gaaboard.com

I am aware that I am slightly vested in that I work for a rival company - I've done my best to present the facts here as bare as possible, if anyone feels that I'm adding editorial or slanting the facts then please say so!

I'd be curious to get the board's opinion as to a recent bet I struck with Paddy Powers. Lest there be any confusion, I do currently work with Ladbrokes, so if people want to bear that in mind before voting, then do so by all means.

Tuesday of last week I noticed a price on Paddy Powers Website - Wexford plus two points against Louth at 8/11. I was looking to get with Wexford as I rate them as a middling team, which is more than I rate Louth - personal opinion and all that before any Louth posters jump down my throat!! I was very surprised to see a two point handicap on the game, particularly as Powers were even money Louth to win the match, but while I considered it unusual I went to strike the bet. I went into one of their Galway shops and asked behind the counter for a large bet. The girl behind the counter rang up head office to confirm the price, to confirm that it was okay to take the bet, all confirmed and duly took it. I stayed in the shop chatting with her for a few minutes seeing as a knew her and my sister had worked in the shop for a while. (The relevance of this will come up).

Went home to see that they had changed the handicap from two points to one, a relatively reasonable response to such a large bet I thought.

Went in to collect on Tuesday, to be told that the bet was to be paid out at 8/15 instead of 8/11, since it was a pricing error. How they would have been willing to void the bet, but I hadn't been in the shop since. They maintain that since Louth were even money, it was a palpable error and that the handicap was clearly intended to be one point at 8/11. I maintain that the handicap is a different market, and must be treated differently. For example this weekend I have Dublin at 1/5 and Galway at 1/8, but I have Dublin 6 point favourites and Galway five - to reflect the likelihood of the lower scoring in Carrick. I also believe that their not contacting me was their mistake - the girl who accepted the bet clearly knew who I was as we chatted for a while about how my sister was getting on and I worked with her myself when I was being trained in. The shop manager, assistant manager and several head office people all have my phone number and email address. I'm not saying that she passed on the information as to who struck the bet, but it was there if anyone took the time out to ask.

I would have voided the bet and backed Wexford at better prices elsewhere if I had known. (Even money plus one point was available)

I appreciate that a two point handicap for a game that close would have been unusual - but by ringing the head office I would have thought that was cleared up.

My question to you the punters is:

Was I taking advantage and 8/15 was the correct price?

or

Are they out of order and should it have been paid at 8/11?

i would assume they would have to pay at 8/11 .What would you do if it happened at ladbrokes Lone Shark

With me the crucial issue would be if a call was put in. If the shop staff took it without calling and it was an erroneous price, then I'd have to think about it (i.e. weigh up the facts to try and determine if the customer knew it was a mistake or not). If somebody in head office answered the call, quoted the price and took the bet, I'd insist it was honoured - however that is just me. I'm not suggesting other bookies have to do things the same way I do, I'm merely curious as to what people think was the fair solution.

I'd say you were shafted there Lone Shark, the call to head-office is the clincher.

as you said lone Shark the girl called Head office and they gave the ok, i'd insist that they would  honour the bet.what options are available to you?

I can't see how it would be right for them to chenge the price to 8/15 after the bet was struck in full knowledge of head office. By all means PP should haul whoever fucked up in head office over the coals but that's their business and a bet is a bet.

should have been 8/11

c***ts. you as a guy who works in a bookies should know this. if the Clerk accepts the bet with the odds written on the docket than thats the odds they pay out, unless its voided or rule 4 or whatever.

On a different view if they advertised one price then changed it would that not be false advertising? Which I'm sure they can also be done for?

Deel Rover - There is an arbitration service called IBAS - to be honest I don't really want to do that because I still know a lot of people in there, and would have called them friends, though I'd begin to wonder after this. Either way I'm not really up for that for the sake of a few hundred quid. Bad Karma and all that.


Slim - if the clerk had accepted it without making the call that would be one thing - there are a huge range of bets out there and it would be very easy for them to make a mistake on something they're not sure of. That's why if she didn't make the call herself, I would have asked her to.


Supersars - mistakes can happen anywhere along the line. It's the equivalent of some Tesco lad pricing up bottle of whiskey at 25c instead of €25  - it probably is false advertising, but who'd want to chase them down over it?

LS, being in the business, do you know if betting comes under contract law (and if it doesn't, why not)? How do bookies manage so frequently to welch (sorry – say "we made a mistake, we didn't mean it when we put up that price and accepted your money for it")?

In this case, I'd contend you had a contract that would stand up in court. An offer was made (PP offered you 8/11), the offer was accepted and a consideration was paid (you handed them your €5K!). There was even a receipt issued, though this is not a necessary condition of a valid contract and furthermore the validity of the offer was double-checked before it was confirmed. So I can't see how they can back out of that.

