Panorama: BBC1 9pm

[SteveO]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

How though Billy, sorry, I don't understand. They are open to abuse from people who know a horse will lose (because of the inside info they have paid for). If you take away lay betting (not that I am suggesting it) then wouldn't you take away this problem? How else could these crooks use their inside info for financial gain without the option of betting on an exchange?? I was just plucking numbers out of the air in my post to try make a point - that if these crooks didn't make as much on the exchanges that the incentive wouldn't be there to offer bungs in the first place. Perhaps it was a daft argument?

If you put limits on Laying Fin the whole system would become unworkable. Also why just restrict the layers when backers can also gain just as much information about when a horse is all out to win a race.

[billy the punter]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

How though Billy, sorry, I don't understand. They are open to abuse from people who know a horse will lose (because of the inside info they have paid for). If you take away lay betting (not that I am suggesting it) then wouldn't you take away this problem? How else could these crooks use their inside info for financial gain without the option of betting on an exchange?? I was just plucking numbers out of the air in my post to try make a point - that if these crooks didn't make as much on the exchanges that the incentive wouldn't be there to offer bungs in the first place. Perhaps it was a daft argument?

Firstly, I must say again, we are talking about a tiny % of races/punters. It's like saying banning cars due to people drinking and driving. Betfair do their bit by agreeing to hand over details of people's accounts to the authorities if they believe something underhand is going on. Even if something drifts alarmingly and loses (WITHOUT any suggestion of wrong doings) they still make enquiries. This sort of thing has never been done before - the data was always confidential. To the 2nd point - there are NOT loads of people laying crooked horse to lose. It is NOT happening. They are isolated instances. I worry you've been sucked in fin.

[billy the punter]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

Billy' date=' I thought betfair came out of last nights programme in a good light, they showed how much effort and co-operation they are giving to the racing authorites, not something many major bookmakers can say.[/quote'] Yes absolutely. Makes me laugh, prior to betfair the big three had plenty of big names on 'retainerships'. I got the impression the makers were trying to blame exchanges as much as those involved in the coups.

[fintron]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

Firstly, I must say again, we are talking about a tiny % of races/punters. It's like saying banning cars due to people drinking and driving. Betfair do their bit by agreeing to hand over details of people's accounts to the authorities if they believe something underhand is going on. Even if something drifts alarmingly and loses (WITHOUT any suggestion of wrong doings) they still make enquiries. This sort of thing has never been done before - the data was always confidential. To the 2nd point - there are NOT loads of people laying crooked horse to lose. It is NOT happening. They are isolated instances. I worry you've been sucked in fin.

I take your points Billy, but I still don't think anyone has answered my question properly.... If you take away lay betting (not that I am suggesting it) then wouldn't you take away this problem? How else could these crooks use their inside info for financial gain without the option of betting on an exchange?? I accept that only a small % of lays on Betfair are dodgy and that when horses drifts that they could be innocent lays, in fact I've never said anything to to contrary :ok

[billy the punter]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

I take your points Billy, but I still don't think anyone has answered my question properly.... If you take away lay betting (not that I am suggesting it) then wouldn't you take away this problem? How else could these crooks use their inside info for financial gain without the option of betting on an exchange?? I accept that only a small % of lays on Betfair are dodgy and that when horses drifts that they could be innocent lays, in fact I've never said anything to to contrary :ok

Taking away lays takes away betting exchanges. Betting exchanges are the best thing to happen to the game in it's history. I thought 100% of punters thought this? No longer are punters held to ransom by high street bookmakers. If you want to get rid of them and continue to get robbed by Ladbrokes/Hill/Coral etc then fine. I'm know you don't. We get better prices due to be able to bet away from boomaker's unfair %'d books. We can bet in running, we can trade, we can bet to place without getting robbed. I just can't get my head around any argument which suggests we shouldn't have betting exchanges. I know you're not actually suggesting it but it's like the old saying - it'll be using a slegdehammer to crack a walnut.

[fintron]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm I can see the positive points about Betfair which you mention Billy - locking in profit, laying in running to avoid hefty losses etc. I've never doubted the positives that exchanges have brought to the industry. The point I'm trying to make is that for all its positives, lay betting leaves itself open to abuse from crooks who defraud innocent punters out of money. As long as exchanges are in existence this will always be the case won't it? If exchanges were non-existent, how could the criminals financially benefit from their inside info? Unless they go up to punters face to face and take bets off directly then they can't cash in can they? I suppose it's just a problem we will have to live with now betting exchanges are so popular. For many, the pro's outweight the con's. We'll have to have faith with the fraud teams (or whetever they are called) at Betfair to try catch the crooks because the exchanges have become an important tool for the serious gambler and now they're here, few would probably want rid of them.

