Any Good Bets Collected, Now The Season is Over?

[Tinmans Love Child]

1 hour ago, TheReds said:

I never said they were a charity. I never said it wasn't up to any individual whether they use a cashout facility or not, or whether you HAVE to cashout, and it isn't just an option. I have told you exactly why they are a con, you are getting paid way under the true odds - that is a fact, not made up, an actual fact.

If cashing out is not taking advantage, then why don't they pay out a cashout at the price you actually have whether your other selection wins or loses, or even with a small takeout rather than taking a huge slice from it?

Maybe con is strong word, but they are only offering a cashout because it makes THEM money and not the customer. Bookies are after mug/losing punters, they don't want people who can beat them, cashout is a prime example of free money for them week in, week out.

And remember a computer system with AI will be working out the cash out values in the moment and will take into account all of the bets across its book to come up with a figure that works for the bookie, clever stuff

[Show Me The Money!]

I had a pound bet accumulator on all the prem games yesterday. Would have won £258. I had every game as I wanted it bar the Leeds game (which I had Leeds down to win) Cashed out for £30 in the 90th min just before they f’ing scored

[Sir Geoff]

3 hours ago, Miah Dennehy said:

I'm quite pleased with myself at having a fiver at 9/1 on Man City when they went 2 down yesterday. I also did the same when Port Vale went  2 penalties down against Swindon

 

I did similar except I laid Villa with 20 minutes or so to go. Just as my bet was accepted they scored the second. A scary few minutes followed until Man City started scoring for fun.

[slartibartfast]

5 hours ago, TomF said:

Anyone see that scouse lass who had Liverpool to win the quadruple and turned down £95k cash out when Man C were 2-0.. ouch 

Eh, dat's a fair few Gyros, is dat, la  ! 

[archie andrews]

complete and utter stunt...who's first ever bet is 100 notes on a quadruple eh? load of bollocks from betfair......

[Lydered]

[maxjak]

6 hours ago, TheReds said:

She is still being ripped off whether it wins or loses. This is also one extreme case - if it is even actually true.

Before the advent of the the cash out option, if you had a four timer, and the first three were winners, you would have to cross your fingers and hope the fourth selection won.  If it ended up losing  then it is     farewell to your stake.  However, as in the instance of the young lady and her bet,   if she so wished she could cash out a percentage of the bet, if she felt lacking in confidence  or felt 95k was a tidy sum to put in her pocket.....I fail to see how that is the bookies taking advantage?  How is she being ripped off, it is all based on risk assessment

[maxjak]

6 hours ago, TheReds said:

I would doubt that bet in the first place due to its "related contingency" angle. In a few weeks time try adding that same bet (or with man city/United etc) to a betslip and see what price you get, then try and place it. You will not be allowed to place the bet, you maybe able to get a "special" price for a quadruple/treble etc, but you won't get the prices advertised as singles and then all multiplied up as that bet is showing.

Of course it is in the bookies favour, they know by giving a cashout (whatever the amount) they will be making a huge amount of money from them because they are basically betting the punter below the actual odds (which they have already taken a percentage out of). No different than Casinos with their edge due to percentages of the true odds, it is all about turnover, whether that be high rollers or small fish, they will not, and cannot lose longterm (not including cheats/card counters etc). It's all about the Maths.

 

That is a valid point...re: Related contingency.  But it is not technically R. C., but even so it seems strange that a bookies would take 4 individual prices as opposed to providing a one off price for the Quadruple to be achieved........so it could be a shaggy dog story?  I will ask Betfair if it is true?

[TheReds]

7 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Before the advent of the the cash out option, if you had a four timer, and the first three were winners, you would have to cross your fingers and hope the fourth selection won.  If it ended up losing  then it is     farewell to your stake.  However, as in the instance of the young lady and her bet,   if she so wished she could cash out a percentage of the bet, if she felt lacking in confidence  or felt 95k was a tidy sum to put in her pocket.....I fail to see how that is the bookies taking advantage?  How is she being ripped off, it is all based on risk assessment

Forget about before cashouts etc, as that means nothing, don't know why you keep mentioning things that haven't been said before. You would also have to cross your fingers on every multi bet, that's what betting is, and if you are waiting on the 4th leg of an acca to collect and the first 3 have won then you have the full odds of the acca on one last selection - you have all of the value, so never give it back at a rip off price.

