ayrmad Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Again, completely different. Betting on something that has already happened is not the same as gaining an edge by having slightly better information. Hence why some people swear by betting on lower leagues in Scotland as they have a better knowledge of it. Nothing to do with cheating betfair customers either. Bet365 don't lay you a price on the tennis 'til they've got the info on each point 1st, and you're probably cheating Betfair as often as their customers, they're probably cheating as much as anyone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fraser Fyvie Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 Bet365 don't lay you a price on the tennis 'til they've got the info on each point 1st, and you're probably cheating Betfair as often as their customers, they're probably cheating as much as anyone. What info on each point? Bet365 don't know who wins the point before they let you back it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mid-table Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 I have to admit that I'm absolutely staggered that people have a problem with courtsiding. It is a matter of fact whether something has happened. If a bookmaker offers a price and you think you know the outcome, then there is nothing wrong, nothing immoral, and certainly nothing illegal, with backing that outcome. If you are offering odds then the onus is on you to get them right. If you can't get your own information, or act on it, fast enough, then you need to rethink how you offer odds. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 1, 2015 Share Posted May 1, 2015 I have to admit that I'm absolutely staggered that people have a problem with courtsiding. It is a matter of fact whether something has happened. If a bookmaker offers a price and you think you know the outcome, then there is nothing wrong, nothing immoral, and certainly nothing illegal, with backing that outcome. If you are offering odds then the onus is on you to get them right. If you can't get your own information, or act on it, fast enough, then you need to rethink how you offer odds. Agree wholeheartedly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wickerman Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 One thing for sure they will not stop offering ,its there biggest earner they have the fastest feeds and can decide what bets they want,the books are easy beat when they offer odds on under 20 matches and lowland league etc which they have started to do , as they are relying on a minimum wage man on an I pad so they are pricing up of stats as opposed to any feed 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Bookmakers will stop offering odds in these markets because some clowns want to 'win' money with no risk. Probably the same people that would happily take change from a 20 of a 10. I'm genuinely shocked that the majority on here seem to think gambling with no risk is a fair procedure. It's fraud which is why it is illegal in some countries and frowned upon heavily on most others. Not even got a clue how to reply to Ayrmad and his post. What a load of paranoid rubbish. What is paranoid rubbish? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bogsideloyal Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 Your hypothetical situation has nothing to do with courtsiding. Ethically it's not great, but most people would do the same, that's not a highly organised con. You also wouldn't be able to 'lump on.' No bookies in their right mind take any size of bet on such a market for that exact reason. You know the outcome of an event that the bookmakers are still offering odds on, so you take advantage of it. What's the difference between my scenario and court siding? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 2, 2015 Share Posted May 2, 2015 That they don't price the market until they know the outcome! It happens plenty of times on inplay tennis. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sgm2 Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 If people have an issue with the "morals" of court siding then what about the "morals" of bookies who take bets on a team who are say 5/4 knowing they and 6/4 and up elsewhere. Bookmakers know the score and know the battle they are in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted May 9, 2015 Share Posted May 9, 2015 If people have an issue with the "morals" of court siding then what about the "morals" of bookies who take bets on a team who are say 5/4 knowing they and 6/4 and up elsewhere. Bookmakers know the score and know the battle they are in. That's the punters fault. If they don't shop around to get the best odds, they can't moan about a particular bookie giving 5/4 when it should have been 6/4. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fanny paddery Posted May 9, 2015 Author Share Posted May 9, 2015 That's the punters fault. If they don't shop around to get the best odds, they can't moan about a particular bookie giving 5/4 when it should have been 6/4.Then surely if a bookie is still offering 2/1 on a team after they have just scored then that is the bookies fault for not having up to date information? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 10, 2015 Share Posted May 10, 2015 Completely different again. You surely can't be this dense? Whatever the thoughts on the morality of courtsiding, making ridiculous comparisons isn't helping anybody's argument. If I was laying bets in play I'd try to ensure that I new the position of the event before everyone else, if I didn't I'd suffer the consequences. Bet365 will lay you odds on every point of a tennis match except quite a few of the major swing points. