is very tricky because you have to find perfect middle ground.
I probably wouldn’t put Bet365 into this category from what I know, but I think the whole Gambling industry had it easy for a long time and really took the piss out of punters. I’m glad to see this is slowly changing and the Gambling Commission taking action. If your a decent bookie it won’t affect you but that’s why we are seeing plenty leaving the UK market and some bigger fines produced.
Trust me - we are working with the Gambling Commission on those changes in a very collaborative way. But there does need to be some realism applied - all bookmakers are 'for profit' organisations and if the regulatory landscape changes so much that it becomes impossible to be profitable then the legitimate operators will cease trading. The big problem with that is that it wouldn't stop people wanting a bet so they would be forced towards unregulated offshore shysters.
As you rightly say - there is a middle ground to search for but it won't be easy.
What you need to do is lose on one way and win on the other... eg. i regularly lose at footy bets, hit a good run here and there but generally definately a loser long term. Poker i have never been a loser on there and they have never restricted, i occasionally dabble in vegas too with mix results probably up if anything but not sure if im honest i do it like once / twice a month.
I think if they see more value to you elsewhere in the industry its probably less likely you will get banned.
I know they restrict bets for those regularly getting the best of it, but again i think it depends how serious you are betting. Ultimately if they have no edge and you have a trend they will cut you off.
Bookies are always the winners no matter how many actual winners there are
What you need to do is lose on one way and win on the other... eg. i regularly lose at footy bets, hit a good run here and there but generally definately a loser long term. Poker i have never been a loser on there and they have never restricted, i occasionally dabble in vegas too with mix results probably up if anything but not sure if im honest i do it like once / twice a month.
I think if they see more value to you elsewhere in the industry its probably less likely you will get banned.
I know they restrict bets for those regularly getting the best of it, but again i think it depends how serious you are betting. Ultimately if they have no edge and you have a trend they will cut you off.
Bookies are always the winners no matter how many actual winners there are
You will never be restricted on poker - as you know the business model is rake and matters not who wins or loses. Very rare also to be restricted on gaming products as the house will always maintain the edge.
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
So you don't think the bookmaker should have the right to decide whether or not to take a bet?
Yes we are quick to spot sharps, one of the reasons we are as successful as we are. But the bet£3.65 tag is long gone - we take the biggest bets in the industry, seriously.
Sorry my wording was poor. I think the answer is a tough one. I certainly don’t think it’s fair to simply restrict a betting account because a punter took value and won a bit. I think Australia agrees because it changed their laws.
In my case, when I was getting up at 8.30am to pile on Pricewise’s tips which were guaranteed for 15 minutes then I had no complaints when I was eventually restricted.
As for the £3.65 tag being gone, i think that’s rubbish, I see it regularly.
I see it all!
Our business model is however based on volume - lots and lots of smaller stake bets rather than fewer larger stakes and consequently (in old parlance) our stake per slip is lower. But that's a much more sustainable and less riskier model.
The Australians didn't get it right - bookmakers have to lay to a certain amount on specified races, and consequently the odds on those races are much less competitive. Allowing sharp players to play acts as a detriment to the betting of the average Joe who just wants a flutter.
Appreciated, but your also bias! I’m not going to argue with just how much your now labelled “Bet £3.65” but it’s definitely not gone.
The Australians may not have, but they recognised what bookmakers were doing was unjust and that’s a point I agree with. I don’t think bookmakers should be made to accept all bets, but I don’t think they should be able to apply the restrictions they have either. I appreciate how that is policed is very tricky because you have to find perfect middle ground.
I probably wouldn’t put Bet365 into this category from what I know, but I think the whole Gambling industry had it easy for a long time and really took the piss out of punters. I’m glad to see this is slowly changing and the Gambling Commission taking action. If your a decent bookie it won’t affect you but that’s why we are seeing plenty leaving the UK market and some bigger fines produced.
Trust me - we are working with the Gambling Commission on those changes in a very collaborative way. But there does need to be some realism applied - all bookmakers are 'for profit' organisations and if the regulatory landscape changes so much that it becomes impossible to be profitable then the legitimate operators will cease trading. The big problem with that is that it wouldn't stop people wanting a bet so they would be forced towards unregulated offshore shysters.
As you rightly say - there is a middle ground to search for but it won't be easy.
Glad to hear you are working with them. Although I hear not everybody is. As I said earlier, I never heard anything different about 365.
I have heard differently about one or two of the others though. Either way, it’s heading in the right direction. For the record, I’m in agreement that it can’t go too much the other way. Certainly tricky to find the perfect solution, can’t please everyone!
Very odd to hear such bad things constantly about BET365 as they were by far the best I've dealt with and bobmunro hasn't paid me to say that! On the flip side SkyBet are a complete disgrace from my own personal exoerience.
To a degree it's an inevitability that you will hear more negatives about bet365 as we are by far the biggest - the law of large numbers at play.