In the Tesco's senario Tesco would have to accept the lower price. Which does happen quite a bit in Supermarkets. But normally when the customer argues then they just call the manager and have to honour the lower price while correcting the mistake to make sure no one else gets the discounted price. I suppose like you say it's a matter or not if you could be bothered arguing with them.

Supersarsfields - I heard some consumer law expert recently saying that's a myth about them having to sell the item at the marked price. Apparently they're entitled to refuse the sale. I.e they can't force you to pay the higher (proper) price, but you can't force them to sell it to you at the lower price. They can just say "no sale".

I always thought betting is a gentleman's agreement rather than a contract and therefore is not enforcable in law. In this case they clearly should have paid out at 8/11. I use PP on-line quite a bit and never had any bother but you hard to hear of this sh1te going on.

Quote from: Lone Shark on June 21, 2007, 02:28:03 PM

Deel Rover - There is an arbitration service called IBAS - to be honest I don't really want to do that because I still know a lot of people in there, and would have called them friends, though I'd begin to wonder after this. Either way I'm not really up for that for the sake of a few hundred quid. Bad Karma and all that.


Slim - if the clerk had accepted it without making the call that would be one thing - there are a huge range of bets out there and it would be very easy for them to make a mistake on something they're not sure of. That's why if she didn't make the call herself, I would have asked her to.


Supersars - mistakes can happen anywhere along the line. It's the equivalent of some Tesco lad pricing up bottle of whiskey at 25c instead of €25  - it probably is false advertising, but who'd want to chase them down over it?

f**k 'em, if thats the case they shouldnt be working there. if they accept the bet and the odds on the slip then thats what they MUST pay you. it isnt the punters fault they let silly dizzy bints work in bkies shaps!

Quote from: Hardy on June 21, 2007, 02:36:04 PM
LS, being in the business, do you know if betting comes under contract law (and if it doesn't, why not)? How do bookies manage so frequently to welch (sorry – say "we made a mistake, we didn't mean it when we put up that price and accepted your money for it")?

In this case, I'd contend you had a contract that would stand up in court. An offer was made (PP offered you 8/11), the offer was accepted and a consideration was paid (you handed them your €5K!). There was even a receipt issued, though this is not a necessary condition of a valid contract and furthermore the validity of the offer was double-checked before it was confirmed. So I can't see how they can back out of that.

It doesn't come under contract law because that would make gambling debts legally enforceable from both sides. The "from both sides" bit is the crucial issue - in that environment I could walk into a bookie shop, lose the €100 I have in my pocket and then lose €5000 that I don't have trying to chase it. In theory bookies could take bets you can't afford and repossess your house, in the same way as a bank could for unpaid debts. So as a result, as a punter protection to stop addictive gamblers losing it all in one go, all bets fall under the category of "gentlemans agreements" in the eyes of the law.

The upshot of this is that no bookie ever legally has to pay you out on any bet, no matter how clear cut. If I walked into a bookie tomorrow and bet on Kerry to win the All Ireland football, as genuine a bet as you'll get, there is no law of the land that will force them to pay if Kerry win and they decide they don't want to. You could object to their license, and in that environment you'd probably succeed, but you still wouldn't get their money.

Obviously they want to be seen to play fair in order to make sure that punters keep coming back. I'm guessing keeping me coming back is not high on PP's agenda.


Slim, in an ideal world I'd agree with you, and like I said if I was the man making the decision, as I sometimes am if it's a GAA bet, I'll try to read the customer's intentions - if he was placing a bet in good faith I'll pay it out. If the indications are he was trying to pull the wool over the clerk's eyes, I'll treat his bet according to our rules, whatever that results in. Having said that, Ladbrokes (for example) have almost 1000 Shop staff in Ireland - Powers probably nearly as many. Of course you'd love to fill those with people who understand horse racing, sports, big brother, politics, soccer and everything else we bet on, but it's simply not practical. You could pay way more for all maths graduates and write in extra margin into our bets to cover the costs, but I suspect that wouldn't wash, nor should it. 

Makes sense - I should have thought of that. I had heard of the 'gentleman's agreement' basis before, now that it's mentioned.

Hardy you could be right. I know from working in Dunnes when ever it happened they always settled on the lower price. Now this might have been as much just to stop any hassle and save future business than due to Laws. But I think there's a difference between a marked price and an advertised price. If it was advertised up on a board or such as a way to entice people in then I think it has to be honoured.

Bookies are a law on to themselves......did a football accum and it clicked......thought I was collecting 700 quid for 5 accum only to be told that 3 of the prices were changes after kick off.....still paid 640 but haven't been back to that bookies since.

