Outofluck

Thanks for the latest replies. This thread started off as a query about Coral’s method of settling each way free bets (when the “win” part loses), although it has since touched on a few related issues. On that original topic, I think it’s clear that there are, indeed, differing views, even among bookies – as I mentioned, Bet365 seems to have settled these bets in the past using the methodology that’s more favourable to the customer (and more logical to me). Now that I know that Coral’s approach is not seen as plainly wrong by others, I can take that into account in the future.

I think the comparison with a cash bettor is probably a bit of a red herring. The whole point of the free bet is to give you a chance to win something with no risk – it’s not really designed to be “fair” compared to someone who has to wager real money. An each way bet (free or paid) is, effectively, two bets – one at, say, 5/1 and one at evens. If one or both of the bets win, clearly there should be a return. And if the bookie is kind enough to make the stakes free, then that return will be profit. To say that there shouldn’t be any profit on a winning free bet because a cash bettor wouldn’t have got a profit in the same scenario doesn’t really follow. Similarly, I’m not sure that it follows that “you should always use the freebie each way” in my favoured settlement method. To stick with the £1 example, a free bet to win on a 4/1 shot might net £4 or nothing. A £1 bet used each way might net £2.40 at most, possibly only £0.40, and potentially nothing. So I imagine the attractiveness of those two options will be different for different punters (and will obviously vary as the size of the bet changes too). I imagine we’ll continue to have differing views on this subject, but I agree with you that it would probably be better if Coral just said “win only” for the free bets.

Thanks for the feedback, harry_rag and Zico10. Obviously the 50p difference on this occasion is neither here nor there, but I wanted to get input from more experienced gamblers so that I know what the score is when it comes to placing future bets. As you say, harry_rag, if this is Coral’s chosen methodology, there’s very little point using a free bet on an each way selection in the future. It also annoys me that Coral presumably use this dodgy formula across the board on each way free bets, saving themselves from paying out who knows how much to punters. I’ve now looked back at my Bet365 account and can see that they apply the more logical (and more favourable to the customer) interpretation when settling e/w free bets. (At least, that was the case six months ago.) I see where you’re coming from with your second post, harry_rag, but I would argue that if you break the bet down into its two parts, the “win” part is a loser and pays nothing to either the cash or free bettor, and the “place” part pays exactly the same profit to both bettors (65p in this case), so it’s perfectly fair. The whole point of the free bet is to insulate the bettor against the loss incurred in the “win” part, while the cash bettor is not insulated, hence the difference in profit. And I still come back to the bizarre scenarios that the Coral methodology can create, like the one mentioned in my initial post – that alone suggests to me that there’s something wrong with their formula. I might contact Coral and see if they can explain and justify their approach – from past experience though, I don’t hold out much hope of getting a useful/satisfactory reply.

I'm not an experienced gambler, and I would be grateful if someone can tell me whether the following payout from Coral seems right. I was given a £1 free bet (so stake not returned) to use and placed it each way (50p unit stake) on a horse that went off at odds of 13/2, with one-fifth place odds. The horse placed. Coral seem to have worked out the return as follows: standard bet of this type would return £1.15 including the initial stake, so knock off the non-returnable £1 free bet and the return is just £0.15. To me, this seems incorrect. I would have thought that it should be treated as the "win" part of the bet losing, and the "place" part winning and returning £0.65 (no stake returned). The Coral method is illogical to me because it can actually mean that you lose money by placing a winning "place" bet. eg/ £1 each way bet (50p unit stake) on a 4/1 horse that places returns £0.90 normally. But using the Coral method for free bets, knock off the non-returnable £1 stake and you owe them 10p! Can anyone tell me if I'm missing something here? Is this method standard across the industry? I know it's only a small amount of money, but if this is Coral's typical methodology, then I feel like it needs challenging. Thanks