She could have cashed out whatever she wanted to, that still doesn't mean it was a good bet, just because it lost it doesn't mean it was a bad bet. If you managed a bookies for 7 years I am unsure how you don't know how odds and value work in the betting industry. I still stand by that her bet wasn't even real in the first place due to related contingency. If it was indeed real she would be lucky to get paid out in full due to that anyway - although maybe had a slight chance due to it hitting the press.

[TheReds]

1 minute ago, maxjak said:

That is a valid point...re: Related contingency.  But it is not technically R. C., but even so it seems strange that a bookies would take 4 individual prices as opposed to providing a one off price for the Quadruple to be achieved........so it could be a shaggy dog story?  I will ask Betfair if it is true?

Of course it is related contingency. Try and do the same bet in a few weeks when the prices are up individually, and if it gets taken I would bet money you won't be getting paid out in full if it wins - but you will only get told after it has won, because that is how the bookies operate.

Do you honestly think Betfair are now suddenly going to say they were telling porkies? Not a chance in hell.

[maxjak]

Just now, TheReds said:

Of course it is related contingency. Try and do the same bet in a few weeks when the prices are up individually, and if it gets taken I would bet money you won't be getting paid out in full if it wins - but you will only get told after it has won, because that is how the bookies operate.

Do you honestly think Betfair are now suddenly going to say they were telling porkies? Not a chance in hell.

As I worked for Ladbrokes for 7 years, i actually know odds compilers at Betfair, so i will ask them............I agree it seems unlikely, as they would have offered a total price, and not individuals ones.  If the bookie takes a bet, and it was advertised as such, then they have to pay out or explain to the Gambling Commission why not?          PS. I regularly use Cash Out, it's a great feature, and is not a rip off IMHO.       

[ralphindevon]

Last season I had Ipswich let me down for the 4 league winners, the other 3 came in and would have won £2,500. Didn’t get very close this season.

I reckon I’m a richer punter thanks to cash out, although I occasionally have lost out, loads of times I’ve bet on fast starters to win games, cashed out when I’ve about tripled my money.

probably not going to get rich this way but I’m usually just up at the end of the season and rarely have to top up my account.

[TheReds]

5 minutes ago, maxjak said:

If the bookie takes a bet, and it was advertised as such, then they have to pay out or explain to the Gambling Commission why not? 

They certainly don't. They can claim multiple things including palpable error, related contingency, claim syndicate betting, can claim you are betting for someone else and make you jump through hoops before paying out, or still refuse and you have to take them to court to get paid. Plenty of nonsense they have tried on over the years as well with voiding bets after they have won but keeping the cash from the voided ones (sleepers) without telling the customers, I have been on the receiving end myself, along with Betfair withholding funds and telling complete lies for over a year.

As for Betfair compilers they will just play along with the PR machine for any made up nonsense from their PR people. Every year we hear how someone has had 50 grand on a horse in the National, 75 grand on the Gold Cup etc etc etc, yet plenty of people cannot get a tenner on with them if they are not mugs. 

As for the GC, they are a laughable Organisation who basically do nothing.

[And Its Smith]

Lovely cash out 

[maxjak]

5 minutes ago, TheReds said:

They certainly don't. They can claim multiple things including palpable error, related contingency, claim syndicate betting, can claim you are betting for someone else and make you jump through hoops before paying out, or still refuse and you have to take them to court to get paid. Plenty of nonsense they have tried on over the years as well with voiding bets after they have won but keeping the cash from the voided ones (sleepers) without telling the customers, I have been on the receiving end myself, along with Betfair withholding funds and telling complete lies for over a year.

