Will the betting shops close permanently after this?

hopalongcass

robbiezero wrote: »

They dont ban you in my experience. Just reduce the amount you are allowed bet to very small money and send you something like this in email:

Off course they do,they will start there when you have a few winners,its a kind of warning keep winning and you are out,and if you keep winning the next one will be a bit harsher and eventually a ban.

robbiezero

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Ah right, so they don't ban you directly. They restrict (ban) you indirectly without an explicit blanket ban.

Thanks.

Yep exactly. IMO they should be forced to lay a minimum amount to any customer to prevent this cherry picking of mugs.
Paddy Power mentioned above arent actually the worst of them and bet365 are probably the best.

robbiezero

hopalongcass wrote: »

Off course they do,they will start there when you have a few winners,its a kind of warning keep winning and you are out,and if you keep winning the next one will be a bit harsher and eventually a ban.

Never experienced that, but my stakes got reduced so small i didnt bother betting any more with them.

Kermit.de.frog

hopalongcass wrote: »

Off course they do,they will start there when you have a few winners,its a kind of warning keep winning and you are out,and if you keep winning the next one will be a bit harsher and eventually a ban.

But if I was an honest gambler who just happened to be lucky, did my research or whatever and I was ultimately actually banned I would probably go to the courts

Just off the top of my head...

1. That these guy are implicitly accusing me of cheating thereby slating my character with no evidence and denying me access to their product

2. Denying me service on the basis i'm winning too much despite the fact that is their product and infringing my consumer rights

They may couch bans/restrictions in all sorts of excuses and misdirection but i'd love to see cases taken just to see what happens.

L1011

hopalongcass wrote: »

English Horse racing starts Monday week June 1st Bookies will be back in full swing then.

Shops won't be. There is no way they can enforce spacing in the average bookie.



There aren't many jobs that can be identified as probably gone now, but main street bookies are one. Toll booth clerks are another; they've all installed card terminals now; there may be one each side if even in future.

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But if I was an honest gambler who just happened to be lucky, did my research or whatever and I was ultimately actually banned I would probably go to the courts

Just off the top of my head...

1. That these guy are implicitly accusing me of cheating thereby slating my character with no evidence and denying me access to their product

2. Denying me service on the basis i'm winning too much despite the fact that is their product and infringing my consumer rights

They may couch bans/restrictions in all sorts of excuses and misdirection but i'd love to see cases taken just to see what happens.

Courts basically won't entertain this, its the quid pro quo for gambling debts being legally unenforceable.

ILoveYourVibes

Thing is though. If you ban them. Then they will go underground ..and the gangs will feast.

And if people can't pay ..well they will pay a lot more ...this way is the best way ..its a step up ...still pretty vampiric ..but its a step up

rizzla

I don't think so. The wife works in one, she mentioned most of her regulars don't like online gambling. You need a debit card, you have to wait for winnings to go to your bank account (3-5 business days) most will end up spending anything they win straightaway. There's a demand for them so I don't think they will be going anywhere.

There's also a social element to the shop and the pub. The pubs closed before the bookies and when that happened, the pub goers just gathered in the bookies.

I'm not sure how they will maintain social distancing etc when they reopen. Pencils would need to be single use, people wouldn't be able to safely gather inside to watch some of the sports they had betted, maybe that's what will kill them off. But the people who oversee these shops are clever, they will find a way, I imagine.

robbiezero

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

But if I was an honest gambler who just happened to be lucky, did my research or whatever and I was ultimately actually banned I would probably go to the courts

Just off the top of my head...

1. That these guy are implicitly accusing me of cheating thereby slating my character with no evidence and denying me access to their product

2. Denying me service on the basis i'm winning too much despite the fact that is their product and infringing my consumer rights

They may couch bans/restrictions in all sorts of excuses and misdirection but i'd love to see cases taken just to see what happens.

These days, you don't even have to be lucky.
You could set up an online account, lodge 500 quid, back a few horses, lose the lot without a single winner or place and still get restricted.
If you can beat SP they will also restrict you, some of them quicker than others.

PARlance

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because you cannot use a credit or debit card to put money into your account. You have to go to a shop.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Not sure how or why you would be going around claiming that online gambling hasn't really caught on in Ireland when you literally don't know the first thing (deposit) about it.

robbiezero

PARlance wrote: »

You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Not sure how or why you would be going around claiming that online gambling hasn't really caught on in Ireland when you literally don't know the first thing (deposit) about it.

