The truth about Betfair...

[ryzerman]

I am posting this on the forum as I hope people here this story and either support me or not.

My name is Raymond Kybartas, I have been betting on betfair for a few years now. Recently I was doing so well that I was told I would be paying a premium charge in the 20% category. Therefore for 4-5 weeks I began paying the charges every on Wednesday. Until I received an email December 17, as shown below.

(17/12/2015 09.07 AM)

"Dear Mr Kybartas

I am writing to inform you that your accounts, "kybartas50","satrabyk2" & "satrabyk1" have been suspended under investigation of Premium Charge evasion.

Your accounts will remain suspended for a period of at least 8-10 working days whilst we complete this investigation. You will be contacted again once the investigation is complete.

Yours Sincerely,"

Betfair Pricing (end of email)

I was in shock because just the day before I paid my premium charge which was a large sum because I had a good week. I did not understand why or what this email meant. So I called right away. The agent was helpful but explained to me that unfortunately I would not be able to speak to these people who sent me this email, but he would ask them to call me. I waited and received no phone call. My account and the 12,500 in it was frozen. Until earlier today I got this email below...

(23/12/2015 03.34 PM)

"Dear Mr Kybartas,

The 6 accounts (satrabyk, kybart, kybartas50, satrabyk2, satrabyk1 & FatTony1504) have been under investigation of Premium Charge evasion due to the inconsistent nature of betting activity conducted across the accounts. Specifically, it is clear that the activity conducted across the accounts is the distribution of a single betting strategy.

In respect of the Premium Charge we provide an allowance against the first £1,000 of charges that would otherwise be incurred by any customer and also exempt customers who have not bet in more than 250 markets. Additionally, higher rates of Premium Charge may apply when a customer’s lifetime net profits exceed £250,000. It is plainly unrealistic to expect to distribute activity across more than one account to benefit from an allowance per account and/or continual exemptions by ensuring less than 250 markets are bet on via each account; or to ensure that the lifetime net profit remains below the threshold above which higher rates may apply.

To that extent, from this week onwards, all accounts listed will be linked for the purposes of calculating the Premium Charge. To week 833 (23:59 Sunday 20th December 2015) the distribution of activity across the accounts has resulted in the underpayment of Premium Charges to the sum of CAD28,324.46, this amount has been debited from the ‘satrabyk1’ account and this account has been unsuspended. Please be aware that this attempt to evade the Premium Charge is in breach of Betfair’s Terms and Conditions.

These deductions will lead to a negative balance on the ‘satrabyk1’ account and it will therefore only be that account that is unsuspended, until the negative balance is cleared. Please make arrangements to fund this account to cover the negative balance at your earliest opportunity. Once any outstanding balance has been repaid the remaining accounts will be reopened.

I trust this makes the position perfectly clear. Your activity on Betfair is conditional upon your acceptance of our Terms and Conditions, and I must repeat that operating accounts in multiple names in order to conceal the true identity of your activity will not be tolerated by us.

Yours sincerely,"

Betfair Pricing (end of email)

So now I am even more shocked and disturbed. From this email they have indicated that all the accounts are the same person. By this they are trying to say that one person used various accounts to avoid the charges. While this might be a strategy they have come across in the past, it holds no truth in this case. I made some calls. First to betfair. Once again they had told me they would call me back. However I called again tonight and the manager said the premium charge people don't call people back. Regardless I also found out that the other 3 accounts listed in the above email had belonged to my father and my brother.

My father years ago was successful on Betfair, so much that he was entering the 40% premium rate, for that reasons and other factors he no longer trades on Betfair. My brother traded for awhile but he has a drain company and just does not have the time.

What I am getting from this email is that for convenience of their site, BF has insinuated that my father is me. Or that me, my father and my brother are all one person or entity as they say. I have witnesses that could testify all of us betting on betfair simultaneously in the betting parlour we attend a few years ago. Also that me Raymond Kybartas a 25 year old has been operating my account satrabyk1 for multiple years. The account satrabyk belonged to my father which I found out today. Weird username but its our last name in reverse, easy to remember.

So now essentially I am in the dark, before the holidays. They have taken 12,500 and also claim that I owe them another almost 16,000. You see a negative amount in my account. For one reason. I have the same name as my dad who was a successful bettor hence the 40% rate. I asked betfair today if relatives with the same name are considered one person. Because I know other families with more than one users betting who were not combined. They laughed and said no that's not the case. I spoke to just a standard phone agent but he was helpful and I assume he understood the rules.

I have emailed the commission and have responded to betfairs email and will keep anyone updated on here about what happens moving forward. Its a nightmare and they leave you in the dark. No reply. Arrogant. They make a decision and its the right one. They punish someone who has done nothing wrong but finally learn how to win some money. I know Canadians wont be allowed on betfair any longer but this is a totally separate issue. I feel like people should know what you are dealing with here. You would think he biggest exchange in the world can be trusted. That you can sleep knowing your money will not be stolen. Its not the case. They have robbed me, and I can only fight to get it back.

Any help and support would be appreciated.

[horses4courses]

I have one question for you, sir.
How many active accounts do you currently access at Betfair?

[ryzerman]

just 1. satrabyk1

[ryzerman]

And this account has a negative balance of almost 16,000. Basically because the other accounts have the same last name as mine they said its all one guy.

[horses4courses]

just 1. satrabyk1

One more question.
Do family members, or associates, work in tandem with you on Betfair?

[Stillriledup]

The premium charge is rough, charging someone more because they win makes no sense to me.

Have you placed wagers at roughly the same time as your family from different IP addresses ?

[ryzerman]

Yes im sure there has been. Like I said there was a time all three of us were betting on different accounts simultaneously...

[ryzerman]

One more question.
Do family members, or associates, work in tandem with you on Betfair?

I trade on my own. My own money, my own account, 95% my own picks also. Unless a tv man or a friend convinces me enough to bet a horse.

[Fox]

Tough break man. Assuming you are Canadian, it is interesting timing given the announcement about the new country restriction.

[thaskalos]

just 1. satrabyk1
You operate the account 'satrabyk1'...and there are five other accounts (satrabyk, kybart, kybartas50, satrabyk2, and FatTony1504).

Your father and brother operated all of the five other accounts?

[horses4courses]

I trade on my own. My own money, my own account, 95% my own picks also. Unless a tv man or a friend convinces me enough to bet a horse.

In your position, I would seek legal advice.
Good luck.

[ryzerman]

You operate the account 'satrabyk1'...and there are five other accounts (satrabyk, kybart, kybartas50, satrabyk2, and FatTony1504).

Your father and brother operated all of the five other accounts?

If you read the above post... you would understand that 2 of those accounts were old accounts I made and used for a couple months many years ago. Lost some money. Than went on again made an account forgot the password username etc.. made a new account. Those first two satrabyk2, kybartas50 were mainly just some poker playing. Finally I made satrabyk1 and started the horses a few years ago. The fattony1504 was my brothers as was kybart, because my bro like me would make an account lose forgot about it and than want to play again but forget the account info so just made a new one, which is allowed. Than satrabyk was my dads account. I found that out today. The reason they bring all these account up is because they think they are speaking to my dad basically. He did not even know about this until I told him today. They didn't feel like they had to email him because to BF I he is me.

[ryzerman]

In your position, I would seek legal advice.
Good luck.

That is exactly what I am going to do If I need to. There is no way someone should be punished for having the same last name and being successful. If they can do this, what else are they capable of.

[chenoa]

If you read the above post... you would understand that 2 of those accounts were old accounts I made and used for a couple months many years ago. Lost some money. Than went on again made an account forgot the password username etc.. made a new account. Those first two satrabyk2, kybartas50 were mainly just some poker playing. Finally I made satrabyk1 and started the horses a few years ago. The fattony1504 was my brothers as was kybart, because my bro like me would make an account lose forgot about it and than want to play again but forget the account info so just made a new one, which is allowed. Than satrabyk was my dads account. I found that out today. The reason they bring all these account up is because they think they are speaking to my dad basically. He did not even know about this until I told him today. They didn't feel like they had to email him because to BF I he is me.

Surprised that a online gaming company would allow one to open up another account if password/username is forgotten, seems that is just asking for trouble.

[ryzerman]

Surprised that a online gaming company would allow one to open up another account if password/username is forgotten, seems that is just asking for trouble.

Well betfair allows that, its a business looking for money. But to withdrawal you have to give id. Like I said my first two accounts were just deposit and lose. I only really started with the satrabyk1 account which I gave ID for.

[Fox]

Well betfair allows that, its a business looking for money. But to withdrawal you have to give id. Like I said my first two accounts were just deposit and lose. I only really started with the satrabyk1 account which I gave ID for.

Betfair originally permitted multiple accounts per customer but you had to use a different funding source for each. A few years back, they changed the terms and conditions to disallow that practice.

[Secondbest]

I'm not familar with betfair.What is a "premium charge"?

[davew]

I'm not familar with betfair.What is a "premium charge"?


If you win too much they increase the rake for you.

[ryzerman]

I'm not familar with betfair.What is a "premium charge"?

Basically as mentioned above if you win, not just the amount but more importantly at a rate in which you are not paying enough in commission they charge you extra. Starts at 20% which I was at.

[Secondbest]

Wait.Let me get this straight if you win over a certain amount they take money away from you?

[ryzerman]

Wait.Let me get this straight if you win over a certain amount they take money away from you?

That is correct. And it doesn't always mean you win a lot. It could mean you have a high percentage of winning to losing.

[appistappis]

raymond, small world, I think I grew up with your father...first initial p

get legal advice quickly, they are stealing from you.

[LottaKash]

That is correct. And it doesn't always mean you win a lot. It could mean you have a high percentage of winning to losing.

That makes no sense... As a modest winning player, I would never consider making wagers with a scheme like that...phooey to them..

I am glad to have learned that truth...

[Secondbest]

That is correct. And it doesn't always mean you win a lot. It could mean you have a high percentage of winning to losing.
I wouldn't bet a dime with these guys.Talk about thieves.Thank you for posting and letting us know about these crooks. Good luck in your fight with them.

[lamboguy]

i am glad that someone else is exposing the pitfalls of exchange wagering. when i have wrote about it, no one believed me here. unfortunately i know the original poster is telling it like it is.

everyone always knocks Churhill Downs and Stronach, yet they are dead set against exchange wagering. instead of fighting each other, my wish would be for the new year that the 2 of them get together to secure the pari mutuel pools and make a few other changes to get the racing game back on track. my strong advice would be to pay more attention to the racing side of their business because at some point of time they are going to need a strong race track to keep their slot machines alive.

[Stillriledup]

i am glad that someone else is exposing the pitfalls of exchange wagering. when i have wrote about it, no one believed me here. unfortunately i know the original poster is telling it like it is.

everyone always knocks Churhill Downs and Stronach, yet they are dead set against exchange wagering. instead of fighting each other, my wish would be for the new year that the 2 of them get together to secure the pari mutuel pools and make a few other changes to get the racing game back on track. my strong advice would be to pay more attention to the racing side of their business because at some point of time they are going to need a strong race track to keep their slot machines alive.

Exchange wagering isn't the problem, it's the people running it that get in the way.

[lamboguy]

Exchange wagering isn't the problem, it's the people running it that get in the way.
what kind of people do you expect to be running exchange wagering?

take my word for this, when a guy goes on the exchange that has a capital S on their back for SUCKER, you are never going to have a chance to book their action.

[biggestal99]

here is the link about betfair premium charges.

http://www.betfair.com/aboutUs/Betfair.Charges/

and a quote

"In circumstances where Betfair considers, in its absolute discretion, that multiple accounts have been used by one person or group of persons in order to avoid or reduce liability for the Premium Charge, Betfair shall be entitled to treat those accounts as if they relate to one person for the purposes of calculating Premium Charges. In such circumstances Betfair shall link those accounts and the linked accounts shall be jointly and severally liable for any unpaid Premium Charge. The Premium Charge will be debited from any such account(s) where applicable.

Allan

[biggestal99]

The premium charge isn,t against all winners only those who don't generate enough commissions for bf

since bf business model is based upon commisions paid to them this makes total business sense to me.

If someone like the op is making a lot of money using betfair shouldn't bf be compensated.


Allan

[Shemp Howard]

Makes the obscene take-out at Penn National seem almost fair.

[davew]

The premium charge isn,t against all winners only those who don't generate enough commissions for bf

since bf business model is based upon commisions paid to them this makes total business sense to me.

If someone like the op is making a lot of money using betfair shouldn't bf be compensated.


Allan

Betfair makes 5% on every matched bet in commission.

Your business plan idea makes as much sense as racetracks saying all wagers that would pay more than $600 are making too much and will be reduced to $599, so that w2-g's do not have to be written.

[pacer]

what are betting with them? horses sports ?

I wouldn't bet with them anymore.

[Fox]

what kind of people do you expect to be running exchange wagering?

take my word for this, when a guy goes on the exchange that has a capital S on their back for SUCKER, you are never going to have a chance to book their action.

Exactly. Betfair had a 2 step plan. Step 1: tax the winners at up to 60% to encourage them to leave. Step 2: now that the sharp players are gone, book the sucker money themselves by actively participating in the exchange as a counterparty. Furthermore, since they control the platform, they can take first peek at any offers before they become available to the public.

If this exchange ever gets off the ground, I would anticipate hearing a big giant sucking sound of money flowing from Betfair USA to Betfair International as Betfair's trading team will be in full force on the international site that will contractually contribute nothing to US racing. Of course nobody will realize it as it will look like a vibrant and healthy exchange with lots of liquidity.

[biggestal99]

Betfair makes 5% on every matched bet in commission.

Your business plan idea makes as much sense as racetracks saying all wagers that would pay more than $600 are making too much and will be reduced to $599, so that w2-g's do not have to be written.

Its not 'my business plan' its BF's.

Their BP is to make money via commissions. If someone is using BF equipment and exchange to make cash shouldn't BF be allowed to make a cash too.

They are in business not to make friends of bettors but to make money providing a service.

Allan

[biggestal99]

Step 1: tax the winners at up to 60% to encourage them to leave.

How does charging 60% of the winnings encourage people to leave?

if I was making money on a consistent basis as a few BF players do
I would not mind paying BF part of my profit as a cost of doing business with them.

Allan

[biggestal99]

why has Betfair stock risen dramatically in the past 2 years?

Allan

[Canarsie]

why has Betfair stock risen dramatically in the past 2 years?

Allan

Maybe because it was close to a five year low in 2011 and it had nowhere to go but up. It's funny as a betfair apologist you only go back two years to skew the facts.

If you bought their stock in 2011 I would imagine thousand of stocks have outperformed Betfair. Your turn to prove me wrong for the first time.

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=BET.L&t=5y&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=

[Canarsie]

The premium charge is rough, charging someone more because they win makes no sense to me.

Have you placed wagers at roughly the same time as your family from different IP addresses ?

I know you like to go back in time this would be a good one to meet that criteria. There was a serious discussion going on about this exact thing quite a few years ago. Many switched companies especially in Canada. Quite a few in the U.K. also because competition heated up.

[Canarsie]

How does charging 60% of the winnings encourage people to leave?

if I was making money on a consistent basis as a few BF players do
I would not mind paying BF part of my profit as a cost of doing business with them.

Allan

The year isn't over yet but this has to be the dumbest post of 2015 hands down.

Why would I work under the table if I was being taxed at 60%? It's your logic that saw companies like Apple placing more and more assets overseas to avoid taxes that are no where near 60% here.

Throw in they might be charging double here in commissions than in the U.K.

I'm just wondering how many people from NJ are now rethinking about even entering the exchange that charges. Why don't you take a look at state usury rates and see how DUMB your argument is.

This is why exchange wagering will fail if FS gets regulated by each and every state. There is a better chance of that happening compared to getting EW introduced to even five states.

http://www.lendingkarma.com/content/state-usury-laws-legal-interest-rates/

[Fox]

The year isn't over yet but this has to be the dumbest post of 2015 hands down.


I second the nomination. I wasn't even going to dignify the question with a response.

[biggestal99]

The year isn't over yet but this has to be the dumbest post of 2015 hands down.

Why would I work under the table if I was being taxed at 60%? It's your logic that saw companies like Apple placing more and more assets overseas to avoid taxes that are no where near 60% here.




LOL. If I was making 10,000 a week using betfair, now they come in and take 6K. That still leaves me ahead 4K as opposed to 0K if I leave.

4K beats 0K every time

so I only make 200,000 a year.

my lifestyle will suffer so.

here is an article from 2011 regarding the advent of the PC.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/jun/29/betfair-premium-charge-increase

Allan

[Fox]

why has Betfair stock risen dramatically in the past 2 years?

Allan

What's good for Betfair isn't synonymous with what's good for the player or what's good for the tracks.

[Appy]

It sounds as though they are, in effect, saying that unless you're a loser they prefer not to do business with you.
Seems like they would understand that without winners no one will play. Then where would they be?

That exactly reflects the testimony given in Senate hearings by the casino operators who are trying to keep racetracks from reopening in Kansas. The powers that be installed a legal loophole, 40% tax on racetracks/22%tax on casino, which created a monopoly for the state owned casinos. When the Senate looked at the feasibility of removing that loophole and creating a level playing field, the operators objected by saying they would not be interested in further investments without that advantage. In simpler terms they said "If WE have to play fair, we won't play."

[Fox]

It sounds as though they are, in effect, saying that unless you're a loser they prefer not to do business with you.
Seems like they would understand that without winners no one will play. Then wher


You can think of it in some ways like a poker game. Initially, BF just hosted the game and dealt the cards. In exchange, they took a rake. As with any poker game, there were winners and losers. Betfair would prefer that the players just bet the money back and forth until it was completely raked out. Viewing the consistent winners as the enemy because they take money out of the ecosystem, they said you can keep playing but every night we will take 60% of your winnings. Now, if they took the 60% and gave it to the losers, that would be one thing. But they just pocket the 60% so it hurts the winners and doesn't really help the losers. After the 60% winner's tax, some winners stayed but most left because it changed the equation too much. Not happy yet, to fill the empty seats, Betfair inserts their own house players into the game. These new house players are just playing for the benefit of the house and are armed with information not available to anyone such as the 100% complete hand and betting history of all the players at the table.
So now they get the regular rake, 60% of the profits of any player good enough to beat the rake, and they get the profits from their own staff of players armed with knowledge not available to anyone sucker enough to still sit at the table. But wait, that's still not enough. They also think a rake increase from 5% to 6.5% is in order.

[Fox]

You can think of it in some ways like a poker game. Initially, BF just hosted the game and dealt the cards. In exchange, they took a rake. As with any poker game, there were winners and losers. Betfair would prefer that the players just bet the money back and forth until it was completely raked out. Viewing the consistent winners as the enemy because they take money out of the ecosystem, they said you can keep playing but every night we will take 60% of your winnings. Now, if they took the 60% and gave it to the losers, that would be one thing. But they just pocket the 60% so it hurts the winners and doesn't really help the losers. After the 60% winner's tax, some winners stayed but most left because it changed the equation too much. Not happy yet, to fill the empty seats, Betfair inserts their own house players into the game. These new house players are just playing for the benefit of the house and are armed with information not available to anyone such as the 100% complete hand and betting history of all the players at the table.
So now they get the regular rake, 60% of the profits of any player good enough to beat the rake, and they get the profits from their own staff of players armed with knowledge not available to anyone sucker enough to still sit at the table. But wait, that's still not enough. They also think a rake increase from 5% to 6.5% is in order.

And a la the casinos in their sheeps' clothing getting in bed with racetracks, Betfair doesn't even really care about the marginally profitable poker game anymore and starts to neglect it while at the same time opening a glitzy new casino/sportsbook in the room right over there where they can entice players to enjoy one of their more profitable products.

[Dave Schwartz]

It sounds as though they are, in effect, saying that unless you're a loser they prefer not to do business with you.
Seems like they would understand that without winners no one will play. Then where would they be?

The reality is that long-term winners are a draw down on the sport, even in a parimutuel environment.

They become like an extra poker dealer cutting the pot, taking money away from what the "house" (i.e. track) can win.

Not saying I like it, but it is the mathematics of the game.


When you think about it, the concept holds true in all games where the line changes based upon amounts wagered. In sports betting it is more advantageous to the player if they are playing against weaker players who push the line towards a more profitable end.

[raybo]

How does charging 60% of the winnings encourage people to leave?

if I was making money on a consistent basis as a few BF players do
I would not mind paying BF part of my profit as a cost of doing business with them.

Allan

60% wouldn't be just "part of" your profit, it would be the "majority" of your profit. :bang:

[AndyC]

i am glad that someone else is exposing the pitfalls of exchange wagering. when i have wrote about it, no one believed me here. unfortunately i know the original poster is telling it like it is.

everyone always knocks Churhill Downs and Stronach, yet they are dead set against exchange wagering. instead of fighting each other, my wish would be for the new year that the 2 of them get together to secure the pari mutuel pools and make a few other changes to get the racing game back on track. my strong advice would be to pay more attention to the racing side of their business because at some point of time they are going to need a strong race track to keep their slot machines alive.

Charging a 20% premium is not inherent to exchange wagering. So let's not make a claim that it is a pitfall. To be done right there would need to be very clear rules as to the financial obligations of a bettor and the exchange.

[thaskalos]

The reality is that long-term winners are a draw down on the sport, even in a parimutuel environment.

They become like an extra poker dealer cutting the pot, taking money away from what the "house" (i.e. track) can win.

Not saying I like it, but it is the mathematics of the game.

The long-term winner IS a drawdown on the sport...but there wouldn't be a sport without him. The only thing that entices the average gambler to seriously participate in a game with the reputation and the takeout of our game is the assumption that the game could be BEATEN...and this assumption exists only because the long-term winner exists. So...along with being a "drawdown"...the long-term winner also becomes the game's best and most effective form of ADVERTISING. It isn't the WINNER'S fault that his contributions to the game are underreported and unappreciated.

The view that the long-term winner is "taking money away from what the track can win" is a bit myopic...IMO. If it weren't for the long-term winner...the track wouldn't win any money at all. No one is stupid enough to play roulette-on-horseback, with a 17-30% takeout.

[Dave Schwartz]

The long-term winner IS a drawdown on the sport...but there wouldn't be a sport without him.

I completely agree.

