What a bet

ALTESSE12

Did anyone hear about the guy who into bookies Kilkenny lost All Ireland in 05 looking for price for 06 All Ireland.
He was quoted 3/1 , then he asked for a price for them to win the next 5 All Irelands. Bookie quoted 1000/1.
He had 50 on...What a bet

TheInquisitor

50000k win , did the bookie pay out?

ALTESSE12

TheInquisitor wrote: »

50000k win , did the bookie pay out?

They havent won 2010 yet , but cant see them being stopped

abouttobebanned

I'd bet a lot of money that this is bull. No bookies would be stupid enough to quote those prices. FACT.

Where do these bloody stories come from.

who what when

abouttobebanned wrote: »

I'd bet a lot of money that this is bull. No bookies would be stupid enough to quote those prices. FACT.

Where do these bloody stories come from.

Agreed. Youd be lucky to get 100/1

okidoki987

Heard it all right, commentator said he was 100% sure of the person who had the bet.
KK would ahve been around 3's to win the first one and then the prices would have been lower for the next 4.
Absolute most it could have been was 100/1.
If the bookie quoted 1000/1, he must have assumed there was no chance of paying out on it.
With what's going on nowadays, I'd say slim chance of getting paid at 1000/1.
Bookie will probably say it was a mistake.

myflipflops

If a bookie layed him 1000/1 then he deserves to go out of business due being stupid.

100/1 would have been about the right price if they were 3/1 for that year. If the bookie worked out the price by calculating out 3/1 to the power of 5 (1024/1) then he doesn't know how to work out a price.

nice1franko

Ok well, firstly can I ask you forgive my stupidity, blokes. This is going to be embarrassing and I know I'll be fukcin roasted but feck it, I'd rather find out why I don;t get this.

So... assuming the bookie gave the punter 3/1 for each selection, as Mister FlipFlops reasonably conjectures, then our lucky punter had:

50 riding on the first selection,
200 on the 2nd,
800 on the 3rd,
3200 on the 4th,
12,800 on the 5th- which, if it win's, will result in 51200.

How is that not correct and fair?

Just checked on the PP calculator and it agrees with me:


Let the ridicule commence... but be gentle as possible please- I've had a few over the weekend and feel very sensitive right now.

myflipflops

nice1franko wrote: »

commence... but be gentle as possible please- I've had a few over the weekend and feel very sensitive right now.

No ridcule. If somebody does have this bet then your process is how the bookie calculated the price.

However, Kilkenny cannot be 3/1 for each championship. The bet implies that Kilkenny win the All Ireland each year so they will be shorter the next year.

Example:

Kilkenny win in 2005 @ 3/1. The are then 2/1 for the next years champs. They win 2006 @ 2/1 and they are 13/8 for the 2007 competition. They win again and they are 11/8, win again and they are 1/1.

The price gets smaller every year.

You are not mulitpying 3/1 x 3/1 x 3/1 x 3/1 x3/1. You are multipling 3/1 x 2/1 x 13/8 x 11/8 x 10/11 (prices are just an example, not necessarily accurate).

nice1franko

ah yeah... course the odds would have shortened

Anyone happen to know what their SP was before each championship?

Well, looks like it was 8/15 for last year anyway:
http://starbets.ie/gaa/hurling/playing-cat-and-mouse-with-the-rest

Right, if I ever open a bookies I'll let yous know lads!

sonnky

Tis true alrite

heavyballs

sonnky wrote: »

Tis true alrite

i bet it wasn't in Harringtons...no chance he would lay that......It wasn't in P Powers because PP would have had it all over the tabloids for some advertisement revenue to ease the pain
Boyles in KK?doubt it...so where was this bet placed i wonder

okidoki987

A local independent I'd guess.

myflipflops

okidoki987 wrote: »

A local independent I'd guess.

That's what i was thinking. Manager/owner just picked a price from his head.

Just checked Boyles max payouts and it is 100k for GAA so if it is them, he will get paid. Not so sure an independant will be able to stand it.

Collie D

Lad in work was telling me about this today. Also find it very hard to believe. Real odds would be about 50 or 60 to one using Myflipflops' theory. Even those prices may be generous. Even if true I'm sure palpable error will come into play

myflipflops

Collie D wrote: »

Even if true I'm sure palpable error will come into play

I don't think so. The palpable error rule was their to cover obvious mistakes. Typos (100/1 instead of 10/1) being one example. Also to stop collusion between staff and customers.

