Why lad, 25 will only receive £85k of £274k winnings after bookies eventually pay out one year later

HAYSIE · April 25

Punter takes bookies to high court after refusing to pay out his winning £274,000 bet a year later

https://uk.yahoo.com/sports/news/punter-takes-bookies-high-court-201459795.html

HAYSIE · April 25

Ladbrokes finally settle man's bet as he takes home £274,000 after taking them to court

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/ladbrokes-finally-settle-mans-bet-175657845.html

Doubleme · April 25

im no stranger to very long shot bets. I have had a £2 bet on a very long shot or even 20p bet on a very long shot bet before where if such a bet comes in I would see returns of £20,000-£250,000 before.

It never has, but i just view it as a cheap lottery ticket eg i wont miss the 20p or £2 should the bet lose which it always does but boy will I notice if I suddenly win £20,000 or even £200,000.

I think bookies must make decent money of people who do this as I have personally known a lot of people who like to take such huge long shot bets with similiar mentality.

however when you hear the bookies do this crud it personally puts you off the bet. They would likely make much more money paying out and advertising someone won such a long shot bet, as it motivates many more such long shot bets instead of discouraging these long shot bets in such a way.

Essexphil · April 26

I have sympathy for Ladbrokes on this one.

In the real world, that is insider trading. Someone placing bets at enhanced odds due to being privy to facts via his employment. The horses were 80/1 and 125/1 because everybody believed the horses were ill. Whereas he knew they had recovered, and were training well. Once this became public knowledge (or, more likely, others discovered the bet) the horses started at way shorter odds. 16/1 and 22/1.

It is exactly this sort of behaviour that tarnishes the sport.

rabdeniro · April 26

It's been going on from year one, it would never have hit the headlines if the prices were a lot lower when he put the bet on.

Essexphil · April 26

rabdeniro said:
It's been going on from year one, it would never have hit the headlines if the prices were a lot lower when he put the bet on.

It has.

And the real losers aren't the Bookies. It is us-the punters.

Bookies need to make a certain amount of profit. The over-round would be a lot lower if there were not people cheating in this way.

It is no different from some of Sunak's circle using insider knowledge to rinse the bookies on the date of the last election. Or a CEO selling stock because he has advance warning of a bad profit forecast.

The prices should have been a lot lower when he put the bets on. Because of facts only he knew.

People like this need to be banned.

HAYSIE · April 26

Essexphil said:
I have sympathy for Ladbrokes on this one.

In the real world, that is insider trading. Someone placing bets at enhanced odds due to being privy to facts via his employment. The horses were 80/1 and 125/1 because everybody believed the horses were ill. Whereas he knew they had recovered, and were training well. Once this became public knowledge (or, more likely, others discovered the bet) the horses started at way shorter odds. 16/1 and 22/1.

It is exactly this sort of behaviour that tarnishes the sport.

What we dont know is how much Ladbrokes took on the more fancied horses that were beaten in both races.

TheEdge949 · April 26

I have fk all sympathy with the bookmakers ever.

They are amongst the most corrupt businesses ever. They never offer true prices, they restrict winning punters and they find any excuse to withold payment when they take a hit.

If you think any bookie offers value, look at a given price on the exchange and compare it.

If you are an intelligent punter who takes value, finds arbs, manages to create a win win scenario and frequently makes ROI then you and your custom are not welcome. However, if the algorithm pings you as a persistant loser or even a problem gambler then you'll drown in a sea of comps, offers and special deals.

HAYSIE · April 26

Essexphil said:

rabdeniro said:
It's been going on from year one, it would never have hit the headlines if the prices were a lot lower when he put the bet on.
It has.

And the real losers aren't the Bookies. It is us-the punters.

Bookies need to make a certain amount of profit. The over-round would be a lot lower if there were not people cheating in this way.

It is no different from some of Sunak's circle using insider knowledge to rinse the bookies on the date of the last election. Or a CEO selling stock because he has advance warning of a bad profit forecast.

The prices should have been a lot lower when he put the bets on. Because of facts only he knew.

People like this need to be banned.

I am not sure they were rinsed.
Those involved seem to have placed quite small bets, in order to avoid attracting attention.
Some have paid the price.
Insider trading is just wrong.

The horse racing scenario is a bit more complex.
Trainers regularly run horses over the wrong distance to get a low handicap, before winning a handicap as a result.
You could argue this is cheating.
The trainer would probably argue that they werent sure of the correct distance.

The case above seems to be about 2 horse that werent fit, becoming fit, and the guys judgement that they would win.
I followed racing for many years, and wouldnt be able to count the number of times that this has gone wrong.
Horses get bet off the boards many times, and dont win.
As far as I am aware there is no obligation on a trainer, or stable staff, to announce that a horse is training well.

HAYSIE · April 28

Essexphil said:
I have sympathy for Ladbrokes on this one.

In the real world, that is insider trading. Someone placing bets at enhanced odds due to being privy to facts via his employment. The horses were 80/1 and 125/1 because everybody believed the horses were ill. Whereas he knew they had recovered, and were training well. Once this became public knowledge (or, more likely, others discovered the bet) the horses started at way shorter odds. 16/1 and 22/1.

It is exactly this sort of behaviour that tarnishes the sport.

Why lad, 25, will only receive £85k of £274k winnings after bookies eventually pay out one year later

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/why-lad-25-only-receive-112206530.html

HAYSIE · April 28

7. Rocky's Diamond (IRE) 22/1
Shane Fitzgerald
Declan Queally
4 117 – 109 116 –
Made virtually all, travelled strongly, disputed lead early, led clearly after 1st, nudged along and reduced lead before 2 out, ridden and ran on after last (trainer said, regarding the apparent improvement in form, that gelding ran very free when wearing a hood on his previous run and he felt that a combination of removing the hood and a change of tactics to front running had helped) (op 80/1 tchd 20/1 and 100/1)

16 ran

6. Diamond Nora (IRE) 16/1
Kevin Sexton
Declan Queally
5 1013 t – 102 108 –
Made all, pushed along and faced challenge approaching last, went clear again run-in, kept on well (stewards inquired into apparent improvement in form; trainer's rep said yard may have been under a cloud and mare may have been sick also; he added that the change in tactics today may have brought about the apparent improvement; matter referred for further investigation) (op 25/1 tchd 11/1)

14 ran

Why lad, 25 will only receive £85k of £274k winnings after bookies eventually pay out one year later

Comments