Bookies - Acceptance?

[Boble]

Well, I have to say I wasn't so happy, when bookmakers opened, as I didn't see the aspect of the game winning by it.

Now I place 4 bets for UFC Fight Night (won 2 , lost 2) and found it kind of cool, to root for the fighter I bet on :-)

 

Next thing I did now was look for odds for UFC 103, and what I saw shocked me, there are about 4 completley inactive bookies, not having any events up at all,

some only offer 1 event or at most 2. And most bookies max out at 3 events, well thats hardly going to work that way. That way, they won't attract people, plus odds are often pretty funny,

like people offering 1.74 for both fighters, or 1.9 and 1.4 this is mostly strange, I found all favourites I wanted to bet on at 1.7 or higher, so either no one bets, and they can't offer better,

or they hardly know about odds making.

 

Is bookies open to the public, can anyone start a bookie now? Is the concept already dead?

 

I would love to have an official bookmaker for my org, but how should they run 3 events a week, on a 2 week ahead base, if they can hardly run 3 events at all.

 

I'd expect for example an LA bookie to have odds on all LA title fights and the major LA Orgs. Is this too much, are bookies overrated?

[Guest]

You make it seem so easy. First the max is 3 the max for in game events. I personally don't care to much about ufc event if I have the time I will throw them down but thats just me. There is a lot more that goes into being a bookiemaker then just looking at the odds I bet a lot of the inactive once have probably lost money and the ones with such crazy odds are once that just don't want to put as much of there money on the line. Its pretty indepth but its a great way to lose a lot of money if you aren't careful. I just wouldn't be such a critic for a person who hasn't done it. I am sure it will be open to everyone soon and a lot of people will lose a lot of money

[backelie]

plus odds are often pretty funny, like people offering 1.74 for both fighters, or 1.9 and 1.4 this is mostly strange, I found all favourites I wanted to bet on at 1.7 or higher, so either no one bets, and they can't offer better, or they hardly know about odds making.

 

I think there's a good deal of truth to your guesses.

It's hard for a bookie to put up 'good' odds (low cut for bookie) when only a few people are betting. The more bettors the lower the risk to the bookie, and I haven't seen a big difference in bets being pulled in depending on the cut, I think unfortunately not enough people care about bookies yet.

 

Same odds for both fighters though IMO that's usually the bookie being lazy and money to be made for the bettor when you can pick a clear favourite.

 

(I feel the odds-setting system is way too inflexible though, and I know Mike's put in a lot of time coding up the bookies and don't want to deal with them right now, but I hope that he'll eventually come back to them in the future for a couple of fixes.)

[Guest]

If you were able to bet more than $5 (although I think one guy does $25) I think there would be a lot more action.

 

Another factor is probably the odds--I mean you see +200 or +300 all the time with big underdogs, but everyone seems to keep it in the +100 to +150 range because they don't want to tke the risk of losing their shirt on a big upset.

 

I think it'll be big once the odds are more attractive, and when theirs just a shortcut icon that leads you to a list of bookies.

[backelie]

If you were able to bet more than $5 (although I think one guy does $25) I think there would be a lot more action.

 

There's three of us now accepting $20, $25 and $30.

 

Another factor is probably the odds--I mean you see +200 or +300 all the time with big underdogs, but everyone seems to keep it in the +100 to +150 range because they don't want to tke the risk of losing their shirt on a big upset.

 

As a bookie, you're never supposed to risk losing your shirt. A bookie done right is a business, not a gambler. You can only have big underdogs if there's a lot of people betting on the favourites to balance it outs. More bettors = better odds.

 

when theirs just a shortcut icon that leads you to a list of bookies.

 

I don't think bookies are visible enough at the moment, having a complete listing on the same page would be sweet.

 

[Guest]

they hardly know about odds making.

There are a lot of problems with bookmaking already.

 

There are too many bookies and too few people to bet, so the very few managers that know something about bookmaking can't adapt their odds properly and will have to take a larger margin of safety. This way you can't distinguish them from the bookies that take a large margin as default and makes them hardly competitive to the managers that offer odds as high as 1.80 for the favorite (with a margin less than 5%). This makes it hard for the good bookies to survive and it's going to be a lot worse when just everybody can open a bookies.

 

I think it's going to come down to which bookie can draw the most betters by advertising and by offering the highest max bet. I feel bad to say it, but let's hope the bad bookies die out before the good bookies do.

 

I also think that bookies should be able to offer more than just 3 events.

[mgp5013]

If you were able to bet more than $5 (although I think one guy does $25) I think there would be a lot more action.

 

Another factor is probably the odds--I mean you see +200 or +300 all the time with big underdogs, but everyone seems to keep it in the +100 to +150 range because they don't want to tke the risk of losing their shirt on a big upset.

 

I think it'll be big once the odds are more attractive, and when theirs just a shortcut icon that leads you to a list of bookies.

 

What pisses me off are the bookies offering odds like -300 +125 on a fight. That is ludacris. I know they are in it to make money but fuck, I won't even bet with them if they have any fight that looks like that. They are just running up the juice.

[PBR]

think johnny sep's is 200 limit