Betting shops

[leighton]

I always go into the shop not as often as before. I place a few bets on and out. I dont bet big i dont stay for long. Its just easier. In some places i got some really good tips on races and they came in too. Wouldnt of hear of them if betting online. Also the bookies i use Paddy Power are decent to deal with I have lost bets and they have paid out my winnings on a number of occasions so thats always a plus.
Over here we dont have the games machinces more of a machine to do the horses and dogs and sports bets more so. So those crack machines where never in a bookies over here thank god for that.

 

[Kinkladze 1]

I always go into the shop not as often as before. I place a few bets on and out. I dont bet big i dont stay for long. Its just easier. In some places i got some really good tips on races and they came in too. Wouldnt of hear of them if betting online. Also the bookies i use Paddy Power are decent to deal with I have lost bets and they have paid out my winnings on a number of occasions so thats always a plus.
Over here we dont have the games machinces more of a machine to do the horses and dogs and sports bets more so. So those crack machines where never in a bookies over here thank god for that.

If you lost the bet why would they pay you out?.. i’ll have to start going there!

 

[Vialli98]

I haven't visited a betting shop in years. I used to go fairly regularly in 2012-ish, as there used to be a William Hill just a few minutes walk from the office I worked in. I then progressed onto just placing bets on the website, and now it's all on done on my phone.

It helps that I'm just a casual betting man, with the odd small amount bets on the football on the weekend - I very rarely bet more than £5 on any given weekend. If I had the tendency to bet big amounts or let it get out of hand with excessive betting, there is no way I'd keep an app like that on my phone.

 

[hammocity]

Read my original post I said low level street dealers and low level laundering.
At no time did I mention anyone higher up the chain.
Read what I have wrote before telling me I am mixed up. I know how it all works from top to bottom.

You don’t know how it works top to bottom because you said put £500 in and have a couple of £5 bets then take the £490 cash out. You can’t do that.

For one, only £2 a spin can be wagered and two if you don’t bet at least 40 percent of your deposit this flags an alert on the Back Office PC and you will be prevented from using the facility.

As I said laundering £500 would take upwards of 6 hours and any small time dealer doing that would soon be identified and action taken.

The Shops don’t want one punter hogging a machine for 6 hours where the profit would be around 3.5 percent where laundering on red/black bets was occurring, it equates to about £18 profit on £500 turnover.

I worked in the gambling industry for 30 years and had quite a bit of involvement in the FOBTS from inception to around 2009, we could dial into any machine from our Office and watch betting on these machines and get reports with detailed betting patterns as could the Betting Shop Operators, this data was supposed to be used to prevent laundering but the Owners turned a blind eye to it, hence the campaign to reduce stakes on the machines.

You’re welcome to your opinion and I didn’t post you were mixed up, I just explained you were not quite correct, your umbrage is a bit unusual.

 

[mikemcfc]

For most Poker is a bit of fun and if you find your level you won’t win or lose much. However it is a game of skill and go beyond your level and play with better players then you are not gambling you are going to piss your money away, you will be eaten alive!


Professionals know there is an element of luck in each hand or game but they also know over time they will win. The recommended game size is 1 to 2 percent of their bankroll eg if they have a fund of £10k they will play £100 to £200 games, to ensure when they lose they can move on to the next game, percentage plays over time guarantees them a profit.

A friend of mine split with his wife and he started playing £50 buy in tournies online, he’s not that good, he eventually sold his house and lost the lot on Poker.

