Now that OPAP publishes the Ghanaian odds both before the bonus and the final ones, we were able to decipher how this bonus works.
We never said it was not a bonus, but it would have been better if the rake were reduced evenly in all kinds of bets, even now that they had been exempt from Markopoulos rent.
To understand what happens first we have a table with the before and after odds and the volumes for the last two horse races (12 races).
We got the odds from the pdf of OPAP with the full results and the turnovers from the page with the "fast results".
Now we are investigating.
First based on what OPAP tells us.
OPAP tells us that if the distributable based on turnover of each race is less than 2000 euros, he completes it to reach 2000 euros, while if the distributable based on turnover exceeds 2000 euros, then he does not intervene (does not give a bonus)
The turnover based distribution is equal to 90% of the turnover - since the rake in the rake game is 10%.
With the turnover prices reported in the table now, turnover distributions are for 12 races:
2057.40, 2047.50, 2078.10, 2067.30, 2606.85, 2052.90, 2032.65, 2015.55, 2047.95, 2051.10, 2086.20 and 2112.75
So no one should have a bonus and so the original Gankan odds would have no increase!
So what happens?
It doesn't work like that, it has to work otherwise.
To find out how it works we forget the regulation as it is formulated but even if there is a bonus given by OPAP.
You have now assumed that in a race the turnover that is played is Τ, the number of points they earn is Ν, the bonus is Β, the pre-bonus performance is u and the bonus after bonus is v (v> = u).
Apply:
u = 0.9 * T / N ................................. (1)
v = (0.9 * T + B) / N .......................... (2)
Divide the relation (2) by the relation (1) and
v / u = (0.9 * T + B) / (0.9 * T)
From which it follows:
B = 0.9 * (v / u - 1) * T ..................... (3)
From the table again we calculate the B values for 12 races:
487.28, 593.20, 306.93, 401.97, 6.97, 537.87, 771.00, 1004.88, 595.68, 563.05, 239.40, 43.79
So if the gambling is real, then these bonuses give.
Why these and by what criteria we do not know, but these must have been bonuses.
Now if we assume that the turnovers are not real, but the distributive is 2000 constant each time, what happens to the "real" turnovers?
It should apply to the bonus B = 2000 - 0.9 * T, so (3) becomes:
2000 - 0.9 * T = 0.9 * (v / u - 1) * T
and the formula (3) is written as:
T = (2000 / 0.9) * (u / v) .................. (4)
and the "turnovers" are obtained for the 12 races:
1796.69, 1723.03, 1936.24, 1860.47, 2216.3, 1763.67, 1611.11, 1482.9, 1721.50, 1743.59, 1993.46, 2177.1
All of these numbers are clearly below 2222.22 (= 2000 / 0.9) which is the threshold for having a bonus, consistent with the declaration, except in one case, of the 133 Horse Racing which was virtually no bonus (3.14-3.15 odds).
Why is OPAP now doing this seemingly foolish thing, to say fake turnovers that do not correspond but to give bonuses?
Normally he had to announce the right turnovers and also during the betting period to tell us "right now the odds are going so much without bonuses, so with bonuses!"
But if he did that it would be clearly anti-commercial. Because he would not tell us "gentlemen you definitely get 30% more than he says if you find the winner" but he would tell us "please do not let others play after you to get the 30%"!
With this kind of bonus not to say this, it would be stupid.
Well then, let's not say anything. Let it do as it does, show bonus payouts on betting screens and finally announce what happened after the bonus.
But why is it announcing fantasy-unsold volumes that even exceed the 2222.22 Euro limit?
This obviously does it to confuse fools - that turnover doesn't work well - you play and you get a bonus !!!
But that's not the case, because as the average turnover rises to 2222.22 euros, so do bonuses and at some point they will cease to exist.
We never said it was not a bonus, but it would have been better if the rake were reduced evenly in all kinds of bets, even now that they had been exempt from Markopoulos rent.
To understand what happens first we have a table with the before and after odds and the volumes for the last two horse races (12 races).
We got the odds from the pdf of OPAP with the full results and the turnovers from the page with the "fast results".
Now we are investigating.
First based on what OPAP tells us.
OPAP tells us that if the distributable based on turnover of each race is less than 2000 euros, he completes it to reach 2000 euros, while if the distributable based on turnover exceeds 2000 euros, then he does not intervene (does not give a bonus)
The turnover based distribution is equal to 90% of the turnover - since the rake in the rake game is 10%.
With the turnover prices reported in the table now, turnover distributions are for 12 races:
2057.40, 2047.50, 2078.10, 2067.30, 2606.85, 2052.90, 2032.65, 2015.55, 2047.95, 2051.10, 2086.20 and 2112.75
So no one should have a bonus and so the original Gankan odds would have no increase!
So what happens?
It doesn't work like that, it has to work otherwise.
To find out how it works we forget the regulation as it is formulated but even if there is a bonus given by OPAP.
You have now assumed that in a race the turnover that is played is Τ, the number of points they earn is Ν, the bonus is Β, the pre-bonus performance is u and the bonus after bonus is v (v> = u).
Apply:
u = 0.9 * T / N ................................. (1)
v = (0.9 * T + B) / N .......................... (2)
Divide the relation (2) by the relation (1) and
v / u = (0.9 * T + B) / (0.9 * T)
From which it follows:
B = 0.9 * (v / u - 1) * T ..................... (3)
From the table again we calculate the B values for 12 races:
487.28, 593.20, 306.93, 401.97, 6.97, 537.87, 771.00, 1004.88, 595.68, 563.05, 239.40, 43.79
So if the gambling is real, then these bonuses give.
Why these and by what criteria we do not know, but these must have been bonuses.
Now if we assume that the turnovers are not real, but the distributive is 2000 constant each time, what happens to the "real" turnovers?
It should apply to the bonus B = 2000 - 0.9 * T, so (3) becomes:
2000 - 0.9 * T = 0.9 * (v / u - 1) * T
and the formula (3) is written as:
T = (2000 / 0.9) * (u / v) .................. (4)
and the "turnovers" are obtained for the 12 races:
1796.69, 1723.03, 1936.24, 1860.47, 2216.3, 1763.67, 1611.11, 1482.9, 1721.50, 1743.59, 1993.46, 2177.1
All of these numbers are clearly below 2222.22 (= 2000 / 0.9) which is the threshold for having a bonus, consistent with the declaration, except in one case, of the 133 Horse Racing which was virtually no bonus (3.14-3.15 odds).
Why is OPAP now doing this seemingly foolish thing, to say fake turnovers that do not correspond but to give bonuses?
Normally he had to announce the right turnovers and also during the betting period to tell us "right now the odds are going so much without bonuses, so with bonuses!"
But if he did that it would be clearly anti-commercial. Because he would not tell us "gentlemen you definitely get 30% more than he says if you find the winner" but he would tell us "please do not let others play after you to get the 30%"!
With this kind of bonus not to say this, it would be stupid.
Well then, let's not say anything. Let it do as it does, show bonus payouts on betting screens and finally announce what happened after the bonus.
But why is it announcing fantasy-unsold volumes that even exceed the 2222.22 Euro limit?
This obviously does it to confuse fools - that turnover doesn't work well - you play and you get a bonus !!!
But that's not the case, because as the average turnover rises to 2222.22 euros, so do bonuses and at some point they will cease to exist.
Last edited:
