Guest MarshallForEngland Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 First thought when I read the thread title:
Nalis Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 What do they mean? When you wanna lay bets But your bookie say no.
ScouseFox Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 I can guarantee yorkie is right. It's a PR stunt. The bookies will never lose on markets like that. oh alright as long as you can guarantee it. you're both wrong btw.
GaelicFox Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 Actually Scouse fox Your wrong 60-90m is bet on the outcome of the premier league title in this country alone A Leicester win will be 7-10m take out (most of that hedging money) The profit on the turnover will be very healthy They never loose on a market like this ! Never
Livid Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 I can guarantee yorkie is right. It's a PR stunt. The bookies will never lose on markets like that. I initially thought that but now I'm not so sure. We were 5000/1 for a reason, they thought we hadn't got a chance in hell. You thought the bets on the usual suspects would cover it but what do I know. Do they cover those bets on Elvis and Lord Lucan riding Shergar and a Unicorn down the mall? Or do they just leave themselves exposed based on the fact it's never going to happen.
ScouseFox Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 Actually Scouse fox Your wrong 60-90m is bet on the outcome of the premier league title in this country alone A Leicester win will be 7-10m take out (most of that hedging money) The profit on the turnover will be very healthy They never loose on a market like this ! Never ok sure, I'm not wrong but it's cool believe what you all want
GaelicFox Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 ok sure, I'm not wrong but it's cool believe what you all want So we are all wrong and your right Hummmmmmm And some like me are professionals in the gambling world And still your convinced your right Love scousers they never back down
Bobcat Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 Bookies don't really mind losses either - a big win like this for Leicester will pretty much guarantee insane amounts of people putting bets on crazy odds, hoping for a big win of their own. Free marketing.
Captain... Posted 13 February 2016 Posted 13 February 2016 Just to give you an idea of how ridiculous those odds were, currently Stoke's longest odds are 2000-1 and Villa's odds on one site to win the league are currently 946 - 1 despite the fact it is virtually impossible for them to do it.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 21 February 2016 Posted 21 February 2016 Bournemouth (15th, four points above the relegation zone, 25 points off top with twelve games left) are currently 5,000/1 to win the league.
foxes_rule1978 Posted 21 February 2016 Posted 21 February 2016 Pure and simple, it was ridiculous odds.. and I wish I had taken it up, even if it sounds improbable the odds on offer were well above the actual probability, meaning it was worth putting money on.
Tim'llFixIt Posted 21 February 2016 Posted 21 February 2016 Dettori won all the races at Ascot in the 90s at 25000/1. I don't know if anybody won though - I just read it in an article about a week ago. A fella from desborough won it,/independent bookies only laid out max 40k though so he didn't win as much as he would have
Guest Col city fan Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 I had always assumed that the few, big pay outs the bookies will make on those lucky punters who backed Leicester, will be small potatoes against the huge sums put on the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd to win the league, make top four etc. If City win the league, I'm assuming the bookies will be laughing all the way to the bank? There would have been consortia backing say Chelsea (even at short odds) to the tunes of millions of pounds that will already be losers. Having to give someone fifty grand cos they had a sneaky punt on Leicester will be nothing by comparison? Or is that wrong? I'm assuming the teams the bookies DON'T want to win the league will be Arsenal and Man City?
foxfanazer Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 I had always assumed that the few, big pay outs the bookies will make on those lucky punters who backed Leicester, will be small potatoes against the huge sums put on the likes of Chelsea and Man Utd to win the league, make top four etc. If City win the league, I'm assuming the bookies will be laughing all the way to the bank? There would have been consortia backing say Chelsea (even at short odds) to the tunes of millions of pounds that will already be losers. Having to give someone fifty grand cos they had a sneaky punt on Leicester will be nothing by comparison? Or is that wrong? I'm assuming the teams the bookies DON'T want to win the league will be Arsenal and Man City? I'd have thought the same Col
themightyfin Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 I am a manager of a bookies and I can tell you Leicester City winning the title will be the best result for the bookies and will give thrm a profit of 100 million plus on the market. The worst result for them would have been Chelsea closely followed by Man City. Either of those winning would have seen a small profit of between 5-10 million for the bookies. Leicester City winning the title means they will only be paying out around 10% of the stakes they have taken in this field. A big result for the bookies. Oh and by the way Leicester will be priced at between 33-1 and 50-1 for the title next season we are getting enquiries already.
glenelgfox Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 Oh and by the way Leicester will be priced at between 33-1 and 50-1 for the title next season we are getting enquiries already. What if we actually win it this season then 33-1 thru to 50-1 are big odds for a defending champion!
Viva Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 Pure and simple, it was ridiculous odds.. and I wish I had taken it up, even if it sounds improbable the odds on offer were well above the actual probability, meaning it was worth putting money on. I don't think they were above the actual probability. About what it should be. If for example Norwich stay up I wouldn't put a penny on them at 5000/1 to win the title next season.
