[Inkwell77]

So some guy in part 2 of this conference claims he is a sharp bettor and asks about books limiting and such....
Here are the panelists ideas to his question...






What would you do if you were running a book?

[Waterstpub87]

Interesting video.

[vidswaps]

Interesting video.

Video?,could I get the link please. Thanks.

[FourLengthsClear]

No right or wrong answer.

If you are in the position of say Ladbrokes with a long established and successful history why would you change your policy of aiming yourself at square money and collaring anyone who threatens to win from you?

Likewise if you are Pinnacle and have invested large sums in attracting some very smart people to work for you to set and manage lines allowing you to offer better value to a more sophisticated client base; changing the policy of allowing winners to win would be retrograde step.

The question would be what to do if you were starting a new book from scratch and that is a very difficult one. Outside the US it could be argued that the market is reaching saturation point, especially when you consider legal restrictions recently introduced in France, Italy etc. To compete with the big names you would need to differentiate yourself but would not necessarily have the expertise to offer the very low margin odds that Pinnacle do. Offering big welcome bonuses is open to all sorts of multi-accounting abuse. I would be thinking long the lines of investing in software that tracked the odds of Pinnacle/SBOBet/Betfair with juice/margin added to bring it somewhere between them and the established recreational books.

[Inkwell77]

I think if a book were to offer up some type of spread based betting that could be very interesting and could incite some public guys, especially on the types that think, "The Packers are going to blow out this weak team." If I were a new book I may look into this type of model.

Say you have a $10 a point type of system (low stakes for the example)

So the Packers are playing the Seahawks and spread is Packers -7
Say Packers win by 10 the bettor who bet on the Packers would win $30. $10 per point. And pay some percent back to the book in winnings.
If some guy were to bet on the Seahawks +7 they would owe $30 to the book.
I have always wondered why this type of betting is available in various stock markets, but not available in sports betting, seems like it would make a lot of sense in sports betting (or as much sense as the current: here is a spread bet on one side at -110 odds).

Also, could maybe look to pool based betting, this may have been tried in Europe with soccer matches, I have no idea, but it seems like horse players don't mind the pool betting type of model and if you keep the rake low I feel many would accept it.

I know the exchange market is out there and it makes a lot of sense, but obviously there are many issues with that as it has been tried a few times...

[Juret]

Also, could maybe look to pool based betting, this may have been tried in Europe with soccer matches, I have no idea, but it seems like horse players don't mind the pool betting type of model and if you keep the rake low I feel many would accept it.

yes, at least in the Scandinavian countries there are numerous types of pools: 13-game 1X2 soccer pools, 8-game ice hockey pools, correct score pools, 3-game correct score pools. however, the payback is usually about 65-75 %, a result of monopolistic markets. and for the 13-game pool it actually used to be 46 %. In the UK however, there are licenses and I believe the pools there have better payouts, but I'm not very familiar with them but they seem popular.

[Waterstpub87]

I think if a book were to offer up some type of spread based betting that could be very interesting and could incite some public guys, especially on the types that think, "The Packers are going to blow out this weak team." If I were a new book I may look into this type of model. Say you have a $10 a point type of system (low stakes for the example) So the Packers are playing the Seahawks and spread is Packers -7 Say Packers win by 10 the bettor who bet on the Packers would win $30. $10 per point. And pay some percent back to the book in winnings. If some guy were to bet on the Seahawks +7 they would owe $30 to the book. I have always wondered why this type of betting is available in various stock markets, but not available in sports betting, seems like it would make a lot of sense in sports betting (or as much sense as the current: here is a spread bet on one side at -110 odds). Also, could maybe look to pool based betting, this may have been tried in Europe with soccer matches, I have no idea, but it seems like horse players don't mind the pool betting type of model and if you keep the rake low I feel many would accept it. I know the exchange market is out there and it makes a lot of sense, but obviously there are many issues with that as it has been tried a few times...

Its called action points. I believe you can call them in at bookmaker, or you formally were able to.

[RickySteve]

I would like to taste her vindaloo.

[JoeVig]

What would you do if you were running a book?

I'd hire that Desi chick first thing.