[donnab]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

that bruce bennett guy seemed like a complete retard, ffs what an idiot who kicks a reporter on camera - might as well be admitting you are guilty just searched for his company propak, can anyone do a keiran fallon voice, 01438-728885 - ring up and pretend to be him if u are bored tomorrow. Or ring up as kenyon and see how quick the receptionist hangs up lol

this guy is very sad looking up phone numbers of the poor blokes company he should try practicing his spelling first what a pratt ha ha ha !!!!!

[happygooner]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

this guy is very sad looking up phone numbers of the poor blokes company he should try practising his spelling first what a pratt ha ha ha !!!!!

You think this is Bruce Bennett trying to deflect attention:unsure :lol I have to say he didn't elicit much sympathy from what I saw even if that literal kick out was unintentionally hilarious;)

[donnab]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm not giving sympathy was just reading some of the quotes on the forum and they were really interesting, then i came to this guys you always get one clown must be quite a sad bloke (probably done all his money ha ha !!!) if thats what he has been searching in his spare time lol what a tosser!!!!

[thomo14]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

not giving sympathy was just reading some of the quotes on the forum and they were really interesting' date=' then i came to this guys you always get one clown must be quite a sad bloke (probably done all his money ha ha !!!) if thats what he has been searching in his spare time lol what a tosser!!!![/quote'] Quite honestly we are all here to help one another not chastise any one its just a jokey comment nothing else lets keep the topic civil lads :welcome Donnab, Rew by the way :ok

[Dodger]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

I agree Punters can back horses to lose nowdays

We have always been able to back horses to lose by backing every other horse in the race. But then we were at the mercy of the bookies %s. Now we can do it on Betfair and just pay the 5% commision on profits. That's why the bookies hate betfair so much...they have allowed others to grab a part of their action.

[Gingertipster]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm

Billy, going to disagree with you here a little, Firstly the show was not irrelevant, many of us had heard things about the case but never saw any footage, now we have. This show was meant to be a follow up to the show 6 years ago to show how the exchanges have influenced and increased the danger of corruption in the sport, we cant argue with that one, it does, simple as. The programme showed how inept both the Police and the BHA were in not following up some of the evidence, the replies from Fergal Lynch were incriminating to me, they were never mentioned elswhere and the BHA said they couldnt get hold of the tapes, that was rellevent in my opinion too. The guy Bennett had not been mentioned before and the BHA said they were still investigating his case, which means it not 4 years too late, why the Police didnt look into him is anyones guess. In my opinion the reason they made and showed this programme was because there WAS enough evidence at hand but all parties bungled it so badly, including that clown from Australia who defended all of the jockeys rides. The BBC knew they had enough and wanted to show it, it was very interesting how Betfair was very accommodating to the programme dont you think, I get the feeling they know it was very serious and cant believe they got away with it so played their part in the programme to show they did help to try and sort it. Its ok trying to defend a sport we love and try to believe its clean, how many times in the last month have you complained about Jockey's rides for instance? How many times have you said horses have drifted alarmingly before the off? I know for people who try to make a living out of betting it must be hard to think all the studying you do maybe sometimes not enough. Call the show what you like and i'm sure the racing press may agree with you tomorrow but i'm glad these programmes are made and dont think they are irrelevant, it may just stop a jockey throwing a race on a horse you have backed in the next week or two.

Billy, Please don't get het up thinking I want to silence your opinion, or anyone elses. The reason why I said be careful is because of what you wrote (in bold) could be seen as though: You are saying the defendants were in fact GUILTY but the prosecution bungled the case, so they got off. As I am sure you know Billy (being a moderator) similar statements like this could get PL in hot water. Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as long as it does not result in you and PL being in court. Had you elaborated on your views that may have been possible. I was only thinking of your own and PL's interests. Fintron wrote: Deleted Nothing to do with them being NOT GUILTY of the crime they were prosecuted for then. I am just saying we all should be careful what we say when giving views on court cases. Ginge

[fintron]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm Ginge, I've deleted that comment from my earlier post now, perhaps it was a careless comment to make. But Lynch didn't do much to quell the suspicion when the reporter confronted him and he walked away, gingerly (no pun intended) up the stairs. Had the judge had access to the cleaned up tapes etc it would have been interesting to see what the jury made of the case then.

[Gingertipster]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm As you have deleted mate, so have I.:ok My comment was really just in case yourself or Billy elaborated on your earlier thoughts. Ginge

[fintron]

Re: Panorama: BBC1 9pm Wise words really, I don't want to land myself in trouble for a daft comment do I. Wasn't there some bother recently involving Sheffield Wednesday and some comments one of their fans had posted on an internet forum?