Guest Col city fan Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 I am a manager of a bookies and I can tell you Leicester City winning the title will be the best result for the bookies and will give thrm a profit of 100 million plus on the market. The worst result for them would have been Chelsea closely followed by Man City. Either of those winning would have seen a small profit of between 5-10 million for the bookies. Leicester City winning the title means they will only be paying out around 10% of the stakes they have taken in this field. A big result for the bookies. Oh and by the way Leicester will be priced at between 33-1 and 50-1 for the title next season we are getting enquiries already. Yeah that's what I thought. Why is Scouse saying the opposite? Surely not based on an article in the Mirror?
foxes_rule1978 Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 I don't think they were above the actual probability. About what it should be. If for example Norwich stay up I wouldn't put a penny on them at 5000/1 to win the title next season. It is just silly odds in my view, I doubt Norwich would be 5000/1 next season, plus they aren't of the quality we are either... I would say it was well above the actual probability ... I would have thought 500/1 would have been more like it.
kylestyle06 Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 Put it this way if Leicester win the league there will be news articles in the paper with the winners at the bookies giving them free advertising . Win/win situation
Viva Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 It is just silly odds in my view, I doubt Norwich would be 5000/1 next season, plus they aren't of the quality we are either... I would say it was well above the actual probability ... I would have thought 500/1 would have been more like it.You are just thinking of the quality of our players now. This time last season with the same players pretty much, we were a million miles away in quality from winning the league. Norwich are doing a lot better than we were, so the comparison is pretty similar. So if Norwich are 5000/1 with a bookie in the summer would you back them for the 'value'? I know I certainly wouldn't.
foxes_rule1978 Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 You are just thinking of the quality of our players now. This time last season with the same players pretty much, we were a million miles away in quality from winning the league. Norwich are doing a lot better than we were, so the comparison is pretty similar. So if Norwich are 5000/1 with a bookie in the summer would you back them for the 'value'? I know I certainly wouldn't. Probably not but I didn't on Leicester either... just felt the run we had and the fact we hadn't really been hammered by anyone we were greatly undervalued... put it this way villa are now 5000/1 for the title
Viva Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 Probably not but I didn't on Leicester either... just felt the run we had and the fact we hadn't really been hammered by anyone we were greatly undervalued... put it this way villa are now 5000/1 for the title There is a difference between not being hammered and missing out on a few draws and the odd win, to picking up over 80 points! They are only 5000/1 because the bookie hasn't bothered to change the odds. It's impossible for them, unless most teams gets chucked out of the league!
adam1 Posted 22 February 2016 Posted 22 February 2016 Its all about the bookies tempting punters to put money on outsiders, the bigger the odds the more chance of tempting money out of people. When enough cash has been laid on, the odds come down and punters start thinking somethings going on so they stick their money on and so it carries on till theres not much money going on. Then the bookies put the odds up a bit to try and sqeeze a bit more money out of people. Meanwhile they re are covering their loss by laying money on other teams with their own money, which means they cant lose. If they pay out half a million on leicester winning the title, you can bet your life they will make 2 million on chelsea, the favourites at the start of the season, not winning the title. Theres a few winners, but theres an awfull lot of losers, which means money in the bookies back pocket. Its strange how the bookies have been anouncing how much money and how many bets have been laid on leicester to win the league,which are feel good stories, The real information to find out is how many bets have been laid on other teams to win the prem, then you can see the percentages the bookies are working with. Completely wrong. As a bookie let me explain. Most money goes onto the 5 teams, the 'big four' and the deluded Liverpool fans lump on Liverpool. Therefore they are shorter in odds because they are favourites. With regards to outsiders at 5000/1 they take a lot less. With regards to Leicester one national firm took less than £100 at 5000/1. They tweeted a picture with the locations - one was someone in Lancashire! That is a maximum liability of £500,000. They would have probably taken near that amount on the big 4 plus Liverpool. Therefore Leicester would be profitable. However that is at the start of the season. The problem is that they got caught in between 20/1 and 500/1, that's when a significant amount of support would have come. Certainly some firms would have let Leicester become a big liability at around 20/1 - 500/1 because they thought we would run out of steam! Remember it is a game of opinion - odds compilers have priced it up and if you disagree with the price - take the bet. You have to remember that Bookies operate to a margin 'over ran.' At a margin of 1% a team, that would be a margin of 120%. Therefore for every £1.2m they take, they will keep £200k (in theory). Obviously the books are never 100% perfect - but the margin means the bookies got a very good chance. In this situation, their average margin may be quite poor (not the show prices, but average worked out across how much money and at what prices) because of how short Leicester have been backed into.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.