As for Betfair compilers they will just play along with the PR machine for any made up nonsense from their PR people. Every year we hear how someone has had 50 grand on a horse in the National, 75 grand on the Gold Cup etc etc etc, yet plenty of people cannot get a tenner on with them if they are not mugs. 

As for the GC, they are a laughable Organisation who basically do nothing.

You seem very stroppy and opinionated?.......anyhow i am bored now, as for all your bluster, you certainly don't   know everything about how betting works ..............   even though it's obvious you think you do?

Edited May 23, 2022 by maxjak

[TheReds]

Just now, maxjak said:

You seem very stroppy and opinionated?.......anyhow i am bored now, as for all your bluster, you don't seem know everything..............;even though it's obvious you think you do?

Stroppy and opinionated? It seems you just don't like to be wrong. I haven't said a single thing that isn't a fact, they are not just my own opinions I have plucked out of my mind, they are actual facts - but feel free to point out anything that I have said is incorrect. You can believe or think what you wish, that's your prerogative. As for whether or not you managed a bookie for 7 years, you have been incorrect on multiple points you have made on this thread, but it seems you are unable to accept you are incorrect! 

[TheReds]

9 minutes ago, And Its Smith said:

Lovely cash out 

Lovely? That proves my point perfectly. Ripped off!

[And Its Smith]

11 minutes ago, TheReds said:

Lovely? That proves my point perfectly. Ripped off!

Haha I would have won nothing and I won over £200.  Was a calculated decision 

[And Its Smith]

Generally I am against cashing out as you will lose over time but you have to look at each individual case.  I cashed out because £230 for me is a lot of money and I wasn’t going to let it go through the play offs anyway, plus I cashed out when Sheffield United were 7th I think.  
 

The Liverpool bet by the lady is another example where the cash out option simply has to be taken. It’s literally a no brainer for almost everyone because of the sums involved.  That amount of money matters.  Don’t cash out for a tenner or the like, absolutely no point.  
 

Someone’s stance on cash outs has to change when the winnings offered makes a difference to that person. If someone gave me £100k and said heads or tails, win and it’s £300k but lose and it’s zero, I would turn the offer down and take the £100k despite the odds clearly showing I should gamble.  Because £100k is a lot of money to risk. 

[maxjak]

17 hours ago, TheReds said:

Stroppy and opinionated? It seems you just don't like to be wrong. I haven't said a single thing that isn't a fact, they are not just my own opinions I have plucked out of my mind, they are actual facts - but feel free to point out anything that I have said is incorrect. You can believe or think what you wish, that's your prerogative. As for whether or not you managed a bookie for 7 years, you have been incorrect on multiple points you have made on this thread, but it seems you are unable to accept you are incorrect! 

Yawn

[maxjak]

17 hours ago, And Its Smith said:

Haha I would have won nothing and I won over £200.  Was a calculated decision 

Well done........that's a great use of cash out.  Which is apparently, according to some know it all's  ..........a con and a rip off? 

[Glen hump]

On 23/05/2022 at 13:43, Seventeen said:

A lot of people don’t have the nerve though. In the same way I know plenty of people who will cash out pennies on their stake just to have another bet. 
 

As said above, a good cash out choice feels great at the time but over the course of time it will always favour the bookies 

Spot on imho, most people who cash out just recycle the money anyway, there’s no way the bookies would offer the facility if it wasn’t making them profit, the same with people who bet on all these bet builders and place massive accas, mug punting at its finest.

[maxjak]

13 minutes ago, Glen hump said:

Spot on imho, most people who cash out just recycle the money anyway, there’s no way the bookies would offer the facility if it wasn’t making them profit, the same with people who bet on all these bet builders and place massive accas, mug punting at its finest.

One bookie offered cash out as a promotion, and all the others quickly offered   a similar option.  It is like many aspects of betting, if your smart and use your wits, you can use it to your advantage?  However, as you rightly state, if you put money on acca's or continually cash out at the wrong time.....you become what   bookies all love......A Mug Punter?.   The object of the exercise,  is surely to use aspects of what the bookies offer to your advantage, and in doing so, avoid falling into the trap of becoming a yet another M P?