Like you I love a house game, we generally bet about £30 each over a six hour session, all similar standard and it gets worse as more beer is drank, it’s not gambling really, just recycling money because at the end of the year everyone who plays could either be just a few quid up or down.

thanks, I know all that. the question was yes or no. The professional (and fairplay to their patience, discipline and premium hands, understanding of position, and reading abilities) though is no different from the slot owner preying on the ones who can't help themselves.
did your friend gamble his house away? or did he unskillfully lose everything by habitually putting money in the pot hoping that the luck of the draw would give him the nut hand where he wouldn't need the skill to play his position properly or successfully read his opponent? because that's what the majority are hoping for. There is an element of skill but when probably 85 to 95 percent of the time the best cards win then it is down to certain amount of luck, a gamble. If poker was a game like one of those Bridge tournaments where all the hands are set at each table and everyone moves around and gets a chance to play every hand then I would agree that it's a complete skill game. At the end of the day I don't see the distinction between someone making the decision to pound money into a slot machine or chasing cards from a deck, it's the same disease.

 

[m7mcfc]

You don’t know how it works top to bottom because you said put £500 in and have a couple of £5 bets then take the £490 cash out. You can’t do that.

For one, only £2 a spin can be wagered and two if you don’t bet at least 40 percent of your deposit this flags an alert on the Back Office PC and you will be prevented from using the facility.

As I said laundering £500 would take upwards of 6 hours and any small time dealer doing that would soon be identified and action taken.

The Shops don’t want one punter hogging a machine for 6 hours where the profit would be around 3.5 percent where laundering on red/black bets was occurring, it equates to about £18 profit on £500 turnover.

I worked in the gambling industry for 30 years and had quite a bit of involvement in the FOBTS from inception to around 2009, we could dial into any machine from our Office and watch betting on these machines and get reports with detailed betting patterns as could the Betting Shop Operators, this data was supposed to be used to prevent laundering but the Owners turned a blind eye to it, hence the campaign to reduce stakes on the machines.

You’re welcome to your opinion and I didn’t post you were mixed up, I just explained you were not quite correct, your umbrage is a bit unusual.

You don’t know how it works top to bottom because you said put £500 in and have a couple of £5 bets then take the £490 cash out. You can’t do that.

Yes you could. I know of people when these terminals came out who would put a couple of grand in a machine and withdraw it after actually betting pittance. Before the cashiers had a chance to empty it their mates would be in the shop dragging the machine out to a waiting getaway vehicle.
Tell me you never came across this in your involvement with FOBTS.

 

[leighton]

If you lost the bet why would they pay you out?.. i’ll have to start going there!

If it is a winning bet that i lost they will pay it out.

 

[peoffrey]

My app each and every time. I hate some of the sleazy bookies near mine. The staff can be useless too.

 

[salfordbluetrue]

Ridiculous to link betting companies with the outcome of the Premier League, you are miles off the mark.

Whilst it is obvious that SKY`s inability to prop united up since the arrival of BT and liverpools meteoric rise since BT are examples of the tv companies putting pressure on the FA for their own gains, why is it rubbish to suggest the the biggest corrupter of sport in the world would be interested in the richest league , did not Leicester give the bookies a massive windfall with their win, and City`s last minute win gave all but one a big windfall, to date the bookies biggest loss was City`s centurions march, of which Scudamore said`we can not allow that to happen again` the question being who is the WE as it did not mean anything to the FA BT or SKY once we had won?

 

[hammocity]

Whilst it is obvious that SKY`s inability to prop united up since the arrival of BT and liverpools meteoric rise since BT are examples of the tv companies putting pressure on the FA for their own gains, why is it rubbish to suggest the the biggest corrupter of sport in the world would be interested in the richest league , did not Leicester give the bookies a massive windfall with their win, and City`s last minute win gave all but one a big windfall, to date the bookies biggest loss was City`s centurions march, of which Scudamore said`we can not allow that to happen again` the question being who is the WE as it did not mean anything to the FA BT or SKY once we had won?

Betting on Premier League winners is minute compared to overall turnover. It will be a target for pro punters when it’s looking like two or three teams could win the trophy but it doesn't attract mega bucks.

Scudamore can say “we” but what’s the connection with betting? Sky and BT’s TV money dwarfs what the betting companies make from a Premier League book. When Leicester won the League it would have been a decent payday for the Bookmakers but probably less profit than if an outsider wins the likes of the Grand National or Derby