A lad was telling me a story that happened to him a while ago. He went in to collect on a placepot. The payout should have been €750-ish, according to the results in the paper. They gave him a cheque for €550-odd, so he queried it. No, she says – 550 is right. So he said fine – must have been my mistake. When he went home, he checked the paper again – 750 was right. So he rang up PP head office and they agreed – the placepot at that meeting was paying 750 – go back into the shop and tell them to ring head office for confirmation.

So he goes into the shop and she says grand – give me back that cheque and I'll write you a new one. After a while, she comes out from the office – sorry, that's actually a losing bet. The horse in the fifth race was fourth and that race only pays on three places!

Never, ever give money back to a bookie!

(Sorry LS, but in this gentleman's agreement, we do expect the bookies to be gentlemen but it's hard for a punter to live up to that standard).

an advertised price is not enforceable as its not an 'offer' but an invitation to treat. dont ask me to go into it as its about all i can remember from law in college

Quoteall bets fall under the category of "gentlemans agreements" in the eyes of the law

I've never heard a better rationale for never, ever betting again.  Thanks LS.   :P

The minor corrective action taken by the odds compiler after the bet was struck means it could hardly be considered a palpable error.

Also, 8/15 is not really the sort of price you give for a handicap.
I presume however, in order to run with the "palpable error" cover story, the bookie has to claim that they got the odds wrong rather than the handicap margin?

Getting the handicap margin wrong smacks of someone incorrectly estimating the prowess of the teams, claiming the odds were wrong can more easily be put down to a clerical error.

In view of the fact the checked the price at HO, the know who you are, they know who you work for, they know they fucked up and you took advantage of it, and they are saying f**k You!

Quote from: Mac Eoghain on June 21, 2007, 03:39:56 PM

In Lone Sharks case I would start a small claim procedure (is there a ROI equivalent?) and see what PP do then. With legal costs the way they are they should payout very quickly.

How can you start a small claims procedure when it is legally considered a gentleman's agreement? The Sporting Life used to run an arbitration service that most bookies agreed to be bound by. Is that still operating?

??????????

 :o

I think you'll find I'm right.

loneshark i believe you were shafted,do you think pp aren't offering you 8/11 because the local bookie knows you and who you work for?noticed in my local bookies in armagh on saturday after i had done my bet at the bottom of the coupon in small print,prices subject to flucuation,never have seen this on any soccer coupon earlier in the year,are bookies deciding when teams line out and depending on how much money they taken on a certain team what odds they pay now on the gaa matchs?

Is this the same Paddy Power that loves to trumpet being caught out over things like, say, who shot Mr Burns (http://www.bbc.co.uk/gloucestershire/content/articles/2006/11/01/colin_november_2006_feature.shtml)? Lone Shark's mistake was not putting the bet on something like the possibility of Frankie Dettori tearing the arse of his jodhpurs when performing his dismount.

Quote from: oneflewoverthecuckoonest on June 21, 2007, 04:34:51 PM
Lone Shark you price up for Ladbrokes, thank you for your blunders last week in the Ring Cup. One complaint, a friend in Carlow wanted a 1000 double on Carlow and Kerry last Saturday morning and after the lady teller spent what seemed an age on the phone he was offered a 100 double at the prices, which he declined in disgust, you can check this out. You were miles out on your price on the Kerry game and my pal felt Carlow deserved favouritism due to home advantage. You make few mistakes, these were exceptions. When punters find the exceptions we cannot get a decent bet on. So tell us all please how much are you willing to accommodate in a single bet in a single office via Ladbrokes. You have joke prices up at this moment for this weeks Ring games, when you put the correct prices up and say you chalk Meath up at 4/9 to beat Mayo, if that is the price range are you willing to lay 9000 to 4000 or is Ladbrokes policy not to take proper bets. Let me know what you are willing to lay on a 4/9 shot on these smaller competitions.
One last point your odds at Ladbrokes on no goalscorer markets are a disgrace at the moment. Last weekend you priced Donegal Tyrone no goal at 9/4 when it was freely available at 7/2 and 4/1 with every other bookie. This weekend you go 100/30 no goal in the Derry Monaghan game, i can get 9/2 with Powers and 5/1 with others, likewise 4/1 no goal with you Galway and Leitrim when 6/1 and 5/1 with others. The true statistical odds on no goal in a football championship game taken over the last three years is 6/1, ie 1 in 7 games no goals. A few years ago Ladbrokes offered value in this market now they do not want to field any bets, are you a coward on this particular market?.

Some posers for you to answer Lone Shark, condolences on being wrongly short changed by Paddy Power.    

Right, let's take this on head on.