[ryzerman]

here is the link about betfair premium charges.

http://www.betfair.com/aboutUs/Betfair.Charges/

and a quote

"In circumstances where Betfair considers, in its absolute discretion, that multiple accounts have been used by one person or group of persons in order to avoid or reduce liability for the Premium Charge, Betfair shall be entitled to treat those accounts as if they relate to one person for the purposes of calculating Premium Charges. In such circumstances Betfair shall link those accounts and the linked accounts shall be jointly and severally liable for any unpaid Premium Charge. The Premium Charge will be debited from any such account(s) where applicable.

Allan


Allan, that post you made above about BF is not true at all in this case. I don't know why you would bring that up. I clearly was paying 20% premium for 4-5 weeks in my own account. What you should said, basically implies to everyone on here, betfair can do whatever they want when they want if it convenients them and makes them money and screws an innocent person!!

[ryzerman]

what are betting with them? horses sports ?

I wouldn't bet with them anymore.

Horses and NO I would never bet with them again. This is a nightmare. They take your money and than go in the dark and think you wont do anything about it... I am more upset about what they have done, than even the money though. They are criminals no other explanation.

[ryzerman]

Its not 'my business plan' its BF's.

Their BP is to make money via commissions. If someone is using BF equipment and exchange to make cash shouldn't BF be allowed to make a cash too.

They are in business not to make friends of bettors but to make money providing a service.

Allan

I appreciate someone on here who wants to take the position of the antagonist, I expected this to happen. But honestly I can tell by your posts you probably work for Betfair in some way.

First is a commission of 6% not making money. Every winning bet you make BF takes 6% from you.

Second I read that you would be happy to pay 60% commission, you do realize if you lose one week you don't get that back. So only when you win your paying 60%. That makes sense to you?

Anyway were steering away from the real issue here. Not whether or not a premium charge should exist but the way in which betfair has handled my situation. You can continue writing as the antagonist but atleast be an ounce sensible about it.

[biggestal99]

Allan, that post you made above about BF is not true at all in this case. I don't know why you would bring that up. I clearly was paying 20% premium for 4-5 weeks in my own account. What you should said, basically implies to everyone on here, betfair can do whatever they want when they want if it convenients them and makes them money and screws an innocent person!!

I took that quote directly from the Betfair website. If its not true, then sue them. If it is then you are SOL. They can and did link all the accounts together.

Allan

[Redboard]

If you read the above post... you would understand that 2 of those accounts were old accounts I made and used for a couple months many years ago. Lost some money. Than went on again made an account forgot the password username etc.. made a new account. Those first two satrabyk2, kybartas50 were mainly just some poker playing. Finally I made satrabyk1 and started the horses a few years ago. The fattony1504 was my brothers as was kybart, because my bro like me would make an account lose forgot about it and than want to play again but forget the account info so just made a new one, which is allowed. Than satrabyk was my dads account. I found that out today. The reason they bring all these account up is because they think they are speaking to my dad basically. He did not even know about this until I told him today. They didn't feel like they had to email him because to BF I he is me.

Has there been any betting activity on satrabyk2 or kybartas50 in the past few years ? Just wondering why BF wouldn't automatically delete these accounts if there were no activity. I thought they all did that.

[ryzerman]

I took that quote directly from the Betfair website. If its not true, then sue them. If it is then you are SOL. They can and did link all the accounts together.

Allan

Oh my. Well your playing your role well. There would be no society if everyone agreed i guess. Im sure if your were in this position you would feel as though BF has the right to do this.

[ryzerman]

Has there been any betting activity on satrabyk2 or kybartas50 in the past few years ? Just wondering why BF wouldn't automatically delete these accounts if there were no activity. I thought they all did that.


No there was no activity bet for atleast 4 years, probably more. That can be proved 100%. Basically the geniuses found every account that had the last name Kybartas. And said lets put them together and screw satrabyk1, which happens to me. That is the extent of there absolute discretion...

[thaskalos]

If you read the above post... you would understand that 2 of those accounts were old accounts I made and used for a couple months many years ago. Lost some money. Than went on again made an account forgot the password username etc.. made a new account. Those first two satrabyk2, kybartas50 were mainly just some poker playing. Finally I made satrabyk1 and started the horses a few years ago. The fattony1504 was my brothers as was kybart, because my bro like me would make an account lose forgot about it and than want to play again but forget the account info so just made a new one, which is allowed. Than satrabyk was my dads account. I found that out today. The reason they bring all these account up is because they think they are speaking to my dad basically. He did not even know about this until I told him today. They didn't feel like they had to email him because to BF I he is me.

If only your satrabyk1 account is currently active...and the other 5 account have been left dormant for years, as you say...then you should have no problem proving your case to Betfair. But if the OTHER accounts are also currently active, even on an infrequent basis, and similar betting tactics are found to be used on all the accounts...then you are going to have a hard time proving that separate entities are using these accounts.

[ryzerman]

If only your satrabyk1 account is currently active...and the other 5 account have been left dormant for years, as you say...then you should have no problem proving your case to Betfair. But if the OTHER accounts are also currently active, even on an infrequent basis, and similar betting tactics are found to be used on all the accounts...then you are going to have a hard time proving that separate entities are using these accounts.

No none of the accounts other than satrabyk1, which is mine have been active for a long time. I think my brother was the last to play, and that was a couple years ago. I don't know the exact date. But again BF has that info. But basically what im getting from their email is that because my dads account satrabyk was in the 40% range, than automatically hes playing for me. And that's the only explanation because i wasn't even old enough when he created his first account so they cant say im the one who is the single entity. They are saying from my understanding of the above email that my dad is playing under his sons account and therefore has bypassed charges so will charge his son who is actually him. That is the dilemma.. They made this up with 0 proof and legitimacy and now i am left to suffer for doing absoultuely nothing wrong but having the same last name and similar username to my dad. I didn't know that was a crime!?

[thaskalos]

No none of the accounts other than satrabyk1, which is mine have been active for a long time. I think my brother was the last to play, and that was a couple years ago. I don't know the exact date. But again BF has that info. But basically what im getting from their email is that because my dads account satrabyk was in the 40% range, than automatically hes playing for me. And that's the only explanation because i wasn't even old enough when he created his first account so they cant say im the one who is the single entity. They are saying from my understanding of the above email that my dad is playing under his sons account and therefore has bypassed charges so will charge his son who is actually him. That is the dilemma.. They made this up with 0 proof and legitimacy and now i am left to suffer for doing absoultuely nothing wrong but having the same last name and similar username to my dad. I didn't know that was a crime!?

Are you currently using the same betting strategies that your father was using years ago when HE was betting? Is it just the NAME that is the same...or is there something ELSE that makes them think that the same person is using these accounts?

Use a little role-reversal here. If YOU were Betfair...then what sort of proof would be enough to change your mind about this issue?

[biggestal99]

Look i know i am being harsh but bf has the right to link your accounts.

Companies write all the rules to favor their side if it comes to a lawsuit.

I feel for you, i really do, its just the rules are against you in this case.

You were judged guilty with out due process which sucks.

Allan

[paddy79]

the people defending betfair are defending a company that charges 60% to winners. and they don't give you a rebate for losses. win 10k one week and get charged 6k. lose 10k the next week and get nothing back.

how is a straight opinion based punter going to win long term with that kind of weekly tax rate?

the company screwed its long term customers by bringing in a premium charge that penalises them retroactively for being winners.

[SuperPickle]

Look i know i am being harsh but bf has the right to link your accounts.

Companies write all the rules to favor their side if it comes to a lawsuit.

I feel for you, i really do, its just the rules are against you in this case.

You were judged guilty with out due process which sucks.

Allan


Allan is unfortunately right...

I'm going to give you the second best advice you'll get on here after getting a lawyer.

Go back and locate the terms of service you agreed to on the accounts and try and figure out what you did wrong.

Betfair is a billion dollar company. They're not going to turn off an account and take the money unless they feel confident they have you. Given their actions I'm pretty sure you inadvertently broke the terms of service you agreed up when you signed up.

You've mention you did the following...

1. Had multiple Betfair accounts
2. People you live with or are related too also had accounts
3. Wagers on the same events may have been placed from these multiple accounts
4. These wagers may have taken opposite bets in these events
5. Multiple accounts used the same internet/IP address

I have to imagine one of these things or 2-3 of them done together breaks the terms of service. You really need to go back and read it slowly and try figure what you might have done.

I will however give you a glimmer of hope. A lot of dummies on this board have mentioned you should sue or have a legal leg to stand on. You probably don't but might only because you're not in the U.S. If a U.S. citizen opens a TvG/Betfair account they waived their right to sue in the terms of service. It's replaced by an arbitrator of Betfair's choosing and you can only imagine how that turns out. If you're a U.S. citizen and buy an Apple product you waive the right to sue Apple in regards to the performance of that product. Sign up for Comcast cable? Waive your right to sue. Cell phone with Verizon or AT&T? Waive your right to sue. On and on...

So while you're combing through the terms of service look for the part you might have broke and look at the part which discusses "remedies" or "disputes." If you agreed to arbitration or any type of private mediation its game over. But if your country of residence prohibits this you might have a punchers shot at getting some of your money back.

Best of luck!

[ultracapper]

LOL. If I was making 10,000 a week using betfair, now they come in and take 6K. That still leaves me ahead 4K as opposed to 0K if I leave.

4K beats 0K every time

so I only make 200,000 a year.

my lifestyle will suffer so.

here is an article from 2011 regarding the advent of the PC.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/jun/29/betfair-premium-charge-increase

Allan

This indicates to me that Betfair is providing the money to keep the markets liquid. It is they, Betfair themselves, that in many cases is taking your bet. When you win, you're winning money from them, and they want it back. So they take it. Otherwise, why would it matter whether you win or not? You put up $100, somebody in Timbuktu puts up $100, one of you wins, Betfair takes their commission. What the hell would it matter how much, or how often, you're winning if they got their commission off every bet? Why would you winning from other gamblers matter to them? Sounds to me like they are providing the liquidity. Stock is probably going up because there is no better investment than in somebody that can just steal as they wish.

[SuperPickle]

This indicates to me that Betfair is providing the money to keep the markets liquid. It is they, Betfair themselves, that in many cases is taking your bet. When you win, you're winning money from them, and they want it back. So they take it. Otherwise, why would it matter whether you win or not? You put up $100, somebody in Timbuktu puts up $100, one of you wins, Betfair takes their commission. What the hell would it matter how much, or how often, you're winning if they got their commission off every bet? Why would you winning from other gamblers matter to them? Sounds to me like they are providing the liquidity. Stock is probably going up because there is no better investment than in somebody that can just steal as they wish.


Keep in mind you're dealing with an ENTIRELY different takeout and tax system so don't get bogged down in the details. British bookmakers don't pay takeout into purses. Hence the small purses. And winnings are taxed differently. I don't know about England but anyone who's been to Woodbine can tell you there's no tax on winnings.

The big question is if I win $10,000 at Royal Ascot and I win $10,000 at Belmont how much am I clearing post taxes and fees. I have a hunch you do better in England.

[classhandicapper]

Speaking as a non lawyer...

If I were Betfair, my first assumption would be that people are going to look for ways to get around the extra costs associated with winning play. So looking for accounts that may be linked in some way was an obvious counter move.

Finding multiple accounts with the same last name, same mailing address, same IP address etc... and things like that would be an automatic. More sophisticated would be looking for similar betting patterns and bets among certain accounts (friends that are working together spitting up the action, the same person using multiple accounts and stuff like that). That's how they used to catch online poker partnerships.

Once they find these patterns and linkages and suspect foul play, they probably have a right to stop them. Some of the rules posted suggest that.

If they have some proof it's the same person or a team, then I think they probably have a right to charge those accounts for uncollected fees.

If you are telling the truth that none of you worked together as a team and that various accounts were created for individual play only, then you are getting screwed. All they'll have is multiple accounts owned by several members of the same family.

But if the IP addresses are the same or betting patterns are the same, then I think you are out of luck. That would indicate that the accounts are in fact related beyond the fact that you guys are relatives.

[ultracapper]

Keep in mind you're dealing with an ENTIRELY different takeout and tax system so don't get bogged down in the details. British bookmakers don't pay takeout into purses. Hence the small purses. And winnings are taxed differently. I don't know about England but anyone who's been to Woodbine can tell you there's no tax on winnings.

The big question is if I win $10,000 at Royal Ascot and I win $10,000 at Belmont how much am I clearing post taxes and fees. I have a hunch you do better in England.

It's clear to me I don't understand how Betfair operates exactly, or exactly what they are subjected to from a tax standpoint. Thank you for the post.

[whodoyoulike]

Isn't TVG owned by a betfair company and/or is it an affiliate of the one the OP is posting?

[paddy79]

You won't get the money back.

Betfair have employed a PREMIUM CHARGE AVOIDANCE TEAM

What this means is that there are some people on a SALARY whose job is to scour through the accounts of premium charge players and look for any associated accounts and then analyze the betting patterns. People are employed solely for this purpose. This means that they MUST provide some results and essentially justify their job position.

If they get a sniff of joint accounts and similar betting strategies on both accounts they will act immediately. There are many stories of this on the betfair forum which is probably the most active gambling forum out there. Have a read of that forum, im sure some people have had the same problem you had. Better yet, post your story on there for some advice.

Best of luck.

[paddy79]

Keep in mind you're dealing with an ENTIRELY different takeout and tax system so don't get bogged down in the details. British bookmakers don't pay takeout into purses. Hence the small purses. And winnings are taxed differently. I don't know about England but anyone who's been to Woodbine can tell you there's no tax on winnings.

The big question is if I win $10,000 at Royal Ascot and I win $10,000 at Belmont how much am I clearing post taxes and fees. I have a hunch you do better in England.

all income from gambling is not taxed in the UK or Ireland.

[whodoyoulike]

Its not 'my business plan' its BF's.

Their BP is to make money via commissions. If someone is using BF equipment and exchange to make cash shouldn't BF be allowed to make a cash too.

They are in business not to make friends of bettors but to make money providing a service.

Allan

Just for full disclosure reasons and other concerns of mine, ----- are you affiliated with a race track or horse owners association?

Because your post is along the same lines I've come to believe is the way which those two entities view the bettor and their money. I can see that as a view point from horse owners but tracks should be indifferent to the bettors money.

[SuperPickle]

all income from gambling is not taxed in the UK or Ireland.

I figured that. So these fees really are small compared to what U.S. residents pay on winnings.

[Fox]

What the hell would it matter how much, or how often, you're winning if they got their commission off every bet? Why would you winning from other gamblers matter to them? Sounds to me like they are providing the liquidity. Stock is probably going up because there is no better investment than in somebody that can just steal as they wish.

Read my post 44 of this thread. It might help put Betfair's frame of mind in perspective. They started as the players' champion where winners were welcome then they went public and that was the end of that. Let's roll out the red carpet for them here though and let them use the same playbook. It will be a bonanza for Betfair and no one else.

[paddy79]

I figured that. So these fees really are small compared to what U.S. residents pay on winnings.


I am not sure about what US players pay on racing winnings. I assume it would be a percentage of the yearly income? and if you make over a certain amount it would be a percentage of that? I imagine it would be easy to not declare everything you've made though since its done in cash? What is the story with rebates for loses?

What makes the betfair 60% charge so devastating is that it's a weekly charge with no rebates. Every wednesday your account gets hit for 60% of the previous weeks winnings. So as an example, you could win 10k one week and win 10k the next week and then lose 10k the third week. You will come out of that situation as an overall loser, 2k down (left with only 4k winnings on the first and second week = 8k profit and then the 10k loss = minus of 2k) when you should be 10k up.

These charges mount up pretty quickly and I wouldn't take the concept of a premium charge lightly if I was you.

[Stillriledup]

I am not sure about what US players pay on racing winnings. I assume it would be a percentage of the yearly income? and if you make over a certain amount it would be a percentage of that? I imagine it would be easy to not declare everything you've made though since its done in cash? What is the story with rebates for loses?

What makes the betfair 60% charge so devastating is that it's a weekly charge with no rebates. Every wednesday your account gets hit for 60% of the previous weeks winnings. So as an example, you could win 10k one week and win 10k the next week and then lose 10k the third week. You will come out of that situation as an overall loser, 2k down (left with only 4k winnings on the first and second week = 8k profit and then the 10k loss = minus of 2k) when you should be 10k up.

These charges mount up pretty quickly and I wouldn't take the concept of a premium charge lightly if I was you.

With the premium charges, what incentive does someone have to work their fingers to the bone handicapping, watching replays till 5am, etc so they can make a lucrative living on Betfair. You can be an overall losing player, but have one nice stretch of luck and get into the premium bracket which you can never escape no matter how many losing months or years you have in a row. Any solid handicapper is going to have a 'hot stretch' does that mean the majority of players on BF are paying premium charges?

[whodoyoulike]

After reading about Betfair's bet charges etc., a question keeps coming up for me -------

Why do people continue using Betfair and are they the only game provider available?

Aren't there other alternatives to the bettor which are more accommodating?

[Stillriledup]

Tracks need to give bettors the option to bet against a horse without having to 'pick the winner' in order to profit.

[paddy79]

With the premium charges, what incentive does someone have to work their fingers to the bone handicapping, watching replays till 5am, etc so they can make a lucrative living on Betfair. You can be an overall losing player, but have one nice stretch of luck and get into the premium bracket which you can never escape no matter how many losing months or years you have in a row. Any solid handicapper is going to have a 'hot stretch' does that mean the majority of players on BF are paying premium charges?

most of the big players left when the charges came in and the us horse racing markets took a hit in liquidity. you can read about in on the betfair forums. the players that play on it are probably losers/breaking even or just about slightly in profit. I paid it at 20% and it pretty much made me a losing player due to the hot stretches and cold stretches. i am profitable but the cold stretches without rebates just kill you when you've paid some of your profits out from the hot stretches.

put simply, betfair don't want winners.

also, a lot of the activity on betfair is trading. players are backing horses at certain odds and then trading the horses when the horses drop in odds or trading out for a small loss if the horse has drifted. much of the activity is done through "bots". another thing to consider is that there is a rival exchange called betdaq which is the only alternative for exchange players but suffers from a real lack of liquidity. what players do is set up their "bots" to back horses at certain prices and simultaneously "lay" the horses at certain prices across both exchanges. The "bot" controls the bets and is programmed to cancel the bets if the odds are not profitable for the player. i think it was mentioned in the article posted on monmouth park introducing betfair that a large number of the activity on betfair was done by "bots", 90% if im not mistaken.

[paddy79]

After reading about Betfair's bet charges etc., a question keeps coming up for me -------

Why do people continue using Betfair and are they the only game provider available?

Aren't there other alternatives to the bettor which are more accommodating?


betfair still offers good enough liquidity and the best prices. the problem only arises when you become an overall winner. i suspect a very small percentage of players are in profit long term. the 20% tax is on all winners. if you can beat that tax and still make profit, which i assume some skilled players can, then you get the 60% tax once you've made an overall profit off 250,000. This is surely the point where skilled players are forced to leave betfair and have been forced to leave. Even though you're paying betfair 60%, the fact is that from their perspective you are still extracting money from the exchange. Once you hit the 60% tax bracket, i would be very very surprised if a position taking player would still be profitable. By position taker I mean a player who manually handicaps races and takes a position and bets on it. I can understand if "bot" players are still profitable because they presumably have programmed their bot to take advantage of some type of numerical edge, im assuming. If a 60% position taking player is still profitable after that weekly 60% deduction on profits, I think he would be one of the best handicappers out there.

[Poindexter]

I am posting this on the forum as I hope people here this story and either support me or not.

My name is Raymond Kybartas, I have been betting on betfair for a few years now. Recently I was doing so well that I was told I would be paying a premium charge in the 20% category. Therefore for 4-5 weeks I began paying the charges every on Wednesday. Until I received an email December 17, as shown below.

(17/12/2015 09.07 AM)

"Dear Mr Kybartas

I am writing to inform you that your accounts, "kybartas50","satrabyk2" & "satrabyk1" have been suspended under investigation of Premium Charge evasion.

Your accounts will remain suspended for a period of at least 8-10 working days whilst we complete this investigation. You will be contacted again once the investigation is complete.

Yours Sincerely,"

Betfair Pricing (end of email)

I was in shock because just the day before I paid my premium charge which was a large sum because I had a good week. I did not understand why or what this email meant. So I called right away. The agent was helpful but explained to me that unfortunately I would not be able to speak to these people who sent me this email, but he would ask them to call me. I waited and received no phone call. My account and the 12,500 in it was frozen. Until earlier today I got this email below...

(23/12/2015 03.34 PM)

"Dear Mr Kybartas,

The 6 accounts (satrabyk, kybart, kybartas50, satrabyk2, satrabyk1 & FatTony1504) have been under investigation of Premium Charge evasion due to the inconsistent nature of betting activity conducted across the accounts. Specifically, it is clear that the activity conducted across the accounts is the distribution of a single betting strategy.

In respect of the Premium Charge we provide an allowance against the first £1,000 of charges that would otherwise be incurred by any customer and also exempt customers who have not bet in more than 250 markets. Additionally, higher rates of Premium Charge may apply when a customer’s lifetime net profits exceed £250,000. It is plainly unrealistic to expect to distribute activity across more than one account to benefit from an allowance per account and/or continual exemptions by ensuring less than 250 markets are bet on via each account; or to ensure that the lifetime net profit remains below the threshold above which higher rates may apply.

To that extent, from this week onwards, all accounts listed will be linked for the purposes of calculating the Premium Charge. To week 833 (23:59 Sunday 20th December 2015) the distribution of activity across the accounts has resulted in the underpayment of Premium Charges to the sum of CAD28,324.46, this amount has been debited from the ‘satrabyk1’ account and this account has been unsuspended. Please be aware that this attempt to evade the Premium Charge is in breach of Betfair’s Terms and Conditions.

These deductions will lead to a negative balance on the ‘satrabyk1’ account and it will therefore only be that account that is unsuspended, until the negative balance is cleared. Please make arrangements to fund this account to cover the negative balance at your earliest opportunity. Once any outstanding balance has been repaid the remaining accounts will be reopened.

I trust this makes the position perfectly clear. Your activity on Betfair is conditional upon your acceptance of our Terms and Conditions, and I must repeat that operating accounts in multiple names in order to conceal the true identity of your activity will not be tolerated by us.

