You get the money from the losers but also from the company if the bet goes one way.
An example of a bet that went one way and the bookies lost was the 2002 World Cup final, Brazil - Germany 2-0. They were giving Brazil 2.10 at ninety minutes and the whole world fell for it.
The morning before the match gradually dropped to 1.60 and then to 1.30, but generally the bookies lost from
this bet.
You can make any bet one-way, the bookies lose.
If say 100,000 euros have been played with odds and you play another 100,000 with odds of 2.50, it makes
to be paid 250,000 so the company will lose 50,000 euros if you win.
Of course, they can limit these so that they don't lose in this way. That is, where they have been played, we say 100,000 euros, they tell you up to 20,000 euros, we accept at 2.50. It turns out a fairly complex formula that computers can handle. I've never bet that much to see what happens but I think they already do.
Where I have some experience is with the old illegal Greek racecourse bookies.
They did not have computers but implemented various systems.
Some bets were not accepted.
Other times they hung up the phones - the online betting equivalent of stopping the bet
companies and you see the screen go gray.
They also cut players.
But - depending on how he smoked them - they also accepted bets from recognized good players who had information. In these cases the bookie proceeded to the so-called "burning". He played the whole amount
of the player in the horse racing mutual and he was playing his own money to win!
Some - a few - of the illegal bookies had another system. All bets were accepted and simple
they burned them in the mutual except if they had information that the horse being played would surely lose then
they kept it.
I had fallen into one of the latter one day. He was an old friend and because he had some other urgent business he tells me "take 400,000 drachmas and go play Katerinaki". What do I tell him? This is lame and will end in Menidi of Menidi! I know, he tells me, but I have no information and I'm not taking any chances, I've been played by a fool and I'll burn it all - go and bring me the papers. So I take the 400,000 dirhams, go to the cashier, give them and the cashiers understood the situation. One of the cashiers was also my friend, from another company. The cashiers were crying and saying to me "Oh, you burnt-out Arachova, the four hundred thousand are going, what the hell is this bookie friend of yours"! Of course, Katerinaki is still running.
So here now with the Internet basically there are small differences.
They don't lose, ala Brazil - Germany, but with the good players there they can win e.g. 7% of it
pool earn 6.5%.
That's how they turn them off.
They have the right to their opinion.
Because - you don't tell me - if I catch you on the street where you're walking and say "oops, Thanasakis, we're going
a bet for Olympiacos-Panathinaikos both of us", are you, Thanasakis, obliged to accept?
Η alone the remedy is to make the bets mutually, with a small rake of course not the mammoths of OPAP.
An example of a bet that went one way and the bookies lost was the 2002 World Cup final, Brazil - Germany 2-0. They were giving Brazil 2.10 at ninety minutes and the whole world fell for it.
The morning before the match gradually dropped to 1.60 and then to 1.30, but generally the bookies lost from
this bet.
You can make any bet one-way, the bookies lose.
If say 100,000 euros have been played with odds and you play another 100,000 with odds of 2.50, it makes
to be paid 250,000 so the company will lose 50,000 euros if you win.
Of course, they can limit these so that they don't lose in this way. That is, where they have been played, we say 100,000 euros, they tell you up to 20,000 euros, we accept at 2.50. It turns out a fairly complex formula that computers can handle. I've never bet that much to see what happens but I think they already do.
Where I have some experience is with the old illegal Greek racecourse bookies.
They did not have computers but implemented various systems.
Some bets were not accepted.
Other times they hung up the phones - the online betting equivalent of stopping the bet
companies and you see the screen go gray.
They also cut players.
But - depending on how he smoked them - they also accepted bets from recognized good players who had information. In these cases the bookie proceeded to the so-called "burning". He played the whole amount
of the player in the horse racing mutual and he was playing his own money to win!
Some - a few - of the illegal bookies had another system. All bets were accepted and simple
they burned them in the mutual except if they had information that the horse being played would surely lose then
they kept it.
I had fallen into one of the latter one day. He was an old friend and because he had some other urgent business he tells me "take 400,000 drachmas and go play Katerinaki". What do I tell him? This is lame and will end in Menidi of Menidi! I know, he tells me, but I have no information and I'm not taking any chances, I've been played by a fool and I'll burn it all - go and bring me the papers. So I take the 400,000 dirhams, go to the cashier, give them and the cashiers understood the situation. One of the cashiers was also my friend, from another company. The cashiers were crying and saying to me "Oh, you burnt-out Arachova, the four hundred thousand are going, what the hell is this bookie friend of yours"! Of course, Katerinaki is still running.
So here now with the Internet basically there are small differences.
They don't lose, ala Brazil - Germany, but with the good players there they can win e.g. 7% of it
pool earn 6.5%.
That's how they turn them off.
They have the right to their opinion.
Because - you don't tell me - if I catch you on the street where you're walking and say "oops, Thanasakis, we're going
a bet for Olympiacos-Panathinaikos both of us", are you, Thanasakis, obliged to accept?
Η alone the remedy is to make the bets mutually, with a small rake of course not the mammoths of OPAP.