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue4578 Posted May 11, 2015 Share Posted May 11, 2015 I'm sure I've told this story before here, but I met someone when Betfair took some of their very biggest customers to the French Open at Roland Garros who runs a so-called "exchange shop". I went for a visit to his shop, and it was nominally a licensed betting shop with a counter taking bets. However the owner told me that most weeks he didn't even take £30 in bets over the counter. Once you walked in you noticed maybe 30-40 work stations, each with two screens. One with the raw SIS racing feed, which was accessible in the shop due to it being a betting shop, and the other a computer screen for accessing Betfair. I believe that the SIS feed is around 3-5 seconds ahead of At The Races, Channel Four or any of the other channels showing live horse racing. You can imagine what an advantage that is. The place I visited is not the only such place that exists, and was populated exclusively by young men in their 20's and 30's exploiting the few second advantage they had over people watching on TV. The fact that this "betting shop" in a fairly run down inner city area had a number of Porsches and Ferraris parked outside probably says a lot. Incidentally, people at Betfair told me that the Premium Charge was introduced as a direct result of these in-play traders making too much money while not paying enough commission relative to their winnings, on all sports and not just horse racing. So for instance if I'm at a football match its 0-0 after twenty minutes and the gk comes out and fouls the last man when clean through on goal. The keepers down injured I know he's getting sent off and I put a bet in play on the opposing team to go and win knowing they will have the man advantage for 70 minutes. Is that illegal if I sit in the crowd and place that bet? http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/8414887.stm That brings to mind this game, which was televised live on Sky on a Saturday lunchtime. Portsmouth were 1-0 up when Javier Mascherano committed a bad challenge just before half time. He injured himself doing so and needed treatment, so the physio came on. While he was on the ground, the referee was talking to Steven Gerrard and I clearly saw the referee say "he's off". It probably wasn't an absolute certain red card looking at the foul, and the Betfair market was not suspended. Portsmouth were available at something like 2.1 at the time, which I backed, and when Mascherano stood up and was sent off this dropped to about 1.35. You've got to feel marginally sorry for the layers who didn't realise the red card was coming but Betfair markets are very cut-throat and everyone is looking to take advantage. The largest mistake I have ever made was when I was laying baseball on there. I was trying to lay both outcomes on an Over/Under 9.5 runs market. I was trying to lay £1100 @ 2.10. Except in my haste to enter the odds I didn't press down hard enough on the full stop/decimal point key and ended up momentarily laying £1100 @ 21. Before I could cancel, one of the bots people run to take advantage of such mistakes snapped up over £1000 of the amount I was laying. If you can accidentally lay an 11/10 shot at 20/1, you have to be prepared to take advantage when you get the chance. Bookies have been moving the goalposts on punters for years, so if they're leaving themselves open to getting fucked about, then good. They want everything in their favour, so if you can gain an advantage then this is fair game in my opinion. Getting them to lay a decent bet in the first place is virtually impossible, and if they suspect you have faster information than them you can probably wave goodbye to your account pretty quickly. It's not gambling, it's stealing money from a company who are offering a service in good faith. Betting on something that has already happened is a con. If you watch Betfair markets at the end of an event you're watching on TV, you almost always get the 1.01 backers and/or 1000 layers piling big money into the market as soon as they know an event has finished. If you're watching on TV, the final whistle or call of game, set, match usually comes a few seconds after the market hits 1.01 or 1000. People are effectively "buying money" by putting down five and six figure sums in order to make as little as £10 or £20. People make a living doing this. It can of course go horribly wrong. There was the time when a team was going for a game-tying field goal in the dying seconds of an NFL game. The officials called it no good and it looked like it had probably gone just wide. Cue the 1.01 backers / 1000 layers piling in. Except that the call was challenged and overturned, and the team that looked like it had lost went into overtime and won the game. Someone probably lost tens of thousands of pounds trying to earn £50. The same happened with an Andy Roddick match at the Rome Masters. He had match point serving for the match and apparently served an ace. The umpire called game, set and match, but while the market went to 1.01/1000 Fernando Verdasco got the umpire to check the mark. The serve was called out, Roddick went on to lose the game and the second set in the tie break. He then lost the final set leaving a decent amount matched on Verdasco to win @ 1000. The point was that bookmakers will happily allow punters to bet on outcomes knowing that they receive information before the punters. If they expect punters to accept that as part of the experience, I am not sure how they can cry when a punter uses information to their own advantage. Spot on. I don't think it's about gaining the edge on traditional bookies as such, it seems