A sad day!

[bettingmad]

Don't know why Heathorns have the word "bookmaker" on their site. It actually says "The Oldest Established Bookmaker in the World".... I think they must still in Victorian times when it comes to cash amounts.

Today they knocked me back when I phoned for a ?5 double! (British Masters & Kemper)

After shaking with fear and going to consult a presumably pale faced supervisor she came back with a quivering voice to say "We don't want doubles on golf.... we might lose too much".

In the past they have always accepted my optimistic (mad) doubles, just refused the ultra optimistic (very insane) trebles.
Isn't it sad? A "bookmaker" brought to their knees in fear, for a fiver bet

 

[AussieVamp2]

was it the same player you were backing, or 2500/1 odds or something?

 

[bettingmad]

It was Stricker & Leaney both 50/1 so a 2600/1 double.
I think it says a lot about golf betting... there are no limits on football or horse-racing accumulators that could amount to much larger liabilites.

 

[bettingmad]

Emailed Heathorns about why their site appears to accept golf doubles but telephone betting refuses them, received this reply:

"Thank you for your enquiry. Golf doubles are not available on the website despite the appearance that they are, I shall get in touch with our software technicians and see if the 'add selections' can be removed from that particular part of the site.

I have also spoken to my manager who confirms that the supervisor was correct in not accepting any double bets on golf. Unfortunately the liabilities are often very high and as we are also often best price on certain players, we would have to cut odds on players involved in doubles and we do not like to do that. We prefer to hold prices on players and lay decent single bets without cutting odds immediately, laying doubles would compromise our position on that.

I hope I have answered your questions and you are satisfied with my explanation. I hope we will be hearing from you again"

Wonder how they dare take doubles on horses, etc. Their prices must be very quick to shorten if they base liabilities on potential returns for multiple bets before there is any running-on money accrued from earlier winners.

 

[AussieVamp2]

imagine a few bookmakers wouldn't take a 2500/1 bet though?

will they do it for a horse, e.g. can you do two 50/1 nags in a double?

 

[Myron]

Would many bookies take that kind of bet? What's in it for the book to risk 12,500 to win 5? It doesn't seem like good business sense to me.

Having said that I'm going to put a little money on Stephen Leaney and Steve Stricker anyways. If you could be willing to make that kind of bet I'm willing to take a shot on it .

 

[crookycymru]

Can give you a little insight into it...but not going to go into too much detail!!

Working for Hills, I can tell you a thing or two about it. I think Myron is quite right in saying that for the potential pay out, it is hardly worth laying the bet in order to make just a fiver!!! And if Heathrons odds are better than most, then they have a valid point in saying that they would rather lay singles, in order to keep their prices competitive. After all, odds are cut by bookmakers in accordance with the amount they have to pay out on that bet!

With regards to horses etc, all bets with a potential payout of over ?3000 must be authorised by the Hills raceroom, while I believe the limits are lower again for sports such as golf. However, I do not in my right mind believe Hills will refuse you this speculative golf double! After all it is hard enough to pick the winner of one tourny, never mind the both!! :shrug:

 

[bettingmad]

Had I wanted a ?5 double, treble, accumulator on horses they would have snatched my hand off and yet with golf there are 100+ runners in every 'race'. I am an optimist and place doubles quite regularly 2 players in 2 events = 4 doubles. This is the first time any company have ever knocked me back on a double. Heathorns did knock me back on a treble once when I wanted 3 doubles and a treble on 3 selections. As to the good business sense argument when I worked at Coral they were more afraid of large staking customers, permission to lay bets was necessary from head office based on stakes not liabilities on ?5 bets. Bookmakers make lots of cash out of small stakes at ridiculously high odds.... but they obviously lack confidence in their golf books. Heathorns prices were not overly high.. the same odds were available elsewhere, sports.com to mention just one

 

[steved]

I used to work in a bookies, and we never had such problems...
I once laid a treble a while back
33/1 Loch Ness Monster to be found
25/1 Elvis to be alive (there had been runours, so we cut the price)
and a short priced horse running on the day the bet was struck..
I put time limits on the Elvis and Loch Ness monster parts.
It gets better. The horse won at 6/4. Then we sold the shop to Ladbrokes while the bet still had 9 months to run...they had an ?11k liability in the pile of ante-post bets we gave them...and we had banked the fiver!!!

 

[bettingmad]

Steved,
I used to have a punter who came in on Jan 1st every year to place ?10 at 1500/1 that Alien life would discovered on earth before the end of the year...

Re Heathorns
While at Coral I attended a training course and on it we were given a list of bets and the percentage profit for each... a single (e/w in particular) was by far the least profitable bet for the company ... we were always encourage to market multiples.
One more... if Heathorns lay a ?5 double on 2 across the card 5 furlong races they have no opportunity to hedge. With golf events lasting 4 days there is still the opportunity to 'hedge' the bet if they deem it necessary.