[TheReds]

7 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Yawn

I'm sure to work in a bookies you have to be over 18, are you an actual adult? Your responses are becoming more childish by the post because you are obviously incorrect, and have no facts at all, whilst calling me "stroppy"........ Why not simply point out exactly where I have been wrong in your opinion, on any single thing I have posted in this thread - you know like an adult who can actually have an adult discussion.

1. Cashouts are massively in the bookies favours, not just a little as you have said, a lot - as simply proved by a bet I placed yesterday. In turn, they are a rip off to any punter. If punters are happy to take them then that is their choice, but from an actual betting point of view they are a poor "bet", and will cost punters in the long run. If you want to make money gambling longterm, you play the odds and nothing else.

2. Bookies can, and do refuse to pay out on many bets, and claim all sorts of reasons. A lot of them they end up paying out after they are threatened with court action, press etc.

3. Many bets are voided without even telling the customer, even after the bet has lost - sleeper bets. Been happening for decades.

4. Bookies ban and restrict many punters for either winning, or simply just beating their price (you don't even need to be in profit with them and can be banned or restricted). I cannot get more than paltry amounts on online and have probably had around 60 online accounts closed or restricted to literally pennies, and all within the space of a couple of years - some of them were closed within 3 bets. This was a few years ago, it is even harder now due to all of their software and algorithms and isn't even worth the time and hassle anymore. The Betfair exchange is my only option nowadays. 

5. Unsure why you would even think the Liverpood bet is real for starters, and not some nonsense PR is beyond me. Add in the fact of the "related contingency" that you don't even think is strictly true in this case, then I will safely say I do in fact know more about the betting industry than yourself, but feel free to come back with an adult reply if you can, showing me where I am wrong on any of my points, and we can talk....

I'm all ears. 

[maxjak]

20 minutes ago, TheReds said:

I'm sure to work in a bookies you have to be over 18, are you an actual adult? Your responses are becoming more childish by the post because you are obviously incorrect, and have no facts at all, whilst calling me "stroppy"........ Why not simply point out exactly where I have been wrong in your opinion, on any single thing I have posted in this thread - you know like an adult who can actually have an adult discussion.

1. Cashouts are massively in the bookies favours, not just a little as you have said, a lot - as simply proved by a bet I placed yesterday. In turn, they are a rip off to any punter. If punters are happy to take them then that is their choice, but from an actual betting point of view they are a poor "bet", and will cost punters in the long run. If you want to make money gambling longterm, you play the odds and nothing else.

2. Bookies can, and do refuse to pay out on many bets, and claim all sorts of reasons. A lot of them they end up paying out after they are threatened with court action, press etc.

3. Many bets are voided without even telling the customer, even after the bet has lost - sleeper bets. Been happening for decades.

4. Bookies ban and restrict many punters for either winning, or simply just beating their price (you don't even need to be in profit with them and can be banned or restricted). I cannot get more than paltry amounts on online and have probably had around 60 online accounts closed or restricted to literally pennies, and all within the space of a couple of years - some of them were closed within 3 bets. This was a few years ago, it is even harder now due to all of their software and algorithms and isn't even worth the time and hassle anymore. The Betfair exchange is my only option nowadays. 

5. Unsure why you would even think the Liverpood bet is real for starters, and not some nonsense PR is beyond me. Add in the fact of the "related contingency" that you don't even think is strictly true in this case, then I will safely say I do in fact know more about the betting industry than yourself, but feel free to come back with an adult reply if you can, showing me where I am wrong on any of my points, and we can talk....

I'm all ears. 

Yawn 2 .........It seems quite obvious that you have an ongoing agenda with  bookies, possibly by them not accepting a bet or failing to pay out to you at some time?.  Even so there is no need to become personal, I'm sorry if you have had a bad experience.  But personally I have never had any problems with my bets, and i find using cash out to be very useful, especially when i have cashed out a £100 bet just before the winning team has conceded a 93rd minute equaliser?   (How is that to the bookies advantage?)  By the way the young ladies name is Tanya Hanley...and apparently the quadruple bet she put on was a special Betfair promotion.............but you are probably not interested, as it it does not fit with your rant?  Goodbye and Farewell.