That would certainly not be my experience anyway. I think it is rife, particularly on soccer. Any time I watch a match in the pub, lots of people are doing bets on it on their phone.

ThewhiteJesus

robbiezero wrote: »

That would certainly not be my experience anyway. I think it is rife, particularly on soccer. Any time I watch a match in the pub, lots of people are doing bets on it on their phone.

100% it’s rife, of course the shops will reopen though, when is the question

Huntergonzo

Some betting shops will not re-open after this, but the larger ones probably will.

Personally I gamble very little, usually a few quid here and there around March & April (for the bigger race meetings) and maybe the odd golf major as well. But I like to have the option so I don't despise betting shops and I have little time for online gambling.

As for the point regarding them preying on vulnerable people, well I'm afraid they're hardly unique in that regard. Big business screwing average people out of money is very common!

I pay €55 a month for a useless phone service (more fool me), there's plenty of people out there who have to wear runners costing €100+ because they can't be seen without them, fcukin beauty products!!!! nuff said, Sky charging €100+ a month so you can watch Storage Wars, the Kardashians and Scunthorpe v Forest Green Rovers (or just re-runs now because of covid).

All bullshít and all screwing people out of their money, that's life folks and it's an individuals own choice, so have at it.

4068ac1elhodqr

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

Thing is though. If you ban them. Then they will go underground ..and the gangs will feast.
And if people can't pay ..well they will pay a lot more ...this way is the best way ..its a step up ...still pretty vampiric ..but its a step up

Somewhat agree, and that's the logic behind the US now opening up their markets, state by state. They're also loosing about $4bn in lost federal and state tax takings, due to the black markets.

Boils down simply to a question of balance. You can't outlaw it easily or without side-effects, but can use a wide variety of tools to control the industry much better.

Sponsorship, advertising and promotions have been at phiss-taking levels in recent years, from UKPL shirts to the non-stop barage of RNG based naff bingo, games and slots TV ads.

Anyone with a concept of math would steer well clear of all this virtual nonsense.

The only plus factor is that of wealth distribution. The hi-rollers (not the average Joes) were always encouraged to splash out based on the (perception) they could well afford it. In turn each would create hundred of jobs, and taxable spend from their tax-shy offshore investments or matresses of cash.

The_Kew_Tour

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Is that legal? What's the excuse they use for closing an account?

Ya it is. I’m banned from PP, Boyle and Ladbrokes online due to winning money.

They stop any accounts that has any type of success over a period

Randy Archer

punisher5112 wrote: »

Not a hope they will disappear....

It's the same argument about pubs and they ruin lives....

Yes in some cases they aid it but it's down to personal responsibility and if people can't control themselves then they need to get help.

There should be better practices in place and if people are known to be going through problems or they feel they may have then they should be able to provide options for them.

No one, neither pubs or bookies ,force people to come in. The majority of people can throw on a few bets and pints etc and don’t harm society . Why should they be dragged down because of a minority of weak minded people who don’t have the intelligence or ability to stop . They’d probably get addicted to wine gums of given the chance

No issue however, with your last proposal, fair enough , it we are all adults

sanjose1

Bet365 a joke when it comes to rugby, one big bet/winner and they slash you to peanuts

PARlance

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Ya it is. I’m banned from PP, Boyle and Ladbrokes online due to winning money.

They stop any accounts that has any type of success over a period

I lived with 2 lads in my early 20's. One like yourself, who they stopped betting as he was a winning account and the other, a problem gambler, who blew 2k on virtual horse racing in under 2 hours, one morning. That was only one of many stories. They completely pray on the problem gamblers and even though they could well absorb winning ones, they don't tolerate that.

Online is a massive problem afaik. If the Government wanted to do something about it they could easily stop online deposits and force them to be made in shops.

ThewhiteJesus

Randy Archer wrote: »

No one, neither pubs or bookies ,force people to come in. The majority of people can throw on a few bets and pints etc and don’t harm society . Why should they be dragged down because of a minority of weak minded people who don’t have the intelligence or ability to stop . They’d probably get addicted to wine gums of given the chance

No issue however, with your last proposal, fair enough , it we are all adults

This post is very harsh imo, considering gambling is linked to depression. It’s escapism for some. Calling them unintelligent or weak for a mental disease is out of order.

