Betting Odds

[lavender88]

Hi, can anyone explain the poor returns on the Masters golf tournament, I backed Rose at 14/1 & Mickleson at 22/1 both £2.50 Each / Way, the total return was £17.50 ???, thanks in anticipation.

[-Talbot-]

Andrae: as of the time the bet was placed half of your stake was lost
coke39294: what's that supposed to mean please?
Andrae: it means as you bet £2.50, we would only take £1.75 as your stake
Andrae: the other £1.75 we take as a loosing bet
Andrae: therefore we use £1.75 as your stake




eh?

[novalis]

As Talbot explained that would be the case only if they were paying out on the first two, something which I doubt. All other firms paid out on at least the first four so the fact they tied for second is irrelevant. I discussed your situation with the manager of our local Hills shop this morning and she is of the opinion that Corals are in the wrong. Go back to the shop and ask how many places they were paying out on. If it is more than two then you have definitely not received the correct amount.

[New Judge]

Yes novalis is completely correct. So long as they are paying for more than the first two places then your place bet has been halved incorrectly.

Their helpdesk is making a big play about half your stake being lost. But that refers to the win part of your bet, not the place part. There is, of course, no dispute that your 2 x £2.50 win bets are lost.

Just another minor point from their "help":

Andrae: it means as you bet £2.50, we would only take £1.75 as your stake
Andrae: the other £1.75 we take as a loosing bet
Andrae: therefore we use £1.75 as your stake

When I was at school half of £2.50 (well, it was £2-10 shillings then!) was £1.25, not £1.75.

You need to get hold of somebody at Corals who knows what they are talking about. If you deal with their helpdesk again it may help if you point at that both second and third qualify as a "place" and there is no justification to halve place bets on two competitors who tied for second place with nobody else involved. Simple way to explain this is to imagine, instead of tying, they finished second and third outright. You would then be entitled (as you are now) to the full stake and odds for each place.

[-Talbot-]

http://www.oddschecker.com/golf/the-masters/winner

Most bookies offered 1/4 for top 5

[Psybbo]

But only 1/3 for 1st and 2nd after the cut or after the 3rd day

[-Talbot-]

That could explain it, Sibbs...

@ 14/1 it looks as if lavender88 didn't bet on Justin Rose at the start of the Masters.

[Maydup]

Can you just confirm the date and time you placed your bet Lavender88?

[New Judge]

"But only 1/3 for 1st and 2nd after the cut or after the 3rd day"

If that is the case it explains it perfectly and the calculation is correct.

[lavender88]

Saturday 3.00 p.m. but aftr all your good input ,is the original stake in the return ?

[-Talbot-]

14 ÷ 3 = 4.6 × 2.5 = 11.66 + your original £2.50 = 14.16

£14.16 is halved because Rose tied for seconded place.

The bet is correct but you spoke to a fool online.

[lavender88]

Thank you !!! we got there in the end, but it was a bit of a disappointment to only gain £7.50 on my original £10 (in total) bet, thank you to everyone.

[Ken4155]

I have had occasion to contact live chat on quite a few occasions - and on nearly all my accounts - and what i have discovered is that the 'operators' will normally have only a basic knowledge of the ins and outs of gambling. That is why many of them, when faced with a 'poser', will request that you wait a while for their reply - gives them time to consult with someone who knows what they are doing. Doesn't necessarily make them idiots but you would think that those that employ them would test their knowledge of T&Cs from time to time.

[New Judge]

No it does not make them idiots, Ken, but they should be able to provide a reasonable explanation of the calculations (and to divide £2.50 by 2 correctly).

I understand your disappointment, lavender, but what you should understand is that £7.50 of your £10 is in the form of losing wagers (your two £2.50 win bets and half of each of your £2.50 place bets).

[thesecondlaw]

Only offering a place payout on the first two seems a bit stingy to me, or is that the norm with golf? Even after the cut, you've got a field of about 60 to choose from.

[ToraToraTora]

ok so they were only paying out 1 and 2 and thuiis halved the stakes on both Rose and Mickleson then, is that the final synopsis, oh an they paid a 3rd on the place, is that correct? Bit tight paying 1 and 2 only.

[New Judge]

I think Psybbo has it correctly, 3Ts. One third odds on the first two for a place on Saturday and Sunday. Not sure if that's customary as I neither follow golf nor do I gamble (but I can settle just about any bet put in front of me).

[Ken4155]

I would hazard a guess, ttt, that they weren't paying out on 1st and 2nd only but that they were paying a 1/3 of the odds for 1/2 only. Then they would have been going 1/4 odds or 1/5 odds for other e.w. bets. As it was at the halfway stage, i think it was quite reasonable and no doubt what attracted lavender88 to it in the first instance.