The fat fingers thread

[Wyndon]

Years ago, I placed a bet of £50 at 50/1 with one of the major firms in the early days of internet betting. I was well aware that it should have been 5/1, but I was going to back the horse in any case. It won and my account was briefly credited with £2,500. This was in the days when winnings were still sent out by cheque - so there was no chance of a swift withdrawal! Eventually the bet was settled at 5/1, as allowed in the rules for 'obvious errors'. I then had to point out that the rules also stated that SP was to be used in such cases - 11/2 in this instance.

[hilly2908]

You seem to be under the impression that bot owners don't have to do any work. I have written thousands of lines of code and spent hours/days/weeks/months/years working on strategies. Yes these programs are making money whilst the owner is doing something else but if you can't beat them join them...

LinusP I am under no illusions and fully aware of how much time, effort and losses people put into trying to create profitable bots and that for everyone that succeeds they will of had several failures so anyone who has the ability to do it hats off to them.

Regards
Andy

[Euler]

Gospel Choir 19:50 Windsor

[Dallas]

19:05

[Wobbler]

i caught that as well i think it occured around 8 minutes before post

[spreadbetting]

Looks like some of the % manipulators got caught out with this one. Looked as if it'd be a non runner then just popped in no problem

Untitled.png

[tomallen123]

Looks like some of the % manipulators got caught out with this one. Looked as if it'd be a non runner then just popped in no problem

Untitled.png

Wow, never seen anything like this before

Let me get this straight, it looked like it would be a non runner so people bet the price down to take advantage of the fact there would be a huge reduction as its' price before being withdrawn (although it wasn't) was 2.xx ?

[mpendle]

Looks like some of the % manipulators got caught out with this one. Looked as if it'd be a non runner then just popped in no problem

Untitled.png

Wow, never seen anything like this before

Let me get this straight, it looked like it would be a non runner so people bet the price down to take advantage of the fact there would be a huge reduction as its' price before being withdrawn (although it wasn't) was 2.xx ?

I believe it is more a case of force the market into 2.xx in order to force the cross matching bot to lay all the others. The person who forced market in will have had backs on the rest of the field, get favourable backs matched (by cross matching bot) and none of them will be reduced in price as the reduction factor of the non runner was insignificant.
His big back of the outsider into 2.xx would have been voided leaving him just the favourable backs (and an all green book if staked correctly) on the rest.

[spreadbetting]

There would be no reduction in prices because it's reduction factor was 2.16% i.e. under the 2.5 but they'd be looking for the market to swell prices of the other runners to maintain that 100% either by cross matching or other markets makers. Because they'd be no reduction those 'enhanced' prices would stand at setttlement.

Price manipulation happens all the time non runners are known, thankfully it's usually cross matching that pays the price

[tomallen123]

Wow, I assumed the reduction factor would be based on the price of the horse when it was pulled out, not on a pre set figure.

Learn something new every day

Will keep my eye on this and see if I can take advantage in the future

[gutuami]

on the last of wolv 21:15 somebody just dropped a bet on an outsider. The reaction of price of the fav was just the oposite

[gutuami]

fav

[to75ne]

thanks i just started looking and i could not work out what happend to the fav, i thought for a moment the betfair graphs had screwed up

[gutuami]

I had a few bets on the fav way out of the price range and they suddenly got matched. There are spikes on other charts also

[convoysur-2]

cork 27th march 3.55