Das Reich

I don't get the connection between bookies and pubs. I did enter one one time and there was only middle aged men (many of them foreigners), no women around only the one who works there. And they watch horsed and dogs on monitors. When I used to go to pubs it was for a totally different reason.

Randy Archer

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

This post is very harsh imo, considering gambling is linked to depression. It’s escapism for some. Calling them unintelligent or weak for a mental disease is out of order.

Nonsense . The rest of society who are capable of controlling themselves, shouldn’t be dragged down because of the failures of a few

Our society is Being molly coddled for far too long . Nanny State ? No thanks

ThewhiteJesus

Randy Archer wrote: »

Nonsense . The rest of society who are capable of controlling themselves, shouldn’t be dragged down because of the failures of a few

Our society is Being molly coddled for far too long . Nanny State ? No thanks

How will you be dragged down ? No one is saying shut anything down you just seem to be on a mad rant. How was Cheltenham by the way ?

PokeHerKing

Jesus lads let's ban cars because of the speeders or drink drivers ehh....

Also the assumption that the degenerate gamblers would all of a sudden become non degenerates if only the bookies were closed is silly. Degenerates gonna be degenerates no matter what. Don't punish the other 90% of society who enjoy a flutter and a few pints.

Tax the $hite out of the companies if you want though, government can put that money back into society and then everyones a winner.

Hulk Hands

PokeHerKing wrote: »

Tax the $hite out of the companies if you want though, government can put that money back into society and then everyones a winner.

They're already taxed to the hilt, to the point where a lot of local companies have folded or sold up as the recent tax hike made it unsustainable for them. A lot of online companies from elsewhere didn't renew their Irish license.

This thread is mad. There's a current thread in AH about drugs with almost universal agreement that they should be legalised, for safety and tax reasons. Yet people here want the opposite, make it illegal and drive a modern gambling society back underground. I'd love to hear some suggestions on how exactly they could enforce a ban on online gambling also?

The lack of knowledge on the industry by most is frightening. Reading posts about casino games being rigged, how it's not possible to win...you see constant suggestion here and Twitter that Paddy Power (a small brand who make up about 10% of their parent company and for who Ireland is a tiny afterthought) are somehow lobbying governments to get Cheltenham and Irish Racing going. The mind boggles

The Tetrarch

Betting is great.

The Tetrarch

Chalk McHugh wrote: »

Desperate carry on. And isn't it statistically proven that 98% of punters lose over the course of every year. Maybe even 99%? Hard to believe the profit margin for the betting vulture companies.

Those statistics are true? I believe you pulled them out of your ....

Abel Ruiz

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Except, if you actually read the OP you would see no suggestion of banning gambling. In fact it's written bold letters.

But loads of other posters have suggested that.
So the point made is right.

kerosene

Das Reich wrote: »

I don't get the connection between bookies and pubs. I did enter one one time and there was only middle aged men (many of them foreigners), no women around only the one who works there. And they watch horsed and dogs on monitors. When I used to go to pubs it was for a totally different reason.

There is a racing pub in every village or town, where the majority of clients are glued to the racing on tv. When a race starts conversations automatically pause.

Not my cup of tea but they are very common. Generally they are within a minute walk from a bookies.

PARlance

Abel Ruiz wrote: »

But loads of other posters have suggested that.
So the point made is right.

Don't think anybody on this thread has been arguing for a ban on gambling.

Plenty don't like it, plenty think there should be more restrictions around it and plenty jumping the gun thinking there are loads of post there that aren't.

robbiezero

kerosene wrote: »

There is a racing pub in every village or town, where the majority of clients are glued to the racing on tv. When a race starts conversations automatically pause.

Not my cup of tea but they are very common. Generally they are within a minute walk from a bookies.

Yep. Can make for a very enjoyable evening or afternoon if that is your thing. I love a evening out with a few of the lads watching the racing and backing a few horses.

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

Those statistics are true? I believe you pulled them out of your ....

I'd say 99.99% of punters lose. It's a recreational passtime for most and the overround makes winning impossible for most.

PokeHerKing

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Except, if you actually read the OP you would see no suggestion of banning gambling. In fact it's written bold letters.

So whats with the crusade against the brick and mortar, is it the architecture you have issue with?

