Mark,

Shame you weren't able to get the account ready for yesterday - but there is always next week! :wink:

Even for those just wanting to back horses Betfair provides some enormous value - yesterday I was only home for the first few races but I managed to get some great prices:

MR1 Tarcoola Diamond - backed at ave $3.16 (2.20 on TAB, 2.70 Top Fluct)
SR1 Grand City - backed at $4.43 (3.00 TAB, 3.30 TF)

For those wondering how I got 4.43 for Grand City I backed it for significantly more than I wanted at 3.85 then layed the unwanted portion of the bet 10 minutes later for $3.50 which means that my effective return on the portion I kept was $4.43.

I also layed a couple of losers - it is kind of fun watching a race and knowing 9 out of the 10 runners will be winners for you - particularly when the one you have layed is running near last!

Also had a couple of "surebets" where I backed and layed the same runner so I won no matter what the outcome.

I think the future has definitely arrived for the serious punters - although I am sure the mugs will keep the TAB profits flowing for a long time yet! No doubt the TABS/bookies will be trying to force the government to act on this but I really don't see how they can stop it. The sensible thing would be to embrace the new technology and for the TABs to join together to set up a true Australian exchange to tap into the huge potential overseas market - but I cant see that happening - it would require them to move with the times and be competitive!

Mark,

Say you offer to lay Northerly at $1.25 around 20 minutes before jump time as was his price yesterday. How can you guarantee the following;

a) someone will back it. It blew from $1.12 to $1.35 on track and was a similar drifter with Betfair. The $1.25 on the bet side of the screen that you saw was very quickly replaced with $1.28 then $1.30 then $1.32. The $1.25 soon slid off the end of the screen not covered. Just because its there doesn't mean someone covers it.

b) what if it firms? Once you have layed at $1.25 you can't bet at less than that obviously.

Becareful said he backed Grand City for substantially more than he wanted to on the basis that he would lay it back at a shorter price. He made a huge assumption that the horse would firm. I assume the $4.43 was achieved by betting say $1000 @ 3.85, laying $800 @3.50. It wins you win 850, it loses you lose 200, less commission = around $4.43. Your bet in this example is that of a $200 punter as that was your loss risk. If Grand City blew you placed a $1000 bet. If your answer is that you knew it would firm, then you have an ability that few share. Putting 5 times your stake on a horse at under its best price (which is what you have done if Grand City - like 80% of runners do, blows) then you have broken every money management rule in the book.

Looking forward to being told I'm wrong.

Hammers,

Personally I avoided Northerly as I was not sure what was going to happen - I thought it would drift a bit but wasn't sure so left it alone (I didn't want to back it at that price but thought it would probably win so didn't feel confident laying it either).

With the Grand City example I was 95% sure it would firm. The reasoning behind this is simple - on TABCORP it was sitting firmly on around $2.60-$2.70, similarly on IAS it was showing $3.00 (slightly firmer than the opening IAS price). I was therefore very confident that the 3.85 on offer on Betfair would not drift and would almost certainly shorten to the $3.50-$3.70 price range, possibly even shorter. Therefore I put the large bet on and waited for it to firm and then layed off the excess to get the bet size I actually wanted at a substantial premium.

As you point out you can never be sure that a horse is going to firm - you are at the mercy of the market - but as a general observation if Betfair price is way above TAB/Bookies then it is more likely that it will firm than drift - if you can get it right more often than you get it wrong you will make money. As to holding $1000 bet I would not have done that - if it had started to drift I would have sold the excess at say $4.00 and just taken the loss. I must admit the backing/laying equation is a lot more like the stock market than the horse racing game we are used to - you have to try to anticipate market movement but I don't think it is as hard as the stock market - you can get some great indications from the prices on TAB/IAS before making your move.

Becareful,

Fair enough reasoning although not fool proof but you do acknowledge that.

I wonder how the timing of the flucs on Betfair compares to the "real thing" on course. Would an on course spotter have time to relay the firmers to someone off course linked to Betfair and back them before they firm and then layoff. Takes the risk out of your actions becareful.

If the flucs are almost simultaneous then it clearly wouldn't work.