We have the broadest product range, the app is pretty much universally recognised as the best in the business, and our prices are amongst the most competitive in the fixed odds world. We are also the most responsible operator as recognised by regulators and the likes of Gamcare and GambleAware. We want to do so much more but sometimes it's like swimming in custard trying to take the other operators with us.
In excess of £50b in bets placed a year (with £47b paid back) and tens of millions of customers the world over - we must be doing some things right!
Accounts are restricted for many reasons - the same reasons that all operators use. Most punters will know what the reason is for their restrictions!!!
Definitely one of the biggest and best bookmakers but also very quick to ban and restrict. As someone is pointed out, the nickname of bet £3.65 is apt in my experience.
Personally I think it’s totally unfair that bookmakers are able to restrict, in the majority of cases just because punters regularly take value. Not digging out your lot Bob, that’s across the board as you say. Skybet probably the worst of the big names. Racebets were the worst overall, I once signed up and got a £50 bonus. Stuck £50 on a horse that was tumbling in (from memory I got 4/1 as it came down from 11/2 and SP was 11/4). Horse got beaten on the line and I got banned!
I was a match bettor for around 18 months so no hard feelings from me about my restrictions as each and every one was deserved, although not all the bookmakers would have realised.
So you don't think the bookmaker should have the right to decide whether or not to take a bet?
Yes we are quick to spot sharps, one of the reasons we are as successful as we are. But the bet£3.65 tag is long gone - we take the biggest bets in the industry, seriously.
Sorry my wording was poor. I think the answer is a tough one. I certainly don’t think it’s fair to simply restrict a betting account because a punter took value and won a bit. I think Australia agrees because it changed their laws.
In my case, when I was getting up at 8.30am to pile on Pricewise’s tips which were guaranteed for 15 minutes then I had no complaints when I was eventually restricted.
As for the £3.65 tag being gone, i think that’s rubbish, I see it regularly.
I see it all!
Our business model is however based on volume - lots and lots of smaller stake bets rather than fewer larger stakes and consequently (in old parlance) our stake per slip is lower. But that's a much more sustainable and less riskier model.
The Australians didn't get it right - bookmakers have to lay to a certain amount on specified races, and consequently the odds on those races are much less competitive. Allowing sharp players to play acts as a detriment to the betting of the average Joe who just wants a flutter.
Appreciated, but your also bias! I’m not going to argue with just how much your now labelled “Bet £3.65” but it’s definitely not gone.
The Australians may not have, but they recognised what bookmakers were doing was unjust and that’s a point I agree with. I don’t think bookmakers should be made to accept all bets, but I don’t think they should be able to apply the restrictions they have either. I appreciate how that is policed is very tricky because you have to find perfect middle ground.
I probably wouldn’t put Bet365 into this category from what I know, but I think the whole Gambling industry had it easy for a long time and really took the piss out of punters. I’m glad to see this is slowly changing and the Gambling Commission taking action. If your a decent bookie it won’t affect you but that’s why we are seeing plenty leaving the UK market and some bigger fines produced.
Trust me - we are working with the Gambling Commission on those changes in a very collaborative way. But there does need to be some realism applied - all bookmakers are 'for profit' organisations and if the regulatory landscape changes so much that it becomes impossible to be profitable then the legitimate operators will cease trading. The big problem with that is that it wouldn't stop people wanting a bet so they would be forced towards unregulated offshore shysters.
As you rightly say - there is a middle ground to search for but it won't be easy.
Glad to hear you are working with them. Although I hear not everybody is. As I said earlier, I never heard anything different about 365.
I have heard differently about one or two of the others though. Either way, it’s heading in the right direction. For the record, I’m in agreement that it can’t go too much the other way. Certainly tricky to find the perfect solution, can’t please everyone!
Why don’t they make it a rule that if a bookie is happy to price something up, they are obliged to accept X amount as a single on that price ?
no idea what that amount should be as rarely bet.
the other side is, what if a desperate man mortgages the house and plants 200 grand on a 100/1 shot ?, [perhaps an extreme example{ .. with modern stats, credit ratings and gambling patterns, bookies should be obliged to refuse bets from addicts and idiots when they know or should know that something is not right.
Account restrictions are just a standard these days. Much as bob might protest Bet365 one of the worst offenders...but equally as he points out that is their right. In my view though their needs to be a crackdown on advertising. If you make a price you should stand it to a reasonable amount. Best advice I can give to account restriction issues is get a VPN blocker and marry someone with a large family! I get people putting on for me in shops as well but that game won't last much longer. Long term I think racing will have to ditch the standard each way model. And I say that as a pure each way scumbag. They will have to make a win price and a place price separately. No other way to model it imo.
Why don’t they make it a rule that if a bookie is happy to price something up, they are obliged to accept X amount as a single on that price ?
no idea what that amount should be as rarely bet.
the other side is, what if a desperate man mortgages the house and plants 200 grand on a 100/1 shot ?, [perhaps an extreme example{ .. with modern stats, credit ratings and gambling patterns, bookies should be obliged to refuse bets from addicts and idiots when they know or should know that something is not right.