The Tetrarch

Augeo wrote: »

I'd say 99.99% of punters lose. It's a recreational passtime for most and the overround makes winning impossible for most.

You can decide where to bet.
Bookmakers charge about 17% average on the big flat meetings, and between 17% and 34% each race on Cheltenham Gold Cup day.
You can bet on an exchange and pay 5% commission, saving yourself about 15%/20%. With 5% commission you are close to break even.
My best win was at 75s on the exchange (=70.3/1). The bookies paid 33/1.



You have no research to prove or support your 99.99% figure.
I won about 3k last year. Does that mean 9,999 other people lost?
Again, the internet will not refuse imaginary statistics ... 99.99%.

Hulk Hands

Augeo wrote: »

I'd say 99.99% of punters lose. It's a recreational passtime for most and the overround makes winning impossible for most.

It's long been debated and it's very hard guage as a winning punter, once closed, will open accounts in their sister, wife's, 3rd cousins name and they'll be classed as a winning punter also. There's an active betting community on Twitter and the most common estimate is 3% winners out of the total.

Those 3% will tend to stake far far higher than a regular punter as they know they have an edge and increase accordingly. So they eat into profit margins far more than 3% which explains why they get so heavily restricted. There's a further group of maybe 5-10% who are break even or close to it. These types have been getting restricted in recent years which gets the ire of many as they really shouldn't . Some firms go safety first if in doubt however

*That's Sports bettors. All Casino players will lose long term. However it's still a relatively cheap passtime with very small margins (97-99% return to player)

robbiezero

The Tetrarch wrote: »

You can decide where to bet.
Bookmakers charge about 17% average on the big flat meetings, and between 17% and 34% each race on Cheltenham Gold Cup day.
You can bet on an exchange and pay 5% commission, saving yourself about 15%/20%. With 5% commission you are close to break even.
My best win was at 75s on the exchange (=70.3/1). The bookies paid 33/1.



You have no research to prove or support your 99.99% figure.
I won about 3k last year. Does that mean 9,999 other people lost?
Again, the internet will not refuse imaginary statistics ... 99.99%.

You can select to pay 2% commission now on betfair and forego any of the reward/promotions. Or at least you could a few months ago.

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

You can decide where to bet.
Bookmakers charge about 17% average on the big flat meetings, and between 17% and 34% each race on Cheltenham Gold Cup day.
You can bet on an exchange and pay 5% commission, saving yourself about 15%/20%. With 5% commission you are close to break even.
My best win was at 75s on the exchange (=70.3/1). The bookies paid 33/1.



You have no research to prove or support your 99.99% figure.
I won about 3k last year. Does that mean 9,999 other people lost?
Again, the internet will not refuse imaginary statistics ... 99.99%.

Lovely spiel but the high street betting offices are full of losing punters.

What were your total stakes to win 3k? What was your turnover? What did you make in each of the previous 10 years?

What % of punters are losing in your view?

It's my opinion by the way not an imaginary stat.

Muahahaha

loyatemu wrote: »

I've been reading this book recently; guy gambled €10 million over a few years, towards the end he was lumping tens of thousands of euro on outlandish accumulators based on eastern European football and obscure tennis matches, all while stealing the money from his job as a post office manager. Paddy Power knew he was just an ordinary Joe Soap, they did nothing, they even invited him to the Curragh to hang out with JP McManus etc. (interestingly, and unfortunately for him, he was actually a pretty good gambler, made back about 90% of his bets. If he'd been worse he'd have run out of cash much earlier and probably lost interest; and if he'd been a bit better PP would have closed his account).

I've gambled a bit in the past, I'm not trying to get on some high horse, but the big gambling companies are morally bankrupt - their disingenuous TV ads make me very angry.

That case of the postman gambling 10 million with Paddy Power was something else. They knew he was earning 30k per year yet they allowed him bet multiples of that sum. At one point towards the end they allowed him to bet 40,000 euro on a Norwegian Womens Football League game.