These arbitrage setups are easier to achieve in the in-running betting on the sports events.
Tonight for instance it was possible to back Australia out to about 1.80 while England were going OK in the first 10 overs and now at the change of innings can lay them back at 1.13.
Backing Australia early still required the accurate assumption that they were going to get back into it at some stage, which is a far better bet for mine than hanging for the Betfair odds to follow the IAS odds in the much thinner markets at the races.
This seems to be where the big players are arbitraging, about 100,00 was bet on Australia in this period at better then 1.70 and more than 2.5 million has been matched total, huge.

Hammers

Of course, you can't guarantee anything in racing. If you look at my past postings you will see that I make a living out of trying to back everything at the best price I can, & after many years experience you get a feel for which horses will blow, which will come in & when the price is just about at it's limit. Still, you can't be right all the time, just so long as you're more right than not. Re Northerly I would have been happy to lay it at $1.25, $1.3, $1.33 because I believed he was a genuine risk at that price. The $1.25 was there for a few minutes for an amount of $5000.
There is money for every horse in a race, I have never seen a runner going around at say 20,000/1 on the TAB, every runner on a Saturday has some support, it's just a matter of how much at what price. What Becareful is doing is just using the markets for good business, & no he/I won't be right all the time, but if you can pick up some $$$ with no risk then you can't beat it. I would rather take the risk on getting the prices right on 1 or 2 runners a couple of times a day than going the punt, as you can see from how badly I am doing on the tipping comp.

The latest international gambling craze – betting exchanges – are posing a real threat to the integrity of horse racing, according to Hong Kong Jockey Club senior consultant and former Sydney-based chief stipendiary steward John Schreck.

“It is a cancer that threatens to ruin the horse-racing industry. They are already beginning to have an effect on the integrity of racing and have the potential to do enormous harm to the industry in general,” Schreck said during a business session on wagering at the Asian Racing Conference today.

“They have only just begun to spring up but already are proliferating across the world as more and more consciousless people grab at the chance to get rich quick at the expense of world racing,” he said.

Betting exchanges are run by organizations such as London-based Betfair and the recently established Australian-based TwoFlys.

These exchanges manage the transaction of a person who deposits with it an amount of money. This in turn is made available at attractive betting odds on the Internet for accredited punters to bet against each other.

The betting exchange operator brings together these people via the Internet and makes a profit from deducting a management fee of about five per cent from net winnings by either the layer or the bettor.

Schreck said that exchange betting raised a number of factors which could impact on the integrity of horse racing. These include:

· Neither the exchange operator nor the layer or bettor are bound by the Rules Of Racing.
· The exchange operator is not subject to any probity check by either racing or civil authorities.
· The operator of the betting exchange is not subject to any criminal record check.
· Presently the betting exchange operator is unwilling to disclose to racing authorities the names of bettors.
· Licensed trainers or jockeys could, under the cloak of anonymity, may be inclined to assist their horse to lose.
· The bettor could have a close connection with a trainer, rider or stablehand.

Schreck said that already rumours were rife that many jockeys and trainers had been earning plenty from laying odds on their horses to lose or getting someone close to them to lay odds. “This is easily arranged given the anonymity of betting exchanges"

“My view is that the only way horse racing can survive this threat to its integrity is for it to be made illegal for anybody to have transactions with betting exchanges. If this is not possible then a second solution is that perhaps there may be grounds for establishing a structure that will enable racing supervisors to follow the money trail and thereby making the covert modus operandi of today an overt operation. This would require a club to establish its own legal betting exchange, creaming off a set percentage of the turnover that would benefit racing control and the supervision of the racing contests and hopefully ensure that participants were reputable and subject to the Rules Of Racing,” Schreck said.

England’s Racing Post news editor Tony Smurthwaite said Betfair.com was launched in London in June, 2000.

“From the outset it was more popular with existing sports fans with odds tending to be higher than those offered by traditional bookmakers as the profit margin was effectively stripped out. It was a maverick cool way of betting and people liked the fact they were not feathering the nests of the major bookmakers in betting through exchanges,” Smurthwaite said.

“Within nine months of its lauch Betfair broke through 1 million pounds a week in turnover,” he said.

“From 1 million pounds in April 2001 the figure grew to 5 million pounds a week by December 2001. By February 2002, after a merger of two exchanges, the turnover per week reached 10 million pounds and by the start of January this year the figure had exceeded 50 million pounds,” Smurthwaite said.

