Bookie restrictions abolished?

I was under the impression it was $2K for metro on course bookies and $1K for non - metro (Australia wide), and that is what they've implemented for NSW racing for on line bookies as well, maybe it was 1K regardless on course as I'm not 100%, but the new on line rule is $2K metro and $1K non-metro. Thats Ascot or Bath in relation.

It is only racing in NSW though, they've always been different as far as I know, so not certain this will go Australia wide. There is also the possibility that 365 and others will not accept any bets for NSW racing, or only certain races where they know they've got the market nailed.

Corals half baked attempt with their £5K Ch4 races promotion could backfire for punters. As far as I know it is only valid in their shops, so the advertised odds on the Ch4 races won't last long at all. If the shop opens at 9am, all the tasty odds will be long gone by 9:10. What do you think the others will do when Corals slash a couple of runners at 9:05 on a Saturday morning? It won't have cost them a bean either, and everyone could struggle to get on. Will Corals be known as the new 'magic sign' within the industry?

That is a little negative, as at least it's a start. The situation as it stands is simply ludicrous. I was talking about this elsewhere, and thought the idea of eligibility for number of FOBT's dependent on minimum liability per bet could work. They have a bookmaking license not a casino license, and some ruling implemented to run parallel with their little cash cows might be the way to go, ie to prove they are a Boomaker first and foremost.
 
Last edited:
But the problem is not the willingness to lay a bet the problem is the ability to price races accurately. If there was confidence in the early prices then every firm would lay a decent bet but the reality is that all firms do their brains on them.
 
SlimChance said:
But the problem is not the willingness to lay a bet the problem is the ability to price races accurately. If there was confidence in the early prices then every firm would lay a decent bet but the reality is that all firms do their brains on them.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Rules which force them to lay bets of certain sizes will just stop them offering early prices. It's no coincidence that the books most notorious for restricting are those which price up earliest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I would question the real reason this has been introduced in Australia.

Is it for the interest of the punter or is it in reality an attempt to make it more difficult for bookmakers who overall offer better odds and choice than the Government owned Totalisator Agency Board ?
 
BennyB said:
Exactly. Rules which force them to lay bets of certain sizes will just stop them offering early prices. It's no coincidence that the books most notorious for restricting are those which price up earliest.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Don't know that's ever gonna happen, Benny. These guys are competing against each other, and need the air of publicity. Why else would Ladbrokes - always the first to renege on a price - allow Kevin Ryan his 1k bets, in full, at their early prices?
Their odds compilers would need to get their act together, but even reverting to the old days of the 'tissue' would leave them less vulnerable than depending on the exchanges to do their job for them.
 
But some firms get a tissue and stick those prices straight up. How can you lay a a customer those prices on a regular basis?
 
@festivalracing: A question to all you lot who do tissue prices for bookmakers. Do you own a form book ????
 
reet hard said:
Don't know that's ever gonna happen, Benny. These guys are competing against each other, and need the air of publicity. Why else would Ladbrokes - always the first to renege on a price - allow Kevin Ryan his 1k bets, in full, at their early prices?
Their odds compilers would need to get their act together, but even reverting to the old days of the 'tissue' would leave them less vulnerable than depending on the exchanges to do their job for them.
Click to expand...

I assume you mean Kevin Blake? The reason they lay him is so they can immediately cut his selection two points and restrict everyone else to a maximum stake of £0.03. It sometimes suits bookies to lay a winning client so they can discover their selections and protect themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Sorry Benny was talking about Ryan Clark....................old age setting in.

Ryan Clark is the guy who had a 6 horse accie up with Corals and won about 12k for a pound but there was a line across his betting slip and Corals tried to say it was 2 x 50p trebles. despite there was no mention of trebles on his bet and the shop where he put the bet on were all rooting for him after 4 had won

The guy went to the newspapers and they eventually paid him out.

I had a similar experience (not Corals)where I was told my bet was accepted then they told me to hang on for what seemed an age and right on the off said they couldn't take it...probably couldn't get through to the course..who knows....I asked for SP but they said no flat out giving me no chance to place the bet elsewhere.

The horse hacked up I was furious and closed my account...........If I could be 100% Betfair I would be, because there's no hassle you can get as much as you want on with a coupleof clicks of the mouse. You don't have to talk to some eejit telling you sorry that price has gone when they haven't laid it for 2 bananas and the prices are generally better than SP anyway.

Bookies are ok for Trixies etc but not for punting race to race.......way too many restrictions in the opposite direction to what Australia are forcing upon their bookies
 
Last edited:
BennyB said:
I assume you mean Kevin Blake? The reason they lay him is so they can immediately cut his selection two points and restrict everyone else to a maximum stake of £0.03. It sometimes suits bookies to lay a winning client so they can discover their selections and protect themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Bookmakers do not do that. If you lay a mark yes you will cut the price but no you do not restrict everyone else. Also what is a card worth? Are you going to lose 50k a year to Kevin Blake to lay him horses that no one else is backing? That's a terrible business plan, his card is not worth 50k a year.
 
Last edited:
BennyB said:
Why do Ladbrokes lay him then?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Why is Ladbrokes share price on the floor and their market share fucked? They are living in the dark ages. Journalists and owners used to get immunity from Ladbrokes which I seriously doubt the new CEO will allow if its not already been done away with. A trading policy of laying all the wrong people and hedging back on course is badly of a date.

The focus of the thriving sportsbooks is on offering the best prices to the most customers rather than a few sharp cunts eating the whole cake.
 
Last edited:
Aye....Blake..... that's the one.:)
Even disregarding the loss of publicity, they're never likely to stop offering early prices, as they know someone else would. However, try getting a cash bet (on anything bar the pricewise races) the day before and it's "prices are for online and phone customers only".
Yes, the bookmakers would need to sort their odds compilers out, but they won't ever have to, as they are in the almost unique position in British retail of not having to honour the prices they advertise. The Aussies aren't wearing it, but we do.
 
If you're willing to go to shops you will get bets on but online it's impossible unless you just keep opening new accounts.
 
Back
Top