It was actually hard on the news item to spot anything personal or related to the forum by the look of it. But we do take peoples concerns about being able to post freely seriously. The reason we originally floated the idea was because people frequently visit the forum who are definitely not BA customers or visit the forum for the wrong reasons.
We are happy to keep an open mind as to whether we section off part of it for long term BA users only. We will be guided by our users.
Leopardstown - 14:00 - Christmas Hurdle - Voler la vedette
Just seen the report now and loved it how they said that people used to be sure their winnings would be payed out, using Ladbrokes as an example 
.
what a load of old tripe
as if any of the bookies would have payed out if the same mistake happend to them.
again poor Journalism by people who know sod all about it really, a theme that has become very apparent of the last few days.
shit ive just realised i ve been defending Betfair quite a bit today, what is the world coming too hey
.what a load of old tripe
as if any of the bookies would have payed out if the same mistake happend to them.
again poor Journalism by people who know sod all about it really, a theme that has become very apparent of the last few days.
shit ive just realised i ve been defending Betfair quite a bit today, what is the world coming too hey
-
superfrank
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 8:28 pm
+1 freddy.
sh1t journalism.
we only realise it's sh1t because we know more about the subject then they do... we should apply the same degree of scepticism to all the 'news' we're fed (especially from the msm). much of it is ill-informed rubbish but it seems it's human nature to believe the stuff we see on tv and read in the papers.
sh1t journalism.
we only realise it's sh1t because we know more about the subject then they do... we should apply the same degree of scepticism to all the 'news' we're fed (especially from the msm). much of it is ill-informed rubbish but it seems it's human nature to believe the stuff we see on tv and read in the papers.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
What I meant wasn't who placed the bets but who is counter to each bet placed. So who is counter to the back and who is counter to the lay.Photon wrote:I suspect that there were some bet angel users, and some casual punters who might've seen this and taken some part but I'm sure the lion share would've been taken by boys from sports exchange shops who would be quickest off the block when it comes to in-running. And who would have sufficiently large amount of money in their account as they tend to put through large amount of money on shorter priced but sure fire winners towards the death.
-
pdupre1961
- Posts: 410
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:01 pm
Or maybe not, as computer programs only work correctly if there are no mistakes. We are all fallible. I lost £20 when I placed a trade into a market that had a spreadsheet monitoring the P&L of each runner. The spreadsheet automatically fired several bets, one against each selection; except the one I had just laid. However, Bet Angel placed a back bet immediately the lay bet was matched.Ferru123 wrote:I think all we can say about the person behind this is that they're either a computing genius or a poor programmer!
Jeff
Basically, I just plain forgot, and had to act fast to minimise the big loss that was about to happen in front of my eyes.
I have since then taken my auto-trading spreadsheet offline and continue testing in Bet Angel practice mode.
-
psycho040253
- Posts: 109
- Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:29 pm
Making the forum, or part of it, closed to non-BA users ain't gonna stop C4 accessing it. All they have to do is to purchase a copy of BA and they have full access to the forum.mugsgame wrote:Absolutely.superfrank wrote:another reason to make this a private forum?
The fact that someone can register. As this guy from C4 did and read and post on the forum is disturbing and brings into focus that there are some with a different "agenda' on here.
I would like PW & BA to have another look at making the forum only available for registered users of the software.
I don't want to restrict my posting, or be careful what I say. Or be worried about giving out info for my Bet Angel "friends". But in light of this I can only see my contributions reduced.
Psycho
-
pdupre1961
- Posts: 410
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:01 pm
Can someone please tell me how the place market is related to the win market.sweetybt wrote:Betfair announcement
The win and place markets on this race are currently suspended.
The markets will remain unsettled while we investigate the in-running betting patterns on this race.
We apologise for the delay.
Looks like this issue isn't going to die.
http://boyciesblog.wordpress.com/2011/1 ... pable-hit/
I think it was an obvious error, but because of the way Betfair have acted in the past, it seems people are not willing to let it die easily.
http://boyciesblog.wordpress.com/2011/1 ... pable-hit/
I think it was an obvious error, but because of the way Betfair have acted in the past, it seems people are not willing to let it die easily.
-
pdupre1961
- Posts: 410
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:01 pm
Sorry, but I've been arbing for a while now, and cannot see how one market affects another, directly.Euler wrote:Do you mean what are they, or how are they linked?
If, I backed the winner at 29.00; how could I lay off in the place market to ensure a profit whatever the result. If anything, I would be using my BetDaq account to lay for a profit. I don't see how I could do the same in the place market on Betfair.
Unless this action (voiding both markets) is to protect Betfair's XM bot. So, maybe my question should be how is XM legal. Surely, they are skimming the markets for a profit. And, to void just the Win market would obviously cost them money.