I deliberated long and hard last week on whether to do the Christy Ring cup or not. The formlines with these teams are very dodgy, and I knew well in pricing that there would be people out there - like yourself - who know way more about the teams involved than I did. I'm confident on the stuff I do, but I did not think for a minute that I would make money pricing up those games. However some bookies like to market themselves as the punters friend with lots of smiling faces and money back offers as long as you bet on markets with 150% over-round, I honestly think that the punters out there appreciate being able to bet on stuff that matters to them and that if I consistently try to price this stuff I will win people over. I priced up the matches, and due to not knowing about the Brick coming back on board for Kerry, I was way out - you are correct. However this is partially the cost of me being the only one willing to price these things up.

However - I am aware that I have 200 shops all across Ireland, so for markets like that, my instructions are to take nothing bigger than a punters average stake - or alternatively a small bet if the punter is unknown once you go into a shop, because if I was to lay €1000 on a bet like that, the guy could then go down the road and have the same bet in another shop. I'd love to believe that the info would make it's way back to me, but it doesn't - it should, but it doesn't, and I have to live with that.

So the answer is simple - get on the phone. That way the bet will be asked to me for clearance, and I'll give a reasonable wager - at least a monkey in that case - and then cut the price accordingly. There is no market on these games, and while I would love to call myself informed on lower level hurling in Ireland, I'll be honest and say that I have not attended a Ring or Rackard Cup game in my life and will probably never get time to. So this has to be the way.

My no goalscorer markets are a disgrace in that you want to bet on it and I'm a short price. Well then go to the bookie who's a bigger price! I've done my sums, you contend that I'm wrong, so keep backing the price I'm bigger on and we'll see who wins in the long run. This week I'm 4/7 Galway, 4/1 No goal and 11/4 Leitrim - an over-round of 110%, which I think is eminently reasonable. If my price on no goal is too short by a big margin, my price on one or both of the teams will be too long - surely that's where you punt then?

As a discerning punter, I've no doubt the last thing you want to do is shut out a bookie who has an opinion and prices accordingly. If I was copying Powers price for each team but then cutting the no goal price and not giving it back elsewhere I could see your grievance, but I suspect here the issue is that you were getting value on this bet previously and now you aren't. (And you're right with you're one in seven, the difference is that if you filter out all the turkey shoots or games involving no-defence teams like Down, Offaly or Roscommon it changes dramatically)

As for the Ring Cup games, my willingness to lay will improve greatly as the competition goes on and I have some real non-league form to go by. With all the transfers this year it was particularly tricky, but I will get better. The 1/100 that's up at the moment is a glitch - I sent them over blank with the prices to be filled in this evening and the eejits went and did that - I'm getting on it. If I choose to go 4/9 on Meath this week, you'll get about 400 or so on in a shop and around two grand on over the phone - if I go that price. It'll be lay to lose a bar or so on the phone. More as the competition progresses, as I said.

I hope this covers everything - all comments always welcome.

Just where is Bombidal when you need him?  Come on lad stand up for your firm, it's not like you not to get a free bit of advertising (or is that only when PP are seen as the punter's white knight?).......

On the matter in question I do actually think that they meant to go 8/11 +1 if they were 1/1 in 70 mins.  However, the fact that HO okayed the bet is the clincher - they should stand by it in that case.

It's very simple, they know that you can beat them and they aren't interested in your trade.

And as for the lads who keep mentioning about bets and the law, cut it out.  Bets don't exist in law, they are only honoured due to gentleman's agreements.

I voted 8/15 just to be awkward.

Quote from: Smokin Joe on June 21, 2007, 09:19:27 PM
Just where is Bombidal when you need him?  Come on lad stand up for your firm, it's not like you not to get a free bit of advertising (or is that only when PP are seen as the punter's white knight?).......

On the matter in question I do actually think that they meant to go 8/11 +1 if they were 1/1 in 70 mins.  However, the fact that HO okayed the bet is the clincher - they should stand by it in that case.

It's very simple, they know that you can beat them and they aren't interested in your trade.

And as for the lads who keep mentioning about bets and the law, cut it out.  Bets don't exist in law, they are only honoured due to gentleman's agreements.

Summed up perfectly Joe, they don't want the Loneshark's trade, and going on his recent results, any wonder!!
If it was me, I presume they'd pay out at 8/11 after it was okayed at head office, but they know who it is and aren't prepared to honour the bet - they have of course the auld 'palpable error rule' which backs them up - in this case it was the lad in head office who made the palpable error.  Even if you went to IBAS there's no guarantee that you'd win and as you say, it's probably not worth it.
It's not fair, but that's life, I'm sure we've all had problems with pp 'the punters friend' - right!!  For most people they'd take the hit just for PR purposes, but in this instance, they probably didn't expect it to end up being discussed on a gaaboard - good pr for one firm, bad for them.