Augeo wrote: »

Indeed, it was increased from 1% to 2% last year iirc and bookmakers continue to pay it rather than pass it on to the consumer but many offers were cut to compensate (treble odd on one winner in a L15 etc etc etc)

And tax on gambling was 10% for years until Charlie McCreevy came in and gave the industry a golden ticket by slashing it to 1%. Even when the govt. put it up to 2% last year the bookies were hopping up and down with the 'jobs, jobs, jobs' mantra :rolleyes: They get a complete free ride in comparison to alcohol and cigarettes which are taxed at 60-80% levels. Aside from that theres questions about corporation tax- they're not happy even paying the bargain 12.5%, instead PP and all the main bookies are HQ'd in the Isle of Man with just a handful of employees there.

robbiezero wrote: »

That would certainly not be my experience anyway. I think it is rife, particularly on soccer. Any time I watch a match in the pub, lots of people are doing bets on it on their phone.

Online gambling is huge, no doubt about it. You only have to look at Paddy Powers share price history to see how their business has exploded from it. In 2010 a share in PP was circa 4 euro, by 2014 it was knocking almost 12 euro and was one of the best performing Irish companies on the markets. Then the Betfair merger came and since then they've grown even further. Now they're trying to crack the US markets by partnering with casino operations in Vegas and trying to get state gambling laws overturned. If they crack that the business will easily double in size yet again.

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

You can decide where to bet.
Bookmakers charge about 17% average on the big flat meetings, and between 17% and 34% each race on Cheltenham Gold Cup day.
.....


......

I'd say your stats are well out there.

Throw up a goldcup day race with prices reflecting what you suggest....

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

.....
You can bet on an exchange and pay 5% commission, saving yourself about 15%/20%. With 5% commission you are close to break even.
.......
I won about 3k last year. .....

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=109759587

Over 200 bets on a close to break even commission rate (your words) you lost 20%..... That 3k winning year is a nice stat alright
Lol

Hulk Hands

Muahahaha wrote: »

And tax on gambling was 10% for years until Charlie McCreevy came in and gave the industry a golden ticket by slashing it to 1%. Even when the govt. put it up to 2% last year the bookies were hopping up and down with the 'jobs, jobs, jobs' mantra :rolleyes: They get a complete free ride in comparison to alcohol and cigarettes which are taxed at 60-80% levels. Aside from that theres questions about corporation tax- they're not happy even paying the bargain 12.5%, instead PP and all the main bookies are HQ'd in the Isle of Man with just a handful of employees there.

You don't understand the tax situation too well if you're comparing it to Alcohol or cigarettes. The vast majority of countries tax on revenue. The Irish, probably because they don't understand it, tax turnover. A bookie operates on circa 5% margin. You apply a 5% tax to that then it can't possibly make money. How would it apply a 60% tax like alcohol?

The 10% tax back in the day is different as that was passed onto the customer. From what I've read, it would be against EU law to apply that these days. In any case, it resulted in customers being charged completely unfairly, with margins over 15% against them. This meant only degenerate gamblers bet. If applied now it would worsen the problem gambling situation, as problem gamblers would lose more, quicker. Recreational gamblers who bet safely would stop betting, stopping that tax intake.

Secondly, gamblers would simply go online and bet tax free there. We're good enough at the moment to have a few companies paying for licenses, paying tax and giving punters a degree of protection. All that disappears with a punters and it's impossible to police.

I don't think any major bookmaker operators outta the Isle of man anymore. PP info is a bit off also. The biggest brand there has long been Aus Sportsbet and they've recently merged with Pokerstars and Skybet. PP is a tiny part of that company

The Tetrarch

Augeo wrote: »

What were your total stakes to win 3k? What was your turnover? What did you make in each of the previous 10 years?
What % of punters are losing in your view?
It's my opinion by the way not an imaginary stat.

My best year was 20.5k profit. From memory my second best year was 10.6k.
The most I have lost in a single bet was 715 pounds. The most I won was 12,800 Euro. My biggest bets were 1,100 and 1,000. Both won.
I got a download from Betfair and Paddy Power of my transacations from when I opened accounts with them and both were in profit.
Do I keep an annual profit and loss for each of the last ten years? No. That is old school. My accounts are online and if I want info I ask for a download.
What did I make in each of the last ten years? I don't know or care. I am ahead. It is a hobby, and I have bet on horses since 1969, and have not gone broke yet, despite all the internet wailing about compulsive gamblers.
I have no idea or opinion about the percentage of losing betters. My own betting is enough to manage.

