Official Betting Thread

[mushy]

However, without any communication or anything, they waited for the spread to win, and resettled it at a lower price, claiming a palp. It never was a palp, as the book percentages were right, and the spreads seemed fine, considering it was playing 9 goals and over in just 3 International group games. .

What exactly is a Palp?
As for Ibas, as far as I can see they are governed by the terms and conditions of the company you are dealing with.
In other words if William Hill states somewhere in its rules that they will do this then its appears to be tough luck on the customer. Unless they are bending these rules to suit themselves.
There are of course times where companies have to protect themselves from scams but this seems different. They also cover themselves for what they call honest mistakes. Am not sure this was one either, as you say it seems a genuine advertised offer on their part.
Having said all that, not knowing exactly what a palp is clearly means I am no expert on the matter.

[Arch Dandy]

What exactly is a Palp?

A palpable error, basically Hill's are saying they've put up the wrong price / offer and it's so wrong they won't honor it, which bookies do from time to time.

Without knowing the actual bet it's hard to say if it's a palp but if it looked too good to be true when you were putting it on it probably is. Saying that bookies are getting worse and worse for paying out or even actually taking proper bets so I wouldn't put anything passed them.

[SammyLeeWasOffside]

What exactly is a Palp?

Palpable error.

Basically they can void a bet and claim it shouldn't have been available. Its a get out of trouble free card for any mistake they make (they aren't so forgiving when its the other way round)

[Fishbone]

I love reading about all the wins and the unlucky losses, and I love seeing the bookies get a bashing. But, there is only one winner and the rules have always been skewed in their favour. It's over 32 years ago, but I worked for one of the big bookies for about a year. We would bank from the day before every morning, and I honestly only remember not banking two days during the year I worked there. I had to call in any bet that would take out over 1,500 pound, and back then that meant putting coins in a pay phone. Had a punter who wanted to put 200 quid on a 15/2 shot, and the horses were going in the stalls. I finally got the go-ahead as they were off. The horse came second. It really annoyed me, as we weren't the butchers or the bakers, we were bookies and bookies take bets. But there were so many procedures in place to protect them. I can only imagine that with the advances in technology today there's even more rules and regulations and safety nets to ensure the bookie comes out on top.

Two days we didn't bank in a year. Just remember that the next time you place a bet.

Having worked for Betfair for nearly four years in a role that was privy to all the data, I can assure you that your statement about the bookies is correct in that they will always come out on top, but this is mostly down to the amount of 'mug' punters or those that blindly bet on an outcome that fill their banks up.

There were plenty of winners on Betfair, which in a regular Sportsbook type betting account would have been shut down long ago and the one thing that probably separated most of these accounts from the 'losers' was knowledge of whatever they were betting on.

[mushy]

A palpable error, basically Hill's are saying they've put up the wrong price / offer and it's so wrong they won't honor it, which bookies do from time to time.

Without knowing the actual bet it's hard to say if it's a palp but if it looked too good to be true when you were putting it on it probably is. Saying that bookies are getting worse and worse for paying out or even actually taking proper bets so I wouldn't put anything passed them.

Thanks Arch, and Sammy.
So, they made a mistake on the price, would they then refund all losing bets on the same spread?
For instance the bet seemed to be a spread of 9 goals or more across the 3 matches in question.
Would they then refund all those that lost by going lower than 9?
I reckon we already know the answer to that one.

[il_martello_di_genovesi]

That's exactly it Mushy. I played the same bet on Thursday and it lost there were 5 goals. Settled as a loser no issue. They went up the same next day, no issue until the bet actually won. 4 days after it had won mind. Tbh IBAS aren't governed by bookmaker rules. They are an independent adjudicator. Whatever they say the bookies have to do. Same as if they say I'm wrong, then I have abide by that.

Tbh something like this, is bad for the bookmaker as they've gone completely the wrong way about it.

[mushy]

On the ibas site it states the following ;
'adjudicate by reference to the operator's own terms and conditions but do not rule on complex legal issues'
Does that not mean that they just read through the terms and conditions of the bookmaker in question and if its written in there that they can pop round and screw your wife then thats exactly what they will do and would therefore rule in favour of the bookies?
In other words whatever is in the terms and conditions can never be challenged.
Below is an example of one of their adjudications.
IBAS RULING:
Whenever a backer opens an online account with a bookmaker he agrees to be bound by that bookmaker's rules. All bookmakers have a rule which entitles them to correct errors in the display or transmission of prices or propositions. All bets accepted by a bookmaker are subject to that rule. At the time the bet in dispute was placed Hendry was leading Williams 6-2 in a best of 17 frames match. For the match to finish in 14 frames or fewer Hendry needed to win only three of the next six frames. That would not have been a 15-8 chance.
In the Panel's opinion, therefore, the displayed price was incorrect and the bookmaker acted within its rules by correcting it. Backers with online accounts should always monitor the e-mail address they used to open their account for messages from the bookmaker concerned. It is pointless to give a bookmaker an e-mail address that is not checked regularly. Doing so will inevitably result in e-mail messages which affect bets not being received.'
So basically they are saying if the displayed price is made in error then tough luck again on you.
I suppose a lot depends on what other bookmakers were offering.
The other thing is, I thought the whole idea of spread betting was that it was governed by market forces fluctuating up and down depending on the amount of money laid either way.