Quote from: ONeill on June 21, 2007, 09:34:46 PM
I voted 8/15 just to be awkward.

There's four votes for 8/15 - why did you not use all your aliases?

QuoteSupersarsfields - I heard some consumer law expert recently saying that's a myth about them having to sell the item at the marked price. Apparently they're entitled to refuse the sale. I.e they can't force you to pay the higher (proper) price, but you can't force them to sell it to you at the lower price. They can just say "no sale".

supersarsfields

QuoteBut I think there's a difference between a marked price and an advertised price. If it was advertised up on a board or such as a way to entice people in then I think it has to be honoured.

Hardy is right.  A marked price is an invitation for you to make an offer and the other party can refuse if they want. 

Quote from: Bogball XV on June 21, 2007, 09:37:59 PM
 For most people they'd take the hit just for PR purposes, but in this instance, they probably didn't expect it to end up being discussed on a gaaboard - good pr for one firm, bad for them.

For the record, I did actually ask if they had any objections to me doing this. I half anticipated a response actually (now that Smokin Joe has "outed" Bombidal, I can confess that I knew his secret identity!!". Like I said, everyone has only themselves to answer to when they go to sleep at night, so I wasn't really doing this to be confrontational - I genuinely just wanted to see if my own values of right/wrong when it comes to betting have become out of kilter with the common view over time.

Well surely a supermarket cant advertise on the web or TV or somewere that their selling something for half price just to get people through the doors, then have the product on offer at a different price. I'm nearly sure there's some law against this. I can understand how a bookies might be different because of the gentleman's agreement thing tho.

Maybe false advertising supersarsfields but they are under no obligation to sell something to you at a marked price.

Contracts are formed when there is an offer, consideration (i.e. money passing) and an acceptance. 

When you go into a shop it would be very easy for you to think that something on a shelf with a marked price is the shop owner making you an offer that you accept when you bring it to the till.  In that case a refusal to sell it to you at that price would be a breach of contract.
That's wrong however.

You go into a shop, there's something on the shelf with a price, that's an invitation to for you to make an offer.  You take it to the counter and offer the money, you are making the offer to enter into a contract.  The shop owner can refuse at any time for any reason.  It's only when they take your money a contract is made.   

Simple answer...If you had 8/11 on your docket then you are entitled to get those odds.  If you didnt have anything on your docket truth is you could be paid out anything and you couldnt object.

Did you have anything wrote on the docket???

Yeah I know, my first point on this was regarding the false advertising side of it. That was the bit that stuck out for me. Which is the point I was making about how a mistake in putting the correct price on a product was different than actually offering a promotion and changing the deal. Which to me is what this would seem to be the case for LS. However again mine is more based on the retail side of things rather than regarding bets.

my mistake then, I misread your post.

I personally think they have tried to shaft you on this one. And I think they should take the hit, its their mistake and its not your fault some trader has slipped up and may have to take a knock on his bonus!

 ??? ???
Having read all the posts, I would say Lone Shark is fully entitled to be paid as the check with head office gave them ample opportunity to discover any error that may have been made.
That said, I would have one little query which would satisfy me as to the validity or otherwise of their spineless argument that they would have offered the chance to cancel the bet had he been back in the shop. Did the girl who accepted the bet tell Lone Shark that they had specifically indicated to her in advance of the bet being successful that this was the case?

Surely if you are correct here LS you should go to IBAS, give the money to charity if dont dont want the bad karma. Both sides would be happy with the outcome and you would have made your point

It's not as simple as that Jack.  IBAS are funded by the bookies, so it's fair to say that you have the bookies tend to get the marginal calls in their favour.
Plus as it happens I think that IBAS would find in favour of Powers as I believe it was a mistake, the fact that the mistake was okayed by HO wouldn't be mitigating circumstances, they would still rule it as a palpable error (IMO).

Quote from: Smokin Joe on June 22, 2007, 10:01:16 AM
It's not as simple as that Jack.  IBAS are funded by the bookies, so it's fair to say that you have the bookies tend to get the marginal calls in their favour.
Plus as it happens I think that IBAS would find in favour of Powers as I believe it was a mistake, the fact that the mistake was okayed by HO wouldn't be mitigating circumstances, they would still rule it as a palpable error (IMO).

so he is not right ?, if it is marginal he should go for it, what will it cost, a postage stamp

Lone Shark,

As someone who is involved in running a one shop independant I can empathise with you here. Once the bet was checked with the trader it should have been honoured. Can I ask, would you have went so heavy if you hadnt thought the odds where slightly wrong? Regardless, its bad form on PP's behalf to not honour the bet. For all their bluster and PR some of their markets are a disgrace, and on ocassions some of your firms arent that hot either although i can appreciate that the lower level gaa is very hard to make a level book on.

