[Hulk Hands]

Originally Posted by FortuneChip

But they're not giving all horses an equal chance. One is 3/10 while another one is 300/1.
If the fav and 2nd fav finished priced order, I can't imagine the forecast paid more than evens. Assuming the 300/1 had no chance, then you're only left betting on the 20/1 shot finishing 3rd ahead of the 33/1 shot, which again would probably be Evens at most.

I don't know what way is was actually worded, but to me the 9/4 applying to the naming of the 1st, 2nd through 5th in the correct order is much more realistic than just naming the first & last home, the latter of which I would be all over!

Exactly. Picking first and last would be an odds on shot. No way it was that. The Punters shouldn't be in a betting shop if they thought they were getting 9/4 on that.

This reminds me of a few weeks ago when some lad about my own age (20-23) was having an argument with the girl behind the counter. The offer on the PP screens was a straight forecast at 9/2, the fav to beat the 2nd fav. It was worded as "'Horse X' to beat 'Horse Y' 9/2". Horse X came second and Horse Y came 5th or something. The lad thought it was a match bet with the fav being 9/2 to finish in front of a horse lower than it in the betting. And he kept arguing it. Eventually an older man came up, explained it, and kindly said to go home, you've no business being in here. Snobby but quite funny at the time

[Mellor]

Originally Posted by Headspace

Picking first TO last at 9/4 does not seem like much of an offer to me. They odds of doing this if you give all horses an equal chance must be astronomical.

Why would you give the horses an equal chance??? And even so, the odds then would be 119/1, hardly astronomical.

9/4 sounds about right for first TO last. The guys are a bit clueless if they thought it was genuinely 9/4 to predict a 3/10 fav would win, and a 300/1 shot would come last.

[carly_86]

I really don't understand why people bet on horses when they no jack s**t about the type of bet there placing or the rules of racing for that matter. In fact why isn't there a place where betting shop staff can moan about the crap they deal with from people

[Collie D]

Originally Posted by carly_86

In fact why isn't there a place where betting shop staff can moan about the crap they deal with from people

It's called the pub. Not exclusive to bookies staff, meet on a Friday after work and have a good aul b*tch about the boss, the worlkload and the customers. Then get drunk and let the bar staff repeat the process about you when you're still there at closing with a huge round in front of you still to be drank.

[DB74]

Originally Posted by Mellor

Why would you give the horses an equal chance??? And even so, the odds then would be 119/1, hardly astronomical.

9/4 sounds about right for first TO last. The guys are a bit clueless if they thought it was genuinely 9/4 to predict a 3/10 fav would win, and a 300/1 shot would come last.

Bookies price things up wrong all the time and make mistakes, especially with specials where there is no benchmark to compare prices

Don't see why you think the guys are clueless. Maybe they were just taking advantage of what they perceived was a (very generous) pricing error.

[Mellor]

Originally Posted by DB74

Bookies price things up wrong all the time and make mistakes, especially with specials where there is no benchmark to compare prices

Don't see why you think the guys are clueless. Maybe they were just taking advantage of what they perceived was a (very generous) pricing error.

Because if they genuinely perceived it as a massive pricing error, then they should have expected that the bookies may not pay out if they noticed. As is the norm.

Also, a poster confirmed that it was actually 1st TO last. So not a pricing error.

[Headspace]

If you think 9/4 sounds about right on an event with 120 different outcomes never go near a bookies again in your life.

[Mellor]

Originally Posted by Headspace

If you think 9/4 sounds about right on an event with 120 different outcomes never go near a bookies again in your life.

If you think the number of outcomes is a factor you probably give up gambling yourself.

[Headspace]

Originally Posted by Mellor

If you think the number of outcomes is a factor you probably give up gambling yourself.

You don't?

I the horses finish in the opposite of odds order what odds should you be getting versus the 9/4 the bookie is offering.

You work out the bookies like this. 9/4=2.25+1=3.25. 100/3.25=30.77. 120 different out comes. 120*30.77=3692. bookies edge in this market is 3692-100=3592%

link

[Mellor]

Originally Posted by Headspace

You don't?

I the horses finish in the opposite of odds order what odds should you be getting versus the 9/4 the bookie is offering.

You work out the bookies like this. 9/4=2.25+1=3.25. 100/3.25=30.77. 120 different out comes. 120*30.77=3692. bookies edge in this market is 3692-100=3592%

link

that only holds true if all outcomes are equal, which is obviously not the case.

The price is based on the chances of the most likely finishing order. A 4 horse race and a 5 horse races could potentially have the same chances.

[CodyJarrett]

Originally Posted by Mellor

that only holds true if all outcomes are equal, which is obviously not the case.

The price is based on the chances of the most likely finishing order. A 4 horse race and a 5 horse races could potentially have the same chances.

Exactly and it doesn't matter if the price drifted on some of the horses, or even all of them - as the price of the special can (and often does) drift too.

Sounds to me like they messed up on the screen and someone somewhere took advantage in a big way and they refused to pay out. The folks you saw may have just been betting small stakes but if they pay them, they would have to pay out the bigger bets also.

Seen it happen with a distance special one day where PP were going:

1 3/4 lengths or less 13/8
Exactly 2 Lengths 3/1
1 3/4 lengths or more 13/8

Few of us spotted the error and placed bets on the 'more' AND the 'less' options .. but they wouldn't pay out, just voided the bet.

[okidoki987]

The bet was deffo 1st to last.

If the poster above saw the bet then

Sounds to me like they messed up on the screen

This can't be true and the punters who backed it probably missed read the screen/bet.

Bookies try and come up with all sorts of different bets to attract punters into their shops.
Some work. some certainly don't.
Most guys won't back something that needs to be explained to them how it works in a shop.

I've seen a bet somewhere, name an unplaced horse in each race at xyz race meeting.
It never says what the place terms are for 4 runner race - which are MUST WIN so what happens in that case - I'd guess winner if horse comes 2nd, 3rd or 4th?
SP favs to be placed - never says place terms with 4 runners needs to win.

[Headspace]

So maybe Whatsupdoc is right right and the offer was first to last. But the bookies edge is as i said. If you pick right and they finish 300/ 1, 33/1, 3/10, 10/3, 20/1 and he pays you 9/4 can you see the edge. That was the offer. If the offer was first and last at 9/4 he would of had 515% edge, thats if the number of outcomes is relevant to the odds.

[okidoki987]

I would guess that most people (in this case) would pick the same 1,2,3,4,5 so one would guess that the bookies also assume the same outcome and therefore have priced up the result based on those 5 in that order and pushed it out slightly.
Nobody in their right mind would pick anything other than the 3/10 shot to win as any other horse to win would pay more in a single (minimum 10/3) instead of 9/4 for the fivefold.