Edited May 24, 2022 by maxjak

[TV Tom]

It all depends what the cash out is, if I’m on course to win £200 with five minutes to go and I’m offered £180 I’d take the £180 every time, far too many 95th minute equalisers in my bets

[TheReds]

35 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Yawn 2 .........It seems quite obvious that you have an ongoing agenda with  bookies, possibly by them not accepting a bet or failing to pay out to you at some time?.  Even so there is no need to become personal, I'm sorry if you have had a bad experience.  But personally I have never had any problems with my bets, and i find using cash out to be very useful, especially when i have cashed out a £100 bet just before the winning team has conceded a 93rd minute equaliser?   (How is that to the bookies advantage?)  By the way the young ladies name is Tanya Hanley...and apparently the quadruple bet she put on was a special Betfair promotion.............but you are probably not interested, as it it does not fit with your rant?  Goodbye and Farewell.

I have always had issues with bookies as they pick and choose who to fleece, yet when they even think someone may outdo them the punter is banned, all while they are enticing problem gamblers to slot machines, roulette and online casinos - the most addictive forms of gambling with their free bets, free spins, bonus roulette etc etc. They are not bookmakers anymore in any sense of the word, they do not play the market in any sports, they play the person. Ask for a decent bet on a horse and they absolutely crap themselves!!

I have only got personal as you put it, after some of your comments on here were aimed at me. Everything I have said is true, yet you still deny some of the things (related contingency, voiding bets/Gambling Commission, rip off etc). Just because I say they are a rip off which can physically be proved by the actual cashouts offered in the huge majority of cases and true odds of the bet winning, then I am unsure why you think they are not a con. If anyone wants to make the most out of any running bet, then simply open up a Betfair account and lay the same bet off at a better price to a near 100% book, rather than the books price. Just basic maths.

As for the womans bet, if it was a Betfair promotion then there would literally be hundreds, if not thousands of punters (especially Liverpool fans) who would have done the same bet for varied amounts. It would have been all over Social media from hundreds of people cashing out from their small layout after the first/second leg. Or have they just let one random woman have it? The bet has got them all the exposure they needed, and regardless if I am wrong about it, it would still be about a 20/1 shot to be true imo.

[TheReds]

1 hour ago, harrys said:

It all depends what the cash out is, if I’m on course to win £200 with five minutes to go and I’m offered £180 I’d take the £180 every time, far too many 95th minute equalisers in my bets

Which would cost you £20, and no doubt you could lay the same bet for the same return of the cashout for a cost of £10 on BF.

[TV Tom]

1 hour ago, TheReds said:

Which would cost you £20, and no doubt you could lay the same bet for the same return of the cashout for a cost of £10 on BF.

If I could be bothered, what if I am waiting on two or three teams, can’t lay off on all of them, sometimes people make it far too complicated but ultimately it’s all about personal choice, I used to lay off if it looked like I had a good thing was about to win which is basically the same as cashing out

[TheReds]

35 minutes ago, harrys said:

If I could be bothered, what if I am waiting on two or three teams, can’t lay off on all of them, sometimes people make it far too complicated but ultimately it’s all about personal choice, I used to lay off if it looked like I had a good thing was about to win which is basically the same as cashing out

Why throw a tenner away though? You could still lay 2/3 teams and still at a less cost than the cashout difference - because the cashout amount would be far less than with one selection waiting, so you would have more money to play with, and would even have the chance of a longshot to be more profitable if 2 actually scored late on against you. Of course it is personal choice, but why give bookies back money you don't need to, when it is actually costing yourself money? You wouldn't return an item back to a shop and ask for anything less than the price you paid, so why should you when it comes to betting? It really isn't far too complicated, and just a couple of clicks. Personally, I couldn't give money back to the bookies when there really isn't any need to, but each to their own I guess.