Related Bet

Slozer

I have placed a double bet on Medermit to win a race which he has won and to win the Arkle also. I didnt take a price on the first race which he won at 5/2 but I did take a price for him in the Arkle (12/1). Now my bookie has told me that it is a related bet and I wont get the 12/1. He is saying that I can only have the price it is at now(4/1).

Can any of you guys tell me if this is correct or not?

Thanks

mdwexford

Is correct im afraid.

Slozer

Should I not be at least entitled to the price quoted for the Arkle right after he won his previous race?

HigginsJ

yea it is correct i'm afraid.

HigginsJ

http://www.sports-betting-student.co.uk/guide/related-bets.asp


this explains it in detail

HigginsJ

Slozer wrote: »

Should I not be at least entitled to the price quoted for the Arkle right after he won his previous race?

you'll eventually only get SP on him winning the Arkle as the 12-1 is void.

elbows666

Slozer wrote: »

I have placed a double bet on Medermit to win a race which he has won and to win the Arkle also. I didnt take a price on the first race which he won at 5/2 but I did take a price for him in the Arkle (12/1). Now my bookie has told me that it is a related bet and I wont get the 12/1. He is saying that I can only have the price it is at now(4/1).

Can any of you guys tell me if this is correct or not?

Thanks

It happened to me years ago with a soccer bet. I backed a double for a team to win and first goalscorer. Then they said it was a related bet (despite the person in the shop taking the bet in the first place) and the bet was split 50 % on Team winning and 50 on first goal scorer

scon86

these bookies are coverd in so many ways you would not believe. but i think you stake should be 50/50. so u should have half the stake on him at 12/1 but lose have the win. its funny how they take the bet but if it comes in then there is a problem, i bet if it lost he wouldnt say a thing...

premierstone

scon86 wrote: »

these bookies are coverd in so many ways you would not believe. but i think you stake should be 50/50. so u should have half the stake on him at 12/1 but lose have the win. its funny how they take the bet but if it comes in then there is a problem, i bet if it lost he wouldnt say a thing...

If it lost it lost why would the bookies need to say anything

And the original bet is a perfect example of a related bet, obviously if Medermit won the race, he's chances of winning the Arkle were cosiderably increased, pretty sure its the responsibility of the punter in this case.

Long Term Louth

This is a common initial mistake made by unsuspecting customers!

If you placed such a bet as the OP on p powers website, it will not accept/proceed with the related bet, this been the case, youd think the betting shop should hold some responsibility to monitor all bets and inform the customer at the time the bet is palced (I know there would be complications for the staff), perhaps adequate signage in each shop?

After all they get enough of our money

Slozer

premierstone wrote: »

If it lost it lost why would the bookies need to say anything

And the original bet is a perfect example of a related bet, obviously if Medermit won the race, he's chances of winning the Arkle were cosiderably increased, pretty sure its the responsibility of the punter in this case.

Yes its obivious that the odds would decrease hence me putting the bet on before he won the race. If the horse had lost the race the price would drift and my bet would be lost this is also obivious. If its so obivious then why didnt the bookies offer an alternative bet to win the 2 races. They of all people would know this! If the horse was even placed in this race it was not certain that he would run in the Arkle and even after the race Alan King didnt know which race he was going to go for. It was not a certainty he would win that race or run in the Arkle hence the 12/1 quoted. This is an Ante post bet and I feel I am taking all the risk here - risk of the horse not running in the Arkle - risk of him loosing his last race etc.

If Medermit wins the Arkle I am strongly thinking about taking this further. Estimated win is now €400 (if he does win) against €1200 for prices quoted (docket signed by the bookie) I dont mind spending another €15 to take this to the smalls claims court just for the craic:) and take my chances there.

Slozer

Long Term Louth wrote: »

This is a common initial mistake made by unsuspecting customers!

If you placed such a bet as the OP on p powers website, it will not accept/proceed with the related bet, this been the case, youd think the betting shop should hold some responsibility to monitor all bets and inform the customer at the time the bet is palced (I know there would be complications for the staff), perhaps adequate signage in each shop?

After all they get enough of our money

I would agree, the rules are made by the bookies and I would bet that there are very few people who know all the rules. I thought I did but I am still learning after 25 years of betting. I knew about related bets through football and in fairness I understand how you cant get the seperate odds for Rooney to score first and United to win the match. However I think a horse winning one race over a different distance and on a different track and possibly different ground can be related to him winning a race with different conditions. This is what gets me and I think they have taken this related bet rule a bit too far!

mdwexford

You wouldnt have a leg to stand on, they are totally covered from cashier errors.

Pj!

Slozer wrote: »

If Medermit wins the Arkle I am strongly thinking about taking this further. Estimated win is now €400 (if he does win) against €1200 for prices quoted (docket signed by the bookie) I dont mind spending another €15 to take this to the smalls claims court just for the craic:) and take my chances there.

You wouldn't have a hope.
The rules are there and they make sense really.

jimjackson

very true Pj you will be suprised what is in a t+c,every avenue covered