As someone who is unfamiliar with betting and odds could someone tell me exactly how much loneshark was shafted on say if it was a £1000 bet?

1,000 at 8/11 would return 1,727.27 (1000 x 8 / 11 plus your 1,000 back). 8/15 would return 1,533.33.

As Lone Shark himself said, betting shops play by totally different rules to all other shops. Just because it says 8/11 on the docket, means feck all. I think if it was a general joe soap punter, they would likely have paid out (and IMO certainly should pay out). But I guess the view they have taken is that another bookie saw that they made a mistake with a price, and that he tried to take advantage of that and lumped on accordingly.  It was clearly an error in the price.

I don't blame LS for chancing his arm, but given the circumstances its hard to blame PP for changing the price.

IBAS would be a close call - as Joe said, they can sometimes take the palpable error thing a bit much, (as in I do think that when the customer tries to make sure that the bet is checked as much as possible before it's struck, then it should cease to apply) but it's not necessarily that I'm saying that I'm not going that direction because I think I mightn't win - it's because it becomes a relatively big issue for the bookie then, and seeing as the guys making the decision are fellas that I'd have worked with, I'm just uneasy at the idea of contesting it. I don't want them to be forced to pay out. Of course I'd take it if they felt it was right, but my reasoning for doing this was to see whether my case is legitimate in the eyes of those who haven't spent their whole life working in the industry. So far it appears that the general position supports that view, which is all I could have hoped for.


My take on palpable error is that it should be obvious to the customer with a modicum of understanding that the price couldn't be right. I've heard of bookies trying to claim palpable error about 4/1 shots when they offered 6/1 and I've no idea how they think they could get away with stuff like that - ditto this case here. I saw the price, having worked as a GAA compiler for years and I honestly thought it was genuine - I really don't see how that's "palpable".

Quote from: Jack Dempsey on June 22, 2007, 10:07:21 AM

Quote from: Smokin Joe on June 22, 2007, 10:01:16 AM
It's not as simple as that Jack.  IBAS are funded by the bookies, so it's fair to say that you have the bookies tend to get the marginal calls in their favour.
Plus as it happens I think that IBAS would find in favour of Powers as I believe it was a mistake, the fact that the mistake was okayed by HO wouldn't be mitigating circumstances, they would still rule it as a palpable error (IMO).

so he is not right ?, if it is marginal he should go for it, what will it cost, a postage stamp

Jack, he is right, I just don't think tht IBAS would see it that way.

Quote from: Lone Shark on June 22, 2007, 11:15:38 AM
but my reasoning for doing this was to see whether my case is legitimate in the eyes of those who haven't spent their whole life working in the industry. So far it appears that the general position supports that view, which is all I could have hoped for.

In one way though the question is unfair, as anyone who would only have a passing interest in betting (or even less), ie the target audience of your question, will automatically feel that if the price is written on the docket it should be honoured.  You only have to see the responses above re Tescos, shops, contract law and the gambling bill.
We know that this is not always the case.

BTW, just to make it clear that I think you should have been paid in the circumstances, but would have to say that I don't think that non serious gamblers would appreciate the finer points of the story (IMO).

Quote from: Smokin Joe on June 22, 2007, 11:23:44 AM

Quote from: Lone Shark on June 22, 2007, 11:15:38 AM
but my reasoning for doing this was to see whether my case is legitimate in the eyes of those who haven't spent their whole life working in the industry. So far it appears that the general position supports that view, which is all I could have hoped for.

In one way though the question is unfair, as anyone who would only have a passing interest in betting (or even less), ie the target audience of your question, will automatically feel that if the price is written on the docket it should be honoured.  You only have to see the responses above re Tescos, shops, contract law and the gambling bill.
We know that this is not always the case.

BTW, just to make it clear that I think you should have been paid in the circumstances, but would have to say that I don't think that non serious gamblers would appreciate the finer points of the story (IMO).

Fair point actually. Ara, tis good to talk all the same.  :)

 A few years ago I noted divergent opinions between price compilers in certain senior championship matches, unfortunately this appears to be no longer the case and the option of choice for the punter has died as you odds compilers are at a pain not to be out of line with each other.

           

Quote from: oneflewoverthecuckoonest on June 22, 2007, 12:10:23 PM
Loneshark a few retorts to your reply. Firstly credit is due to you for pricing the lower level games when your competitors are failing to do so. On the flip side, for a big firm to offer their prices in the shops to a maximum of 400 is a joke, for a small independent it would be acceptable, not for a multinational business like Ladbrokes.
             

