William Hill-Sex, Lies and...erm..more lies

[ONEDUNME]

William Hill spokeswoman on The Morning Line this morning. Big Mac tackled her (well, more accurately, politely asked her about William Hill paying out only four places on the National when others were paying out five or six places.

Her answer - and this is a quote

"If you bet with a bookmaker who's offering 5 or 6 places, you're going to get shorter odds as a result of it"

Blatant, blatant lie aimed at the flat cap retards who only bet in shops. When their horse finishes fifth and some internet savvy person asks them why they bother betting with the robbing bastards, they can say "well, you must be taking a shorter price then"

Don't get me wrong, the daft cunts get what they deserve but it's not right that they can get off with lying without anyone pointing out that they're talking bollocks.


Comparison v Bet365

Don't push it - both 9/1
The midnight club - both 11s
Oscar Time - both 14s
What a friend - BET365 better at 14/1. William Hills 12/1
Backstage and Ballanbriggs - both 14s with both
Quinz - At last, one for Hills at 16/1, bet365 14/1

BUT. Stan James are offering 16/1 on this with five places, PLUS, bet365 do an offer where they match the other big bookies price if they are bigger (i think it's after 9 or 10 am)

Silver by Nature - Bet365 win again with 16/1. Hills 15/1

Big fella thanks - bet 365 better with 18/1. Hills 16/1

Bullshit, bullshit, fucking bullshit. It's nothing but a downright lie.

Arbor Supreme 20s with Hills, 18s bet365 (3-2 to bet365)
Niche Market - both 20s
Bluesea Cracker 20/1 with hills 25/1 with 365 (4-2)
Character Building both 25s


Skippers Brigg, State of Play, Majestic Concorde, West End Rocker all 33/1 with 365

28/1 25/1 28/1 33/1 with Hills. 365 better with three out of those four and level with the other. 7-2

Tidal bay, Hello Bud, chief Dan George all 40/1 bet365

33/1 28/1 40/1 Hills. 365 better with two out of three and level with the other
10-2.


I could go on

[ONEDUNME]

In fact I will - maybe they offer more value at the bigger end of the market (which, let's face it, is probably even more relevant to the extra ew place)

Comply or Die 50/1 with 365 40/1 with hills (11better with 365, 2 better with hills)

In Complience, Killy Glen, Or Noir De Semoza, Dooneys Gate, vic Venturi, the tother one

All 66/1 with bet365 40 50 50 66 50 and 50 with hills.
Five out of six better with 365 and one the same (16 better with 365, 2 better with hills)

Golden Kite 80/1 with 365 and a piddling 50/1 with w hill

Gran Slam Hero 100/1 365 80/1 hills (18 points to 2 so far)

Hang on, here's a hills best price King Fontaine 66/1 365, 80s hills (18 pts to 3) but small consolation for Hills as Totesport and Stan James are both bigger at 100/1 with a fifth place.

Can't Buy Time, Surface to Air, Ornais 80/1 with 365, 66, 66 and 80 with hills (20pts to 3)

The other five rags are 100/1 with 365 and Hills with the exception of Quolibet with is 150 with hills making the final score..........

Bet365 better on 20 prices, Hills better on just 4.

What's even more worrying if you're a Hills punter is that there is only one horse out of the whole forty that they are offering a better price than you can get with a bookie paying five or six places. ONE!

Lies. Fact!

[Bigkegman]

Great posts ODM. The normal punters who continue to plod into the shops are getting ripped off right left and fecking centre.....

Guaranteed Odds - wtf.... I would like to see how much online bookies pay out from offering guaranteed odds compared to the shops just paying out on price taken.

we only have 1 bookie in town - Ladbrokes so they rule the roost but down the road in Berwick there are many bookies and if you only get 1 winner in your lucky 15 they pay TREBLE the odds compared to our DOUBLE.

[beamer]

I don't want to cause any hassle ONEDUNME, but the 365 prices are totally useless unless the liability is less then approx £100.

It's not just 365, but most are gutless accountants. It's all about market share nowadays, where they can increase their customer base and sell on the business at some stage. All these offers are totally useles as they never state liability.

The fact that betfair/betdaq are offering cash incentives for using the smartphone apps, shows how desperate the market is at the moment, but no one seems to want winning punters. That may sound a strange statement, but winning punters at least increase turnover. The old Mawdsley bookmakers have gone through several name changes, but generally layed a bet requested. very strange but winning punters were encouraged to bet with them, with a few freebies thrown in. Turnover/ market share was obviously the strategy, which looks to have worked but the did lay a bet.

Hills/ Ladbrokes are tossers, but at least you generally know what they will take, unlike 365 ( and Corals). I've even had a football bet knocked back with this firm and I'm a losing punter ! All these prices/offers we see are irrelevant, including pricewise selections, as they are generally unobtainable.

I'm only pissed off cos wife and kids won on the National and I lost.


Cheers beamer

[ONEDUNME]

Originally Posted by beamer

Hills/ Ladbrokes are tossers, but at least you generally know what they will take, unlike 365 ( and Corals). I've even had a football bet knocked back with this firm and I'm a losing punter ! All these prices/offers we see are irrelevant, including pricewise selections, as they are generally unobtainable.

I'm only pissed off cos wife and kids won on the National and I lost.


Cheers beamer

I know the feeling mate.

I would think a hundred quid is plenty for 90% of punters anyway but, for what it's worth, I've never had a bet refused by them and I've won and lost thousands with them.

With regard to Pricewise, I never follow the bloke because I see his selections as less than value because of the weight of money that is blindly placed on them but i have noticed that unless you somehow have access to his selections the night before (ie, if you know someone who works in the newspaper circulation business) the price is going to be gone by the time that you get to know about it.

I had a good tip for a horse a few years ago and put a bet of about thirty quid on in a Ladbrokes shop in Derby where I happen to be working at the time. I rang a mate and he asked me to put him a tenner on it so I went back into the shop and the geyser says "I'll take this one but don't come back to back it again" Thirty fucking quid! LOL. For one of the biggest bookies in the country. I'm guessing there had been money for it. it won but the odd thing was that the price later drifted.

Anyway, to get back to the point, I watched the race in a bookies near a Ladbrokes yesterday and there were plenty of their slips on tables afterwards. Inevitably someone in there had backed the fifth horse and I was obliged to tell him the fault with betting with the magic sign.

What I dont understand is with all the money that Hills and Laddies spend on promotions, they cut back on the budget and risk the negative press from yesterday. Ladbrokes have also taken themselves off Oddschecker which presumably was costing something. As a result, I hardly ever use them now.Times must be really hard for them.

I suppose they're relying on punters being so stupid that they will have forgotten about all this this time next year.

Perhaps thety are right.

[beamer]

I think the reason for coming off oddschecker was to stop the arbers taking a quick profit on the exchanges.

I would think a hundred quid is plenty for 90% of punters anyway

I think £100 liability is piss poor. If you can't get a fiver e/w on a 33/1 shot there is something seriously wrong in my view. I know the alternative view is they have the right to take whatever bets they want. 365 are probably not as bad as a few others, as baldy probably tops the league.

Giving these firms SP business use to give you some guarantees to early prices, but that's no longer the case.

beamer

[ONEDUNME]

My bad, I somehow missed the word liability and I thought u were talking about £100 stake.

There's only one bookie that limits my liability to £100 and that's sporting bet. Maybe it's just you mate?