One for
@bobmunro or anyone else who knows.
My mate keeps on saying he’s being hard done by when being offered cash out. He’s convinced other punters would be offered more.
I said I think it’s an algorithm using the relevant live markets so would be the same for all punters.
Short of us both doing the same bet, can anyone say whether cash out offers are tailored considering the particular punters history?
Comments
All algorithms, stats based imo
I rarely cash out, unless its like a few minutes and a few pounds difference. Just personally more of a gambler punter and feel its in the bookies favour mostly and a bit too low.
BTW cash-out is generally more profitable for bookmakers than letting the bet run.
As an example, if you are betting on a coin toss, you don't get 1/1 odds, you are more likely to get 45/100.
If you then cash in, I think you then pay the "spread" again, so you will get 45/100 odds twice on that same coin toss (although this is the other side of the bet) so you could end up guaranteeing £90 on a £100 bet.
So from actual experience i can confirm (maybe) randomly, his bet had a lower cash out than mine at all points, and he is a serial cash outer and i'm not!!
I do use cash out sometimes. But it can really mess with your head.
If you've got the funds and a Betfair/Smarkets account it's usually more worthwhile to lay your bet than cash out. Also gives you the option of partially laying with extra profit if the bet still wins. Appreciate that's not always possible if it's a live acca.
Although as soon as the games kick off it always shoots down to like 60% of the original stake on the cash out option.
You would have been better to call or live chat. Explain you placed the bet twice in error - and they would have voided the second bet with a full refund if it was clear it was in error and the price hadn't changed.
People gamble money on what they predict or think or guess will happen in the future.
The objective is to be right, and then feel good about themselves if their prediction turns out to be true.
But they sometimes doubt themselves and don’t believe they are as good as they thought, so they withdraw their money from the gamble.
Where is the feel good factor then?
Unless there is something like they have gambled the family’s weekly Universal Credit and want to get the money back before it all goes.
They say when the fun stops, stop. But is there any actual fun? It sounds like worry and stress, and possibly guilt that drives the gamblers to change their mind in this way.
Are the beneficiaries the gambling companies, where their business objective is to remove enough money from others so they can live on the interest of the interest.
Gambling has always been around, and I can see the attraction, even indulged from time to time, but the downsides seem to outweigh the ‘fun’.
When they had quiz machines in pubs it was something I liked because it didn’t depend on guessing the future, but using knowledge accumulated from the past.
In that scenario is it better to take £59 profit or risk it for the possibility of winning another £90 or potentially nothing at all?
That's where the fun comes into gambling for me, sometimes i'll take the £59 profit and get myself a take away and a few beers, sometimes i'll push it to the end. It's not really even about the money, but the excitement for me comes from trying to get the best possible result and "beat" the bookie.
"Guilt" or regret do not come into it, it just adds another facet to the experience having that cash out option (and yes I'm aware that cash outs are better for the bookie than the punter in the long term)
My track record of cashing out is abysmal. I’ve probably cashed out 10 times and probably been wrong to have done so on at least 8 of them - to the bookies’ delight. On that basis, a top half finish for CAFC looks good value at 5/2 at the moment. ……just saying!
Maybe the algorithms aren't that sophisticated - yet - but it's only a matter of time.
In 2014 he stood to win six figures on Martin Kaymer in the Abu Dhabi Championship. Kaymer was 10 shots in front during the final round but that was reduced to 6 at the turn. Kaymer was still 1.01 (1/100) to lay but it never occurred once to him to lay off. The rest is history. I asked him why he didn't lay off and his answer was quite simple. 1.01 was the wrong price. He took that "loss" with admirable stoicism (wouldn't have been how I would have reacted) because, in the long run, he trusted his judgement and that giving back profit would only cost him.
However, if you bare in mind that cash-out is in the bookmakers favour from an overall margin perspective then why would they either want to disincentivise a rare cash-out punter or punish a regular cash-out punter? I would suggest there is equal motivation from a bookmaker to encourage cash-out across the board.
I haven't got any issues at all with people questioning the morality of gambling - sometimes (unsurprisingly) I will defend, at other times I will agree. This isn't really the purpose of this thread though.