You do not get to be a large multinational by being flippant about money, even small sums of money. If a guy bets in the shops I have no concrete measurement to say that this guy may have taken us for a few quid on the Christy Ring Cup, but we got it back elsewhere, like I do online. If I haemorrhage £5k a week on these bets, as I would do if I laid away with impunity, I would be fired. The new guy would learn from my mistake and then not offer them at all. I know these events matter to Irish people - if I tried to explain to my english boss that I was offering bets on events that had maybe 200/300 people in attendance, he'd scrutinise the decision and the results - and without any clear MEASURABLE business reason for offering them, I would be instructed to pull them. Hopefully the day will come when I'm not doing all Irish stuff by myself and I can spend a full day studying the form for these matches - that day is not today I'm afraid.

Quote from: oneflewoverthecuckoonest on June 22, 2007, 12:10:23 PM

I read a thread  a few months ago where you listed nearly a 100 novelty type GAA chmapionship linked bets. The majority of these bets would not be attractive to your average punter even if you added an extra zero to your quoted price because maybe one or two of the 100 odd are likely to bear fruit. Why waste your time insulting the punter's intelligence. Before you jump to the defence, name more than 2 of those bets that you personally would bet on. As I noted your odds on no goalscorer is a joke and examining your markets on that subject your bravery extends to being the biggest price on the least likely option. In all honesty you would b better off not pricing in this market.
   

Not at all. These bets were not designed for people who want to make a killing - they were designed to give people something to talk about, to gain a few column inches to remind people that while we are English owned, we are an Irish identity offering Irish product, and to localise ourselves a bit. You may not have isolated value, but tell that to the people that have piled into David Brady to start for Mayo @ 2/1 before he got recalled into the squad, or Cormac Bane to win an All Star at 50/1 - there's two for you right there. I will lose money on this stuff, and just because you didn't get any of it is no reason to berate me for doing so.

As for my "bravery" - my job is not to be brave - it is to assess the probability of each outcome and to price it accordingly. Any bookie who prices up with the intention of "drawng money" on any one selection is not pricing correctly - if you price properly you should believe that every price you post up is a correct reflection and any one of them could draw the money.  I took an independent look at this market and devised an algorithm for pricing several goal markets all based on my own expectancy - in other words my prices go up without a second look to Powers or Boyles - and you reckon it's not worth doing? Hardly the attitude of a punter who wants choice in the marketplace. Again, you're giving me no reason to believe that this is anything other than bitterness that last year you made money punting incorrect prices with Ladbrokes and now that door is closed to you.

Quote from: oneflewoverthecuckoonest on June 22, 2007, 12:10:23 PM

By pricing for Ladbrokes you at least give the punter another choice, because Paddy Power, Boyles Celtic and Bruces to name but 4 all appear to sing from the same hymn sheet and fear going out on a limb. Last year you were first up with prices for the Minor championships and that is where you gain kudos with the punter in that you give a price choice before your rivals. A few years ago I noted divergent opinions between price compilers in certain senior championship matches, unfortunately this appears to be no longer the case and the option of choice for the punter has died as you odds compilers are at a pain not to be out of line with each other.

In conclusion LS as I indicated earlier you should be paid by Paddy Power. However this episode may serve the mere punter because should a similar case arise where a punters gets a bet OK'ed with Ladbrokes HQ can we assume that you will see to it that this sort of bet is indeed honoured rather than resorting to the Paddy Power tactics.             

I'm all too aware that there are very few actual opinions out there - however you must remember too that these opinions have been cannibalised by arbsters. This week I am Dublin minus six when most bookies are a five. I actually think the handicap should be seven, but if I do that I'll just be flooded by people backing both sides with different bookies and looking to hit the middle and get two payouts. It's understandable, but it's not good business to lay. And ultimately my brief has to be to make a percentage for Ladbrokes.

And do you have my word that a bet ok'd with HQ will be honoured? If the bet is a bet on domestic Irish sports (not racing mind) and thus falls under my remit then yes, absolutely. I would encourage anyone who feels they have been harshly treated to come back to me. I won't commit on stuff that's not my product because ultimately I can't promise something that's not my decision to make, but i would certainly go in to bat for you if anyone brings such an issue to my attention.

The fact that they accepted the bet and put the call in says it all, definitely should have paid out the original price.

On National day this year in the bookies I work they had made a mistake on the National coupon, where it should have said:

An Irish trained 1,2, and 3 - 8/1

it said

An Irish trained 1,2 or 3 - 8/1

I pointed this mistake out to my boss but he was busy and said to ask the girl who made the coupon, shes a bit stupid so said that it was right, I then stuck a hundred quid on it as it was a cert. At about twelve o clock he twigged on and took all the coupons in but all bets struck earleir had to stand.

Silver Birch won for the Irish and I had 900quid to lift later!!