I also read the Tony 10 book about 1.75 million Euro stolen from An Post to gamble. A person mentioned earlier in the thread that Tony O'Reilly was a good gambler. He was a clueless, reckless plunger, using free money. He was betting 20k or more on odds-on accumulators on Indonesian soccer, Norwegian ladies soccer, boxing, tennis, and any event that was starting in the next few minutes.
He had no knowledge of the sports he bet on, and did no research.
And the An Post internal audit department must not be up to much use either.

My stakes to win the 3k last year? No idea.
I had very few bets in 2019. The 3k was mostly from bets on Watch Me at Royal Ascot at 24s and 36s. The rest of the year was uninteresting.
I don't bet on jumps racing, only flat, and only on Group races.
Turnover does not concern me. Why would anyone be interested in turnover? You can't bank turnover. I never heard any better talking about their turnover. Profit and Loss is where it's at.

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

..............
What did I make in each of the last ten years? I don't know or care. I am ahead. It is a hobby, and I have bet on ........

Lol.... Every punter is ahead according to themselves..... Up overall.... Yup :pac:

Your memory seems good on the good years... For someone who doesn't care

The Tetrarch wrote: »

My best year was 20.5k profit. From memory my second best year was 10.6k.
.......

Your 200 bet log at exchange prices must have been an unusually bad run for such a successfull punter.

The Tetrarch

Augeo wrote: »

I'd say your stats are well out there.
Throw up a goldcup day race with prices reflecting what you suggest....

It is tough dealing with the clueless.
I said "Bookmakers charge about 17% average on the big flat meetings, and between 17% and 34% each race on Cheltenham Gold Cup day."
I looked up the Racing Post Cheltenham Cup day race reports 13th March 2020.
The over-round is listed at the bottom of each race. They were 122%; 132%; 125%; 117%; 129%; 129%; 134%.

You would say my stats were well out? :rolleyes:

The Tetrarch

Augeo wrote: »

Your 200 bet log at exchange prices must have been an unusually bad run for such a successfull punter.

If you like I can give you the links to successful bets that I recommended the on Betfair forum, and on the boards.ie forum.

Does anyone understand his/her above post?
What is 200 log bet?
And what is this unusually bad run?

The Tetrarch

Augeo wrote: »

Your memory seems good on the good years... For someone who doesn't care

I have four horses at stud. My hobby is pedigree research. Betting is occasional, and not very important.
What is much more important is the success of the horses.

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

It is tough dealing with the clueless.
I said "Bookmakers charge about 17% average on the big flat meetings, and between 17% and 34% each race on Cheltenham Gold Cup day."
I looked up the Racing Post Cheltenham Cup day race reports 13th March 2020.
The over-round is listed at the bottom of each race. They were 122%; 132%; 125%; 117%; 129%; 129%; 134%.

You would say my stats were well out? :rolleyes:

To be fair you probably checked that before posting initially.

The Tetrarch

Augeo wrote: »

To be fair you probably checked that before posting initially.

I called you out on your post where you said I was wrong.
You were wrong. You are a clueless guesser.

Are you going to apologise for your false claims?

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

If you like I can give you the links to successful bets that I recommended the on Betfair forum, and on the boards.ie forum.

Does anyone understand his/her above post?
What is 200 log bet?
And what is this unusually bad run?

142 losers, 46 winners..... That's 188 bets.....i referred to it as a 200 bet log.... You lost 20% at what you call breakeven odds as they were exchange odds.

Doesn't tally with thousands of profit annually claims.

The Tetrarch wrote: »

I had a thread on the 2015 flat season Group races. https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057328262
142 losers cost €568.00. 46 winners returned €455.79. Loss for year was €112.21 (19.8%)
In 2019 it is any race, probably maidens, or races with little form.

Every punter has successful bets..... Much more losing ones though.... As illustrated in your log.

The Tetrarch

The Tetrarch wrote: »

I called you out on your post where you said I was wrong.
You were wrong. You are a clueless guesser.

Are you going to apologise for your false claims?

You are a docket flasher / hindsight merchant
As most punters who claim they are up overall are.

The Tetrarch

First of all the "you must just have looked that up" about the over-round of 17% to 34%.

I posted on 15th March 2020 on the horse racing forum
"It shows it at the end of the race reports on the Racing Post website:
Cheltenham Gold Cup 1990: Total SP: 113%
Cheltenham Gold Cup 2019: Total SP: 117%" <

---

........................................................................................

