Mad Bomber??
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
How did you find out a specific clients betting patterns?payuppal wrote:The last time I can remember this sort of tactic, it turned out to be the solicitor from Bromyard
That's what I think as well.Yantraman wrote:Its an Arab, surely?
If you have unlimited money you can eventually make it back if you keep backing with higher and higher amounts and price is not your object. It fits the bill nicely in this case.
Rumor has it that it was an Arab that caused problems for Betfair's high roller service. Betfair decided they couldn't take that sort of risk on in the end. You know, the type BOOKMAKERS take on, the type of risk we are willing to accept for participating on your exchange.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Such as this Sheikh:
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mark ... debts.html
Always thought gambling was against Muslim belief???
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mark ... debts.html
Always thought gambling was against Muslim belief???
Betfair is to return more than £200,000 to the pension fund robbed of almost £1.6 million over a 21-month period by disgraced company director, Andrew Petrie, who was jailed for six-and-half years last week.
The refund is the commission Betfair earned from Petrie’s gambling, primarily as a layer, on the betting exchange where it was said in court his losses exceeded £1million.
In addition to announcing the repayment, Betfair spokesman Mark Davies on Sunday also answered critics who have queried how Petrie, 43, from Kidderminster, could lose such a large amount without sounding alarm-bells within the organisation.
Davies said: “Betfair made the decision, as soon as we became aware of his activities, to return any money made on its own account tothe pension fund from which Andrew Petrie had stolen.
“There is no obligation on us to do so, but because people with money in a pension fund have been defrauded by a criminal, and because we can tell exactly what Andrew Petrie has done with a part ofthat money that he spent on Betfair, we will return all the funds that ended up in our account to their rightful place.”
Earlier press coverage of the case had suggested Petrie was a novice punter who harboured ambitions to become a successful exchange layer, but when he appeared for sentencing at Hereford Crown Court on Friday it emerged his business interests included holding a bookmaking permit and licence for a betting shop, AP Turf Accountants, in Bromyard, Herefordshire.
Betfair were aware ofthis as Petrie had ticked the bookmaker box when registering with the exchange.
Davies said: “The question that has most commonly been asked of us (since the Petrie case became public knowledge last month) is how can he have had this sort of money going through us without us noticing? Well the answer is that we did notice, but it was entirely in line with the business that he always had because he was clearly using us as a hedging mechanism. Some days he was up substantial six-figure sums and some days he was down substantial six-figure sums, but that was because he was running a shop.”
Petrie, who began taking money to fund his gambling after taking sole charge of the pension fund belonging to Derbyshire-based MMD Design and Consultancy, admitted three charges of theft and asked for 11 similar offences to be considered. The total sum was £1,592,338.
The refund is the commission Betfair earned from Petrie’s gambling, primarily as a layer, on the betting exchange where it was said in court his losses exceeded £1million.
In addition to announcing the repayment, Betfair spokesman Mark Davies on Sunday also answered critics who have queried how Petrie, 43, from Kidderminster, could lose such a large amount without sounding alarm-bells within the organisation.
Davies said: “Betfair made the decision, as soon as we became aware of his activities, to return any money made on its own account tothe pension fund from which Andrew Petrie had stolen.
“There is no obligation on us to do so, but because people with money in a pension fund have been defrauded by a criminal, and because we can tell exactly what Andrew Petrie has done with a part ofthat money that he spent on Betfair, we will return all the funds that ended up in our account to their rightful place.”
Earlier press coverage of the case had suggested Petrie was a novice punter who harboured ambitions to become a successful exchange layer, but when he appeared for sentencing at Hereford Crown Court on Friday it emerged his business interests included holding a bookmaking permit and licence for a betting shop, AP Turf Accountants, in Bromyard, Herefordshire.
Betfair were aware ofthis as Petrie had ticked the bookmaker box when registering with the exchange.
Davies said: “The question that has most commonly been asked of us (since the Petrie case became public knowledge last month) is how can he have had this sort of money going through us without us noticing? Well the answer is that we did notice, but it was entirely in line with the business that he always had because he was clearly using us as a hedging mechanism. Some days he was up substantial six-figure sums and some days he was down substantial six-figure sums, but that was because he was running a shop.”
Petrie, who began taking money to fund his gambling after taking sole charge of the pension fund belonging to Derbyshire-based MMD Design and Consultancy, admitted three charges of theft and asked for 11 similar offences to be considered. The total sum was £1,592,338.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
I remember the story but didn't recall it detailing his betting pattern.payuppal wrote: He was charged with fraud and the full story came out.
Not many single bets on favs of £100,000 so it was relatively easy to realise it was him.
I don't believe that what we are seeing today and have seen many times before would have been the person you refer to as the MO is pretty much always the same. Or maybe he has more clients
Edit: The story you posted doesn't indicate how much he was placing bets for? Also he seems to be mainly laying from that story where as the bomber has always pretty much backed so don't think you could link the bomber to the solicitor imo.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Okay my mistake I thought you were saying they were when you said:payuppal wrote:I'm not suggesting the two are linked other than by the tactic of placing very large bets in big lumps.
As this tactic that the bomber is using has been used now for approaching 3 years so I thought you were talking about remembering one of those instances.payuppal wrote:The last time I can remember this sort of tactic, it turned out to be the solicitor from Bromyard
I suspect that it is just somebody with immense pockets. If you go to a Casino you have house limits so that somebody with deep pockets can't force the Casino to take bigger and bigger bets and eventually bust the Casino with a big win. So it looks to me like they are just chucking money at the problem as there is very high liquidity in the market.