Yours sincerely,"

Betfair Pricing (end of email)

So now I am even more shocked and disturbed. From this email they have indicated that all the accounts are the same person. By this they are trying to say that one person used various accounts to avoid the charges. While this might be a strategy they have come across in the past, it holds no truth in this case. I made some calls. First to betfair. Once again they had told me they would call me back. However I called again tonight and the manager said the premium charge people don't call people back. Regardless I also found out that the other 3 accounts listed in the above email had belonged to my father and my brother.

My father years ago was successful on Betfair, so much that he was entering the 40% premium rate, for that reasons and other factors he no longer trades on Betfair. My brother traded for awhile but he has a drain company and just does not have the time.

What I am getting from this email is that for convenience of their site, BF has insinuated that my father is me. Or that me, my father and my brother are all one person or entity as they say. I have witnesses that could testify all of us betting on betfair simultaneously in the betting parlour we attend a few years ago. Also that me Raymond Kybartas a 25 year old has been operating my account satrabyk1 for multiple years. The account satrabyk belonged to my father which I found out today. Weird username but its our last name in reverse, easy to remember.

So now essentially I am in the dark, before the holidays. They have taken 12,500 and also claim that I owe them another almost 16,000. You see a negative amount in my account. For one reason. I have the same name as my dad who was a successful bettor hence the 40% rate. I asked betfair today if relatives with the same name are considered one person. Because I know other families with more than one users betting who were not combined. They laughed and said no that's not the case. I spoke to just a standard phone agent but he was helpful and I assume he understood the rules.

I have emailed the commission and have responded to betfairs email and will keep anyone updated on here about what happens moving forward. Its a nightmare and they leave you in the dark. No reply. Arrogant. They make a decision and its the right one. They punish someone who has done nothing wrong but finally learn how to win some money. I know Canadians wont be allowed on betfair any longer but this is a totally separate issue. I feel like people should know what you are dealing with here. You would think he biggest exchange in the world can be trusted. That you can sleep knowing your money will not be stolen. Its not the case. They have robbed me, and I can only fight to get it back.

Any help and support would be appreciated.

In my book this is absolutely criminal. As much as I would love exchange wagering in the US, if Betfair became legal today, they would not see a dime of my money. Thank you OP for posting. I really feel your pain.

[paddy79]

the original poster has said his father was forced out of betfair due to the premium charge tax. i can say the same.

however, looking at it from betfairs perspective, you have a number of accounts coming from the same IP address. this is a big flag.

I believe the original poster in that he probably hasn't been using the accounts himself. however, the strategies on the accounts clearly must be similar. i have no doubt that the original posters father would have schooled him on making profit with certain strategies.

betfair has seen a similarity in profitable strategy here. they noticed one account was profitable but was neutralized by the premium charge (your dads) and then they see your account which is profitable but not taxed as much as your dads (the premium charge tax rises with the amount of profit you have made).

looking at it from betfairs perspective, there is no way to tell who is using the account. your dad could be using the account, from their perspective. then it becomes a situation where he would be avoiding the premium charge tax.

what is disgraceful here is the way betfair conducts their business. this is a clear case of very disrespectful customer service. "we will get back to you" followed by no calls and so on. they do not want winning players, simple as that and because they have a monopoly on exchange playing, they know they can treat players like this and get away with it because there is nowhere else to turn.

[whodoyoulike]

...
put simply, betfair don't want winners.

also, a lot of the activity on betfair is trading. players are backing horses at certain odds and then trading the horses when the horses drop in odds or trading out for a small loss if the horse has drifted. much of the activity is done through "bots". another thing to consider is that there is a rival exchange called betdaq which is the only alternative for exchange players but suffers from a real lack of liquidity. what players do is set up their "bots" to back horses at certain prices and simultaneously "lay" the horses at certain prices across both exchanges. The "bot" controls the bets and is programmed to cancel the bets if the odds are not profitable for the player. i think it was mentioned in the article posted on monmouth park introducing betfair that a large number of the activity on betfair was done by "bots", 90% if im not mistaken.

I'm unfamiliar with exchanges since they're unavailable to me here in the US, I've never researched how to use them or what would be a good strategy when using one. Thanks for the info and the pitfall warnings of using exchanges especially this one.

So, they're basically bookies of horse bets which is why you think they don't want winners. And, they probably are booking most if not all of the bets themselves instead of flowing the money through a track's wagering pool.

[paddy79]

With the premium charges, what incentive does someone have to work their fingers to the bone handicapping, watching replays till 5am, etc so they can make a lucrative living on Betfair. You can be an overall losing player, but have one nice stretch of luck and get into the premium bracket which you can never escape no matter how many losing months or years you have in a row. Any solid handicapper is going to have a 'hot stretch' does that mean the majority of players on BF are paying premium charges?


my theory on this is that skilled players can take the hit of losing 20% of their profits per week. the original poster said his dad was forced out once he got to 40%. i myself couldn't beat 20%. i would assume that 60% would neutralize any handicapper.

i place my bets in what we call "bookmakers". which are casinos on the high street in the UK which allow you to walk in and place bets. they do not charge any tax but they also do not like winning players. you would have a very hard time placing a bet for a couple of hundred dollars. this is why i have moved into exotic betting, looking for very big returns from small outlays.

i live in hope of an exchange arising which doesn't charge players premium taxes.

[paddy79]

I'm unfamiliar with exchanges since they're unavailable to me here in the US, I've never researched how to use them or what would be a good strategy when using one. Thanks for the info and the pitfall warnings of using exchanges.

So, they're basically bookies of horse bets which is why you think they don't want winners. And, they probably are booking the bets themselves instead of flowing the money through a track's wagering pool.


the idea of an exchange is beautiful in theory. the prices on betfair are routinely better than the prices that are put up on the track. take charles town last night for example

http://form.timeform.betfair.com/course?courseId=2.93&date=20151224

the figures on the right hand side where you see BSP/Tote are the betfair starting price and the tote price. decimal odds but the gist is that Betfair prices are typically much better by quite a big percentage. the winner of the last race paying at 62% higher on the exchange than it was at the charles town track for example.

nobody had a problem with betfair taking 5% from the profit on every bet. You win $100 and get $95 and give betfair a $5 cut. this was a very profitable model from betfair and allowed them to grow into a multi million dollar company. There is still millions matched on events. The liquidity is unreal at times. A lot of casual (long term losing) gamblers would have betfair accounts and would place small bets here and there. It's still a profitable idea. Betfair marketed themselves as "anti casinos" and "anti bookies" where you were allowed to win money and so on. However the original founders have left the company. andrew black was the man who set it up with the original superb idea and it revolutionized betting. now the board is full of executives whose main concern is maximising profits for shareholders.

Another concern is that betfair has recently merged with bookmaker paddy power. Paddy power in fact have an overall higher percentage of ownership i believe. This is more bad news for exchange hopefuls. to read more about that click here, this might be of interest. it's a very articulate piece of writing on what the future of betfair might be


http://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/30575973/paddy-power-merger-the-final-betrayal#flvWelcomeHeader

[whodoyoulike]

the idea of an exchange is beautiful in theory. the prices on betfair are routinely better than the prices that are put up on the track. take charles town last night for example ...

But, one problem which I see as you previously mentioned although their prices are routinely better if they deemed you to be good and won't accept your full bet versus the track they wouldn't be better. It reminds me of stores which have huge discounted sale items but never carry enough of the item(s).

What good is that?

[SandyW]

If you win too much they increase the rake for you.

Interesting, in other words, you are allowed to play as long as you don't win too much or are a loser.

[no breathalyzer]

sounds like it.. same thing is going on in the poker world.. win too much on certain sites you get table restrictions .. standard

[Stillriledup]

my theory on this is that skilled players can take the hit of losing 20% of their profits per week. the original poster said his dad was forced out once he got to 40%. i myself couldn't beat 20%. i would assume that 60% would neutralize any handicapper.

i place my bets in what we call "bookmakers". which are casinos on the high street in the UK which allow you to walk in and place bets. they do not charge any tax but they also do not like winning players. you would have a very hard time placing a bet for a couple of hundred dollars. this is why i have moved into exotic betting, looking for very big returns from small outlays.

i live in hope of an exchange arising which doesn't charge players premium taxes.

Thanks for all the info Paddy, great writeups!

I'm confused as to why they wouldn't want winners, it's not like the money that is won is coming from them, right? Isn't it money coming from losing players w BF just getting a cut of the AMOUNT bet?

[paddy79]

But, one problem which I see as you previously mentioned although their prices are routinely better if they deemed you to be good and won't accept your full bet versus the track they wouldn't be better. It reminds me of stores which have huge discounted sale items but never carry enough of the item(s).

What good is that?



well you hit the nail on the head.

i do beleive that skiilled handicappers can make it to the 250,000 threshold. I myself am trying to come up with strategies to do it. if you are a winning player you're probably capable of adapting. My prediction is that betfair will take hold of american racing eventually. It may be a good thing because i believe that a lot of guys on here could make it to 250,000. beating the 60% weekly tax at that point would surely neutralize them however.






Thanks for all the info Paddy, great writeups!

I'm confused as to why they wouldn't want winners, it's not like the money that is won is coming from them, right? Isn't it money coming from losing players w BF just getting a cut of the AMOUNT bet?




well the official reason from betfair was that winners extract money from the exchange and betfair have to spend more and more money getting new customers to create accounts. the marketing from betfair is huge in the uk. they've got themselves on tv adds and billboards. they pulled a funny stunt a while back when they rigged an ATM to give out 10k to the public. pretty funny but it shows they really do market to get their name out there

http://www.thedrum.com/stuff/2014/09/18/betfair-gives-atm-users-surprise-super-rich-cash-machine

so clearly they are spending a lot on marketing. however that does not really justify the 60% charge. or even the 20% charge to be honest. to me it's a clear message that bigtime winning players are not wanted. to tell you the truth i honestly dont know why.

now my theory on this is that in an optimal world betfair would want a multitude of losing players fighting it out. lets say they are all losing to each other. they are still giving betfair 5% every bet. so though they got even money on the 1-2 horse and they won $100, they only bank $95 and betfair get their $5 commission (which they take from EVERY player on every winning bet as a minimum). This player then loses to the other player who banks $90 and betfair take another $5. Slowly betfair is taking their money. I think this is what they want in an ideal world.

however the point still stands that winning players are paying their commission. what we see though is that betfair management have decided this isn't enough.

finally, when you see that skilled players will get better odds from layers on the exchange, then it's obvious that a lot of players will be profitable if the exchange comes in. if you're making money now, you will make more money if betfair comes in. and that will be great for a while. but once the charges hit you will soon find yourself back to square one, but i suppose with some more money in your bank account.

[Stillriledup]

Thanks again for the info. Do you think that's really true that winning players cause 'betting handles' to be lower?

[paddy79]

Thanks again for the info. Do you think that's really true that winning players cause 'betting handles' to be lower?


no i don't think they cause the handle to be lower but they extract from the final handle.

what i mean is lets say at the end of your week on betfair you've made 2k profit. since you're a winning player you will extract that. so if we look at betfair as a pool of money that everybody contributes into, well as a winner you are extracting 2k from the pool. that 2k could have ended up in a losing players hands and he would have probably lost it to another losing player next week. i mean this is just my theory on it since im assuming that hitting winning players with 60% tax is basically saying you don't want them. perhaps betfair is happy to have the winning players. well, as long as they pay their 60% every week!

maybe the way to look at it is how can i become a winning handicapper at 60% weekly tax. because if you can do that, i think you can probably make millions.

[satrabyk]

the original poster has said his father was forced out of betfair due to the premium charge tax. i can say the same.

however, looking at it from betfairs perspective, you have a number of accounts coming from the same IP address. this is a big flag.

I believe the original poster in that he probably hasn't been using the accounts himself. however, the strategies on the accounts clearly must be similar. i have no doubt that the original posters father would have schooled him on making profit with certain strategies.

betfair has seen a similarity in profitable strategy here. they noticed one account was profitable but was neutralized by the premium charge (your dads) and then they see your account which is profitable but not taxed as much as your dads (the premium charge tax rises with the amount of profit you have made).

looking at it from betfairs perspective, there is no way to tell who is using the account. your dad could be using the account, from their perspective. then it becomes a situation where he would be avoiding the premium charge tax.


what is disgraceful here is the way betfair conducts their business. this is a clear case of very disrespectful customer service. "we will get back to you" followed by no calls and so on. they do not want winning players, simple as that and because they have a monopoly on exchange playing, they know they can treat players like this and get away with it because there is nowhere else to turn.

Hello everyone this is Raymond's father: Thanks Paddy for your feedback...

I only found out about this from Raymond today as Betfair did not have the decency to email me anything about this even though my account satrabyk is on the list of accounts suspended...
I learned about Betfair on Paceadvantage in 2005, signed up and fell in love with them immediately. They gave a bettor a chance to make money primarily due to the low takeout of 5%. I am sure that I have posted threads on here in the past indicating that if Betfair would be legalized in the U.S. that tote handle would be severely impacted. Mainly to the fact of Betfair's lower takeout. In any case I did ok on Betfair. At times I was at the 20% level and had to pay charges at times. Early in 2014 I stopped betting seriously due to health issues. At the time if I recall I wasn't even near the 20% level.
I have 2 sons. My older son decided to sign up several years ago well before I stopped. He lost money on Betfairs casino and poker where winnings/losses are not included in premium charge calculation. He also was losing on the exchange(horses/sports) as well. For a long period of time he was betting on Betfair on his own computer and IP address while I was also betting on my computer and IP address. After I stopped betting seriously I gave him tips to increase his chances of winning on the exchange and at times made some bets for him on the rare occasions that I was with him. I gave him my laptop to use after his broke down. He eventually started to get the grasp of my tips and actually started to make a small profit. Around December 2014 we both received an email that our accounts were being investigated because it appears that we were attempting to avoid premium charges. Apparently Betfair decided to link our accounts and alerted us that we were approaching the 40 % premium charge level. My son wasn't really that concerned at the time since he just opened up a drain business and had to devote his time there and with my heart issues and decent company pension we did not bother pursuing any action. Would be impossible to win at the 40% level anyways.

Note that during this time and months before my second son Raymond was betting on his own computer and IP making money. Note that Raymond(age 25) is a gifted handicapper and can actually teach me a few things. At the age of 22 he won a handicapping contest and won $3000. He has done quite well on Betfair and hit the 20% premium charge level and did not mind to pay the premium charges at times because he credits Betfair for giving him a chance to win. And now from the above email he received has inherited a 40% premium charge level that he has nothing to do with. Just because he has the same last name. Neither of my sons live with me. Another question to ask is why didn't they link his account with mine and his brother's the first time ?

Also note that if they are linking accounts based on betting strategies good luck to Betfair. They would have to link the winning accounts of several people I introduced to Betfair. All of them are using a similar winning strategy. When I write a book on how to win at Betfair then they will have to link all those accounts as well........

Another important note: Betfair assured me that new accounts related or live in same residence are not automatically linked for the purposes of premium charges as long as they can prove they are separate entities....If my son does not receive his money I will help him fight this to the end. Heart problems or not...I got all the time in the world and a lot of friends in the right places.....and how I glorified Betfair back in 2005....where did they go wrong ???

Betfair return my son's money and if you have any class have someone from your company post on here that this was just a mistake. It's Christmas !!!!

[SandyW]

well you hit the nail on the head.

i do beleive that skiilled handicappers can make it to the 250,000 threshold. I myself am trying to come up with strategies to do it. if you are a winning player you're probably capable of adapting. My prediction is that betfair will take hold of american racing eventually. It may be a good thing because i believe that a lot of guys on here could make it to 250,000. beating the 60% weekly tax at that point would surely neutralize them however.










well the official reason from betfair was that winners extract money from the exchange and betfair have to spend more and more money getting new customers to create accounts. the marketing from betfair is huge in the uk. they've got themselves on tv adds and billboards. they pulled a funny stunt a while back when they rigged an ATM to give out 10k to the public. pretty funny but it shows they really do market to get their name out there

http://www.thedrum.com/stuff/2014/09/18/betfair-gives-atm-users-surprise-super-rich-cash-machine

so clearly they are spending a lot on marketing. however that does not really justify the 60% charge. or even the 20% charge to be honest. to me it's a clear message that bigtime winning players are not wanted. to tell you the truth i honestly dont know why.

now my theory on this is that in an optimal world betfair would want a multitude of losing players fighting it out. lets say they are all losing to each other. they are still giving betfair 5% every bet. so though they got even money on the 1-2 horse and they won $100, they only bank $95 and betfair get their $5 commission (which they take from EVERY player on every winning bet as a minimum). This player then loses to the other player who banks $90 and betfair take another $5. Slowly betfair is taking their money. I think this is what they want in an ideal world.

however the point still stands that winning players are paying their commission. what we see though is that betfair management have decided this isn't enough.

finally, when you see that skilled players will get better odds from layers on the exchange, then it's obvious that a lot of players will be profitable if the exchange comes in. if you're making money now, you will make more money if betfair comes in. and that will be great for a while. but once the charges hit you will soon find yourself back to square one, but i suppose with some more money in your bank account.

Just like a poker game with a rake, if all the players are equally talented and they all play long enough Betfair ends up with all the cash.

[Stillriledup]

Just like a poker game with a rake, if all the players are equally talented and they all play long enough Betfair ends up with all the cash.

Interesting that in a game that's essentially parimutuel, BF is trying to manipulate who wins and who loses. A bit shady if you ask me.

[ryzerman]

the original poster has said his father was forced out of betfair due to the premium charge tax. i can say the same.

however, looking at it from betfairs perspective, you have a number of accounts coming from the same IP address. this is a big flag.

I believe the original poster in that he probably hasn't been using the accounts himself. however, the strategies on the accounts clearly must be similar. i have no doubt that the original posters father would have schooled him on making profit with certain strategies.

betfair has seen a similarity in profitable strategy here. they noticed one account was profitable but was neutralized by the premium charge (your dads) and then they see your account which is profitable but not taxed as much as your dads (the premium charge tax rises with the amount of profit you have made).

looking at it from betfairs perspective, there is no way to tell who is using the account. your dad could be using the account, from their perspective. then it becomes a situation where he would be avoiding the premium charge tax.

what is disgraceful here is the way betfair conducts their business. this is a clear case of very disrespectful customer service. "we will get back to you" followed by no calls and so on. they do not want winning players, simple as that and because they have a monopoly on exchange playing, they know they can treat players like this and get away with it because there is nowhere else to turn.


School me? lol, not a chance. I appreciate the post but I am to stubborn for that haha. Again they told me they would get back to me, yesterday morning.

(24/12/2015 07.45 AM)

"Hi Raymond

Thanks for getting in touch.

I have forwarded this over to our Pricing team, they should be in contact with you soon.

Let me know if there’s anything else I can help with. Or maybe our FAQs will come in handy?"

Again no response... How can this be acceptable.

[paddy79]

I may be asking too much here but are you primarily a backer or a layer?

[lamboguy]

my experience with betfraud was that they were supper greedy with me! i was playing with them around the turn of the century, at first they gave me a decent match, then they got smaller and smaller. the horses i backed wound up getting pounded in the mutual pools. so one day i decided to do the opposite and back the looser and lay the winner. that week i was getting legitamate first time starters that should have been 2-1 going off at 4-1 after i had bet my money. it lasted a week and the betting exchange shut me off.

things changed and betting exchanges became illegal here and i never had the chance to send in beards. maybe things have changed but i highly doubt it.

its christmas and i hope this guy that just got screwed gets his money from them and learned his lesson about betting exchanges.

[Fox]

Another question to ask is why didn't they link his account with mine and his brother's the first time ?


The timing is interesting. It obviously is related to the decision to withdrawal operations from Canada. It was the last chance for a money grab and the Preium Charge Enforcement Department took full advantage. I am sure you and your boys were not the only ones affected this past week. I imagine most will remain silent in hopes they can plead their case discretely.

[Fox]

things changed and betting exchanges became illegal here and i never had the chance to send in beards. maybe things have changed but i highly doubt it.


The only thing that changed is the well informed and inside information sharks have driven away most of the fish. US markets are not very active or liquid with most matching done in the last minutes. I know a lot of folks are anxious to get 8/1 on the exchange on a horse that is 4/1 on the tote, but the reality is those horses are usually dead and someone knows that.

[davew]

my experience with betfraud was that they were supper greedy with me! i was playing with them around the turn of the century, at first they gave me a decent match, then they got smaller and smaller. the horses i backed wound up getting pounded in the mutual pools. so one day i decided to do the opposite and back the looser and lay the winner. that week i was getting legitamate first time starters that should have been 2-1 going off at 4-1 after i had bet my money. it lasted a week and the betting exchange shut me off.

things changed and betting exchanges became illegal here and i never had the chance to send in beards. maybe things have changed but i highly doubt it.

its christmas and i hope this guy that just got screwed gets his money from them and learned his lesson about betting exchanges.


That is interesting - many say the same about offshore sportsbooks - so is it 'rouge employees' or the company plan/model? Even the 2 big fantasy sports companies have had 'integrity' problems.

I seriously doubt any ADWs act in this way, although I have no way of knowing if someone follows a few 'select accounts' to fade their bets.

The betting exchange idea is sound - but anything is bad if it is ran by a crooked company, trying to improve their 'stock value'.

[thespaah]

Basically as mentioned above if you win, not just the amount but more importantly at a rate in which you are not paying enough in commission they charge you extra. Starts at 20% which I was at.
20% of WHAT?
Does BF just swipe 20% of the funds in your account at a time of their choosing? Do they take 20% off the top of individual winning bets?
Do they take 20% off the top off the dollar amount of each of your bets?
Example, if you bet $100 worth of supers, are you actually betting $80 once they factor in the confiscation?....
How you can even allow yourself to be subjected to a 20% or more rake above and beyond the 15% to 30% takeout charged by the tracks( assuming the funds are comingled) is a mystery..
At the first hint of a premium of any kind I would have cleaned out my account(s) and sent a very terse email to those Limey bastards and told them to shove their ADW into the orifice which delivers the most pain....

[thespaah]

The premium charge isn,t against all winners only those who don't generate enough commissions for bf

since bf business model is based upon commisions paid to them this makes total business sense to me.

If someone like the op is making a lot of money using betfair shouldn't bf be compensated.


Allan
BF like any other ADW receives compensation for every bet they take.
BF is just using its discretion to pile on additional charges to those who quite frankly "win too often".....Which in my view makes no sense.
First, how often or in what amounts an account holder wins or loses should not make a difference to them as they collect a commission on all bets.
Second, it makes no sense for BF to pull this money grab because they are reducing the account holder's ability to churn money through their ADW by 20%....Why on earth would they want to reduce the amount of action?.....to reply to my ow question, it appears on the surface that BF considers high percentage winners to be rigging the system....sort of like how Casinos used to treat card counters.
The difference is BF takes a rake no matter what....They always get their money and the other thing is, the money won is not coming out of BF's coffers. It comes from the losing bets of others in the pools.....
Or am I missing something here.
No doubt I revert back to my OP in this thread.

[thespaah]

Its not 'my business plan' its BF's.

Their BP is to make money via commissions. If someone is using BF equipment and exchange to make cash shouldn't BF be allowed to make a cash too.

They are in business not to make friends of bettors but to make money providing a service.

Allan
Hang on a second...
Yes, Betfair is a business. And as with any business, their primary function is to realize a profit for the owners/investors.
However, as with any customer service type business, it is incumbent upon a business to at least appear to the their customers that they are not attempting to make ALL of their profits off one customer.
Does that make sense?
And here is one issue about customers service type businesses where you are in part incorrect.
That is "yes, they should e attempting to build a relationship with their customers"....If a business treats its customers with respect while valuing their patronage, that business will almost guarantee itself not only repeat business, but that satisfied customer will most likely recommend said business to those they are acquainted.

[thespaah]

How does charging 60% of the winnings encourage people to leave?

if I was making money on a consistent basis as a few BF players do
I would not mind paying BF part of my profit as a cost of doing business with them.

Allan
60%? You do not perceive this as in the last bit confiscatory?

[thespaah]

why has Betfair stock risen dramatically in the past 2 years?

Allan
The answer is obvious. The company is turning a profit...
Do you think the stock price rises because the investors believe the business is fair toi its customers? Or do they only concern themselves with the bottom line of the company in which their money is invested?
The price of the BF stock is mutually exclusive to the issue of this thread.
And I will argue that point unrelentingly.

[thespaah]

LOL. If I was making 10,000 a week using betfair, now they come in and take 6K. That still leaves me ahead 4K as opposed to 0K if I leave.

4K beats 0K every time

so I only make 200,000 a year.

my lifestyle will suffer so.

here is an article from 2011 regarding the advent of the PC.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/jun/29/betfair-premium-charge-increase

Allan
Ok....Lets say you won $10 k playing poker at a casino. You go to cash your chips and the cashier hands you a check for $4,000....Is that what you means by "I'm ahead by four thousand dollars"?.Seriously? You'd find that acceptable?....If you say yes, you would find that acceptable, with all due respect and candor, I'd be compelled to call BS on that response.

[ryzerman]

20% of WHAT?
Does BF just swipe 20% of the funds in your account at a time of their choosing? Do they take 20% off the top of individual winning bets?
Do they take 20% off the top off the dollar amount of each of your bets?
Example, if you bet $100 worth of supers, are you actually betting $80 once they factor in the confiscation?....
How you can even allow yourself to be subjected to a 20% or more rake above and beyond the 15% to 30% takeout charged by the tracks( assuming the funds are comingled) is a mystery..
At the first hint of a premium of any kind I would have cleaned out my account(s) and sent a very terse email to those Limey bastards and told them to shove their ADW into the orifice which delivers the most pain....


Thanks for the questions. Basically what it means is at the end of each week, they calculate your profit, how much commission you paid and than top it up if you are below 20%. So say I win at a high rate. That week my percent might be 5%, 20-5=15%, 15% of your profit that week is taken. It sucks but I took it for what it is. They gave me a way to make money so I accepted it. I had no idea they were going to do what they did after. Accuse me of being someone else with no backing and than say your entire account from the start has to have paid 40%, and you owe us over 28,000. I cant believe this is even debated or considered by an exchange that wants to grow!!!? When it comes to a there rules.

[thespaah]

The reality is that long-term winners are a draw down on the sport, even in a parimutuel environment.

They become like an extra poker dealer cutting the pot, taking money away from what the "house" (i.e. track) can win.

Not saying I like it, but it is the mathematics of the game.


When you think about it, the concept holds true in all games where the line changes based upon amounts wagered. In sports betting it is more advantageous to the player if they are playing against weaker players who push the line towards a more profitable end.
I concur.. However, the house, in this case betfair, gets their cut on both wining and losing wagers.
Additionally, is it not true that winners are more likely to churn more through the system?....
And if so, does that not create a greater opportunity for The house to realize more in profits?
it appears to me that Betfair does not buy into the model that the more the bettor profits the more likely they wager more in dollars and quite possibly increase the amount of their wagers and increase the frequency of wagering.
Therefore this "distrust" of the customer compels Betfair to take what is in my view a confiscatory percentage of their customer's winnings...
None of this makes sense to me...
I would imagine I am in need of further education on this matter.
oh....Happy Holidays to you and your family.....

[thespaah]

Allan is unfortunately right...

I'm going to give you the second best advice you'll get on here after getting a lawyer.

Go back and locate the terms of service you agreed to on the accounts and try and figure out what you did wrong.

Betfair is a billion dollar company. They're not going to turn off an account and take the money unless they feel confident they have you. Given their actions I'm pretty sure you inadvertently broke the terms of service you agreed up when you signed up.

You've mention you did the following...

1. Had multiple Betfair accounts
2. People you live with or are related too also had accounts
3. Wagers on the same events may have been placed from these multiple accounts
4. These wagers may have taken opposite bets in these events
5. Multiple accounts used the same internet/IP address

I have to imagine one of these things or 2-3 of them done together breaks the terms of service. You really need to go back and read it slowly and try figure what you might have done.

I will however give you a glimmer of hope. A lot of dummies on this board have mentioned you should sue or have a legal leg to stand on. You probably don't but might only because you're not in the U.S. If a U.S. citizen opens a TvG/Betfair account they waived their right to sue in the terms of service. It's replaced by an arbitrator of Betfair's choosing and you can only imagine how that turns out. If you're a U.S. citizen and buy an Apple product you waive the right to sue Apple in regards to the performance of that product. Sign up for Comcast cable? Waive your right to sue. Cell phone with Verizon or AT&T? Waive your right to sue. On and on...

So while you're combing through the terms of service look for the part you might have broke and look at the part which discusses "remedies" or "disputes." If you agreed to arbitration or any type of private mediation its game over. But if your country of residence prohibits this you might have a punchers shot at getting some of your money back.

Best of luck!
Playing Devil's advocate for a moment..
Let's just say what the OP stated early in the thread is true that at one time BF allowed multiple accounts held by one person. And in doing so that multi account holder used the terms and conditions set by the vendor( BF) to his advantage. In the interim, BF without notice of any penalty or increase in fees, banned multiple accounts. At that point, BF took that actin which the OP describes. Would you view this as fair and just?
To clarify, let us please leave out the typically cynical response of "it is their game, they can do whatever they wish"....
Please go ahead with your response to my query.

[biggestal99]

Ok....Lets say you won $10 k playing poker at a casino. You go to cash your chips and the cashier hands you a check for $4,000....Is that what you means by "I'm ahead by four thousand dollars"?.Seriously? You'd find that acceptable?....If you say yes, you would find that acceptable, with all due respect and candor, I'd be compelled to call BS on that response.

Well just to be a devils advocate, what if you went to that same poker table KNOWING that you will win week inand week out. Now are you more willing to part with that same 6k.

Most of the 40-60 pc customers do just that.

Allan

[paddy79]

Well just to be a devils advocate, what if you went to that same poker table KNOWING that you will win week inand week out. Now are you more willing to part with that same 6k.

Most of the 40-60 pc customers do just that.

Allan


You consistently defend betfair.

What do you have to say to POSITION TAKERS who get hit at the highter weekly tax rates? These guys are good enough to be profitable but not after the betfair deductions. What do you say to these HONEST and PURE players who do not use "bots" or engage in any untoward behavior?

[whodoyoulike]

BF like any other ADW receives compensation for every bet they take.
BF is just using its discretion to pile on additional charges to those who quite frankly "win too often".....Which in my view makes no sense.
First, how often or in what amounts an account holder wins or loses should not make a difference to them as they collect a commission on all bets.
Second, it makes no sense for BF to pull this money grab because they are reducing the account holder's ability to churn money through their ADW by 20%....Why on earth would they want to reduce the amount of action?.....to reply to my ow question, it appears on the surface that BF considers high percentage winners to be rigging the system....sort of like how Casinos used to treat card counters.
The difference is BF takes a rake no matter what....They always get their money and the other thing is, the money won is not coming out of BF's coffers. It comes from the losing bets of others in the pools.....
Or am I missing something here.
No doubt I revert back to my OP in this thread.

It appears to me from the previous posts that BF is not flowing the bets through the tracks unlike the US ADWs. So, the money is coming out of their coffers. And, as you've stated they're still taking their commissions on both sides. But, their dislike of winning players is obviously because the payout is coming out of their bottom line.

Btw, I was still under the impression that casinos still discourage card counters.

Has that changed?

[whodoyoulike]

I still don't understand why anyone would use them given their threshold conditions. Unless they're giving greater than 2.5x your acceptable odds.

[davew]

It appears to me from the previous posts that BF is not flowing the bets through the tracks unlike the US ADWs. So, the money is coming out of their coffers. And, as you've stated they're still taking their commissions on both sides. But, their dislike of winning players is obviously because the payout is coming out of their bottom line.

Btw, I was still under the impression that casinos still discourage card counters.

Has that changed?


The purpose of the exchange is to match wagers between a layer (horse will lose) and a backer (horse will win) at an agreed upon price. The winner of the wager has a fee extracted for the exchange service.

If a few people consistently win and withdraw their winnings, there is less money to churn.

[whodoyoulike]

The purpose of the exchange is to match wagers between a layer (horse will lose) and a backer (horse will win) at an agreed upon price. The winner of the wager has a fee extracted for the exchange service.

If a few people consistently win and withdraw their winnings, there is less money to churn.

But, does BF or any similar entities flow the bets through the track like a US ADW?

Thanks for the info, I've never used them and I'm just going off of the posts in this thread.

[davew]

But, does BF or any similar entities flow the bets through the track like a US ADW?

Thanks for the info, I've never used them and I'm just going off of the posts in this thread.


There may be some people playing arbitrage between the markets (exchange and track)- what exchange wagering does is fix the price and amount when both sides are matched. Unlike pari-mutual where the winning pay price is not known until all bets are retrieved and tallied. Most people have witnessed themselves thinking and betting a 3/1 at post time, and watching the race run and odds drop .... at the finish the 6/5 odds are no longer an overlay.

[SuperPickle]

Playing Devil's advocate for a moment..
Let's just say what the OP stated early in the thread is true that at one time BF allowed multiple accounts held by one person. And in doing so that multi account holder used the terms and conditions set by the vendor( BF) to his advantage. In the interim, BF without notice of any penalty or increase in fees, banned multiple accounts. At that point, BF took that actin which the OP describes. Would you view this as fair and just?
To clarify, let us please leave out the typically cynical response of "it is their game, they can do whatever they wish"....
Please go ahead with your response to my query.

I think you're asking me if he was in compliance of their TOS when he signed up and then Betfair changed the TOS making him noncompliant is that fair? My answer is yes. Businesses and websites change their TOS regularly. For example everytime you update your iPhone software you generally agree to new TOS. It's a pretty standard business practice.

Do I feel bad for the guy? Yes. Do I think Betfair should cut him some slack and refund him some money. Yes I think that's the right business practice in this case.

I just don't feel they're in the wrong.

Btw... the second I read the OP I knew this thread would morph into a debate about Betfair's fees. Any thread on this board that mentions any takeout rate or cost to horseplayers morphs into that. Just like any thread that mentions a suspect or bad ride morphs into a race fixing thread.

This board is the most predictable place in horse racing.

[Stillriledup]

I think you're asking me if he was in compliance of their TOS when he signed up and then Betfair changed the TOS making him noncompliant is that fair? My answer is yes. Businesses and websites change their TOS regularly. For example everytime you update your iPhone software you generally agree to new TOS. It's a pretty standard business practice.

Do I feel bad for the guy? Yes. Do I think Betfair should cut him some slack and refund him some money. Yes I think that's the right business practice in this case.

I just don't feel they're in the wrong.

Btw... the second I read the OP I knew this thread would morph into a debate about Betfair's fees. Any thread on this board that mentions any takeout rate or cost to horseplayers morphs into that. Just like any thread that mentions a suspect or bad ride morphs into a race fixing thread.

This board is the most predictable place in horse racing.

Things morph into what people care about, Is PA the only message board on the net that "morphs'?

The OP is not being paid due to BFs 'fees' for winning players, not all that difficult to foresee a fee discussion ensuing.

As far as the race fixing threads go, they morph into that due to the people who aren't actually complaining about the ride, in the FH Perez thread it wasnt until post 24 where someone 'complained' about a fixed race, none of the previous 23 posts suggested this was a fixed race.

[ryzerman]

Allan is unfortunately right...

I'm going to give you the second best advice you'll get on here after getting a lawyer.

Go back and locate the terms of service you agreed to on the accounts and try and figure out what you did wrong.

Betfair is a billion dollar company. They're not going to turn off an account and take the money unless they feel confident they have you. Given their actions I'm pretty sure you inadvertently broke the terms of service you agreed up when you signed up.

You've mention you did the following...

1. Had multiple Betfair accounts
2. People you live with or are related too also had accounts
3. Wagers on the same events may have been placed from these multiple accounts
4. These wagers may have taken opposite bets in these events
5. Multiple accounts used the same internet/IP address

I have to imagine one of these things or 2-3 of them done together breaks the terms of service. You really need to go back and read it slowly and try figure what you might have done.

I will however give you a glimmer of hope. A lot of dummies on this board have mentioned you should sue or have a legal leg to stand on. You probably don't but might only because you're not in the U.S. If a U.S. citizen opens a TvG/Betfair account they waived their right to sue in the terms of service. It's replaced by an arbitrator of Betfair's choosing and you can only imagine how that turns out. If you're a U.S. citizen and buy an Apple product you waive the right to sue Apple in regards to the performance of that product. Sign up for Comcast cable? Waive your right to sue. Cell phone with Verizon or AT&T? Waive your right to sue. On and on...

So while you're combing through the terms of service look for the part you might have broke and look at the part which discusses "remedies" or "disputes." If you agreed to arbitration or any type of private mediation its game over. But if your country of residence prohibits this you might have a punchers shot at getting some of your money back.

Best of luck!

Wow this comment really tops it off. You come in here, without reading a damn thing about the OP and make claims and threats. You even have the guts to jot downs points.1.) Multiple accounts. What the hell does an account I haven't used in 5 years have to do with my account right now? What does my dad or brothers account have to do with mine. One thing, same last name. I suppose if Smyth had an account in your ****ed up thought process that would give BF a logical reasonining to combine 5,000 accounts. As long as it ****s the people and they make more money.

2. Me my brother and dad never lived together while anyone owned a BF account. So there goes another genius theory.

3. Wagers on the same event might have been processed. Well that would only make it more obvious that there is not one single entity at work! I never bet at the same time as my dad on BF. And my brother maybe we both bet at the same time on occasion but opposites. How the **** do you bet opposites. He books and I back a horse. You think that would effect a premium charge lol when there is 100,000 matched in a race. My god...

4. The same IP address, I guess everyone using the same IP if that even happened ever should be combined as one?.

There is not 1 thing here that break terms and conditions. The way you and that allan character are defending BF would be as if, I had something written down in my house that says I can steal from anyone if they sit on the left side of my couch or if they open the handle with their left hand. You would always get a few people saying yes that is ok. Similar to the two of you. :bang:

You call people dummies and sadly you are prob biggest dummy on this board. Clueless didn't take the time to read the OP, just post using what you think is knowledge. Its not. Last time I checked I was in Canada not the US :bang:

I am not even on here only for the money. But the principle of what they have done. To let the world know the masterminds behind this website. The shadiness of their operation. The absolute disregard of a loyal customer. There has been 0 breach of any rules. You can spin any rule and make it appear as though it translates if you want. No were in that rule does it say at any point in time if we feel someone is evading the premium charge we can not only put them on the 40% charge but also go back from the start of the time they began betting and charge them. Its one thing if they told me we speculate you are doing something to evade a charge. Than fine il be mad because its not true but I will avoid betting because they warned me. But you don't tell someone and than say, oh by the way we are going to use our rule to go back in time and take your money!!.

[ryzerman]

I may be asking too much here but are you primarily a backer or a layer?

Even though this is not relevant, I predominately back horses to win. I have so many laws I apply to each race.

[ryzerman]

After reading about Betfair's bet charges etc., a question keeps coming up for me -------

Why do people continue using Betfair and are they the only game provider available?

Aren't there other alternatives to the bettor which are more accommodating?

Because I thought it was something I can trust. The odds are usually as good as you will get. There is good liquidity in the markets. However none of that matters when you find out what they are all about. They have not back to me, and when they do im sure rather than call me as was promised they will send me another email with a play of words than somehow voids them of any wrongs they have done. I guess they have so much money they simply don't give a shit. That what happens when they take over with no competition I guess.

[classhandicapper]

I have a question.

When they froze the account how much money did you have in it?

You told us how much they say you owe, but you didn't tell us how much was on deposit when they froze the account.

I get the frustration, but if it wasn't an especially large number, Betfair is going to get the worst of this because these kinds of threads are going to hurt their business.

When they say you owe them "X", how are they going to collect it?

[Canarsie]

How does charging 60% of the winnings encourage people to leave?

if I was making money on a consistent basis as a few BF players do
I would not mind paying BF part of my profit as a cost of doing business with them.

Allan

I think the U.S. government should tax your earnings at 60%. After all every country needs to have a balanced budget so I'm sure you won't object to that amount of taxation. Once the budget is balanced they intend to spend more of YOUR money because you stated that its ok in your book. Maybe they will even give betfair an interest free loan.

It's the cost of doinfg business here if betfair can do it certainly the United States treasury can follow their business model without your objections.

[Canarsie]

There are many intelligent questions and answers on this subject which brings me to think EW is doomed to failure.

There is no doubt employees and on air hosts from TVG read this board that cannot be disputed. One would think that they would authorize an employee to post either on their own web page and/or here how EW is exactly going to work. If they cared about the consumer this would be priority number one. The negative comments on here are harsh and once you get a bad reputation it is very hard to shake.

If 20% of New Jersey residents don't like what they read on here that is income that is lost forever. Why in the world they wouldn't want to educate these people is beyond my comprehension. From day one betfair has been and remained a secretive company that doesn't give a damn about their customers. Throw in a NJ company whose name is under exchange wagering. How much of the 60% will they get by letting Betfair run the show?

Never an explanation about why tracks are being dumped and shuffled pertaining to broadcasting has gone on for a very long time. To be fair they have done good by offering wagering incentives some which had to hurt them financially.

The fact remains if NJ residents could legally cut the cord they would lose a large percentage of them to alternative ADW's. This is the same company that surcharged a single two dollar wager twenty five cents up to a few years ago. A two dollar bettor could win a show bet that paid $2.10 or $2.20 and actually LOSE money when that tariff was in effect. Do they deserve to be trusted? That's entirely up to the people on this board to decide.


Answers, rebuttals, and anything else is always welcomed.

[paddy79]

There are many intelligent questions and answers on this subject which brings me to think EW is doomed to failure.

There is no doubt employees and on air hosts from TVG read this board that cannot be disputed. One would think that they would authorize an employee to post either on their own web page and/or here how EW is exactly going to work. If they cared about the consumer this would be priority number one. The negative comments on here are harsh and once you get a bad reputation it is very hard to shake.

If 20% of New Jersey residents don't like what they read on here that is income that is lost forever. Why in the world they wouldn't want to educate these people is beyond my comprehension. From day one betfair has been and remained a secretive company that doesn't give a damn about their customers. Throw in a NJ company whose name is under exchange wagering. How much of the 60% will they get by letting Betfair run the show?

Never an explanation about why tracks are being dumped and shuffled pertaining to broadcasting has gone on for a very long time. To be fair they have done good by offering wagering incentives some which had to hurt them financially.

The fact remains if NJ residents could legally cut the cord they would lose a large percentage of them to alternative ADW's. This is the same company that surcharged a single two dollar wager twenty five cents up to a few years ago. A two dollar bettor could win a show bet that paid $2.10 or $2.20 and actually LOSE money when that tariff was in effect. Do they deserve to be trusted? That's entirely up to the people on this board to decide.


Answers, rebuttals, and anything else is always welcomed.


Good post.

Unfortunately betfair has completely changed as a company over the years and what was once a much loved company among gamblers, has now managed to synthesize an insurmountable amount of resentment among a lot of these users.

This negative word of mouth is probably something they didn't consider strongly enough when they set about changing their terms and handing loyal customers with big tax bills. Not only does this hit those players hard but it also hits budding players who will no doubt be put off by a company with such bad press from it's users and who they know will be extracting 60% of their winnings each week if they become successful. It's madness on betfairs side.

How they think they are they going to grow im not sure. They will have to be offering quite a lot to the NJ commission and the tracks.

[ronsmac]

I think the U.S. government should tax your earnings at 60%. After all every country needs to have a balanced budget so I'm sure you won't object to that amount of taxation. Once the budget is balanced they intend to spend more of YOUR money because you stated that its ok in your book. Maybe they will even give betfair an interest free loan.

It's the cost of doinfg business here if betfair can do it certainly the United States treasury can follow their business model without your objections.
Strong post.

[biggestal99]

There are many intelligent questions and answers on this subject which brings me to think EW is doomed to failure.

There is no doubt employees and on air hosts from TVG read this board that cannot be disputed. One would think that they would authorize an employee to post either on their own web page and/or here how EW is exactly going to work. If they cared about the consumer this would be priority number one. The negative comments on here are harsh and once you get a bad reputation it is very hard to shake.

.

They don't even have an exchange manager yet. They have an job out for it.

How would a TVG employee know how BF will manage the NJ exchange?

That's not in their paygrade.

Once NJ horseplayers see the prices they can get on the exchange I think that will overcome anything.

Look at the 6th race at Aqueduct today.

