Trap bets have always been an emotive topic on the internet.
I don't refer to bets involving greyhounds trap numbers but, instead the practice of trying to trick the unwary into placing a bet under false pretences.
The practice is rife on betting exchanges, one tactic being, in an illiquid market where an outcome is offered at, say, 3.15, to ask for 32 in the hope someone in haste will mistake it for 3.2 and lay the inflated price.
"Licenced bookmakers themselves are now coming under criticism for configuring their software to 'trap' the unwary."
Some believe that exchange operators should intervene to prevent such practices, others think it's part of the laissez-faire marketplace and exchange punters can't be expected to conduct themselves with the same ethics as betting operators like licenced bookmakers.
"the win board price and place portion tick boxes are purposely deselected so that... he is given a win only bet at starting price."
One of the Big Three firms of bookmakers is alleged to have configured its software so that, when a punter asks for, say, £100 each-way in certain races (eight-runner handicaps with an odds-on favourite, that sort of thing), not only is the maximum stake reduced but the win board price and place portion tick boxes are purposely deselected so that, if the punter simply accepts the reduced stake by pushing the submit button, he is given a win only bet at starting price.
Other bookmakers have been accused of dodging laying the SIS show, increasing their profit margins by shaving fractions off the show prices but selling them to their clients as if they are the bona fide SIS show.
"It could be that bookmakers are seeing prices collapsing on Betfair faster than SIS can relay them to their clients"
It could be that bookmakers are seeing prices collapsing on Betfair faster than SIS can relay them to their clients (the bookmakers) and are tired of laying prices which will inevitably be revealed to be 'back board' (a term used to describe a price which has now 'gone' to be replaced by a less generous one - many betting shop punters attempt to obtain such prices by rushing to the counter just as the price changes) prices within seconds.
And it could be that some bookmakers take their live shows via xml feed from the Press Association who live shows do not always mirror the SIS shows.
Nevertheless, it remains a matter for concern and punters shouldn't hesitate to quiz their bookmakers over the source and authenticity of their board prices.
"the cartel... intends to meet the challenge of low-margin online competitors with higher, not lower, prices."
These reports and the growing suggestions that the bookmakers are gearing up for industry prices - William Hill's decision to hedge onto Betdaq has led to speculation that Hills intend to use Betdaq as vehicle for returning their own bespoke (or industry) starting prices on a supposedly independent platform the government won't object to, while the chairman of the Tote says it is not tenable to run their bricks and mortar businesses at 'internet margins' strongly hinting he supports an industry SP - make it clear that, as usual, the response of the cartel which 'owns' most of the nation's recreational punters intends to meet the challenge of low-margin online competitors like betting exchanges with higher, not lower, prices.
It ought to be a recipe for disaster but, such is the nature of their captive recreational audience, that they are likely to find demand for their betting products relatively inelastic, even at higher margins.
However, it makes the case for betting via betting exchanges instead stronger than ever.
BBC
