Betting !!

[gumbopickles]

anyone know a site i can get to that will do to win the division and top score together ie Murray top lge 1 goalscorer and Brighton champions etc.
I have searched the main ones but cannot get for lge one or two.

any help appreciated.

 

[clippedgull]

skybet I think

yes.

20/1 brighton to win the league one title

40/1 murray to be top scorer

£1 win double £861 returned!!

 

[Ernest]

No chance of that bet as it is a related contingency so waste of time even looking

 

[SurreySeagulls]

Coral will let you do a double.

22/1 Brighton to win the title and 28/1 Glen Murray to be top goalscorer

£1 double would net you £667 if they both came off.

 

[clippedgull]

No chance of that bet as it is a related contingency so waste of time even looking

gotta be worth a quid though! better than throwing it away on a lotto ticket.

 

[clippedgull]

Brighton starting on PLUS 16pts to win League One 18/1

Murray at 40/1

£1 double win £779

Skybet

 

[Ernest]

gotta be worth a quid though! better than throwing it away on a lotto ticket.

You won't get the bet at those odds as they are connected, it is called a related contingency which means one affects the other i.e. if Murray is top scorer then a good chance Albion will win the league.
Even if you get the bet on and have a slip with 800/1 on it the bookies will simply refuse to pay out and claim the pulpable error rule or offer you a reduced odds settlement.

 

[Ernest]

Coral will let you do a double.

22/1 Brighton to win the title and 28/1 Glen Murray to be top goalscorer

£1 double would net you £667 if they both came off.

I bet you they won't

 

[clippedgull]

You won't get the bet at those odds as they are connected, it is called a related contingency which means one affects the other i.e. if Murray is top scorer then a good chance Albion will win the league.
Even if you get the bet on and have a slip with 800/1 on it the bookies will simply refuse to pay out and claim the pulpable error rule or offer you a reduced odds settlement.

I didn't realise that.

 

[Paxton Dazo]

Just put ma 6 team Accy on

 

[reigate]

I seem to remember a case at the end of the Euro 2008 qualifiers where someone from Brighton was taking a bookmaker to court as they would not pay out on a double bet of England losing to Croatia AND Russia qualifying. The bookies refused on the basis that if England lost, Russia were almost certain to qualify as they only needed to beat Andorra.

Never heard the outcome but I assume the bookie won

 

[Ernest]

I seem to remember a case at the end of the Euro 2008 qualifiers where someone from Brighton was taking a bookmaker to court as they would not pay out on a double bet of England losing to Croatia AND Russia qualifying. The bookies refused on the basis that if England lost, Russia were almost certain to qualify as they only needed to beat Andorra.

Never heard the outcome but I assume the bookie won

Another case was a few years ago when Warwicks won the 4 timer at cricket and some fans had accas on them winning all 4 and the bookies refused to pay out at the accumulative odds and paid them something like 50/1 instead of 500/1 or whatever it was.
They hid behind the related contingency rule and the punters had to lump it.

 

[reigate]

Another case was a few years ago when Warwicks won the 4 timer at cricket and some fans had accas on them winning all 4 and the bookies refused to pay out at the accumulative odds and paid them something like 50/1 instead of 500/1 or whatever it was.
They hid behind the related contingency rule and the punters had to lump it.

How did they get away with that? Surely they are unrelated.

 

[gumbopickles]

ok thanks for the help.

seems ridiculous though they can claim that. in brightons case us winning the league doesnt entirely count on Murray being top scorer, as likely to be forster so dont get where they are coming from . If they offer the odds they shoul;d be obliged to pay them.

 

[Ernest]

How did they get away with that? Surely they are unrelated.

It was a bit of a rip off as they said if they won one cup that proved they were a good team so more chance of winning another or something like that, it went to the bookies dispute abitrators who of course ruled in the bookies favour.

 

[Gary Leeds]

it would be like putting a bet on the half time score being 0-0, the full time score being 0-0 and there being no goalscorer you normally get about 3-1 on half time, 7-1 full time and 7-1 no goalscorer so combined odds of 147-1 on all 3.

BTW if anyone finds a bookie to take the above bet then let me know, I will cut you in

 

[Mr Burns]

You won't get the bet at those odds as they are connected, it is called a related contingency which means one affects the other i.e. if Murray is top scorer then a good chance Albion will win the league.
Even if you get the bet on and have a slip with 800/1 on it the bookies will simply refuse to pay out and claim the pulpable error rule or offer you a reduced odds settlement.

I dont think they are related though in the betting sense.

That rule is for example, and dreams, Brighton, Man Utd, Liverpool and Newcastle are in the semi finals of the FA Cup. You couldn't bet on Brighton to win the cup, doubled with a team from the south to win it, for example.

But I dont see a problem with Brighton to win the league and Murray to be top socrer. If that was a problem, surely Brighton to win 2-0 and Forster to score first could be seen as a related contingency! After all if, nay when we win 2-0 you would except a striker to be score first in most cases, hence their lower odds?

 

[Mtoto]

It was a bit of a rip off as they said if they won one cup that proved they were a good team so more chance of winning another or something like that, it went to the bookies dispute abitrators who of course ruled in the bookies favour.

I was at the press conference where this bet was laid, when Warwickshire were unveiling Brian Lara as their new overseas player, not long after he'd set a new record for the top score in a Test.

The chairman of Warwicks asked a Ladbrokes rep if he could have a Yankee on them winning all four, and the rep cheerfully laid him. It was only several months later, when it looked as though it might actually cop, that the bookies started sifting through the small print in their rules, and announced, to much derision but their own great relief, that they had decided it was a related contingency.

If I remember right, Warwicks came up one short (lost the NatWest final?), but it was still a perfect demonstration of the kind of games the bookies will play. Some related contingencies - like Murray top scorer/Albion win the league - are obvious, but this was much more debatable. In fact, since so many teams are either one-day or long-game specialists, you could easily argue that winning the championship made it less likely they would take a one-day trophy.

In the end, though, trying to wriggle out of it cost them plenty in bad PR - it was 15 years ago, after all, and there are still punters on here who remember it.

 

[Mtoto]

Mr Burns, Brighton to win 2-0 and Forster to score first would very much be seen as a related contingency. You can have a bet on it, but at nothing like the odds you would get for a straight double. If Brighton are evens to win, and Forster is 5-1 to open the scoring, the double is 11-1, but you will barely get half those odds at the betting shop.