This is disgusting, someone must be able to stop Betfair from cheating the markets this way. A friend of mine warned me a year ago not to bother with Betfair as there were no easy profits any more. Seems he knew about Betfair's XM bots.
-
superfrank
- Posts: 2762
- Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 8:28 pm
i think XM is ok in principle (for punters) but the Gambling Commission should never have allowed it to operated for profit. it's skimming as you say and anything similar would be illegal on a financial exchanges.
-
MarketTrader
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 12:34 pm
I'm surprised to see how venomous the reaction has been to the Ch4 coverage of this.
Personally, I was pleased to see the issue raised in profile. And the fact they used a shot of this forum is neither here nor there. It's just a shame Bet Angel's profile was not raised at the same time. We live in a free country don't we? Anything posted in the public domain is public. If you do not want your thoughts to be viewed by others then don't post them.
The guys at any news organisation cannot be expected to experts in everything. I am not an expert in the economy nor the political situation in Syria but I am now informed enough to make my own decisions about them thanks to the news.
But these guys are experts at delivering the points that the majority will understand whilst ensuring Betfair get a public pummelling. OK, they may paint a broader picture than we would like but they need to ensure the man on the street is not lost.
Betfair need to be held to account. They have grown into an unfriendly global corporation who's main aim is to generate returns for investors. The actual user of their services and websites are no longer the primary focus. And this needs to change. With the premium charge they started down a path to alienate the trader. Not to mention thousands of pounds worth of account funds mysteriously disappearing. With this debacle, they have also alienated the regular punter.
It's time they sorted their house out and opened up a dialogue with their customers. A good place to start would be with the traders on this forum. I expect people here are probably responsible for a fair percentage of the liquidity seen in the sports markets.
I would call on Betfair to urgently look at what they are doing before they self-destruct. I for one need Betfair to survive and be stronger. But they need to look after their customers. Their profits will surely follow.
Personally, I was pleased to see the issue raised in profile. And the fact they used a shot of this forum is neither here nor there. It's just a shame Bet Angel's profile was not raised at the same time. We live in a free country don't we? Anything posted in the public domain is public. If you do not want your thoughts to be viewed by others then don't post them.
The guys at any news organisation cannot be expected to experts in everything. I am not an expert in the economy nor the political situation in Syria but I am now informed enough to make my own decisions about them thanks to the news.
But these guys are experts at delivering the points that the majority will understand whilst ensuring Betfair get a public pummelling. OK, they may paint a broader picture than we would like but they need to ensure the man on the street is not lost.
Betfair need to be held to account. They have grown into an unfriendly global corporation who's main aim is to generate returns for investors. The actual user of their services and websites are no longer the primary focus. And this needs to change. With the premium charge they started down a path to alienate the trader. Not to mention thousands of pounds worth of account funds mysteriously disappearing. With this debacle, they have also alienated the regular punter.
It's time they sorted their house out and opened up a dialogue with their customers. A good place to start would be with the traders on this forum. I expect people here are probably responsible for a fair percentage of the liquidity seen in the sports markets.
I would call on Betfair to urgently look at what they are doing before they self-destruct. I for one need Betfair to survive and be stronger. But they need to look after their customers. Their profits will surely follow.
You can create a synthetic place price from the win odds so I imagine quite a few people play on both at the same time, so I had expected both to be voided.pdupre1961 wrote:Sorry, but I've been arbing for a while now, and cannot see how one market affects another, directly.
-
pdupre1961
- Posts: 410
- Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 8:01 pm
OK Peter, in this case was the place market affected???Euler wrote:You can create a synthetic place price from the win odds so I imagine quite a few people play on both at the same time, so I had expected both to be voided.
I agree with this guy that the argument that this bet was a palp and therefore should have been voided doesn't hold water.
Betfair's case would have been stronger if they'd just said that bets were made with phantom money, and therefore had to be voided.
I don't see why the place market bets and bets in the win market which weren't matched against the phantom money needed to be voided. If some people in the place market were mislead by the win price into thinking that Voler had little chance of winning, surely it's a case of 'buyer beware'! It makes you wonder whether Betfair themselves had taken a chunk of the phantom money, and hedged their risk by placing lays in other horses in the win and place markets.
Jeff
Betfair's case would have been stronger if they'd just said that bets were made with phantom money, and therefore had to be voided.
I don't see why the place market bets and bets in the win market which weren't matched against the phantom money needed to be voided. If some people in the place market were mislead by the win price into thinking that Voler had little chance of winning, surely it's a case of 'buyer beware'! It makes you wonder whether Betfair themselves had taken a chunk of the phantom money, and hedged their risk by placing lays in other horses in the win and place markets.
Jeff
Euler wrote:Looks like this issue isn't going to die.
http://boyciesblog.wordpress.com/2011/1 ... pable-hit/