I think you will find that 2014 thread was Euro 4 bets on every Group race on the flat in England, a tiny amount.
It was an experiment, not serious betting. 146 losers, 46 winners, Loss for year was €112.21 (19.8%). That was not my only betting.

........................................................................................

Here are a few winning bets which I think show my usual bet is not Euro 4

2012 Betfair forum
https://community.betfair.com/horse_antepost/go/thread/view/94098/29061313/larc-de-triomphe-2012?pg=27

07 Oct 12 02:18

Solemia

Draw: good
Stamina: good
Form: bad
Ground: suits
Stamina: good
Jockey: good
Odds: 75

07 Oct 12 15:17
FRA / Long (FRA) 7th Oct / 15:25
2400m Grp1 Solemia Back 22599765694 07-Oct-12 01:54 C 75 112.68 75 8,338.32
2400m Grp1 Solemia Back 22598756804 07-Oct-12 00:32 C 75 70.00 75 5,180.00

I woke at 16:05 and missed the race.

Profit Euro 12,842.59 (5% commission)
.........................................................................................
2000 Guineas 2016 -30th April 2016

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/newreply.php?do=newreply&noquote=1&p=113531248

I am backing Galileo Gold €100 at 12/1.
Never be afraid of one horse and all that.

I backed Galileo Gold at 12/1. Euro 100 bet
His price went out massively. I backed him again at 16.5/1. Euro 100 bet
That might be the road to the poorhouse.

Profit Euro 2,707.50
.........................................................................................
Royal Ascot - Queen's Vase
17th June 2016 17:35

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057608074&page=21

17th June 2016 17:35
Weld's horse Ebediyin looks a good thing but I like nice odds.
€20 at 70s Sword Fighter, hammered by Ebediyin last time out when apprentice ridden.

post#304
Thanks. Even a blind squirrel can find an acorn.
Sword Fighter 67.11 €50.00 €3,305.25

Profit Euro 3,139.99
.........................................................................................
25/05/2019
Irish 2000 Guineas, The Curragh 15:35
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=110270765

Phoenix Of Spain.... 22.00
First run this year. Consistent last year.
Beaten a head by Magna Grecia over 8f in the Group 1 "Racing Post" Trophy at Doncaster "bumped inside final 50yds".
Previous race 2nd by 1 3/4l to Too Darn Hot over 7f.

Emaraaty Ana ... 180.03
18th of 19 in the English Guineas.
Will do better today as there are only 14 runners.
Led for a while by 3 lengths on his own "isolated" in the English 2000 Guineas so has pace.
Ridden by David Egan in the English Guineas, Andrea Artzeni today.
Won a Group 2 last year.

My bet was Euro 50 on Phoenix of Spain at 22s
Profit Euro 1,995.00
.........................................................................................
Royal Ascot 2019
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057990004&page=10

I had one winner and plenty of seconds this week.
Today I am going to watch and enjoy
15:40 Hello Youmzain 10.00
16:20 Watch Me 24.00

If Hello Youmzain wins I might put the lot on Watch Me.

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057990233&page=6

I posted that on the end of the day 3 thread

Watch Me 50.00 36 1,750.00
Watch Me 50.00 36 1,750.00
Hello Youmzain 10 20.00
Watch Me 20.00 24 460.00

What also helps is Watch Me is by Olympic Glory, the sire of my yearling filly, and that is his first Group 1 winner.

Profit Euro 3,762.00
.........................................................................................

Mysterypunter

Augeo wrote: »

You are a docket flasher / hindsight merchant
As most punters who claim they are up overall are.

There is an aftertiming thread for that, I had 500 quid on Bayern Munich to win 5-2, and a score double, Munich 5-2 with a 25-1 winner, but I can't remember what it was. But seriously, over rounds have increased due to price cuts across the board, and new prices like 17-20, 20-23, and the like, I saw a bookmaker match bet the other day, 1.4 vs 2.35. That's 2-5 v 11-8 in old money. Also golf tournaments, 80 players 5 places a fifth the odds, top of the market. 9-2 5-1 6-1 8-1 8-1 14 bar. The top 10 players are 100-105%, and the bookie has 70 players. Only one or none of the top 10 can win, so very limited liability. Everything is a fifth of the odds now as well, no value in ew trebles and accums any more. Bookmakers will kill themselves in the end with greed, but will never die out because of the Addicts. Barney Curley had it spot on when we called them dole recycling shops.