Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BJ
I don't understand why thousands and thousands of punters would offer greater odds because somebody layed the field at 1000 to 1..? Are you suggesting that people would look at previous odds given and then think that all horses should be treated as 1000 to 1..?
Wouldn't it be a better strategy to lay $4000 @$3 and try to get people to offer better odds than that so you can quickly grab them, knowing that it would start at $2.50?
And he can't lose up to $12,000, he guaranteed losing $12,000 as all bets were immediately matched.
This is alot of money to make up when less than $100,000 gets matched on the event....
|
O.K. let me state it a bit better as I was rushed last night.
I don't understand why thousands and thousands of punters would offer greater odds because somebody layed the field at 1000 to 1..? Are you suggesting that people would look at previous odds given and then think that all horses should be treated as 1000 to 1..?
Not at all, the fact is that if someone else wants to lay any of the horses, their lay odds go into a queue, if they offer less than 1000/1, unless the 1000/1 is matched immediately. Therefore the higher the odds offered to lay the horse, the greater chance of it being the NEXT matched bet.
I don't know all the details of when the 1000/1 was offered, or how quickly they got matched, but nobody is going to offer a lay price of $2.50 when 1000/1 is on offer, they have to make it attractive to the bettor. I'm not saying anyone's going to offer 1000/1 or even 10/1, but many would offer say 3/1 instead of 2/1 - or 6/1 instead of 4/1, therfore making his big plonk well worth it.
And he can't lose up to $12,000, he guaranteed losing $12,000 as all bets were immediately matched.
This is alot of money to make up when less than $100,000 gets matched on the event
True he is guaranteed losing $12,000 in LAYS, but not in total wagers on the race. Yes, the liquidity would scare me, and I think it's a very dangerous practice, because there are too many unknowns, but all he has to do is wager $5,000 and get two points over what he would have gotten without the lay bets and he's well in front.
I note Sportz's comment about the change in favorites and prices in the race.
I'm sure the punter got a much better price than he otherwise would have secured.
But I wouldn't do it.
There are guys doing really weird and dumb things on BF frequently, such as offering 1000/1 in running (in the UK) before the horses even get to the home turn and 10/1 on an evens favourite, just because it's running 4th at the turn.
This guy's method is not appealing to the savvy punters like Mark, but those who really don't know what's going on and follow the crowd.