Horse paid a paltry 5.30 on track as chalkie, BF price was oh lets see 8 bucks.

Are you are telling me people won't play BF if their prices are better than the tracks?

com'n you would rather place a bet a track and collect 5.30 rather than collect an 8 buck payoff.

Allan

[whodoyoulike]

...

Look at the 6th race at Aqueduct today.

Horse paid a paltry 5.30 on track as chalkie, BF price was oh lets see 8 bucks.

Are you are telling me people won't play BF if their prices are better than the tracks?

com'n you would rather place a bet a track and collect 5.30 rather than collect an 8 buck payoff.

Allan


I think the problem concern was when you reached their thresholds for the 60% and 20%. I mentioned earlier that I think you shouldn't use BF if your winnings exceed the 250k pound level unless you were getting more than 2.5x your acceptable odds. So, for me the 8 vs 5.30 isn't worth it and the individual should've made their bets on track where they wouldn't be incurring the surcharge.

[ryzerman]

I have a question.

When they froze the account how much money did you have in it?

You told us how much they say you owe, but you didn't tell us how much was on deposit when they froze the account.

I get the frustration, but if it wasn't an especially large number, Betfair is going to get the worst of this because these kinds of threads are going to hurt their business.

When they say you owe them "X", how are they going to collect it?

Im surprised it wasent said yet, prob was but there was 12,500. I guess for rich people like you that's not much. So I should keep what they are doing quiet. So next time it happens to someone else in a different manner and they go through they same thing. No reponse, no reply from them. I don't owe them shit, they owe me two things, an apology and my money.

[thespaah]

Well just to be a devils advocate, what if you went to that same poker table KNOWING that you will win week inand week out. Now are you more willing to part with that same 6k.

Most of the 40-60 pc customers do just that.

Allan
LOL...You're moving the goal posts.
You'd be correct if the rule was in place from day one.
It wasn't.
And it is impossible to say those that win do so at that pace or with the expectation that they will win no matter what....
Question. TO your knowledge are any other betting platforms doing the same thing?

[thespaah]

It appears to me from the previous posts that BF is not flowing the bets through the tracks unlike the US ADWs. So, the money is coming out of their coffers. And, as you've stated they're still taking their commissions on both sides. But, their dislike of winning players is obviously because the payout is coming out of their bottom line.

Btw, I was still under the impression that casinos still discourage card counters.

Has that changed?
To my knowledge, most states have made it illegal for casinos to ban this strategy. I believe there were several lawsuits. One of which was in New Jersey. Early on after casino gambling was legalized in AC, the casinos were booting card counters with regularity. I believe there were some who sued the casinos and won their cases.
Some of the casinos were even banning play by those using basic black jack strategy.
I think the reason we see automatic shufflers, reduced odds payouts for hitting Black Jack, taking away the ability to split aces more than once and other things, were in part answers to card counting. Not only that, card counting is now a science. People with brilliant mathematical minds are able to calculate probable odds out of six deck shoes in the middle of a hand. I have made it a point to read about this stuff. Its fascinating.

[thespaah]

It appears to me from the previous posts that BF is not flowing the bets through the tracks unlike the US ADWs. So, the money is coming out of their coffers. And, as you've stated they're still taking their commissions on both sides. But, their dislike of winning players is obviously because the payout is coming out of their bottom line.

Btw, I was still under the impression that casinos still discourage card counters.

Has that changed?
If Betfair is just booking bets and not comingling funds, first no one in the US should use them as they are cannibalizing the money that could be flowing through track pools and thus contributing to the sport, then I can see why the company would prefer their customers be losers as opposed to profitable winners.

[thespaah]

They don't even have an exchange manager yet. They have an job out for it.

How would a TVG employee know how BF will manage the NJ exchange?

That's not in their paygrade.

Once NJ horseplayers see the prices they can get on the exchange I think that will overcome anything.

Look at the 6th race at Aqueduct today.

Horse paid a paltry 5.30 on track as chalkie, BF price was oh lets see 8 bucks.

Are you are telling me people won't play BF if their prices are better than the tracks?

com'n you would rather place a bet a track and collect 5.30 rather than collect an 8 buck payoff.

Allan
Assuming a player is in the higher fee brackets, what is the difference?....Who would care if BF payoff is eight dollars if after the fee is collected, the true payout is reduced to near or at the track payout?

[whodoyoulike]

To my knowledge, most states have made it illegal for casinos to ban this strategy. I believe there were several lawsuits. One of which was in New Jersey. Early on after casino gambling was legalized in AC, the casinos were booting card counters with regularity. I believe there were some who sued the casinos and won their cases.
Some of the casinos were even banning play by those using basic black jack strategy.
I think the reason we see automatic shufflers, reduced odds payouts for hitting Black Jack, taking away the ability to split aces more than once and other things, were in part answers to card counting. Not only that, card counting is now a science. People with brilliant mathematical minds are able to calculate probable odds out of six deck shoes in the middle of a hand. I have made it a point to read about this stuff. Its fascinating.

Just curious about BJ changes if any have occurred, I haven't played in years never really counted but used something similar because I thought it was easier for me. When I started, single decks were still commonly used but quit later when 6+?? decks, frequent shuffles etc., were used. And, casinos weren't everywhere as now and had to play only in Vegas, Tahoe or Reno.

[thespaah]

Just curious about BJ changes if any have occurred, I haven't played in years never really counted but used something similar because I thought it was easier for me. When I started, single decks were still commonly used but quit later when 6+?? decks, frequent shuffles etc., were used. And, casinos weren't everywhere as now and had to play only in Vegas, Tahoe or Reno.
Have a friend who goes to Vegas a couple times per year. He avoids the "touristy" casinos on the strip because as he says, that is where one finds the auto shufflers and various rules which tip the house edge even further in the favor of the house. He goes to the casinos downtown where some of them still offer single and two deck games and none of the more modern stuff made to squeeze every dime out of the players they can.
As far as other states. West Virginia for example, particularly the Mardis Gras which is tied to the Tri -State Dog track offers side bet black jack. I watched one player make $800 in a matter of minutes on a $5 table. Yeah it's a prop bet but, pretty hittable. No auto shufflers there. 6 deck shoes....The one in Cherokee, NC which just a couple years ago was able to squeeze table games out of the Bible Thumpers in Raleigh, no auto shufflers there either. And they are now serving adult beverages at the tables. Nice to have a beer and play.

[sharkie187]

Okay, I've seen this before during my time 4 years in the UK. First off, the bookies are there to make a profit. They make a profit when bettors lose...end of story. When bettors win, great. When bettors keep on winning, eyebrowls are going to be raised. When you have multiple accounts and keep winning, now you're taking from their profits and they have the right to stop the service they are offering you. It's the same thing if you go with a group of buddies and go to a casino and count cards, the casino will stop you eventually. Remember, this is the bettor vs the bookmaker, and the bookmaker is going to win.

It's not just Betfair, but Ladbrokes, Coral, Paddypower, Betfred, and William Hill all do the same thing and have the same policy.

If this guys was winning off the tote...no questions asked, keep betting. No one is losing in this instance. The tote gets its take out and the bookmaker gets a small percentage as well.

[ultracapper]

The purpose of the exchange is to match wagers between a layer (horse will lose) and a backer (horse will win) at an agreed upon price. The winner of the wager has a fee extracted for the exchange service.

If a few people consistently win and withdraw their winnings, there is less money to churn.

BF, by taking their onerous cut, isn't adding to the churn, unless they are backing, or laying, as need be, to keep the markets liquid. This is what I'm afraid they're doing. I'm afraid they aren't purely brokering. I'd be afraid they are filling bets to keep a liquid market. Therefore, a hatred for habitual winners.

[davew]

BF, by taking their onerous cut, isn't adding to the churn, unless they are backing, or laying, as need be, to keep the markets liquid. This is what I'm afraid they're doing. I'm afraid they aren't purely brokering. I'd be afraid they are filling bets to keep a liquid market. Therefore, a hatred for habitual winners.


Some people have inferred they are 'booking some bets' and they get first crack at all back/lays sent through their system. If this is the case, they are just an elaborate bookmaker, but not hosting an exchange wagering platform. If they are 'adding liquidity' they are hurting the possible success of exchange wagering, by alienating many users and all they tell.

[ultracapper]

I can't see a wager exchange business model that needs to charge 60 cents on the dollar to be profitable.

[biggestal99]

I can't see a wager exchange business model that needs to charge 60 cents on the dollar to be profitable.

Bf makes appox £10 million a month in profits.

Allan

[ultracapper]

Bf makes appox £10 million a month in profits.

Allan

Then why don't they cut their premium skim down to 40% and be satisfied with 7.5million pound sterling per month.

[davew]

Then why don't they cut their premium skim down to 40% and be satisfied with 7.5million pound sterling per month.


stock options for employees and executives?

[Fox]

I can't see a wager exchange business model that needs to charge 60 cents on the dollar to be profitable.

Betfair gave up on the exchange model years ago and they are just using it to get their foot in the USA. Once the carrot on a stick gets them firmly entrenched here, they will focus on their more profitable products such as bookmaking, casino games, poker, tote, etc.

[horses4courses]

Betfair gave up on the exchange model years ago and they are just using it to get their foot in the USA. Once the carrot on a stick gets them firmly entrenched here, they will focus on their more profitable products such as bookmaking, casino games, poker, tote, etc.

Same goes for William Hill

[ryzerman]

Okay, I've seen this before during my time 4 years in the UK. First off, the bookies are there to make a profit. They make a profit when bettors lose...end of story. When bettors win, great. When bettors keep on winning, eyebrowls are going to be raised. When you have multiple accounts and keep winning, now you're taking from their profits and they have the right to stop the service they are offering you. It's the same thing if you go with a group of buddies and go to a casino and count cards, the casino will stop you eventually. Remember, this is the bettor vs the bookmaker, and the bookmaker is going to win.

It's not just Betfair, but Ladbrokes, Coral, Paddypower, Betfred, and William Hill all do the same thing and have the same policy.

If this guys was winning off the tote...no questions asked, keep betting. No one is losing in this instance. The tote gets its take out and the bookmaker gets a small percentage as well.

Obviosuly you did not read the OP, its not a matter of stopping me. Its the fact without any warning they are going make up something that is false and thereby put me at 40%. Thus go back in time and say I owe them over 28,000. How can anyone even fathom how nuts this is. Really!

[ryzerman]

BF, by taking their onerous cut, isn't adding to the churn, unless they are backing, or laying, as need be, to keep the markets liquid. This is what I'm afraid they're doing. I'm afraid they aren't purely brokering. I'd be afraid they are filling bets to keep a liquid market. Therefore, a hatred for habitual winners.


No question they seed the market. But that should not give them the right to act in such a way!! You lose to someone you don't get back at them by cheating and screwing them.

[lamboguy]

last i looked, London was the home of casino's and cruise ships that bring you tie you lose blackjack, double zero roulette, and bookmaking shops that feature 20+30% vigorish on sporting event's.to go along with that, their poker rakes are the highest in the world. why should Betfair feature anything different?
these days i am playing into large So. Cal and NYRA w-p-s pools with an effective takeout of about 8% after rebate.

everyone's dream is to have places like Betfair to run as advertised so that we all can pluck their feather's 365 days a year and become millionaire's in our bathrobes sitting at home. you may get them once or twice, but believe me that's not how the games played in the real gambling world.

[paddy79]

Betfair gave up on the exchange model years ago and they are just using it to get their foot in the USA. Once the carrot on a stick gets them firmly entrenched here, they will focus on their more profitable products such as bookmaking, casino games, poker, tote, etc.


Agreed. They are really trying to push their sportsbook, (which gives much worse odds than the exchange). They've even got a Virtual Sports section now.

[Canarsie]

Assuming a player is in the higher fee brackets, what is the difference?....Who would care if BF payoff is eight dollars if after the fee is collected, the true payout is reduced to near or at the track payout?

Perfect :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[Canarsie]

They don't even have an exchange manager yet. They have an job out for it.

How would a TVG employee know how BF will manage the NJ exchange?

That's not in their paygrade.

Once NJ horseplayers see the prices they can get on the exchange I think that will overcome anything.

Look at the 6th race at Aqueduct today.

Horse paid a paltry 5.30 on track as chalkie, BF price was oh lets see 8 bucks.

Are you are telling me people won't play BF if their prices are better than the tracks?

com'n you would rather place a bet a track and collect 5.30 rather than collect an 8 buck payoff.

Allan

You give me one race out of hundreds probably run that way.

Since you know that much about TVG and in your words their "paygrade" I CHALLENGE you to produce a contract or other visual evidence. Once again you are wrong if I could bet against you on the exchange I would have a very healthy income at my disposal.

[satrabyk]

Okay, I've seen this before during my time 4 years in the UK. First off, the bookies are there to make a profit. They make a profit when bettors lose...end of story. When bettors win, great. When bettors keep on winning, eyebrowls are going to be raised. When you have multiple accounts and keep winning, now you're taking from their profits and they have the right to stop the service they are offering you. It's the same thing if you go with a group of buddies and go to a casino and count cards, the casino will stop you eventually. Remember, this is the bettor vs the bookmaker, and the bookmaker is going to win.

It's not just Betfair, but Ladbrokes, Coral, Paddypower, Betfred, and William Hill all do the same thing and have the same policy.

If this guys was winning off the tote...no questions asked, keep betting. No one is losing in this instance. The tote gets its take out and the bookmaker gets a small percentage as well.

This is definitely not a case of one person that opened several accounts to try to avoid premium charges. If you read my previous post you will see that there are 3 people involved here each betting independently on their own. 3 of the accounts on list were probably opened at one time by my sons and forgotten about and hardly used and they opened another one months/years later because they forgot about existing previous ones.
We each live apart. Each have own computer and IP address. On a rare occasion if we are at same betting parlor there is a chance one of us could have used another person's computer. The only thing that is common is our last name and that all 3 of us managed to find a way to win. But note that most of the people l referred to Betfair are also winners and use a similar betting/trading strategy.
The only thing that I can think of why Betfair is doing this is that my older son stopped betting around March of this year because he had to dedicate his time on his drain business. Not to mention that a 40% premium charge handicap makes it no longer viable to keep betting anyways. Then in May with the start of Woodbine my younger son decided to bet more aggressively on Betfair as this is one of his favorite tracks. He did well. Hit 20% premium charge level and then gets blown apart without warning .....From the timing of these events Betfair has now decided that this "one" person moved his betting from one account to another to avoid the 40% charge and went back to May and recalculated his charges as though he was always at 40%. My younger son had no idea that my and his brother's account were linked and at the 40% level. My son didn't even know what a premium charge meant until he recently had to pay them a few weeks ago ???????

[biggestal99]

You give me one race out of hundreds probably run that way.

Since you know that much about TVG and in your words their "paygrade" I CHALLENGE you to produce a contract or other visual evidence. Once again you are wrong if I could bet against you on the exchange I would have a very healthy income at my disposal.

Yeah I am sure that TVG ADW people are in the high level meetings on Jersey Exchange wagering. Its my opinion that they are not included. sorry its my opinion not a fact.

I'd do a race by race at Aqueduct tomorrow to enlighten you on the better prices you get on BF compared to track prices.

Once in a while you'll get a better price on track, so I'll give it a run tomorrow.

If you live in Jersey and place win bets, its a no brainer. BF SP vs track prices.

Allan

[paddy79]

This is definitely not a case of one person that opened several accounts to try to avoid premium charges. If you read my previous post you will see that there are 3 people involved here each betting independently on their own. 3 of the accounts on list were probably opened at one time by my sons and forgotten about and hardly used and they opened another one months/years later because they forgot about existing previous ones.
We each live apart. Each have own computer and IP address. On a rare occasion if we are at same betting parlor there is a chance one of us could have used another person's computer. The only thing that is common is our last name and that all 3 of us managed to find a way to win. But note that most of the people l referred to Betfair are also winners and use a similar betting/trading strategy.
The only thing that I can think of why Betfair is doing this is that my older son stopped betting around March of this year because he had to dedicate his time on his drain business. Not to mention that a 40% premium charge handicap makes it no longer viable to keep betting anyways. Then in May with the start of Woodbine my younger son decided to bet more aggressively on Betfair as this is one of his favorite tracks. He did well. Hit 20% premium charge level and then gets blown apart without warning .....From the timing of these events Betfair has now decided that this "one" person moved his betting from one account to another to avoid the 40% charge and went back to May and recalculated his charges as though he was always at 40%. My younger son had no idea that my and his brother's account were linked and at the 40% level. My son didn't even know what a premium charge meant until he recently had to pay them a few weeks ago ???????




To be honest, its just your word vs betfairs. and to the tune of 25,000, I think betfair are not going to take any chances. as you have seen, they don't ask questions.

As much as I hate the company, I think they are right to link the accounts in this case to be honest. Too much circumstantial evidence. You're all using interchanging laptops/IPs. Similar strategies. Father and sons all using the same strategies and all using the same IPs/laptops from time to time.

This was amateur hour really. But you weren't aware of betfairs desire to remove winners from the exchange so I can understand. Also, im not saying it's FAIR, but on the balance of things, I can understand why betfair linked the accounts. The whole premium charge tax is a complete joke though and hitting someone for a 25k bill out of nowhere is ridiculous.

Whats interesting though is that if betfair had let the account remain active and remain a winning account, the account would have been paying a premium charge and would have been giving betfair a hefty slice of the pie. Surely it would have paid more than 25k if we look at it long term. So are betfair short term in their thinking? Or what? They've killed a big player and liquidity provider here for 25k. Long term they could make much more than 25k off the player so it's interesting to say the least.

The most important conclusion is that the money is gone. No lawyer will be able to beat betfair in this case. However, im curious as to what the original posters plan of action is going to be here? Have you taken legal advice? Do you plan on making efforts to recover the 25k? Do you still plan on betting with betfair in the future? Can you beat the 40-60% weekly tax?

[Canarsie]

Yeah I am sure that TVG ADW people are in the high level meetings on Jersey Exchange wagering. Its my opinion that they are not included. sorry its my opinion not a fact.

I'd do a race by race at Aqueduct tomorrow to enlighten you on the better prices you get on BF compared to track prices.

Once in a while you'll get a better price on track, so I'll give it a run tomorrow.

If you live in Jersey and place win bets, its a no brainer. BF SP vs track prices.

Allan

Sorry you give me scenarios and then say its just your opinion. Once again you are caught in a corner and trying you best to get out. Your no Harry Houdini so the odds (even on the exchange) of you making a successful breakout are slim.

Since I know you past history I will wager ten grand (hypothetical) that you are doomed and stuck where you are. That was the easiest ten grand I have ever made. But WAIT betfair has arbitrarily decided that they will take more than HALF (60%) my winnings because they said so.

Something isn't right that they are taking my money like that (again hypothetical) so I decide to do some research. This is what I come up with instantly on my first search. Imagine a lawyer or someone else who knows what they are doing can find.

The criminal usury limitations (N.J.S.A. 2C:21-19) apply to all loans subject to State of New Jersey law. The maximum permissible rate is 50% for corporations and 30% for non-corporate borrowers. The civil usury rates are governed by N.J.S.A. 31:1-1 et.


http://www.state.nj.us/dobi/division_consumers/finance/bankfaqs.htm

I don't want one track do every one that betfair has listed as a potential client. You quote and say all that 'INSANE" stuff being a betfair apologist do the job correctly.

[davew]

Yeah I am sure that TVG ADW people are in the high level meetings on Jersey Exchange wagering. Its my opinion that they are not included. sorry its my opinion not a fact.

I'd do a race by race at Aqueduct tomorrow to enlighten you on the better prices you get on BF compared to track prices.

Once in a while you'll get a better price on track, so I'll give it a run tomorrow.

If you live in Jersey and place win bets, its a no brainer. BF SP vs track prices.

Allan

Isn't BF SP the value before BF rakes the commission from winners? and before premium charges? Their treatment of deadheats will also throw many for a loop.

[paddy79]

Isn't BF SP the value before BF rakes the commission from winners? and before premium charges? Their treatment of deadheats will also throw many for a loop.



Yes the betfair SP is before the mandatory 5% takeout and the weekly 40-60% take out for some successful players. You're essentially getting 2-5 for that 1-1 shot. Since we all aim to be very successful players, that 60% threat is very offputting.

[Fox]

Yeah I am sure that TVG ADW people are in the high level meetings on Jersey Exchange wagering. Its my opinion that they are not included. sorry its my opinion not a fact.

I'd do a race by race at Aqueduct tomorrow to enlighten you on the better prices you get on BF compared to track prices.

Once in a while you'll get a better price on track, so I'll give it a run tomorrow.

If you live in Jersey and place win bets, its a no brainer. BF SP vs track prices.

Allan

Please also be sure to include the amount contributed to Aqueduct who is putting on the show. It shouldn't take long to type, just click the key to the right of the 9 on your keyboard.

[biggestal99]

Please also be sure to include the amount contributed to Aqueduct who is putting on the show. It shouldn't take long to type, just click the key to the right of the 9 on your keyboard.

BF and the NYRA go back a long way.

http://standardbredcanada.ca/news/11-2-09/betfairnyra-reach-deal.html

“We are thrilled to offer the best year-round racing in the United States to the world’s leading online wagering company. Betfair is a cutting-edge organization and we look forward to an expansive relationship with them.”

How many NYRA races does BF (TVG) sponsor?

Hell how many races nationwide are sponsored by them?

Allan

[Fox]

BF and the NYRA go back a long way.

http://standardbredcanada.ca/news/11-2-09/betfairnyra-reach-deal.html

“We are thrilled to offer the best year-round racing in the United States to the world’s leading online wagering company. Betfair is a cutting-edge organization and we look forward to an expansive relationship with them.”

How many NYRA races does BF (TVG) sponsor?

Hell how many races nationwide are sponsored by them?

Allan

Lol.....a quote from 2009.

[ultracapper]

Yeah I am sure that TVG ADW people are in the high level meetings on Jersey Exchange wagering. Its my opinion that they are not included. sorry its my opinion not a fact.

I'd do a race by race at Aqueduct tomorrow to enlighten you on the better prices you get on BF compared to track prices.

Once in a while you'll get a better price on track, so I'll give it a run tomorrow.

If you live in Jersey and place win bets, its a no brainer. BF SP vs track prices.

