You mean itās at the price you take, regardless of what the SP is?
I remember Kevin Blake saying a while back that they should just remove BOG as an incentive as it just rewards mug punters who donāt understand value. And that taking a price and getting a bigger SP return shouldnāt be rewarded as youāve effectively shown you donāt understand pricing models. Thereās some merit in his thinking.
Thatās grand except 95% of punters are mugs and itās the mugs who are getting mugged off here. Iād rarely have a bet on a horse the night before anyway. Bar maybe Cheltenham if I was going to be busy the following day.
Bookies like Paddy Power are starting to feel the pinch now. The easy growth is gone and it looks like regulation will continue to get tougher so they need to start squeezing the customers they have.
Paddy also have market share now so they donāt have to be the most attractive on anything. The price sensitive customers they might lose are probably the ones they donāt want anyway. But itās a slippy slope
No. The remainder is put on at SP.
Thatās different from BOG though. If youāve a grand on youāre saying the first 500 is at the price with BOG attached and the 2nd 500 at SP? If BOG was removed then youād have the same price on both stakes but the 2nd 500 couldnāt be paid out higher if it returned higher.
Yeah, If it drifts happy days and youāll get the bigger price on both parts of the bet. 500 at the price you take and 500 on the SP. A single 500 euro shop bet can move the price on a bet. Iāve seen calls going to the trader to ring in a bet and the bet would be accepted @ 4/5 but cut from 4/5 to 8/11 straight away after the bet was placed.
In a joke shop operation like Boylesports yeah. Most proper bookies wouldnāt move price on a ā¬500 bet on a 4/5 shot. Unless it was from a special case.
I agree with @Mac Iād love to see the bookies just do away with BOG in entirety if it meant being less restrictive/reactive as a whole to possible āsharpā accounts. I suppose when you have these BOG concessions it follows that they feel obliged to weed out the top 5% who they feel they canāt beat. That figure feels like it might be higher though in terms of restrictions whereas in reality are 5% making a profit on betting year to year? I doubt it. I suspect more like 1-2% are. It is frustrating that you have to use kid gloves with accounts if you want to hold on to them as long as possible and really bet below what you want and behave yourself to give yourself best chance of surviving for as long as possible.
Not sure it makes much odds though if the bookies are releasing prices overnight versus at 9-10am in morning, as you regularly see stuff shorten up overnight (presumably for a good reason) but then itās suddenly pushed back out everywhere by about 11am next day. And anyway even if bookies are releasing at 9-10am thereās going to be that 2hr period where odds are unstable and they are going to trade it cautious until things inevitably firm up which is usually around midday onwards. At least if you have your eye on a horse thatās 16/1 but some bookie moves it in to 8/1 overnight, thereās a chance itās back out to 14/1 by midday, I see that regularly, probably as they move it more in sync with market value. Whereas if that cut 16/1 to 10/1 happens at 9am youāre not going to see it pushed back out to 14/1 by midday. This probably happens because youāll also have two different traders managing it overnight versus the day fella. So the day fella might have no knowledge that he should keep this at 8/1. Whereas if itās him making the change at 9am you can be sure heāll keep it short. Just my two cents worth on that.
1 Like
Gambling should be banned or at the very least heavily restricted. The āblokey/matesā ads they are allowed run are particularly reprehensible.
3 Likes
I suspect we will see cartel like activity with bookmakers in the short to medium term. A few have gone to the wall recently or been bought out/merged. Competition will decrease which will be bad for customers. It doesnāt help when governments start meddling in the industry either.
The exchange for all its good probably has finished book making in the long term.
2 Likes
I made an awful blunder there in Powers that thankfully ended ok. I intended to back Chacun Pour Soi in the 6:40 @ 3/1 but I had a bit of a brain fart and wrote down 5:30 Punchestown #1 on the docket @ 3/1.
Thankfully as I got on before the off for the 6:40 and #1 for the 5:30 tomorrow is 6/4 they acknowledged it as an error on my part and paid out. 
1 Like
I write down numbers for dogs but would always write the horses name out on a docket. Different stokes for different folks
Same as this myself
Good to know
1 Like
4 mins it took you, 3 mins later than usual
He got the like anyway
Iāve read plenty worse
Iām in Powers here doing the lotto for the work and thereās some old wan here kicking up a big fuss over her bet on the virtual. She had 2 euro at 12/1 on some virtual yoke which won and when she went to collect she was told she was 2 seconds too late. Her bet was voided and she got her two euro back.
Sheās on the phone ringing head office now and she says sheās going public on the radio with it.
Obviously if it didnāt win and she missed the off she wouldnāt have known and never would have got her money backā¦