more to me like the exchanges that take the bulk (if not all) of the trading.I've no idea why an ordinary punter would want to sit and bet on the exchanges point by point on a tennis game. Which suggests to me that courtsiding drives a "competition" between syndicates where the winner is the one with the fastest, most effective Technology. If that's the case, then leave them to it. The in-running turnover is much higher on the exchanges, I think generally you have to be an idiot to use traditional bookmakers for betting in-running (there are exceptions, particularly in slow moving sports like cricket or events with lots of breaks in play). The bookmaker can just delay accepting your bet to see if things move to their advantage. If you're using Betfair and plan to bet in-running, you have to be extremely aware of any time delay if you're watching coverage on TV, online or just looking at scores. It even states this in the rules for each market. I've seen first hand how people try to gain an advantage with horse racing and I've spoken to a number of tennis courtsiders. Don't be naive and you won't get burned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 I'm sure I've told this story before here, but I met someone when Betfair took some of their very biggest customers to the French Open at Roland Garros who runs a so-called "exchange shop". I went for a visit to his shop, and it was nominally a licensed betting shop with a counter taking bets. However the owner told me that most weeks he didn't even take £30 in bets over the counter. Once you walked in you noticed maybe 30-40 work stations, each with two screens. One with the raw SIS racing feed, which was accessible in the shop due to it being a betting shop, and the other a computer screen for accessing Betfair. I believe that the SIS feed is around 3-5 seconds ahead of At The Races, Channel Four or any of the other channels showing live horse racing. You can imagine what an advantage that is. The place I visited is not the only such place that exists, and was populated exclusively by young men in their 20's and 30's exploiting the few second advantage they had over people watching on TV. The fact that this "betting shop" in a fairly run down inner city area had a number of Porsches and Ferraris parked outside probably says a lot. I'm quite sure there was one near Gorgie in Edinburgh, must be heaven betting on golf and knowing a long putt has dropped b4 the market knows. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latino Lover Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 (edited) Just laid Suarez anytime when he didn't emerge at ht, got matched at 9. I feel like a real bad b*****d. Edited May 12, 2015 by Latino Lover 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paris Hilltoon Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Just laid Suarez anytime when he didn't emerge at ht, got matched at 9. I feel like a real bad b*****d. Scum... Sub human, Courtside loving Scum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Latino Lover Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Scum... Sub human, Courtside loving Scum. Haha. In other news I can no longer bet with boylesports and they seem to have done this to quite a few people 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD1711 Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 (edited) f**k the bookies. They are the scum. I saw on Twitter after the Grand National that a guy had put numerous 50 pence tricasts on. One of his selections won and he was due 49k. However Bet365 told him there was a system error and even know he clicked the correct 1st 2nd and 3rd place. He posted screenshots of before and after complaining he didn't get paid out, and they reversed his selection and put it down as a loser. Shocking. Edited May 17, 2015 by KD1711 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest_Man#1 Posted May 17, 2015 Share Posted May 17, 2015 The Tricast paid 21000, (half of this for his 'bet') so forgive me if I'm calling the rest of this post bullshit as well. ETA - just found this. Here's what happened. 1- boy picks a tricast, horses to finish first, second and third, not combination. 2- display error with bet reverses the selection. 3- bet settled as the boy requested the bet to be put on. 4- boy wants payed out on a bet he never put on. 5- Bet365 tell him to bolt. Summary - bet placed, bet lost, no returns. From my understanding, he put on the bet and it was in a certain order. Then after the bet was settled they told him that a display error had caused it to look that way and it had changed the order. Seems extremely dodgy tbh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) Why would Bet365 be unwilling to pay out £10000? Simple answer is that it was a losing bet. If the Tricast was in the order he chose he would have been payed out. It wasn't. You can even see by the £48000 his bet would have paid, which is because he'd chosen the 40/1 third as the winner. No surprise to see the usual simpletons calling conspiracy though. Forgive me for having no sympathy with bookies, bookies try their hardest to get out of their obligations, don't know how many thousands I lost on bets placed after the off, nowt wrong with that but they always made a song and dance when one of those bets came in. Had a friend who wrongly placed the same £10 tricast on 4,5 and 6 at the dogs, it came in and paid £94.50 for a £, it took him half an hour on the phone to head office before he was paid out his second £945. As a long term investor in bookies holidays I have zero sympathy with bookies and their contradictory list of rules. Edited May 18, 2015 by ayrmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.