It is like buying money!

Nozza · Post by **Nozza** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:37 pm

Get a BoylesSports account set-up:

www.boylesports.com

And get a small wedge layed on these:

Sunderland to win remaining 4 games @ 9/1
Sunderland to score 75 or more goals in 06/07 season (currently 65) @ 10/1.

Silly prices.

knobpolisher · Post by **knobpolisher** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:52 pm

This is the Sunderland who have failed to win 18 out of 42 league games this season !
This is the Sunderland who are currently averaging 1.5 goals per game !

chris · Post by **chris** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:59 pm

I've checked your fixtures - the Sunderland who still have to go to Colchester - who are very good at home.

Bolton to beat Arsenal at 4-1 - that's the bet to go for

Luna · Post by **Luna** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:02 pm

Anything to do with the fact BoylesSport are now your main sponsors?

Dr.Karl · Post by **Dr.Karl** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:18 pm

Hoolio, if you're really intending to bet on Sunderland to win all their remaining games why don't you place your stake on the next game at the best price possible and then if they win, place all your winnings and original stake on to the next game and continue to do so for all their games. You'd definitely get better odds than 9/1 that way.

Nozza · Post by **Nozza** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:54 pm

Dr.Karl wrote:Hoolio, if you're really intending to bet on Sunderland to win all their remaining games why don't you place your stake on the next game at the best price possible and then if they win, place all your winnings and original stake on to the next game and continue to do so for all their games. You'd definitely get better odds than 9/1 that way.

Because I can't get it in a double with the scoring bet.

Pays for me season ticket if it happens.

NumptyNumbNuts · Post by **NumptyNumbNuts** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:58 pm

Hoolio wrote:
Dr.Karl wrote:Hoolio, if you're really intending to bet on Sunderland to win all their remaining games why don't you place your stake on the next game at the best price possible and then if they win, place all your winnings and original stake on to the next game and continue to do so for all their games. You'd definitely get better odds than 9/1 that way.
Because I can't get it in a double with the scoring bet.

Pays for me season ticket if it happens.

You could always put in a treble with West Ham to stay up!

Batman · Post by **Batman** » Thu Apr 12, 2007 5:35 pm

Hoolio wrote:Get a BoylesSports account set-up:

www.boylesports.com

And get a small wedge layed on these:

Sunderland to win remaining 4 games @ 9/1
Sunderland to score 75 or more goals in 06/07 season (currently 65) @ 10/1.

Silly prices.

No such thing as a stupid bet, just stupid people.

communistworkethic · Post by **communistworkethic** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:22 am

there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.

Dr.Karl · Post by **Dr.Karl** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 5:03 pm

communistworkethic wrote:there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.

Aye, their shocking overrounds.

Bruce Rioja · Post by **Bruce Rioja** » Fri Apr 13, 2007 7:53 pm

communistworkethic wrote:there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.

Ahh, count me in as the exception here, my good man. A girl I once knew, well her father decided to buy the little local independent 'bookies' when it came up for sale some years ago. Anyway, a punter came up on one of those bets that requires explanation (well, to the likes of me anyway). As a result her dad lost the bussiness, their house and everything.

a1 · Post by a1 » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:51 pm

Bruce Rioja wrote:
communistworkethic wrote:there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.
Ahh, count me in as the exception here, my good man. A girl I once knew, well her father decided to buy the little local independent 'bookies' when it came up for sale some years ago. Anyway, a punter came up on one of those bets that requires explanation (well, to the likes of me anyway). As a result her dad lost the bussiness, their house and everything.

you can probably buy insurance for that sort of stuff , plus most betting places have a top payout level were if you bet £100 on elvis landing on the moon at 5,000,000,000 to 1 and if that happens they'll only owe you £300,000 ish or summert coz their small print sez so..

blurred · Post by **blurred** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:04 am

Bruce Rioja wrote:
communistworkethic wrote:there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.
Ahh, count me in as the exception here, my good man. A girl I once knew, well her father decided to buy the little local independent 'bookies' when it came up for sale some years ago. Anyway, a punter came up on one of those bets that requires explanation (well, to the likes of me anyway). As a result her dad lost the bussiness, their house and everything.