Betfair chief executive Edward Wray said the organization handled 600,000 bets last Saturday alone.

He said there was a lot of hysteria among traditional betting outlets about betting exchanges but this was totally unwarranted.

“We are helping to grow the racing industry and reputable organizations such as ours are putting something back to racing in the United Kingdom by way of a product fee which is currently 10 per cent on commissions (gross profit) which is paid to British Racing. We are also prepared to do so in other overseas countries by talking to the racing clubs concerned,” Wray said.

He said Betfair was operating globally and had taken bets on races in Australia and New Zealand in recent months.

“Betting exchanges are here to stay. There is no turning the technology clock back and the betting public want them,” said Wray.

[quote]
“They have only just begun to spring up but already are proliferating across the world as more and more consciousless people grab at the chance to get rich quick at the expense of world racing,” he said.

So now I am a consciousless person trying to get rich at the expense of world racing! :evil:

Why is it that is is perfectly OK for the owners, trainers, jockeys, bookmakers, TABs, and especially the big racing clubs to get rich from racing but if the poor punters start to have a winning chance then that is wrong?

Certainly there need to be some rules and controls to prohibit jockeys/trainers, etc betting on the exchanges but this needs to be done in co-operation with the exchanges - trying to ban them will just force them to move to a country that welcomes gambling operators (eg. Carribean islands) and you will have no control at all. It is no different from any other sport where gambling is common - you just have to make it clear to all the "players" that any betting by them is banned and if any of them get caught then they are automatically banned for life.

I find the whole "this will ruin the integrity of racing" argument a bit of a joke - maybe someone can explain to me how having a leading trainer and a bookmaker in the same family is not a breach of this high integrity standard or are we supposed to believe that they never discuss the winning chances of the various horses running the next day?

Is there any reason Australian TABs have not and could not offer a similar service... so that money is still being directed into the Aussie racing industry and current strict controls are enabled? To me it is such a great product and could really grow racing interest. I say good on any company that gives the punters a bit of a go!

By the way... I loved that movie Shrek :smile:

[ This Message was edited by: shy on 2003-03-04 13:34 ]

Jockeys, trainers, stablehands etc have & always will bet on & against their runners, no matter what the rules.

Shy,

Of course they could offer a similar service (although the online gambling legislation could pose a few problems to true Australian companies - but TABs could get that modified easily!). The problem is that would require them to be forward thinking instead of desperatly trying to protect their large margins so it probably won't happen.

To me the logical solution would be for the three major TABs to join forces to create a single exchange which they could then "sell" under their own brands - so you would access it from the individual TAB websites (and possibly branches) but it would be a single exchange behind the scenes. This would give them the advantage of keeping costs down (by sharing them) and the punters the advantage of bigger pools. The 5% commission could then be directed to the appropriate TAB depending on where the bet was sourced from and then split with the government & racing industry.

The benefits to the racing industry could potentially be enormous with the extra turnover from overseas customers.

Of course what will probably happen is they will try to fight the exchanges instead and by the time they realise it is an inevitable evolution it will be too late and they will have missed the boat.

Fellas,

I don't wish to be the bearer of bad news but Please correct me if I am wrong butI think it is illegal for we punters in NSW to bet with this agency.
Each day we are bombarded by an official announcement stating in it's best draconian tone: "it is an offence to bet with overseas operators not registered in NSW." Does this apply to Betfair?
Sorry about the negativity.

Cheers.

Xanadu, I think you are referring to this from the Racetab site...
http://www.racetab.com.au/illegal/index.html

of course many things are illegal and we still do them, but obviously there is a risk involved, especially in blabbing about it on an open forum or advertising it.

those who are in favour of this sort of thing are better off spending their energies writing to the TAB's, racing industry heads and other vested interests.

see ya
Every Topic

The law only applies to NSW punters so the rest of us can take advantage of Betfair legally (at the moment!). Obviously for NSW residents there is a risk involved but to date I have not heard of a single person being prosecuted under this law and I would think it would be next to impossible for them to prove it as there is currently no way for the NSW Govt to force Betfair to hand over customer lists or their betting records. If you are concerned about the law then either stick to the TAB or Australian bookies or move to a better state/territory :grin:

PS. ET - you weren't aiming that blabbing/advertising comment at me were you? Surely you would know that Canberra is not part of NSW!
_________________
"Computers can do that????" - Homer Simpson



[ This Message was edited by: becareful on 2003-03-05 12:21 ]

We are supposed to live in a free society and one of the cornerstones is supposed to be freedom of choice.
I say good luck to you fellas as what do we punter get from govts? - the dreaded rounding-down of divs which cost you and me over a hundred million dollars annually. No wonder people look elsewhere!

no BC,
I wasnt aiming the comments at you in Canberra.