Allan

I can't believe anybody on this forum would encourage anyone to bet on BF. We've discussed ad nauseum the 17-20% take the track imposes and discuss how difficult that is to overcome, but now we're discussing playing in a format where 60% of our winnings will be raked, and considering that to be advantageous to betting at the track. That's insanity. If you can hit those horses at BF, you can hit them at the track, and it would be hard for me to believe that the prices are so inflated at BF that it would be easier to overcome a 60% rake than a 20% rake.

This whole thing is just confusing me. Particularly when you consider that BF obviously has great latitude in determining whether they want to play with you or not, and then imposing rules as they see fit in determining just how much they'll take from you. I understand they have a TOU that should be read, understood and memorized before you actually start playing, so you know what may be coming, but it sounds like their rights go even beyond that if they feel injured in anyway by a player's activity. Stunning.

[SuperPickle]

I can't believe anybody on this forum would encourage anyone to bet on BF. We've discussed ad nauseum the 17-20% take the track imposes and discuss how difficult that is to overcome, but now we're discussing playing in a format where 60% of our winnings will be raked, and considering that to be advantageous to betting at the track. That's insanity. If you can hit those horses at BF, you can hit them at the track, and it would be hard for me to believe that the prices are so inflated at BF that it would be easier to overcome a 60% rake than a 20% rake.

This whole thing is just confusing me. Particularly when you consider that BF obviously has great latitude in determining whether they want to play with you or not, and then imposing rules as they see fit in determining just how much they'll take from you. I understand they have a TOU that should be read, understood and memorized before you actually start playing, so you know what may be coming, but it sounds like their rights go even beyond that if they feel injured in anyway by a player's activity. Stunning.


Again I think getting bogged down in BF's UK fees is off base because its different wagers, in a different market with different takeouts. I don't know if getting hit with 20-60% tax on winnings is a better or worse proposition than having 15-30% of your betting dollars never getting into the pool at all like we have here stateside.

I do know this. I personally know two guys who did very well on the exchange BF had in Canada. One open an account with a couple hundred in it and turned it into a couple thousand over the summer. He's not a the world's greatest handicapper to just took action on horses he thought were dead.

I think before you get bogged down in fees and value you need see the exchange in action. It's quite impressive.

[whodoyoulike]

Yes the betfair SP is before the mandatory 5% takeout and the weekly 40-60% take out for some successful players. You're essentially getting 2-5 for that 1-1 shot. Since we all aim to be very successful players, that 60% threat is very offputting.

Exactly my point! Except there is no essentially about it. You should make your bets on track. You'd be better off unless BF offered you 2.5x your acceptable odds.

Why would anyone use BF unless you stop before hitting their threshold conditions?

[biggestal99]

22Exactly my point! Except there is no essentially about it. You should make your bets on track. You'd be better off unless BF offered you 2.5x your acceptable odds.

Why would anyone use BF unless you stop before hitting their threshold conditions?

£250,000

I have a long way to go.

Allan

[satrabyk]

This whole thing is just confusing me. Particularly when you consider that BF obviously has great latitude in determining whether they want to play with you or not, and then imposing rules as they see fit in determining just how much they'll take from you. I understand they have a TOU that should be read, understood and memorized before you actually start playing, so you know what may be coming, but it sounds like their rights go even beyond that if they feel injured in anyway by a player's activity. Stunning.

Well said.....What I can't understand is the fact that I used to generate anywhere from $25000 to $30000 or more a year in commissions and yet they are no longer interested in your business ?????

[whodoyoulike]

22

£250,000

I have a long way to go.

Allan

But, it sounded as if several people are passing the threshold conditions. I'm still uncertain if the 60% conditions apply on a cumulative basis from day one, restarts over each year or is it something else.

[chiguy]

I can't believe anybody on this forum would encourage anyone to bet on BF. We've discussed ad nauseum the 17-20% take the track imposes and discuss how difficult that is to overcome, but now we're discussing playing in a format where 60% of our winnings will be raked, and considering that to be advantageous to betting at the track. That's insanity. If you can hit those horses at BF, you can hit them at the track, and it would be hard for me to believe that the prices are so inflated at BF that it would be easier to overcome a 60% rake than a 20% rake.

This whole thing is just confusing me. Particularly when you consider that BF obviously has great latitude in determining whether they want to play with you or not, and then imposing rules as they see fit in determining just how much they'll take from you. I understand they have a TOU that should be read, understood and memorized before you actually start playing, so you know what may be coming, but it sounds like their rights go even beyond that if they feel injured in anyway by a player's activity. Stunning.

Stunning is exactly right. I cannot believe what I read on here sometimes. I just don't get it. Up to 60% of your winnings? Is that before or after the wife takes her cut?

[ryzerman]

To be honest, its just your word vs betfairs. and to the tune of 25,000, I think betfair are not going to take any chances. as you have seen, they don't ask questions.

As much as I hate the company, I think they are right to link the accounts in this case to be honest. Too much circumstantial evidence. You're all using interchanging laptops/IPs. Similar strategies. Father and sons all using the same strategies and all using the same IPs/laptops from time to time.

This was amateur hour really. But you weren't aware of betfairs desire to remove winners from the exchange so I can understand. Also, im not saying it's FAIR, but on the balance of things, I can understand why betfair linked the accounts. The whole premium charge tax is a complete joke though and hitting someone for a 25k bill out of nowhere is ridiculous.

Whats interesting though is that if betfair had let the account remain active and remain a winning account, the account would have been paying a premium charge and would have been giving betfair a hefty slice of the pie. Surely it would have paid more than 25k if we look at it long term. So are betfair short term in their thinking? Or what? They've killed a big player and liquidity provider here for 25k. Long term they could make much more than 25k off the player so it's interesting to say the least.

The most important conclusion is that the money is gone. No lawyer will be able to beat betfair in this case. However, im curious as to what the original posters plan of action is going to be here? Have you taken legal advice? Do you plan on making efforts to recover the 25k? Do you still plan on betting with betfair in the future? Can you beat the 40-60% weekly tax?

Circumstantial evidence? Oh my... You are very mislead sir. Your asking lots of questions. An instigator. I don't like that. I will not be giving you any info on my plans, as I can see your a completely lost in your conclusions. Or in BF thinking.

But i will once again indicate an important point that seems to not sink into some peoples heads!. Very simply they linked the accounts because they wanted money they were not entitled to get. I will emphasize this point once more! If BF felt we were on entity because we had the same last name.. :bang: Or there was an IP address similarity once upon a time.. :bang: Than they should have emailed me with the email they sent me in regards to my 20% premium charge in the first place!! :bang: Notice I keep banging my head to the insanity of the argument in itself. BF had told me that I will be paying 20% about 2 months ag. Now why in gods name did they not add that we also feel you are a single entity in relation to the above accounts and therefore you will be put on 40% rate FROM NOW ON! Even though they would be wrong to do so, they like you say have some evidence that would support that notion and it would be tough for me to argue against there decision as unjust I might think it is. So I would accept there decision moving forward. But rather they went back in time without warning and said you are 40% since you started. AND not only that... you have taken on EVERY SINGLE ACCOUNT AT A 40% rate and therefore you owe us money. If someone can argue against this ludicrously or see their opinion as just it is the last I will acknowledge anything they say. I went from a certain amount earned in my life to an amount that is more than 4 times that. Why because of the same last name. Betting strategy. R u for real, you would have to link so many accounts, their would be few not linked together on the entire site!!!

[thaskalos]

I can't believe anybody on this forum would encourage anyone to bet on BF. We've discussed ad nauseum the 17-20% take the track imposes and discuss how difficult that is to overcome, but now we're discussing playing in a format where 60% of our winnings will be raked, and considering that to be advantageous to betting at the track. That's insanity. If you can hit those horses at BF, you can hit them at the track, and it would be hard for me to believe that the prices are so inflated at BF that it would be easier to overcome a 60% rake than a 20% rake.

This whole thing is just confusing me. Particularly when you consider that BF obviously has great latitude in determining whether they want to play with you or not, and then imposing rules as they see fit in determining just how much they'll take from you. I understand they have a TOU that should be read, understood and memorized before you actually start playing, so you know what may be coming, but it sounds like their rights go even beyond that if they feel injured in anyway by a player's activity. Stunning.

Here is the difference, though. Our tracks take their cut off the top BEFORE the bet is decided...so, this cut can easily turn a winner into an overall LOSER...meaning that this player will end up with no profit at ALL in the end. But Betfair takes its share AFTER the player has collected his profit...which means that the player will still end up with a decent profit after all is said and done. Plus...Betfair provides a betting landscape where the player is allowed to wager on a much bigger scale than what our parimutuel system here is capable of supporting.

A heavy-betting player may end up with more money overall even after splitting his profits with Betfair...than he is able to earn by playing OUR version of the game.

[classhandicapper]

Im surprised it wasent said yet, prob was but there was 12,500. I guess for rich people like you that's not much. So I should keep what they are doing quiet. So next time it happens to someone else in a different manner and they go through they same thing. No reponse, no reply from them. I don't owe them shit, they owe me two things, an apology and my money.

I didn't say you should keep it quiet. I think the opposite.

I think none of this makes sense from their perspective UNLESS they are fairly certain there was a rule violation. They are getting a lot of bad publicity on a very active forum among horse players.

Is it worth it to them to get that bad publicity just to screw you out of 12.5K if there was no rule violation?

I don't think so.

That doesn't mean I am accusing you. I don't know you or what happened. I just think what they are doing doesn't make sense. A more sensible approach for them absent clear cut evidence of a rule violation would be to simply suspend all the accounts except one and allow you guys to withdraw money from the rest. That would be saying we don't trust that you guys aren't trying to avoid fees by having all these accounts. But since we can't prove it, you can withdraw and have one account. That may seem a little unfair if there are multiple members of a family that do play independently, but it would be understandable and no one would be getting
screwed out of money

[Fox]

22

£250,000

I have a long way to go.

Allan

I doubt they will use the same 250,000 threshold for the USA exchange. It will likely be different profit thresholds and surcharge rates.

Initially, I suspect they will strategically not have any premium charge in place as they will want to curry favor with the players and have everyone clamouring for more. Once they approach saturatation in terms of player acquisition and state expansion, they will then yank the rug out. By then it will be too late and the parasite will be there until the death of the host. Betfair won't care though as by that time they will have their database of millions of suckers and much more profitable against the house games to offer them.

Of course, Allan and the rest of us will all be up $5,000,000 at that point so who cares. Bring it on. I'll be the first to sign up once it gets to a livable state. Unfortunately, Jersey doesn't fit the bill.

[ryzerman]

I didn't say you should keep it quiet. I think the opposite.

I think none of this makes sense from their perspective UNLESS they are fairly certain there was a rule violation. They are getting a lot of bad publicity on a very active forum among horse players.

Is it worth it to them to get that bad publicity just to screw you out of 12.5K if there was no rule violation?

I don't think so.

That doesn't mean I am accusing you. I don't know you or what happened. I just think what they are doing doesn't make sense. A more sensible approach for them absent clear cut evidence of a rule violation would be to simply suspend all the accounts except one and allow you guys to withdraw money from the rest. That would be saying we don't trust that you guys aren't trying to avoid fees by having all these accounts. But since we can't prove it, you can withdraw and have one account. That may seem a little unfair if there are multiple members of a family that do play independently, but it would be understandable and no one would be getting
screwed out of money

Thank you, that is exactly correct. It would be unfair but I would accept there accusation. But what they did is just simply outrageous. And I would no interest in attacking them on here if I did not feel this way. What can I do they don't reply they shut me out, and they have my money...

[Fox]

Is it worth it to them to get that bad publicity just to screw you out of 12.5K if there was no rule violation?


They have already made an organizational commitment to premium charge in spite of the negative publicity it generates. After the initial premium charge basic was instituted, they got a ton of bad publicity. That didn't stop them from doubling down and implimenting super premium charge a year or so later. Clearly, that indicates the bad publicity was outweighed by the sum of the loot they collected. Remember, premium charge only affects winners who are an undesirable nuisance anyway. Losers fill the coffers, not winners.

[EMD4ME]

Here is the difference, though. Our tracks take their cut off the top BEFORE the bet is decided...so, this cut can easily turn a winner into an overall LOSER...meaning that this player will end up with no profit at ALL in the end. But Betfair takes its share AFTER the player has collected his profit...which means that the player will still end up with a decent profit after all is said and done. Plus...Betfair provides a betting landscape where the player is allowed to wager on a much bigger scale than what our parimutuel system here is capable of supporting.

A heavy-betting player may end up with more money overall even after splitting his profits with Betfair...than he is able to earn by playing OUR version of the game.

Sorry for the SILLY question out of left field but IF you make $50,000 via Betfair AFTER the 40% or 60% cut, are you then liable to pay income taxes on the $50,000?

I assume the answer is yes? WOW, what an amazing system we have....

If not, I guess the cut taken is the cost of being great and more understandable.

[ultracapper]

Here is the difference, though. Our tracks take their cut off the top BEFORE the bet is decided...so, this cut can easily turn a winner into an overall LOSER...meaning that this player will end up with no profit at ALL in the end. But Betfair takes its share AFTER the player has collected his profit...which means that the player will still end up with a decent profit after all is said and done. Plus...Betfair provides a betting landscape where the player is allowed to wager on a much bigger scale than what our parimutuel system here is capable of supporting.

A heavy-betting player may end up with more money overall even after splitting his profits with Betfair...than he is able to earn by playing OUR version of the game.

They take their cut after each winning bet is collected? After a profitable month? I'm obviously having a difficult time comprehending this. It's like I'm missing a key piece of info to understand how they can even be defended, never mind being utilized.

[Stillriledup]

They take their cut after each winning bet is collected? After a profitable month? I'm obviously having a difficult time comprehending this. It's like I'm missing a key piece of info to understand how they can even be defended, never mind being utilized.

Then if you lose the next month, they don't reimburse you. There must be something we are missing here, right?

[davew]

Exactly my point! Except there is no essentially about it. You should make your bets on track. You'd be better off unless BF offered you 2.5x your acceptable odds.

Why would anyone use BF unless you stop before hitting their threshold conditions?

I have not been to any tracks that offer the 'will not win' bet - which is essentially what a 'lay' bet is.

It is possible to dutch all others and get a somewhat similar bet, except the frequent late drop on the winner, will not be accounted for.

[ultracapper]

I have not been to any tracks that offer the 'will not win' bet - which is essentially what a 'lay' bet is.

It is possible to dutch all others and get a somewhat similar bet, except the frequent late drop on the winner, will not be accounted for.

If I could find an EXCHANGE, A BROKER, that I could lay with, I would jump all over it. I'd be happy to pay a reasonable commission for the service of matching me with another gambler that will accept the other side. But I am not looking for a bookie. Not one that holds my money, sets unbelievable commission rates, and penalizes me for winning. I can't explain the philosophic battle I had when I made my first deposit with TVG. If I thought for a second my bets with TVG were not going directly into the pools, I would be gone. Like that.

I'm going to say something here that won't be popular, and might even be insulting, and I'm sorry for that, but then I am turning my back on this thread, and on the subject of Betfair, forever. There is a very, very, very, fine line between a gambler, and a sucker. Successful gamblers, poker players, for instance, are always looking for the pigeon, the sucker. A bookie is nothing more than a gambler by another name.

Every successful gambler you will ever know either bets sports, plays poker, or bets horses. Bookies and casinos make the rules, set the prices, and they do it with THEIR OWN PROFITABILITY in mind. And then you have "gamblers" thinking they're going to take these people's money. Look in the mirror and wise up. You ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THEIR MONEY IN THE LONG RUN. Maybe once, maybe twice, maybe a little here, maybe a little more "there". If you ever get to "there", run. Because the gig is coming close to ending. The only game in town for a true gambler, a gambler with success on his mind, is head to head with another gambler. That's it.

Has anybody considered what these guys could do to pools at the track? BF can accept huge bets, lay some of it off into the pool, and kill the on track price. They can limit their exposure to any bet they take this way. And I'd bet these guys are real, real, real good at math. They could manipulate the money they lay off, with the rake they pull from the bettor, basically minimizing their exposure to nothing, while screwing the on track bettors of that horse. These guys are a scourge.

Good luck on this one fellas.

[thaskalos]

If I could find an EXCHANGE, A BROKER, that I could lay with, I would jump all over it. I'd be happy to pay a reasonable commission for the service of matching me with another gambler that will accept the other side. But I am not looking for a bookie. Not one that holds my money, sets unbelievable commission rates, and penalizes me for winning. I can't explain the philosophic battle I had when I made my first deposit with TVG. If I thought for a second my bets with TVG were not going directly into the pools, I would be gone. Like that.

I'm going to say something here that won't be popular, and might even be insulting, and I'm sorry for that, but then I am turning my back on this thread, and on the subject of Betfair, forever. There is a very, very, very, fine line between a gambler, and a sucker. Successful gamblers, poker players, for instance, are always looking for the pigeon, the sucker. A bookie is nothing more than a gambler by another name.

Every successful gambler you will ever know either bets sports, plays poker, or bets horses. Bookies and casinos make the rules, set the prices, and they do it with THEIR OWN PROFITABILITY in mind. And then you have "gamblers" thinking they're going to take these people's money. Look in the mirror and wise up. You ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THEIR MONEY IN THE LONG RUN. Maybe once, maybe twice, maybe a little here, maybe a little more "there". If you ever get to "there", run. Because the gig is coming close to ending. The only game in town for a true gambler, a gambler with success on his mind, is head to head with another gambler. That's it.

Has anybody considered what these guys could do to pools at the track? BF can accept huge bets, lay some of it off into the pool, and kill the on track price. They can limit their exposure to any bet they take this way. And I'd bet these guys are real, real, real good at math. They could manipulate the money they lay off, with the rake they pull from the bettor, basically minimizing their exposure to nothing, while screwing the on track bettors of that horse. These guys are a scourge.

Good luck on this one fellas.

Ultracapper...what "exposure" do you suppose that Betfair has on any bet?

[SuperPickle]

Sorry for the SILLY question out of left field but IF you make $50,000 via Betfair AFTER the 40% or 60% cut, are you then liable to pay income taxes on the $50,000?

I assume the answer is yes? WOW, what an amazing system we have....

If not, I guess the cut taken is the cost of being great and more understandable.


No. As it said somewhere on the thread horse racing wagering winnings are not taxable in Ireland and the U.K.

Even though I've said multiple times on this thread not to get bogged down in fees because they don't grasp all the economics people insist on doing so.

So now we have a bunch of people grandstanding about how outrageous a fee of 20-60% of winnings is and they themselves would never pay these fees. Meanwhile these same people are all u.s. Players who pay a 15-30% takeout depending on track and bet type and then pay a tax rate of 15-40% on annual gambling winnings and signers depending on income bracket and state tax rules neither of witch apply to UK players playing the Betfair exchange.

So what we have is a bunch of people claiming they would never pay fees they already pay in equal to or greater amounts in different ways.

So basically most people on this thread have no idea what they are talking about.

[ultracapper]

Ultracapper...what "exposure" do you suppose that Betfair has on any bet?

As I understand it, they're basically a bookie, which means 100% exposure. I know they're being represented as an exchange, but they don't seem to be operating as one.

[thaskalos]

No. As it said somewhere on the thread horse racing wagering winnings are not taxable in Ireland and the U.K.

Even though I've said multiple times on this thread not to get bogged down in fees because they don't grasp all the economics people insist on doing so.

So now we have a bunch of people grandstanding about how outrageous a fee of 20-60% of winnings is and they themselves would never pay these fees. Meanwhile these same people are all u.s. Players who pay a 15-30% takeout depending on track and bet type and then pay a tax rate of 15-40% on annual gambling winnings and signers depending on income bracket and state tax rules neither of witch apply to UK players playing the Betfair exchange.

So what we have is a bunch of people claiming they would never pay fees they already pay in equal to or greater amounts in different ways.

So basically most people on this thread have no idea what they are talking about.

And this illustrates the reason why Betfair will never catch on in this country...even if it's approved by our gambling laws. Because gambling income is TAXED in this country...the gambler would have to pay government taxes, ON TOP of any fees that Betfair sees fit to institute.

[Stillriledup]

As I understand it, they're basically a bookie, which means 100% exposure. I know they're being represented as an exchange, but they don't seem to be operating as one.

But isn't it true that they don't accept the bet unless there's someone betting the other side for at least an equal amount?

[thaskalos]

As I understand it, they're basically a bookie, which means 100% exposure. I know they're being represented as an exchange, but they don't seem to be operating as one.

Do you bet WITH Betfair...or THROUGH them, and with the other members?

[thaskalos]

Every successful gambler you will ever know either bets sports, plays poker, or bets horses. Bookies and casinos make the rules, set the prices, and they do it with THEIR OWN PROFITABILITY in mind. And then you have "gamblers" thinking they're going to take these people's money. Look in the mirror and wise up. You ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THEIR MONEY IN THE LONG RUN. Maybe once, maybe twice, maybe a little here, maybe a little more "there". If you ever get to "there", run. Because the gig is coming close to ending. The only game in town for a true gambler, a gambler with success on his mind, is head to head with another gambler. That's it.



Do you doubt that you have people who win money while betting sports in this country? How do you suppose that these bettors WIN...if the bookies are as unbeatable as you claim? You DO know that the only way to bet sports in this country is through bookies...right?

[ultracapper]

Do you doubt that you have people who win money while betting sports in this country? How do you suppose that these bettors WIN...if the bookies are as unbeatable as you claim? You DO know that the only way to bet sports in this country is through bookies...right?

OK. Give me time to think. I popped a cork there. I'll admit it. Something's not right in Kalamazoo though, or whatever the saying is.

[ultracapper]

But isn't it true that they don't accept the bet unless there's someone betting the other side for at least an equal amount?

If that's true, I don't understand at all the premium rake fees. Let's start there. Why are they charging those to winners of a filled bet? What are they losing that they need to recoup?

[ultracapper]

Do you bet WITH Betfair...or THROUGH them, and with the other members?

No, on all counts.

[ultracapper]

Do you doubt that you have people who win money while betting sports in this country? How do you suppose that these bettors WIN...if the bookies are as unbeatable as you claim? You DO know that the only way to bet sports in this country is through bookies...right?

A quick answer on this one is that there is plenty of liquidity in the legal betting markets in the US for the bookies to keep their books balanced. The books in Vegas now and again are exposed on some bets, but for the most part, they are able to "lay off around town" to keep their exposure to a minimum.