Lone Shark I am most certainly backing you on this one with you same thing happened to me with Boyles Sports, I put €30 on Mayo to beat Fermanagh @ 9/4 (If I recall I may be wrong) which I got in Boyle Sports in Clones, yet when I went to collect that money in Boyle Sports in Dublin they told me the bet was actually 4/9, my problem lay in the fact that the person in the Clones Office wrote the price in biro after they put it through the machine, despite the fact that that price was on the screen in the Clones office & I asked them to write the price down because I thought that was crazy odds seen that Fermanagh had lost all there games & the fact that despite this being a home game for them it was in Clones therefore not really @ home. When I argued in the shop in Dublin that they fax the slip to Clones to check if the handwriting was belonging to any of the Clones staff, I was convienently told that the fax machine was out of order. The girl then suggested I go into the office in Clones and argue my case, this was in Dublin & I was wearing a MAYO Jersey. I asked her was she serious? She could not understand the inconvieniance of someone from Mayo simply casualy calling up to Clones for the difference of €40 or so between the two odds. It would cost me far more on public transport & food & time wasted to collect the damn bet. I later collected the clearly worse 4/9 odds win as I was told by others no matter how right or wrong I was I would never win against the bookies.

Will never lay a bet with Boyles Sports again, Never Ever Ever.  >:(

If Louth were evs to win the match and wexford +2 was indeed 8/11, what LS did you think Powers were going to be betting Wexford +1 ?

Quote from: Fishead_Sam on June 22, 2007, 03:48:25 PM
Lone Shark I am most certainly backing you on this one with you same thing happened to me with Boyles Sports, I put €30 on Mayo to beat Fermanagh @ 9/4 (If I recall I may be wrong) which I got in Boyle Sports in Clones, yet when I went to collect that money in Boyle Sports in Dublin they told me the bet was actually 4/9, my problem lay in the fact that the person in the Clones Office wrote the price in biro after they put it through the machine, despite the fact that that price was on the screen in the Clones office & I asked them to write the price down because I thought that was crazy odds seen that Fermanagh had lost all there games & the fact that despite this being a home game for them it was in Clones therefore not really @ home. When I argued in the shop in Dublin that they fax the slip to Clones to check if the handwriting was belonging to any of the Clones staff, I was convienently told that the fax machine was out of order. The girl then suggested I go into the office in Clones and argue my case, this was in Dublin & I was wearing a MAYO Jersey. I asked her was she serious? She could not understand the inconvieniance of someone from Mayo simply casualy calling up to Clones for the difference of €40 or so between the two odds. It would cost me far more on public transport & food & time wasted to collect the damn bet. I later collected the clearly worse 4/9 odds win as I was told by others no matter how right or wrong I was I would never win against the bookies.

Will never lay a bet with Boyles Sports again, Never Ever Ever.  >:(

what did you expect. the shop staff cannot be held accountable for every single price. Most of the time they dont have a clue. This was clearly an obvious error.
anyone remember the lads who backed liverpool to not win the CL and 500/1 but kicked up a fuss when they found out it should have been 1/500... chancers the lots of ye

Quotewhat did you expect. the shop staff cannot be held accountable for every single price

that's their job.

QuoteThis was clearly an obvious error.

Whats an obvious error, 500/1 versus 1/500 would indeed be obvious to an informed punter. Is 9/5 instead of 7/5 an "obvious error"? 

There needs to be some regulation of bookies, they run a slipshod operation and use this "error" thing to wriggle out of the cost of their errors to their customers who place bets in good faith.

I would favour a requirement to pay some compensation. E.G an error costing less than some figure should be simply paid out, say €50 or €100, and for any error over that amount they should be  required to pay the €50 as compensation for the hassle caused to the customer.

They should have paid you at 8/11 Lone Shark, not a massive difference in price to 8/15 and it was reasonable for you to expect they might offer this (even if it was generous)

Sam, sorry to tell you, but that was an obvious error and even though it was handle poorly by the staff of Boyles I don't think you have a leg to stand on

Quote from: Hardy on June 21, 2007, 03:16:45 PM
A lad was telling me a story that happened to him a while ago. He went in to collect on a placepot. The payout should have been €750-ish, according to the results in the paper. They gave him a cheque for €550-odd, so he queried it. No, she says – 550 is right. So he said fine – must have been my mistake. When he went home, he checked the paper again – 750 was right. So he rang up PP head office and they agreed – the placepot at that meeting was paying 750 – go back into the shop and tell them to ring head office for confirmation.

So he goes into the shop and she says grand – give me back that cheque and I'll write you a new one. After a while, she comes out from the office – sorry, that's actually a losing bet. The horse in the fifth race was fourth and that race only pays on three places!

Never, ever give money back to a bookie!

Oh i'd go mad, i'd thrash the place!!

I'd throw all the pens on the floor!!