Avoid William Hill
Comments
-
Non-story.
Every bookmaker, or any other business selling a product or service, has the right to correct a palpable error. The price was clearly a mistake and if this particular customer wishes to take his dispute to IBAS they will find in favour of William Hill.
But stories like this get responses like 'they welch on bets' ;-)1 -
What i would like to know is why did he only put 50p on it ?2
-
So for the sake of £1,000 William Hill will get some bad publicity.
1 -
"Student Nurse" might be a clue.Bedsaddick said:What i would like to know is why did he only put 50p on it ?
2 -
Safer all round to avoid all bookies.5
-
They could set a bad precedent and when someone puts £100 on a similar bet at 2,000 to one they would rue giving away £1,000 for 'cheap' publicity. The punter, almost certainly, knew that he was getting a price that was a mistake. I wouldn't be surprised to discover that he limited the bet to 50p because he thought that £1,000 was as much as they would pay out in error.iaitch said:So for the sake of £1,000 William Hill will get some bad publicity.
1 -
Never trust a bookie wearing spiked shoes....0
-
what a numpty,turning down 2x £50 free bets aswel.4
-
34 year student nurse betting on tennis and to a 50p stake .......says all ....if I was him I would grab the 2 £50 free bet vouchers he can then have a 100 tennis bets ...and if they win he would get paid out ...less stake0
- Sponsored links:
-
There's a moral issue here.
The odds were shown and the bloke took them.
If I bet £200 rather than £20 or £2000 rather than £200 by mistake would William Hill reimburse me because of my 'palpable' error?
Like hell they would!
They cannot or rather should not have it both ways.
14 -
the story is there is no such thing as poor bookie .....grab the free bets0
-
Billy Hill have the best app, they are my bookmaker of choice
This is a non story, errors happen a lot of the time
2000/1 is a clear error0 -
"On any one tennis match, we can offer up to 150 prices which are constantly changing as the game unfolds. Obviously, while we try to ensure that our odds are correct at all times, there can be small human errors."
Are these odds actually maintained in-play by humans ??0 -
Systems based on algorithms are used extensively - but those systems are created by humans!!IA said:"On any one tennis match, we can offer up to 150 prices which are constantly changing as the game unfolds. Obviously, while we try to ensure that our odds are correct at all times, there can be small human errors."
Are these odds actually maintained in-play by humans ??0 -
Yes.IA said:"On any one tennis match, we can offer up to 150 prices which are constantly changing as the game unfolds. Obviously, while we try to ensure that our odds are correct at all times, there can be small human errors."
Are these odds actually maintained in-play by humans ??
Algorithms at work but have to manually update them as the game, set and match unfold.
0 -
I believe all betting odds worldwide are controlled by Ray Winstone's enormous floating headIA said:"On any one tennis match, we can offer up to 150 prices which are constantly changing as the game unfolds. Obviously, while we try to ensure that our odds are correct at all times, there can be small human errors."
Are these odds actually maintained in-play by humans ??18 -
They are!Garrymanilow said:
I believe all betting odds worldwide are controlled by Ray Winstone's enormous floating headIA said:"On any one tennis match, we can offer up to 150 prices which are constantly changing as the game unfolds. Obviously, while we try to ensure that our odds are correct at all times, there can be small human errors."
Are these odds actually maintained in-play by humans ??0 -
Yeah, I imagined there was a human updating the score somehow, but thought that would automatically update the odds via algorithms etc, along with the bets placed so far.WSS said:
Yes.IA said:"On any one tennis match, we can offer up to 150 prices which are constantly changing as the game unfolds. Obviously, while we try to ensure that our odds are correct at all times, there can be small human errors."
Are these odds actually maintained in-play by humans ??
Algorithms at work but have to manually update them as the game, set and match unfold.0 -
No but I bet that if you'd written £200 on the betting slip and only given him 50p he would have, kindly, pointed it out to you.LenGlover said:There's a moral issue here.
The odds were shown and the bloke took them.
If I bet £200 rather than £20 or £2000 rather than £200 by mistake would William Hill reimburse me because of my 'palpable' error?
Like hell they would!
They cannot or rather should not have it both ways.
;-)
On a serious note I suspect that if they'd written 2-1 when it should have been 20-1 if you'd asked them to review it when you went to collect your winnings they would have paid out 20-1.0 - Sponsored links:
-
Money grabbing bookie, money grabbing punter.
I don't know who's worse.0 -
Clearly a palp, can't believe a journo would waste their time writing a story about it1
-
I've done it online where I accidentally put £10 accumulator on but put it in a triple stake meaning I've bet £30. It's not even worth taking it up with them. You've just got to cross your fingers.kings hill addick said:
No but I bet that if you'd written £200 on the betting slip and only given him 50p he would have, kindly, pointed it out to you.LenGlover said:There's a moral issue here.
The odds were shown and the bloke took them.
If I bet £200 rather than £20 or £2000 rather than £200 by mistake would William Hill reimburse me because of my 'palpable' error?
Like hell they would!
They cannot or rather should not have it both ways.
;-)
On a serious note I suspect that if they'd written 2-1 when it should have been 20-1 if you'd asked them to review it when you went to collect your winnings they would have paid out 20-1.0 -
Like something like this has never happened on here...............
0 -
This is 2015. Journalists forge careers by writing about absolute nonsense. Eg: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2560118/Lauren-Goodger-jumps-round-puddle-outside-coffee-shop-friend.htmlrina said:Clearly a palp, can't believe a journo would waste their time writing a story about it
2 -
I don't know who Lauren Goodger is but thank god she's alright0
-
Ha ha ha - really????kings hill addick said:
No but I bet that if you'd written £200 on the betting slip and only given him 50p he would have, kindly, pointed it out to you.LenGlover said:There's a moral issue here.
The odds were shown and the bloke took them.
If I bet £200 rather than £20 or £2000 rather than £200 by mistake would William Hill reimburse me because of my 'palpable' error?
Like hell they would!
They cannot or rather should not have it both ways.
;-)
On a serious note I suspect that if they'd written 2-1 when it should have been 20-1 if you'd asked them to review it when you went to collect your winnings they would have paid out 20-1.
If you had 50p on it maybe - if you had 10K, yeah right.
Look guys, you like a bet, you don't mind sending 20 quid a week down the s***ter, I don't mind p***ing 20 (+) quid a week up the wall. But I don't feel the need to defend the brewery in order to justify my stupidity.
Bookies are rich for a reason, and you are not sitting on a beach in the Bahamas for the same reason.
Enjoy your bet, but don't try and defend their "heads we win tails you lose" rules.
4