[SuperPickle]

And this illustrates the reason why Betfair will never catch on in this country...even if it's approved by our gambling laws. Because gambling income is TAXED in this country...the gambler would have to pay government taxes, ON TOP of any fees that Betfair sees fit to institute.

Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!

This thread is an exercise in stupidly.

Betfair is a billion dollar company. They get the economics of the system are vastly different. They realize they can't charge 20-60% fees here. Also they pay a bunch of the 20-60% to the UK government in business taxes. Yeah player winnings aren't taxed there but bookmaker profits sure are.

Again It is an entirely different system.

In fact Betfair abandoned doing this in California because they takeout rate they proposed to the CHRB was lower than current takeout races and the horsemen freaked and blocked exchange wagering in CA.

SRU will back me up on that fact.

Tell him SRU..,

[thaskalos]

If that's true, I don't understand at all the premium rake fees. Let's start there. Why are they charging those to winners of a filled bet? What are they losing that they need to recoup?
Please go back and read post #46 of this thread...where Dave Schwartz correctly states that the long-term winner is a "draw down on the sport". The long-term winner takes money AWAY from the game...and when money is removed from the game, the game isn't as "liquid" as it would be if the players were winning and then losing the money right back. Betfair charges the big winners, in order to offset the losses in income that it incurs as a result of having the winnings of those players leave the game.

[SuperPickle]

Please go back and read post #46 of this thread...where Dave Schwartz correctly states that the long-term winner is a "draw down on the sport". The long-term winner takes money AWAY from the game...and when money is removed from the game, the game isn't as "liquid" as it would be if the players were winning and then losing the money right back. Betfair charges the big winners, in order to offset the losses in income that it incurs as a result of having the winnings of those players leave the game.

Yesssssss!!!! This!!!!!

Betfair isn't charging a takeout, they're not taking a cut of the money in the pool.

So before you get up from the table they want a nice piece of that $500 you won to both offset it leaving the table and because they are not a non-profit charity.

[Stillriledup]

Please go back and read post #46 of this thread...where Dave Schwartz correctly states that the long-term winner is a "draw down on the sport". The long-term winner takes money AWAY from the game...and when money is removed from the game, the game isn't as "liquid" as it would be if the players were winning and then losing the money right back. Betfair charges the big winners, in order to offset the losses in income that it incurs as a result of having the winnings of those players leave the game.

But isn't the money that's taken away due to winning get recouped by winners betting more money and more often than they would if they were break even or losing players?

[ultracapper]

Please go back and read post #46 of this thread...where Dave Schwartz correctly states that the long-term winner is a "draw down on the sport". The long-term winner takes money AWAY from the game...and when money is removed from the game, the game isn't as "liquid" as it would be if the players were winning and then losing the money right back. Betfair charges the big winners, in order to offset the losses in income that it incurs as a result of having the winnings of those players leave the game.

WHAT???? You buy that? Come on. For every loser that leaves, 5 more take his place. Nobody gets out of here alive except for the very few fortunate. Lifetime gamblers are chunking money into the pot while climbing into the coffin.

I'd love to see studies of this phenomenon. I have a lot of respect on this board for Dave and yourself, but that's a little too theoretical for me. I would need to see something that supports that, with all due respect to the both of you.

[thaskalos]

Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!

This thread is an exercise in stupidly.

Betfair is a billion dollar company. They get the economics of the system are vastly different. They realize they can't charge 20-60% fees here. Also they pay a bunch of the 20-60% to the UK government in business taxes. Yeah player winnings aren't taxed there but bookmaker profits sure are.

Again It is an entirely different system.

In fact Betfair abandoned doing this in California because they takeout rate they proposed to the CHRB was lower than current takeout races and the horsemen freaked and blocked exchange wagering in CA.

SRU will back me up on that fact.

Tell him SRU..,

SuperPickle...I understand what you are saying, and I know that the California horsemen freaked out when Betfair proposed their takeout to the CHRB. But the California horsemen reacted in the exact same manner that the REST of the horsemen will react in this country. In this country, the taxman isn't satisfied to just collect the taxes from the "bookmaker". Here...the taxman is used to taxing EVERYBODY...and this isn't open to debate. When Betfair sees that the government won't wave the tax on the player's gambling winnings, and that the horsemen won't accept Betfair's proposed takeout rates...THEN what do you suppose will happen?

[ultracapper]

Nooooooooooooooo!!!!!

This thread is an exercise in stupidly.

Betfair is a billion dollar company. They get the economics of the system are vastly different. They realize they can't charge 20-60% fees here. Also they pay a bunch of the 20-60% to the UK government in business taxes. Yeah player winnings aren't taxed there but bookmaker profits sure are.

Again It is an entirely different system.

In fact Betfair abandoned doing this in California because they takeout rate they proposed to the CHRB was lower than current takeout races and the horsemen freaked and blocked exchange wagering in CA.

SRU will back me up on that fact.

Tell him SRU..,

Just had to laugh because I know I'm at the front end of this statement.

[davew]

As I understand it, they're basically a bookie, which means 100% exposure. I know they're being represented as an exchange, but they don't seem to be operating as one.

If they are booking bets, then they probably are doing it on both sides for all the horses in the race, that drastically cuts the exposure - even our entries are stand alone runners on their exchange.

[thaskalos]

WHAT???? You buy that? Come on. For every loser that leaves, 5 more take his place. Nobody gets out of here alive except for the very few fortunate. Lifetime gamblers are chunking money into the pot while climbing into the coffin.

I'd love to see studies of this phenomenon. I have a lot of respect on this board for Dave and yourself, but that's a little too theoretical for me. I would need to see something that supports that, with all due respect to the both of you.

You must understand that the winning gambler pays no taxes on these gambling winnings in those countries...while Betfair is TAXED for the business that it conducts. Should Betfair allow the big winners to remove their winnings from the game without suffering a tax burden...while Betfair shoulders the tax bill all alone?

If the gamblers in the UK were taxed like we are...then it would be a different story.

[ultracapper]

Yesssssss!!!! This!!!!!

Betfair isn't charging a takeout, they're not taking a cut of the money in the pool.

So before you get up from the table they want a nice piece of that $500 you won to both offset it leaving the table and because they are not a non-profit charity.

So as players, we are supposed to resign ourselves to the fact that our purpose is to feed the pot and just keep the game going so BetFair can earn their fees. 'Sir, you won, but we must keep the game going so here is a little chunk of what you won, and the rest is to keep the game going. You know, we don't want it to leave the table. Oops, it just left the table, and into our bank account. Well, as long as it didn't go into your bank account."

I'm leaning back towards my rant of a couple pages ago. I guess if you keep calling us stupid and uninformed long enough, common sense will dessert us sooner or later.

[ultracapper]

You must understand that the winning gambler pays no taxes on these gambling winnings in those countries...while Betfair is TAXED for the business that it conducts. Should Betfair allow the big winners to remove their winnings from the game without suffering a tax burden...while Betfair shoulders the tax bill all alone?

If the gamblers in the UK were taxed like we are...then it would be a different story.

So I would guess BetFair is taxed on it's income, a percentage of that income. Am I right? Let's assume I am. So they are basically saying that income minus taxes paid isn't sufficient income, and therefore they need a rake to enhance income. OK, I can see that. I'll come back to this in a minute.

[thaskalos]

So I would guess BetFair is taxed on it's income, a percentage of that income. Am I right? Let's assume I am. So they are basically saying that income minus taxes paid isn't sufficient income, and therefore they need a rake to enhance income. OK, I can see that. I'll come back to this in a minute.

It's a BUSINESS, Ultracapper...and there are costs associated with it. Betfair has to make a worthwhile profit in order to continue providing this service...and its members know that. They allow you to make your profit...and then they ask you for their share, while you get to keep the rest. In THIS country, the tracks take 17-30% off the top, before the money ever reaches your hand...and in the end, you are left with no profit at ALL.

Unless, that is, you believe these online forums...where everyone seems to be either "winning", or "holding their own". There was a poll question here a few years ago...where the original poster asked whether we were "Winning", "Losing" or "about even" in this game. As I recall...only 33% confessed that they were "losing". All the rest declared that they were either "Winning", or "about even". :rolleyes:

[LottaKash]

Yesssssss!!!! This!!!!!

Betfair isn't charging a takeout, they're not taking a cut of the money in the pool.

So before you get up from the table they want a nice piece of that $500 you won to both offset it leaving the table and because they are not a non-profit charity.

So, you are saying that it is ok for them to keep up to $300 from the $500 of your winnings, and you are good with that ?... :confused:

[ultracapper]

It's a BUSINESS, Ultracapper...and there are costs associated with it. Betfair has to make a worthwhile profit in order to continue providing this service...and its members know that. They allow you to make your profit...and then they ask you for their share, while you get to keep the rest. In THIS country, the tracks take 17-30% off the top, before the money ever reaches your hand...and in the end, you are left with no profit at ALL.

Unless, that is, you believe these online forums...where everyone seems to be either "winning", or "holding their own". There was a poll question here a few years ago...where the original poster asked whether we were "Winning", "Losing" or "about even" in this game. As I recall...only 33% confessed that they were "losing". All the rest declared that they were either "Winning", or "about even". :rolleyes:

First off, I have no misunderstanding that they are a business, and that they are in it for profit. I understand that, and appreciate that fact in spirit. I also would appreciate, as a gambler, the service that I at first, and would want to believe, they are offering.

What I'm having trouble with, is the idea that winners, even after a pre-determined rake has been paid, are asked for even more. Evidently, because there is a concern for liquidity? Or because, as we have been informed so proudly, they earn 10 million pounds per month. They confiscate accounts upon internal investigations with no queries to the account holders. They even have the gall to send them a $25K bill for services rendered and not properly compensated for above and beyond the confiscated account balance. There is a feeling that they don't like winners, and that may be because it is BetFair's money, and not some other gambler out there in the nether world, who's money the winner is getting. Therefore BetFair wants it back to keep the game alive. Or is it to pay taxes? I don't have to comment on the reliability of info we get on this forum as we all should be aware that anybody can say anything here, but there was a post that said they have given up on the exchange model because booking and online casino games are much more profitable. Even though we must consider the source, it helps explain some of the other behaviors we've heard about and does fit into the picture that's been painted here.

My concern would be, does BetFair basically look at all monies deposited with them as their money? It's almost like "once we've got it, we're not letting it leave. Even if all we're going to do with it is seed the game and pay taxes."

You say you can't win in the pari-mutuel markets in US horse racing. But can you win when you bet 1000, seeing 5-1 on the exchange board, get back 6000, pay 2000 in rake, leaving you 4000? Or bet 1000, seeing 3-1 on the board, getting back 4000, leaving you with 4000? I don't understand the advantage to the first one. You have to beat the rake either way. I would venture to say, that if take were to ever be reduced, it would be the US race tracks that would do it before the $10 million pound per month private for profit company that imposes premium rakes on excess winnings and confiscates accounts if they are suspicious they are being denied their "fair" share.

I'm sure this will keep me up tonight.

[thaskalos]

First off, I have no misunderstanding that they are a business, and that they are in it for profit. I understand that, and appreciate that fact in spirit. I also would appreciate, as a gambler, the service that I at first, and would want to believe, they are offering.

What I'm having trouble with, is the idea that winners, even after a pre-determined rake has been paid, are asked for even more. Evidently, because there is a concern for liquidity? Or because, as we have been informed so proudly, they earn 10 million pounds per month. They confiscate accounts upon internal investigations with no queries to the account holders. They even have the gall to send them a $25K bill for services rendered and not properly compensated for above and beyond the confiscated account balance. There is a feeling that they don't like winners, and that may be because it is BetFair's money, and not some other gambler out there in the nether world, who's money the winner is getting. Therefore BetFair wants it back to keep the game alive. Or is it to pay taxes? I don't have to comment on the reliability of info we get on this forum as we all should be aware that anybody can say anything here, but there was a post that said they have given up on the exchange model because booking and online casino games are much more profitable. Even though we must consider the source, it helps explain some of the other behaviors we've heard about and does fit into the picture that's been painted here.

My concern would be, does BetFair basically look at all monies deposited with them as their money? It's almost like "once we've got it, we're not letting it leave. Even if all we're going to do with it is seed the game and pay taxes."

You say you can't win in the pari-mutuel markets in US horse racing. But can you win when you bet 1000, seeing 5-1 on the exchange board, get back 6000, pay 2000 in rake, leaving you 4000? Or bet 1000, seeing 3-1 on the board, getting back 4000, leaving you with 4000? I don't understand the advantage to the first one. The rake is going to get you either way. I would venture to say, that if take were to ever be reduced, it would be the US race tracks that would do it before the $10 million pound per month private for profit company that imposes premium rakes on excess winnings and confiscates accounts if they are suspicious they are being denied their "fair" share.

I'm sure this will keep me up tonight.

I don't bet with Betfair, and neither do you...nor will we ever. The question of whether or not Betfair offers enough "value" to its customers can only be answered by the customers themselves. My own experience in business tells me that a private enterprise doesn't usually grow to the billion-dollar level without supplying adequate value to its customer base.

Speaking strictly for myself...I would relish the opportunity to bet with Betfair. The wagering format in this country seems decidedly "minor-leagueish" to me.

[ultracapper]

I don't bet with Betfair, and neither do you...nor will we ever. The question of whether or not Betfair offers enough "value" to its customers can only be answered by the customers themselves. My own experience in business tells me that a private enterprise doesn't usually grow to the billion-dollar level without supplying adequate value to its customer base.

Speaking strictly for myself...I would relish the opportunity to bet with Betfair. The wagering format in this country seems decidedly "minor-leagueish" to me.

I too, would love the opportunity to bet with a true exchange. I agree with your statement about growth and value. I wonder if you agree with my statement about gamblers in general in my original rant.

Good Night Thask.

[LottaKash]

the wagering format in this country seems decidedly "minor-leagueish" to me.

While that seems to be true enough in reality, given the choice, I would rather pay the "track rake", which as we all know makes and keeps this game of ours go, to begin with, rather than further richen the bandits that go by the oxymoronic name of "bet fair", that in reality, contributes nothing to enhance or maintain this game of ours..

[thaskalos]

I too, would love the opportunity to bet with a true exchange. I agree with your statement about growth and value. I wonder if you agree with my statement about gamblers in general in my original rant.

Good Night Thask.

I couldn't decipher what your original statement about the gamblers was. :)

If you were saying that bookies were unbeatable...and that the only way to win long-term is for gamblers to bet against one another...then I disagree. IMO...unless parimutuel wagering is conducted in a certain manner, it becomes a very disadvantageous form of betting for almost all of the bettors out there. And in this country...parimutuel wagering isn't conducted in the right manner.

Good Night UC.

[thaskalos]

While that seems to be true enough in reality, given the choice, I would rather pay the "track rake", which as we all know makes and keeps this game of ours go, to begin with, rather than further richen the bandits that go by the oxymoronic name of "bet fair", that in reality, contributes nothing to enhance or maintain this game of ours..

LottaKash...you are obviously a better man than I am. Truth be known...about half of my wagering is now done overseas...where the wagered money does nothing to "enhance or maintain this game of ours". It took me an embarrassingly-long time to realize this...but it finally occurred to me that this game isn't really "ours". It belongs, and is run, by a bunch of individual entities who are only concerned with securing the biggest piece of the pie for themselves...without wasting their time thinking about me, and my financial welfare. And, since no-one seemed to care about ME...I figured it was about time that I started caring about me, MYSELF.

I have now adopted the exact same philosophy that the racing industry has embraced...and I operate with only my OWN benefit in mind. If things go the way that I plan...I will soon be doing ALL my wagering overseas.

Don't get me wrong...I still love this game. But I have realized that this doesn't work...unless the game loves me back.

[LottaKash]

Don't get me wrong...I still love this game. But I have realized that this doesn't work...unless the game loves me back.

Haha, yes I agree, where is the love ?...

And, I am not that idealistic either, as I see this game just dying a slow and almost an inevitable death, unless of course something changes....Fat chance tho, as is, hunh ?..

Hey, make hay while the sunshines... Get-em Gus !.. ;)

[biggestal99]

SuperPickle...I understand what you are saying, and I know that the California horsemen freaked out when Betfair proposed their takeout to the CHRB. But the California horsemen reacted in the exact same manner that the REST of the horsemen will react in this country. In this country, the taxman isn't satisfied to just collect the taxes from the "bookmaker". Here...the taxman is used to taxing EVERYBODY...and this isn't open to debate. When Betfair sees that the government won't wave the tax on the player's gambling winnings, and that the horsemen won't accept Betfair's proposed takeout rates...THEN what do you suppose will happen?

Well the horsemen of jersey took a big leap of faith and signed a deal with the "devil".

Was their deal a good one for them remains to be seen.

Allan

[Canarsie]

So I would guess BetFair is taxed on it's income, a percentage of that income. Am I right? Let's assume I am. So they are basically saying that income minus taxes paid isn't sufficient income, and therefore they need a rake to enhance income. OK, I can see that. I'll come back to this in a minute.

They make even more money than you thought.

Betfair worries racing industry with move offshore to save tax


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/leisure/8369475/Betfair-worries-racing-industry-with-move-offshore-to-save-tax.html

Disclaimer: unlike the betfair apologist this post is from March 2011. They might have changed things since then I really haven't followed it. But their agenda is to rake the government and winning player for as much as possible.

[Canarsie]

I'm going to conduct an informal poll here for NJ residents that is really one simple question.

A. Will you bet on the exchange when it becomes active?

B. I will not be playing on the exchange due to betfair policy.

I guess we can make this available to U.S. residents and see what the results are. If the betfair apologist is right and EW gets passed by legislatures like wildfires you will be getting it sooner than later. Disclaimer: he has never been right so be forewarned.

Please state if you are a NJ resident or live elsewhere and I will do my best to keep a running total.

[biggestal99]

They make even more money than you thought.

Betfair worries racing industry with move offshore to save tax


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/leisure/8369475/Betfair-worries-racing-industry-with-move-offshore-to-save-tax.html

Disclaimer: unlike the betfair apologist this post is from March 2011. They might have changed things since then I really haven't followed it. But their agenda is to rake the government and winning player for as much as possible.

almost EVERY UK company does exactly the same.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/may/12/uk-companies-condemned-tax-havens

Allan

[biggestal99]

I'm going to conduct an informal poll here for NJ residents that is really one simple question.

A. Will you bet on the exchange when it becomes active?

B. I will not be playing on the exchange due to betfair policy.

I guess we can make this available to U.S. residents and see what the results are. If the betfair apologist is right and EW gets passed by legislatures like wildfires you will be getting it sooner than later. Disclaimer: he has never been right so be forewarned.

Please state if you are a NJ resident or live elsewhere and I will do my best to keep a running total.

A. Will try and be account #1 on the Jersey exchange, will be an active trader.

and yes I live in the only state in the union with a licensed exchange.

Allan

[castaway01]

I'm going to conduct an informal poll here for NJ residents that is really one simple question.

A. Will you bet on the exchange when it becomes active?

B. I will not be playing on the exchange due to betfair policy.

I guess we can make this available to U.S. residents and see what the results are. If the betfair apologist is right and EW gets passed by legislatures like wildfires you will be getting it sooner than later. Disclaimer: he has never been right so be forewarned.

Please state if you are a NJ resident or live elsewhere and I will do my best to keep a running total.

Yes, I will bet on the exchange. If I can make money doing it, I'll continue to do so. If the take is too high or the competition too tough or the handle too small for me to make money, then I'll stop. But I'll try it, sure. It sounds like a new challenge and POSSIBLY a good opportunity.

[SuperPickle]

So as players, we are supposed to resign ourselves to the fact that our purpose is to feed the pot and just keep the game going so BetFair can earn their fees. 'Sir, you won, but we must keep the game going so here is a little chunk of what you won, and the rest is to keep the game going. You know, we don't want it to leave the table. Oops, it just left the table, and into our bank account. Well, as long as it didn't go into your bank account."

I'm leaning back towards my rant of a couple pages ago. I guess if you keep calling us stupid and uninformed long enough, common sense will dessert us sooner or later.


I'm not Paul Krugman. I'm no economist. But you have two systems...

1. The US Pari-mutual system. The tracks take 15-30% of every dollar you bet as a tax. Then if you're up at the end of the year government taxes take 15-40% of any winnings depending on how much you make and if state and city taxes kick in.

2. The Betfair Exchange. No takeout. No government taxes. Betfair taxes you 20-60% of your winnings.

I'm not advocating one system over the other. I'm making the point that people on this board with their "I would never pay those fees" attitude are already paying comparable fees. Maybe more. So the answer is "yes they will."

I don't think either is good for horse players. But I think anyone outraged by Betfair's 20-60% fees does really understand the vig and tax system currently in place in the U.S. system.

Anyone outraged doesn't understand how much they are currently taxed in the U.S. pari-mutuel system or don't bet.

[SuperPickle]

So, you are saying that it is ok for them to keep up to $300 from the $500 of your winnings, and you are good with that ?... :confused:

Yes. Because under the current system Let's say I had to bet $1,000 to win the $500. The tracks would have taken about around $220 of the $1,000 in takeout. That $220 never goes into the pool. Hence the term "takeout."

Then let's assume I'm up this $500 at the end of the tax year. The government takes another $150 of that $500.

So on the U.S. part system I'm out $370 in various taxes, vigs, takeouts and withholdings.

In the UK it's only $300 even at their highest takeout rate.

It's apples and oranges. You guys need to do the math.

[Fox]

2. The Betfair Exchange. No takeout. No government taxes. Betfair taxes you 20-60% of your winnings.


You can't really compare the US parimutuel system to the UK exchange system. Plus, you didn't really explain the exchange system accurately anyhow. More accurate would be:

5% takeout/commission on all payoffs.
20% to 60% exchange tax on net winnings.
If it is the New Jersey exchange, add 15% to %40 for Uncle Sam.

[paddy79]

Circumstantial evidence? Oh my... You are very mislead sir. Your asking lots of questions. An instigator. I don't like that. I will not be giving you any info on my plans, as I can see your a completely lost in your conclusions. Or in BF thinking.