In this case, the guy would have asked for a specific price in a shop. If it was an indy, the manager/owner would have given it. If it was one of the bigger boys, itwould have been from the trading team. Being a one off price request, the wrong odds were given through lack of pricing ability, not a blatant error.

Whoever is lucky enough to have it is 100% within his rights to get paid. The most likely scenario where he won't get paid in full is that the bookmaker won't be able to afford to pay. I'm no expert on independants profits but I would guess that 50k would be a massive blow.

Collie D

myflipflops wrote: »

Whoever is lucky enough to have it is 100% within his rights to get paid.

I wasn't aware of that. Anyone in Kilkenny seen any bookies suddenly close up this morning and the owner emmigrate?

stevood

United 12/5 to win the league after losing it last year. I bet you would get monster odds on 5 in row. Prob close to 1000/1 and not some diminished crap of 100/1

If anybody wants to check it, let us know

myflipflops

stevood wrote: »

United 12/5 to win the league after losing it last year. I bet you would get monster odds on 5 in row. Prob close to 1000/1 and not some diminished crap of 100/1

If anybody wants to check it, let us know

Even if you got 12/5 for each of the 5 seasons, it's only 454/1 or thereabouts.

cleremy jarkson

It seems obvious that if this bet did happen at 1000/1, the bookie worked it out like (3/1)^ 5....which of course is ridiculous. Still, I hope the guy gets paid off!

If I was offered 10/1 now that they would go on to 7-in a row I'd take it!

radharc

cleremy jarkson wrote: »

If I was offered 10/1 now that they would go on to 7-in a row I'd take it!

So would everyone, it's 9/4 with Paddy P

cleremy jarkson

radharc wrote: »

So would everyone, it's 9/4 with Paddy P

9/4 is probably still a good bet!!

EDIT: Just checked PP there, and its down to 7/4! 8 in a row is 4/1 and 9 in a row is 7/1.
Not good odds in my opinion; it only takes an off day on the path to one of the finals to screw things up.

okidoki987

Maybe but the interest cost alone would probably offset any profit :rolleyes:

Devastator

myflipflops wrote: »

If a bookie layed him 1000/1 then he deserves to go out of business due being stupid.

wow....so you've never had an off day or made a mistake

Peyton Manning

Devastator wrote: »

wow....so you've never had an off day or made a mistake

There's an off day, and then there's a day that costs your business the best part of £50k.

Devastator

Archimedes wrote: »

There's an off day, and then there's a day that costs your business the best part of £50k.

gambling industry is a risky business. Responsibility goes with the patch but we can all f*ck up once.....just happens so this poor sod was for a lot more

myflipflops

Devastator wrote: »

wow....so you've never had an off day or made a mistake

I'd be fired in my job for making a mistake of this magnitude. I've certainly never had an off day of this extent or made a mistake this huge and blatant.

Edit: Admittedly, 'deserves to go out of business' is a harsh statement.

Devastator

myflipflops wrote: »

Edit: Admittedly, 'deserves to go out of business' is a harsh statement.

thats basically what i was getting at

Dan Chipowski

This story is total rubbish, imo.

None of the bigger firms would have taken the bet.

And then you're down to the smaller firms and indys......which (5 years ago) probably leaves Hacketts, Molloys, Celtics and of the local independents maybe Finnegans

As for any of the above laying that sort of bet.....it just wouldn't happen.

Royal Seahawk

One thing that has to be taken into consideration is the fact that before the 2006 season started the idea of Kilkenny doing 5 in a row would have been ludicrous. Cork were the team to beat and Galway seemed to be the up and coming team about to break through and win a few All-Irelands.
Wexford had beaten Kilkenny in 2004 and Galway really ripped open their defence in the 2005 semi. Coupled with the fact that no Gaa senior inter county team has ever won 5 All Irelands in a row and from a purely punter's point of view 1000/1 wouldn't be far off.

Hindsight is 20/20 vision. :cool:

cson

As an fyi to those debating whether he'll get the 50k off an Independent; any Indo worth their salt will have signs in the shop displaying a maximum liability on any one docket to a certain amount - usually anywhere between 10k - 25k depending on the game [sports/horses/dogs/lotto]. So it's likely the punter will get a max of 25k unless the Bookmaker wants the publicity of paying it out in full.

Also; remember that a gambling debt is considered a debt of honour and furthermore it has no legal standing in this country. So if he took it to Court the Judge would likely just laugh at him.