[il_martello_di_genovesi]

IBAS will go by their terms and conditions, providing the reason is clear. For example, if you can get a 2 way tennis match, one player at 3/1, and one at 5/1, it's an obvious mistake. The percentages are wrong and it's clear. Therefore, no case. Also if Roger Federer was 12/1 and you were playing against him at odds of 1/100. We would know this is wrong. One is a multi champion and one posts on KUMB . But you understand when a palp is clear?

In this sense the percentages were right. They made under 7 goals an odds on favourite, 7-8 bigger, and 9+ a lot bigger. So I played this on Thursday. It finished on 5 goals, so nowhere near. This would show that the unders was a likely odds on chance? Therefore no way a clear palp. Everything adds up. They were happy to settle this as a loser. The next day they went up the same spreads for another group. The prices Changed slightly as Andorra were involved. But even so. The Belgium game was the first time they'd conceded 6 for ages. It was after that group produced 10 goals that they said, oh no, the price for the overs was wrong. It should've been odds on. But funny the day when it lost, it was fine. Added to the fact that these are their own spreads. So Hills opinion, not even a general bookmaker opinion.

So essentially they are trying to have it both ways, and are claiming a palp. I present this case to IBAS. Hills will have to try and prove it's a clear palp. If they cannot do so, IBAS will rule against them, and say that the bet was fair and they will have to payout.

You probably understand it a bit better now.

[mushy]

I certainly do and thanks for all the info, its enlightening.
Go for it, and please update us with how you get on and what the IBAS ruling is.
In my day we used the Sporting Life Green Seal service to settle disputes like this.
Life and betting were a lot simpler then.

[James P]

Quick question.

Can you do Draw No Bet accumulators? If I did 5 results and 3 won and 2 were draws, they'd just pay out the treble yeah? Or does it void the whole bet?

[Aztec Hammer]

Quick question.

Can you do Draw No Bet accumulators? If I did 5 results and 3 won and 2 were draws, they'd just pay out the treble yeah? Or does it void the whole bet?

I would have thought they'd pay out on the treble, but you should have a word on the live chat thing with them if you do it online, to make sure

Had a great win yesterday, in the Pats-Jets game.

Shane Vereen to score 2 or more TDs at 15/2. Stuck £11 on and won a ton. First time in his career that he has scored multiple TDs in a game. Been smashing the bookies on the NFL this year - there's definitely money to be made. I go for high percentage doubles with fairly large stakes. The only art is picking out two games each week that you are sure will not be upsets.

[rare as rockinghorse shat]

Quick question.

Can you do Draw No Bet accumulators? If I did 5 results and 3 won and 2 were draws, they'd just pay out the treble yeah? Or does it void the whole bet?

Yes, they reduce all the selection voids to the lowest common multiple (or single, or complete void if that is indeed the case).

I've done it a few times. It can be a very, very good tactic.
How many 5 or 6 ways you had fall short by a draw or two?

May not be a huge win, but profit is profit.... more to the point, you've retained your stake and then some!

[White Goodman]

the one thing that probably separated most of these accounts from the 'losers' was knowledge of whatever they were betting on.

Were any of these accounts opened in the name Rosie?

[jastons]

£5 on over 2.5 goals in the four Dutch div 1 games @ 4/1

[rare as rockinghorse shat]

Sydney v Adelaide Utd - 9:30am kick off

Buying Sydney multi-corners this morning @ 6

Going in for £15 per point on this one. Risking £90.

It IS a big risk - I know there's a good chance I can lose big here because Sydney only played a few days ago against Western Sydney in a very heavy derby match, so will be a bit leggy.

But in that game, they played some really attacking football, amassing 15 corners and I think although they will rest a few players, they will look to continue the form and intensity with a place in the semis up for grabs.
Adelaide are an attacking team and will probably look to go at Sydney early doors as well to get a lead for Sydney to chase and tire. Could be very open either way.

If you're looking for a standard bet on this game, it wouldn't surprise me to see over 1.5 first half goals, or Adelaide to be winning at half time.
If this is the case and Sydney grab a few first half corners, then they'll be looking to press.

This may be one for me to weigh up at half time, whether to cash in/close or not.

[rare as rockinghorse shat]

As I was concerned, Adelaide just tore them apart that half - Sydney look jaded and barely caused a threat.

But, I've been absolutely saved by some late pressure and 2 last minute Sydney corners in the first half!
I reckon Sydney have to push second half - it being a cup match and all - so happy to leave for them to try get the 3 required for a no-loss.


Edit: 2x4 - £30 profit. Not too bad.

[Bend it like Repka]

No one has put a horse up for ages!

Wolves 5.50

Keenes Pointe 11/2

[Billydinho]

BTTS and win acca:

Schalke
Blackburn
Cardiff
Wigan

270/1

[Whufc06]

No one has put a horse up for ages!

Wolves 5.50

Keenes Pointe 11/2

Great shout mate, won 13/2

[Bend it like Repka]

Genius me.