But i will once again indicate an important point that seems to not sink into some peoples heads!. Very simply they linked the accounts because they wanted money they were not entitled to get. I will emphasize this point once more! If BF felt we were on entity because we had the same last name.. :bang: Or there was an IP address similarity once upon a time.. :bang: Than they should have emailed me with the email they sent me in regards to my 20% premium charge in the first place!! :bang: Notice I keep banging my head to the insanity of the argument in itself. BF had told me that I will be paying 20% about 2 months ag. Now why in gods name did they not add that we also feel you are a single entity in relation to the above accounts and therefore you will be put on 40% rate FROM NOW ON! Even though they would be wrong to do so, they like you say have some evidence that would support that notion and it would be tough for me to argue against there decision as unjust I might think it is. So I would accept there decision moving forward. But rather they went back in time without warning and said you are 40% since you started. AND not only that... you have taken on EVERY SINGLE ACCOUNT AT A 40% rate and therefore you owe us money. If someone can argue against this ludicrously or see their opinion as just it is the last I will acknowledge anything they say. I went from a certain amount earned in my life to an amount that is more than 4 times that. Why because of the same last name. Betting strategy. R u for real, you would have to link so many accounts, their would be few not linked together on the entire site!!!



To be fair, even if you used different IPs and different laptops, you all have the same last name so betfair may still have linked the accounts. But when you log in and place a winning bet and then another log in comes on the same laptop, same IP, using a different account with a similar strategy and places a similar bet, then I can see where betfair are coming from in linking the accounts. In the UK/Ireland people have been getting accounts closed for years and this is very well known. The trademark way to get around it is make an account in the wife/brother/uncle/mother etc name and then gamble away, claiming they are winning, not you. Even though the strategy is similar.

But I understand the US is different and you don't have bookies and see how these slimeballs operate. Betfair are scum for doing what they did. It was ignorance on your parts to be so freely using the same IP/Laptop but then again you didn't realize how bad betfair can be

[paddy79]

I doubt they will use the same 250,000 threshold for the USA exchange.

I don't see this working. This brings the traders/winners that they have neutralized back into the frame. All someone has to do is pack up to new jersey and set up shop there and start winning from betfair again. I think they have to maintain the 60% charge. Keep in mind, they don't care about the customer, they care about how much money their shareholders are receiving each quarter.

[Canarsie]

So far two for the exchange and zero against. I'm not going to cherry pick posts just do it fairly with no commentary.

[paddy79]

Betfair have a sportsbook and an exchange. They ban people who are winners from the sportsbook by restricting their stakes and charge up to 60% weekly tax to winners on the exchange. A funny story just came up on the betfair forum - a guy banned from the sportsbook because he's not a consistent loser and given no reason by betfair management. This is just another example of how they run their business and how they treat customers












http://community.betfair.com/horse_racing/go/thread/view/94102/30633623/banned-by-betfair-sportsbook-for-losing#flvWelcomeHeader



Happy New Year to All.

Turned out to be a historic year for me on two fronts. Firstly, censored by Boylesports which was the first bookie i've been restricted by in 30 years of punting, which i was quite chuffed about really, did the ego a bit of good and all that. Now just found out i've doubled that number with Betfair Sportsbook. Not quite as glamorous however as it turns out i've lost with them!!! Is this a cunning new way within the bookmaking industry, ban the losing punters as well as the winning ones. No doubt there wouldnt be an issue with either bookmaker if i deposited £50 on the slots or roulette though!



Dario : Hello welcome to Betfair you are chatting with Dario. How can I help?
Dario: Hello there
pete: Simple question really. Why are you refusing to take even a £1 e/w double bet off me?
Dario: What is happening, it won't let you bet? Are you given any message?
pete: Maximum allowed is 82p e/w. Every time i try to place a bet i am restricted to ridiculous amounts. Earlier wanted £20 on a 15/8 shot that was restricted to £8
Dario: And are you trying to bet on the exchange?
pete: no, sportsbook
Dario: And are you trying to bet on an australian market by any chance?
pete: No. Only ever bet on English Horse racing
Dario: Ok, can you please send me a screenshot of the message you are getting, I will need to escalate this with our sportsbook department to check further?
pete: It will mean i have to try and place a bet to get the message, and it will be sods law it will get accepted.
pete: the message only appears when i submit the bet. Not just today either, every time i have tried to bet over last couple of months the same restrictions
Dario: I understand Pete, and does this happen also on the exchange markets?
pete: no just sportsbook
Dario: SO Pete I have been checking with our sports department and the reason you cannot place any sportsbook bets is because your account has been restricted to using only the exchange markets, its a traders decision that unfortunately cannot be reversed
pete isle: why?
Dario: Its not something that they make us aware of, its solely up to the discretion of our sports department
pete: i would like someone to have the decency to speak to me and explain why they have taken that decision. While theyre at it they can also tell me how many thousands of pounds profit i HAVEN'T made in the last couple of years as i presume that is normally the reason these decisions are taken. I've barely placed a bet with the sportsbook in 6 months and would find it funny id it weren't so pathetic.
Dario: Pete, I understand your position, unfortunately its not something that we can over turn from helpdesk as its entirely a sports department decision and we aren't made aware of any specific reason. If you wish to escalate this forward you may do so by clicking on help at the top end on our web site > then help topics > and type in complaint
pete: I don't expect you to overturn it., i would simply ask that whoever has taken this decision would have the common courtesy to get on a phone and explain his reasons for doing so. Or haven't the basics of customer service reached Betfair's trading desk yet?
Dario: Pete unfortunately from my end I cannot give you a reason becuase we are unaware of the specific reasons ourselves at helpdesk. It is solely to the discretion of our sports department and they do not disclose any reasons
pete: i'd be embarrassed working there. I spent 20 year on Ladbrokes raceroom and yes we restricted customers who were non profitable i.e. tens of thousands in front, but never £10- £20 punters. And I made sure that i had the bollx to ring that customer and explain to him personally why we had to do it. It's not pleasant but at least the punters respected the fact we told them. Your trading dept are obviously full of faceless graduates who need to grow a pair. Please can you provide me with a Sportsbook P&L for the last 12 months as your system does not allow me to do it for myself and so i can see how many thousands i'm in front
Dario: Pete your P & L on sportsbook is 2,661.46 as deposits and 2,487.52 as returns, Im sorry you feel this way Pete, unfortunately from my end there is not much more than this I can tell you as I don't know the reason myself eithert
pete: So your binning losing punters as well now then!!! Absolutely priceless!!!!!! Shame really, i was looking forward to spending my millions! Thanks for your time Dario, you have my sympathy.
Dario: Sorry for this Pete, wish I could do more myself in this case





:lol:

[Fox]

I don't see this working. This brings the traders/winners that they have neutralized back into the frame. All someone has to do is pack up to new jersey and set up shop there and start winning from betfair again. I think they have to maintain the 60% charge. Keep in mind, they don't care about the customer, they care about how much money their shareholders are receiving each quarter.

When I said that I doubt they will use the same thresholds, I meant they may be even less favorable for the player. Maybe super premium charge will start at a net profit of 50,000 or 100,000 instead of 250,000. Who knows, top tier could be 70% surcharge. Bottom tier might be 25% instead of 20%. As far as people who already have international accounts opening USA accounts, I suspect they will link those immediately. For the Betfair virgins, which will be most of the players, I predict they will grant a reprieve and will have no initial premium charge. Their number one priority will be expansion not profit initially. To expand, they'll want to be popular with the players and the track/horsemen. To be popular with the players, they best not have the surcharge. In lieu of mass advertising, they might even just take that part of the budget and slowly pour it on the exchange in the form of liquidity at generous odds to get the wheels churning and everyone singing praises about the wonderful prices they get. Remember, the premium charge was not instituted until after 10 years in the UK by which point they were approaching saturation in terms of expanding the customer base. There is no way they would have been as successful as they were in the UK if they had premium charge from the start. They'll wait here too until the rug is full before they pull it out.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

I'm not Paul Krugman. I'm no economist.

And neither is Krugman. He's an idiot.

I'll agree with your earlier comment that most of U.S. players don't get all the numbers involved. But this brings up the same question of Stronach versus Derby Wars. Why don't U.S. tracks offer an exchange style wager themselves?

The thing that sticks in my craw about Betfair is that, as a private company, they can toss you out and keep your dough - and you as a player have little to no recourse.

[Fox]

Why don't U.S. tracks offer an exchange style wager themselves?

This would be a much more beneficial course for the tracks to take than getting in bed with Betfair. The biggest problem with New Jersey's current course is that the interests of the tracks/horsemen are not aligned very well longterm with that of Betfair as far as I see it.

If you think exchange betting is such a great idea Monmouth, do it yourself. The technology for a narrowly focused racing exchange is not magical and can be acquired or developed for far less than you will be giving away by letting someone else run the show. The way it is setup, I'd be surprised if they even breakeven when the remittances received from Betfair are measured against the parimutuel revenue lost from wagering dollars exiting the pools in favor of the exchange. I would think it better to keep the parimutuel and exchange revenue under the same roof as opposed to allowing revenues to be syphoned off by an external entity.

[ryzerman]

To be fair, even if you used different IPs and different laptops, you all have the same last name so betfair may still have linked the accounts. But when you log in and place a winning bet and then another log in comes on the same laptop, same IP, using a different account with a similar strategy and places a similar bet, then I can see where betfair are coming from in linking the accounts. In the UK/Ireland people have been getting accounts closed for years and this is very well known. The trademark way to get around it is make an account in the wife/brother/uncle/mother etc name and then gamble away, claiming they are winning, not you. Even though the strategy is similar.

But I understand the US is different and you don't have bookies and see how these slimeballs operate. Betfair are scum for doing what they did. It was ignorance on your parts to be so freely using the same IP/Laptop but then again you didn't realize how bad betfair can be

You seem to say a lot without any reason. Maybe you know something I don't.. Interesting. Firstly i guess if my name was Smith they should link all those accounts. Again you are missing the point. Point is, for whataver ****ed up reason they have to link my account with someone else, it does not entitle them to reverse time and take my money. If its in the discretion that i am the same as my father and my brother. :bang: Than an email about what is going to take place in the future.. i.e (40% on my account if i continue to play) is the necessary and uncriminal course of action. But no BF felt they can go back in time with their false accusations and rob my money. If they can do something as ****ed up as this, what else are they capable off? This is the leading exchange? This is an absolute joke.. slimeball or not.. only part is, they still have my money.. and this is not funny or acceptable!

[therussmeister]

I'm not Paul Krugman. I'm no economist. But you have two systems...

2. The Betfair Exchange. No takeout. No government taxes. Betfair taxes you 20-60% of your winnings.
But when Betfair opens shop in New Jersey, there will be government taxes on top of Betfair's 20-60% cut.

[therussmeister]

I'm going to conduct an informal poll here for NJ residents that is really one simple question.

A. Will you bet on the exchange when it becomes active?

B. I will not be playing on the exchange due to betfair policy.

I guess we can make this available to U.S. residents and see what the results are. If the betfair apologist is right and EW gets passed by legislatures like wildfires you will be getting it sooner than later. Disclaimer: he has never been right so be forewarned.

Please state if you are a NJ resident or live elsewhere and I will do my best to keep a running total.
I am not a NJ resident, and I choose:

C. I would not play on the exchange because I don't think it would be more profitable than the exotic wagers I currently play.

I bet a total of four win bets in 2015.

[satrabyk]

It was ignorance on your parts to be so freely using the same IP/Laptop but then again you didn't realize how bad betfair can be

No Paddy. My son never used the same laptop/IP address as I or his brother did. If he did it would have been on a rare occasion if we happened to be together at the betting parlor and for some reason he didn't have his laptop and he wanted to make a bet....Because he shares the same stupid last name they feel he should inherit a back dated 40% premium charge without notice...grab his $13000 a couple weeks before Canadians banned and claim that his and the other accounts belonging to myself and my other son owe another $15000 before they can be unsuspended again.

[highnote]

But when Betfair opens shop in New Jersey, there will be government taxes on top of Betfair's 20-60% cut.


From what I have read in this thread here is my "hallucination" about what might be happening and the reason for it:

Betting exchanges started out as a high volume/low transaction cost business model that had moderate fixed costs with low variable costs. This was a great alternative to racetracks with their moderate volume/high transaction costs due to high fixed costs of running a racetrack and the moderate variable costs that go along with it.

The betting exchange model allowed the top X percentage of exchange bettors to eventually cannibalize the weakest. Once the weakest bettors went away, because it was too tough to win, the cannibals would turn on each other and only the best of the best would survive.

So in order for the model to work exchanges had to find a fresh supply of meat to feed the cannibals, otherwise, there would be little action for the cannibals and little or no fees for the exchanges.

The solution was to charge winners a fee on their winnings. Some cannibals would be knocked out of the game. Others would pay the fees and the betting exchanges would protect their income stream.

The exchanges could also seed the pools and even if they took the other side of bet they could make money because they would be getting a huge commission off of the winners. And they would continue getting their standard commissions from the losers.

It's probably more complicated than this because some on-track and some off-track bookies probably lay off some of their liabilities on the exchanges.

A betting exchange in the U.S. will probably NOT be able to operate as a high volume/low transaction cost business because too many politicians, racetracks and horsemen will want their cut of the action.

The concept of online person-to-person betting exchanges was conceived in the U.S. in 1997 and not a single one is in operation here. And they just closed in Canada.

It might be the case that there are back-room negotiations taking place at this very moment and exchange betting will be legal before too long.

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

[ryzerman]

Still no word from Betfair about the money they owe me! I cant believe what is going on here. They are official criminals, the worst kind of person. They steal your money and than just ignore you. How the **** can they think what they are doing is ok. They will never get away with this.

[ryzerman]

I will keep everyone posted in terms of what if they do finally get back to me, they say. When I started I thought they were a legitimate big web site that would not do stuff like this. Stuff drug dealers on the street don't even do. People have to understand, you can tell someone you don't want there business but you cannot take their money away. This is beyond wrong.

[whodoyoulike]

I will keep everyone posted in terms of what if they do finally get back to me, they say. When I started I thought they were a legitimate big web site that would not do stuff like this. Stuff drug dealers on the street don't even do. People have to understand, you can tell someone you don't want there business but you cannot take their money away. This is beyond wrong.

Don't you guys have some type of government oversight which allows these companies to operate in your area e.g., we have racing commissions which allow our ADW's to operate in our separate jurisdictions or a federal FTC? I'm assuming they would step in and provide info for the consumers.

[Stillriledup]

Still no word from Betfair about the money they owe me! I cant believe what is going on here. They are official criminals, the worst kind of person. They steal your money and than just ignore you. How the **** can they think what they are doing is ok. They will never get away with this.

Have a lawyer send them a letter asking for the money they stole.

[davew]

Have a lawyer send them a letter asking for the money they stole.


Betfair is traded on Nasdaq. A judgment from a lawsuit would have to be settled, the cost of the lawyers to get it may be a problem. A class action suit might be possible if somehow you could get names of the ones they hve screwed.

It sure sounds like their 'exchange wagering' has become nothing more than a glorified bookie.

[biggestal99]

Don't you guys have some type of government oversight which allows these companies to operate in your area e.g., we have racing commissions which allow our ADW's to operate in our separate jurisdictions or a federal FTC? I'm assuming they would step in and provide info for the consumers.

Malta is the official arbiter for Betfair Non-UK customers.

Allan

[whodoyoulike]

Malta is the official arbiter for Betfair Non-UK customers.

Allan

My thinking was he should go to whomever authorizes Betfair or any others to operate in his betting jurisdiction. He's not disputing a transaction (or arbitration) with them but rather they have confiscated his money unfairly. He noted what if his name was Smith or Jones, a business or anyone else doesn't have the right to arbitrarily decide in their favor unopposed.

Someone has granted them access to operate in the UK.

If this happened here, I'd be calling the CHRB, the Governor or anyone else who has a phone.

[biggestal99]

Have a lawyer send them a letter asking for the money they stole.

Betfair didn't steal the money, just linked together those accounts which they they thought were evading thier premium charge, which they have a right to do under the TOS.

Allan

[Frost king]

As far as I know, he has no recourse in the matter. Both American and Canadian laws prohibit off shore betting. As you are circumventing the current tax laws, by undertaking these actions. So he looks to be out of luck, with Betfair. By the time he even gets lawyers involved, that amount that was confiscated, will be chewed up in legal fees. Just chock it up to bad luck and move on. Trying to move off shore has its problems. Remember you are betting in a foreign country under a different set of rules, and doing it illegally. You got your fingers caught. Just move on.

[satrabyk]

As far as I know, he has no recourse in the matter. Both American and Canadian laws prohibit off shore betting. As you are circumventing the current tax laws, by undertaking these actions. So he looks to be out of luck, with Betfair. By the time he even gets lawyers involved, that amount that was confiscated, will be chewed up in legal fees. Just chock it up to bad luck and move on. Trying to move off shore has its problems. Remember you are betting in a foreign country under a different set of rules, and doing it illegally. You got your fingers caught. Just move on.

Not exactly true. Betfair is regulated by the Malta Gaming Commission. This is were we can go to file a complaint even if we are Canadians since Betfair allowed them on at the time.....

[Longshot6977]

Malta is the official arbiter for Betfair Non-UK customers.

Allan


Here is Malta's e-mail address to send a Betfair complaint to.
support.mga@mga.org.mt

Got it from Betfair's Dispute Resolutions page here http://www.betfair.com/aboutUs/Dispute.Resolution/

And here's some similar complaints dug up easily from Google--
http://www.casinomeister.com/forums/showthread.php?t=49319


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/retailandconsumer/8782921/Betfair-removed-52000-from-customers-account.html

[biggestal99]

Has there been any betting activity on satrabyk2 or kybartas50 in the past few years ? Just wondering why BF wouldn't automatically delete these accounts if there were no activity. I thought they all did that.

Extremely difficult to get your account deleted from the bf database.

I had a friend from at the uk who wanted his account deleted.

Had to jump though many hoops to get it done.

One of theirmain things to catch cheaters is to vigiantly monitor all betting transactions.

Allan

[ryzerman]

Extremely difficult to get your account deleted from the bf database.

I had a friend from at the uk who wanted his account deleted.

Had to jump though many hoops to get it done.

One of theirmain things to catch cheaters is to vigiantly monitor all betting transactions.

Allan

Right and those account had no betting transactions... So what r u trying to say. Cheaters are people like you who argue for a company, that is blatantly robbing someone, who did not do anything they claim. Once this is all out there, people here and in the world are going to see what Betfair has done. They have pissed me off, and I will make sure this does not get swiped under the rug.

[ebcorde]

No Paddy. My son never used the same laptop/IP address as I or his brother did. If he did it would have been on a rare occasion if we happened to be together at the betting parlor and for some reason he didn't have his laptop and he wanted to make a bet....Because he shares the same stupid last name they feel he should inherit a back dated 40% premium charge without notice...grab his $13000 a couple weeks before Canadians banned and claim that his and the other accounts belonging to myself and my other son owe another $15000 before they can be unsuspended again.


I use betfair exchange for an odds advantage but bet on twinspires. sorry to hear your misfortune. sounds like they knew they could get away with it.

does not surprise me I saw a picture of the betfair CEO, he looked shady to me.

good luck.

[ebcorde]

Right and those account had no betting transactions... So what r u trying to say. Cheaters are people like you who argue for a company, that is blatantly robbing someone, who did not do anything they claim. Once this is all out there, people here and in the world are going to see what Betfair has done. They have pissed me off, and I will make sure this does not get swiped under the rug.

see that's what I don't get. if you have no transactions than how can they screw you over? because they know they can.

the CEO has a untrustworthy face. when it comes to money the brits have all their i's dotted and t's crossed

[ryzerman]

Now betfair is hiding behind there terms and conditions as what would be expected. However as far as their terms and conditions go. It relates to me only if the term stated "We can do what we want when we want because we feel like doing it or we want to steal money from an innocent person" To my eyes it reads the same. I have not breached nothing in their terms...yet they umbrella me into it as if I did. LET ME TELL YOU PEOPLE this can happen to any of you. If you lose don't worry, youll be fine. But start winning and be careful they may use a term and condition to take your money. I don't think anyone in there right mind would trust them after this. I have no reason to make any of this up. There is right and wrong. What they did is wrong. ignore it if you like.

[ebcorde]

Now betfair is hiding behind there terms and conditions as what would be expected. However as far as their terms and conditions go. It relates to me only if the term stated "We can do what we want when we want because we feel like doing it or we want to steal money from an innocent person" To my eyes it reads the same. I have not breached nothing in their terms...yet they umbrella me into it as if I did. LET ME TELL YOU PEOPLE this can happen to any of you. If you lose don't worry, youll be fine. But start winning and be careful they may use a term and condition to take your money. I don't think anyone in there right mind would trust them after this. I have no reason to make any of this up. There is right and wrong. What they did is wrong. ignore it if you like.


I hear ya. if you play again, when you win , take your money/winnings out promptly.

one of my sons got me into the habit of that.

[biggestal99]

Now betfair is hiding behind there terms and conditions as what would be expected. However as far as their terms and conditions go. It relates to me only if the term stated "We can do what we want when we want because we feel like doing it or we want to steal money from an innocent person" To my eyes it reads the same. I have not breached nothing in their terms...yet they umbrella me into it as if I did. LET ME TELL YOU PEOPLE this can happen to any of you. If you lose don't worry, youll be fine. But start winning and be careful they may use a term and condition to take your money. I don't think anyone in there right mind would trust them after this. I have no reason to make any of this up. There is right and wrong. What they did is wrong. ignore it if you like.

They have done it before and they will do it again. I am sure they have some software that alerts them to problems.

You just got caught up with their software,

and yes i can happen to anybody.

Maybe when I win I can stay under their radar.

Allan

[PaceAdvantage]

Now betfair is hiding behind there terms and conditions as what would be expected. However as far as their terms and conditions go. It relates to me only if the term stated "We can do what we want when we want because we feel like doing it or we want to steal money from an innocent person" To my eyes it reads the same. I have not breached nothing in their terms...yet they umbrella me into it as if I did. LET ME TELL YOU PEOPLE this can happen to any of you. If you lose don't worry, youll be fine. But start winning and be careful they may use a term and condition to take your money. I don't think anyone in there right mind would trust them after this. I have no reason to make any of this up. There is right and wrong. What they did is wrong. ignore it if you like.sorry this happened to you...but...we get it already...how long are you going to keep this up?

Get back to us when you have something new to report.