My recent experience with on line betting company ‘policies’ have taught me just how ‘customer unfriendly’ some of the service providers operating in South Africa are. In the last few weeks I have encountered problems in striking bets which would have had me laughing if they were not so obstructive or downright ridiculous. Before I go into the detail of some of my experiences let me describe my punting style :
1.) I am not ‘in the know’ about any betting activity. I am unashamed to say that, like about 99% of the punting fraternity, I am GUESSING when I have a bet.
2.) I seldom bet on favourites. The bigger the price the bigger my bet – a discipline which I developed over many years and have managed to stick to. It certainly keeps the losses contained.
3.) I play only with money I am comfortable (but not happy!) to lose.
4.) I usually punt the longer shots and cover my stake on the obvious selection when I believe it will be difficult to beat. (If we had access to Betfair I could simply lay horses I don't like).
A couple of months ago I decided (win, lose or draw as I’m GUESSING) that I wanted to build a book on the 2023 Rugby World Cup. My early attempts to ‘get on’ in one hit were unsuccessful so I temporarily abandoned the plan. As I was wanting a pretty substantial initial bet I was not particularly surprised by this development.
Shortly thereafter I decided to re-employ a method I have used in the past – I started playing on the UK racing (both flat and jumps) and whenever I won (often very small amounts) I rolled my winnings onto the RWC.
I also opened two new accounts which brought my total to three : Interbet, Betfred, Hollywood.
Before I launch into specific detail clanners might like to consider the following :
1.) The RWC 2023 starts in September 2023 so service providers have been holding my cash interest free since December 2022. Nice business one would have thought!
2.) The odds offered since inception have, on average, been ‘under the odds’ from those offered on international markets. Even better business. Lay me the bet and take back overseas at a profit. But as we know.....no layer has ever done that. Right.
3.) Most electronic sites have limits of approximately R25k whereafter the punter is blocked as one cannot reason with a computer. I can understand why this limit exists although I would assume that its purpose is to protect the layer from a substantial bet that arrives minutes before an event. But MONTHS before? Surely common sense would suggest a daily re-calibration as the layer has plenty of time to ‘take back’ or shorten?
Now let’s go into some detail on the ludicrous experiences I have had :
BETFRED :
1.) The ‘instant EFT’ service offered is ‘instant’ only after the punter has gone through a fairly convoluted process to make the payment. A bit of a hassle although I appreciate the conservatism given the amount of fraud about.
2.) I quite quickly used up my ‘allowance’ and managed to get about R26k of the team I wanted to back first.
3.) No more since then.
4.) Normally one can circumvent this problem with doubles. But not with Betfred! Any attempt is met with the response that one has used up one’s allowance on the team in the second leg. Wow!
Given the above I decided to withdraw a small balance I had with them and try elsewhere. I entered into a long, involved interaction with nameless agent/s (they don’t sign their emails so you have no idea who you are talking to). I sent up my proof of banking account no less than 3x times (they conveniently forget that I supplied these details when I opened the account) and after a dialogue that went on from February 22nd – March 5th I eventually got the following response :
Please note we only withdraw on winnings not on deposits
Is that even legal when you have refused a bet?
I eventually circumvented this problem by striking an obvious winning bet with the entire amount just so that I could recover my funds. I don’t expect to be paid anytime soon as their site quotes a turnaround time of two(?) days.
I dread to think how this might pan out if my RWC bets connect.
Hollywood :
Not that dissimilar to Betfred except that one ‘John’ quoted me 50% on withdrawals that were not winnings.
Eventually I was reluctantly laid the requested bet to avoid the hassle of a refund. No more since.
Interbet:
By far the best with a couple of small reservations :
You can get whatever you want on their exchange. Unfortunately offers have all but dried up and you will be fortunate to get on every couple of days. Forget stretches – you will be lucky to get the price. But you can live in hope!
Getting money in or out is simple and usually the same day unless you play in the evening; in which case you will be paid the following morning. Unfortunately, though, deposits go from almost instantaneous to quite slow once the daytime staff go home. Whoever takes care of crediting accounts after hours is probably more interested in playing solitaire than monitoring payments.
But I have experienced one lulu of a response this last weekend :
As there were no offers on the exchange and my allowance on the bookmaker site had been used up I attempted the following double this Saturday just passed :
Stormers (to beat the Bulls) x South Africa (RWC)
I was utterly amazed to be blocked on the basis of a ‘related event’. The only ‘relationship’ is that they are both rugby games. Two different competitions – one regional and one international – and they actually believe that the outcome of a league match would influence a World Cup market!
This is akin to me taking a bet on a single Championship Match into the FIFA World Cup and being blocked because they are ‘related’. Do grown men actually make these rules?
I have certainly learned that outside of numbers and other mindless bets the South African betting industry does not seen particularly interested in promoting anything outside of mug betting activity.
I’ll see this through only because I am stubborn. I should maybe have stayed in 'punting retirement'.
The bet is related. If the bet is accepted they can adjust the odds at a later stage if they wish to do so. Normally the price comes down by 25% to 33%
Makes perfect sense.
You can't take a double of Kaizer Chiefs to beat Pirates and Argentina to win the World cup because everyone knows if Mduduzi Shabalala scores in the Soweto Derby then Messi will be inspired to win the world cup and the odds will shorten.
Some online bookies accept maximum 25k for sports online until you get limited. If you phone in, WSB and Betxchange sometimes will lay you more. Bet.co.za have accepted big sporting bets online and phone in. Soccershop formerly Lance Michael maybe is worth a try. Their limit online is 20k.
The bet is related. If the bet is accepted they can adjust the odds at a later stage if they wish to do so. Normally the price comes down by 25% to 33%
I can accept that if Scotland were to beat Ireland, their odds on winning the World Cup may shorten - so yes in that sense, the bet is 'related'
However in the bet taken by Garrick, surely whether the Stormers beat the Bulls imo will have zero influence on the 'Boks chances in the WC - so somebody is smoking something
The bet is related. If the bet is accepted they can adjust the odds at a later stage if they wish to do so. Normally the price comes down by 25% to 33%
I can accept that if Scotland were to beat Ireland, their odds on winning the World Cup may shorten - so yes in that sense, the bet is 'related'
However in the bet taken by Garrick, surely whether the Stormers beat the Bulls imo will have zero influence on the 'Boks chances in the WC - so somebody is smoking something
I was referring to Dave's bet with the screenshot above.
Topic Author