Account restrictions are just a standard these days. Much as bob might protest Bet365 one of the worst offenders...but equally as he points out that is their right. In my view though their needs to be a crackdown on advertising. If you make a price you should stand it to a reasonable amount. Best advice I can give to account restriction issues is get a VPN blocker and marry someone with a large family! I get people putting on for me in shops as well but that game won't last much longer. Long term I think racing will have to ditch the standard each way model. And I say that as a pure each way scumbag. They will have to make a win price and a place price separately. No other way to model it imo.
I don't protest in terms of restricting - as I said earlier we do it quicker than most and it protects what is a pretty slim margin. Also, gone are the days when the odds compiler was king - markets are traded purely on numbers, not opinion, and the market determines the price. I've lost count of the times 30 years ago, maybe as recent as 15 years ago, where odds compilers would say '"That's the right price - stick to it" - as you very well know, Nick, there is no such thing as the right price unless you're tossing a coin and quoting 5/6 or 10/11 each of two. All odds have to be subject to fluctuation based on 'the market'.
Now to the bit I highlighted - as an each-way merchant, all your birthdays would come at the same time. You're not really interested in the 'Win' part! Not sure if you're old enough to remember, but maybe bring back SP Place - adjusted as it used to be where the favourite was odds on - 1/6 odds for example where it would have been 1/5 for normal each-way. As long as the place book is overround I don't have an issue with place only - but there will be a lot of restrictions if that's the only business a customer gives us!
@bobmunro I'd argue with Betfair there is very much a right price these days, certainly over time anyway!
Regarding the win/place bet scenario. Look at something like the Eclipse antepost market. I can't imagine I'd make it onto too many Bet365 Christmas card lists by availing myself of the 25/1 ew 1/5 first 3 Deirdre. I can assure you I'm very much interested in the win part of the bet, indeed it is the balance between what you give up on the win part that offsets the value in the place part.
In the Eclipse, with a couple of NRs possible I can bet into a potential c.230% place market. If 8 line up on the day the place market will still likely be overbroke. If the markets were actually split up, you could bet to the overround in each without having to worry about rats such as myself picking it off! Just link your markets to Betfair markets and put your feet up!
Comments
I did hear a story of a South African horse betting syndicate on bet365 a few years ago.
e.g. back horse at starting price of 16/1, everybody else would then back the horse down to 4/1 or a price that was significantly less than 16/1 which enabled a good cashout before the race even started.
Only worked for a couple of weeks maybe a month before they cottoned on. Ended up being banned and every time the user create an account be it in family members name or whatever, it doesn't take them long to ban again.
Friend of mine setup his own syndicate stealing customers from another syndicate. This guy found out who he was and called his employer, my mate lost his job for gambling at work.
The Australians may not have, but they recognised what bookmakers were doing was unjust and that’s a point I agree with. I don’t think bookmakers should be made to accept all bets, but I don’t think they should be able to apply the restrictions they have either. I appreciate how that is policed is very tricky because you have to find perfect middle ground.
They are filthy scumbags who knock and don't pay out .
Can't believe they're still going , I was knocked back in 2013 , they paid small dribs and drabs back but eventually just ignored everything ... this wasn't even winnings it was money put in to the account .
"gambling debts and gambling monies connected to gambling were not recoverable at law under Section 36 of the Gaming and Lotteries Act 1956"
proper scam "For example, if you deposit £1000, we will credit your account with a £1000 bonus"
no idea what that amount should be as rarely bet.
I think if they see more value to you elsewhere in the industry its probably less likely you will get banned.
I know they restrict bets for those regularly getting the best of it, but again i think it depends how serious you are betting. Ultimately if they have no edge and you have a trend they will cut you off.
Bookies are always the winners no matter how many actual winners there are
I won't contradict you on that!
Best advice I can give to account restriction issues is get a VPN blocker and marry someone with a large family! I get people putting on for me in shops as well but that game won't last much longer.
Long term I think racing will have to ditch the standard each way model. And I say that as a pure each way scumbag. They will have to make a win price and a place price separately. No other way to model it imo.
If only.....
Regarding the win/place bet scenario. Look at something like the Eclipse antepost market. I can't imagine I'd make it onto too many Bet365 Christmas card lists by availing myself of the 25/1 ew 1/5 first 3 Deirdre. I can assure you I'm very much interested in the win part of the bet, indeed it is the balance between what you give up on the win part that offsets the value in the place part.
In the Eclipse, with a couple of NRs possible I can bet into a potential c.230% place market. If 8 line up on the day the place market will still likely be overbroke. If the markets were actually split up, you could bet to the overround in each without having to worry about rats such as myself picking it off! Just link your markets to Betfair markets and put your feet up!