I was just making the point generally that with everyone talking about it so much and talking about how great it is compared to the TAB's is perhaps not the wisest move.

Governments are happy to ignore things that you do quietly.
They only feel inclined to take action when people flaunt it in their faces :smile:

So IF this stuff is wonderful, eg Betfair etc, then maybe its the kind of thing one should quietly enjoy before there is a rush away from the TAB's and every State DOES legislate against it.

By the way, are you sure that its legal in every State to bet on local races via an overseas agency???

keep up the good work,
see ya
Every Topic

by the way...
it does open up ones mind as to how incredible lazy and incompetent the local TAB's are -
but I cant for the life of me imagine they would want to run Betfair style operations - they would be taking 5% commission on money that they normally get triple the commission on.

cant see it

Every Topic

ET,

Fair enough - although I doubt this forum reaches enough people to generate a "rush away from the TABs" :smile:

With regards to the 5% vs 15% commission point the main reason I would see is that it would probably generate a huge increase in turnover. For example last Saturday I only had one "normal" bet (placed with IAS) but 5 bets on Betfair - none of those would have occured on the normal TAB as I was either laying, taking advantage of the huge overs or doing a "surebet". Had I not had other commitments in the afternoon it would have been much higher still. Therefore my turnover was more than 5 times higher than it would have been without a betting exchange - 5 lots of 5% is certainly better than one lot of 15%.

Even for punters just using the exchange to place their normal bets I am pretty sure over time they would be investing significantly higher turnover on an exchange - most people do not say "I will bet $500 turnover this month" - they say "I will put $100 in the account and bet until that is gone" - if they are losing less due to the lower takeout then they will compensate by increasing their turnover.

Add to that the potential international market which makes the Aussie turnover look insignificant and maybe there is a reason to set one up? They could even brand it with a different name so that the regular TAB punters did not know it was a TAB offering and still keep their 15% from the mugs money.

For those who are interested Betfair will be covering races from Adelaide tomorrow (as well as Brisbane, Melbourne and Sydney metro). Also they have been covering quite a few of the midweek meetings although the turnover on these has been pretty low as you would expect.

Also just found out they will be covering all NRL and AFL games - with "In Match" betting on those games.

I am humbled by the knowledge of you blokes, but have I got it right that if like most us you are a loser, then all you need do is LAY the horses we "would" have backed and we're IN????

Partypooper.... if only it were that simple :smile: If you can lay them for very close to the price you would have paid for a win you more than likely would be ahead. The problem is the price you pay to lay. For example paying just .30 more for a short priced fav will kill any profit over the long run.

Partypooper,

As Shy has indicated the price on Betfair is usually over the TAB/Bookie price so simply laying what you used to back will generally not work to well (of course it depends on how much of a loss you are making to start with - if you are loosing 30% on turnover then you probably could make a decent profit simply laying your selections). I have been working on a system for laying and here are the selections for today.

The rules are simple - if the horse is over $4 on Supertab (but less than say $12 - don't want the risk to be too high) then lay it on Betfair provided the price is not too much higher than the TAB price (10-20% should be OK). If it is under $4 on TAB AND the price on Betfair is higher than TAB then back the selection instead. I have given 2 selections for each race - only use the 2nd one if first selection is scratched.

SR1 1,5
SR3 1,4
MR3 1,3
SR4 5,7
SR5 1,11
MR5 2,6
SR6 6,1
MR6 2,15
SR7 2,3
SR8 2,5
SR9 7,3
MR9 1,2

Shy & becareful, thanks for that. What has me interested, is a lot of reseach I have done on pre-post favs. i.e. back em all and you lose consistently 10-15% on T/O, the higher the pre-post price the greater the loss on T/O up to 30%.(overall it doesn't seem to matter which publication is used as long as you stick to the same one) You see where I'm heading here?