I'd be intrigued to know the ins and outs of that - as mentioned there should be not only some form of liability insurance stipulated, but also most bookies will only accept bets up to a certain amount - quite often even going in to ladbrokes or somewhere they'll have to check with head office before accepting certain bets/liabilities...

warthog · Post by **warthog** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:08 am

blurred wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
communistworkethic wrote:there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.
Ahh, count me in as the exception here, my good man. A girl I once knew, well her father decided to buy the little local independent 'bookies' when it came up for sale some years ago. Anyway, a punter came up on one of those bets that requires explanation (well, to the likes of me anyway). As a result her dad lost the bussiness, their house and everything.
I'd be intrigued to know the ins and outs of that - as mentioned there should be not only some form of liability insurance stipulated, but also most bookies will only accept bets up to a certain amount - quite often even going in to ladbrokes or somewhere they'll have to check with head office before accepting certain bets/liabilities...

I'm sure I've read somewhere that there isn't a legal obligation for a bookie to pay up.

In any case such a business should be run as a limited company so liability is limited to the assets of that company.

Bruce Rioja · Post by **Bruce Rioja** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:40 am

Of course, anyone with any brains would've insured themselves accordingly, or set up a Ltd company, but this guy decided to blow his redundancy money on buying the bookies and ran with it. It was about 25 years ago.

communistworkethic · Post by **communistworkethic** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 9:00 am

IIRC a gambling debt isn't enforceable in law for either party - a fact well known to the Rooney household.

As a bookie you can't buy insurance against a big winner, it's part of your job to "lay" those bets elsewhere, offsetting your risk.

chris · Post by **chris** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 10:15 am

I remember seeing a story from a few years ago where someone bet a large sum on his team to stay up at about 66-1. They did - but those odds were meant to be the odds for winning the division. As I recall, the bookmakers were not obliged to pay up (though they did for commercial reasons).

Henrik's fan club · Post by **Henrik's fan club** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:48 pm

warthog wrote:
blurred wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
communistworkethic wrote:there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.
Ahh, count me in as the exception here, my good man. A girl I once knew, well her father decided to buy the little local independent 'bookies' when it came up for sale some years ago. Anyway, a punter came up on one of those bets that requires explanation (well, to the likes of me anyway). As a result her dad lost the bussiness, their house and everything.
I'd be intrigued to know the ins and outs of that - as mentioned there should be not only some form of liability insurance stipulated, but also most bookies will only accept bets up to a certain amount - quite often even going in to ladbrokes or somewhere they'll have to check with head office before accepting certain bets/liabilities...
I'm sure I've read somewhere that there isn't a legal obligation for a bookie to pay up.

In any case such a business should be run as a limited company so liability is limited to the assets of that company.

But if they didn't pay up nobody would go in there anymore, so they'd still go bankrupt

warthog · Post by **warthog** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 5:53 pm

Henrik's fan club wrote:
warthog wrote:
blurred wrote:
Bruce Rioja wrote:
communistworkethic wrote:there's a reason you never see a poor bookie.
Ahh, count me in as the exception here, my good man. A girl I once knew, well her father decided to buy the little local independent 'bookies' when it came up for sale some years ago. Anyway, a punter came up on one of those bets that requires explanation (well, to the likes of me anyway). As a result her dad lost the bussiness, their house and everything.
I'd be intrigued to know the ins and outs of that - as mentioned there should be not only some form of liability insurance stipulated, but also most bookies will only accept bets up to a certain amount - quite often even going in to ladbrokes or somewhere they'll have to check with head office before accepting certain bets/liabilities...
I'm sure I've read somewhere that there isn't a legal obligation for a bookie to pay up.

In any case such a business should be run as a limited company so liability is limited to the assets of that company.
But if they didn't pay up nobody would go in there anymore, so they'd still go bankrupt

Yes they would, if they did that for run of the mill bets, but we're talking the really massive losses here. What usually happens if they haven't laid the bet off, is that they negotiate with the punter so he gets at least some of the winnings.

Nozza · Post by **Nozza** » Sat Apr 14, 2007 8:10 pm

Still on.