24 B 2 B Essential Guide to ... EiG IBAS
Time to revise live betting rules
John Samuels of IBAS explains the areas in which bookmakers need to look to protect both them and their customers
he surge in popularity of ‘in-play’ or ‘in-running’ betting has generated an increasing number of IBAS disputes both in shop and online. One issue, covered in this column last year, was the question of when a bet is deemed to have been struck. An example was given of a large stake bet being placed in a betting shop, but then the bet has to be agreed with head office, and the stake money has to be counted etc. In the meantime, the circumstances of the market could have easily changed. Different companies approach the dilemma in different ways, although an increasing number now advise staff to enter the bet onto the system prior to seeking trader authorisation. There are many other areas, though, where in-running
T
betting has created disputes which are far from straight- forward to resolve. Earlier this year, one online bookmak- er rejected the claim of a customer that a bet had been struck, without his consent, at a price shorter than that he had agreed when he clicked to confirm it. This was tested by IBAS mem- bers of staff who (after several attempts to replicate the sce- nario) established that the web- site in question was indeed acting as the customer had alleged, where the price of the selection had shortened between the bet being requested and con- firmed. This was a very un- usual case, but a pertinent reminder of the value of customer feedback.
Based on disputes handled recently by IBAS, other ad- vice for operators would include: • Ensure that your rules are robust for dealing with bets struck after subject of the bet has occurred
• Seek a reliable independent third party source of the precise time when pivotal, match-changing events oc- curred - consider using more than one where the vol- ume of business supports this; IBAS could not accept an argument that a bet was only ‘possibly’ or ‘probably’ late
• Warn staff to be vigilant for delays between requesting a price and placing the bet - wherever possible, it is al- ways worth re-checking the price before processing the bet
• For shop and telephone betting in particular, establish clear rules for what events/occurrences give rise to a ‘late’ bet - for example, where a bet is placed on a team which had been awarded a penalty but where the penalty was not yet taken, the customer has a clear ad- vantage, but may not fall foul of a rule which only pro- vides for bets being deemed late after a goal is scored
• With live prices often being adjusted by computer pro- grams rather than manually, it is always worth sense- checking prices as often as possible. If the prices of the two teams or players are transposed, an undetected inputting error can result in up to a whole match being incorrectly traded, dozens of voided bets and unhappy customers. Likewise, live trading software is prone to occasional freezing errors, and staff vigilance can save a great deal of frustration and disappointment if such problems are detected at an early stage
Similarly, operators should consider reviewing rules for
DOES THE AWARD OF THE PENALTY NEED TO BE RECOGNISED IN YOUR LIVE BETTING RULES?
the settlement of sports bets where those rules were writ- ten before in-play betting took off. IBAS is receiving in- creasing numbers of cases where different sources of live data record different numbers of corners, bookings, wides, aces etc. Particularly where there is scope to settle bets before a match is completed (eg. first half only mar- kets) operators might want to consider specifying how those bets will be settled - and it may be in some cases that a competition’s official website is adequate for being the arbiter on final match results but not for ‘live’ statistical bets. With so many websites offering live minute-by- minute sporting information, it is important for both par- ties to a bet to be clear of which one is relevant to bet in question.
Although rarely relevant to bet settlement, a number of
IBAS disputes could have been avoided if operators had shown greater care in ensuring that the live data shown on a bookmaker’s screens or website relating to the latest state of play in an event was accurate - customers often rely on the information shown to inform their betting choices, and they often complain to IBAS when the data is inaccurate and misleading. Time and again we see cases where a customer com- plains, for instance, that a rugby score, say, was shown as 10-15 and the customer places a bet, only for the customer to later learn that the actual score at the time was 15-10. How do most operators react to this scenario? Generally, they quote their rule that states that they cannot be held re- sponsible for the information that is displayed on their sites! If this becomes a common cause for complaint among customers it may be better to abandon the data provider and show no information than to display some- thing misleading.
BettingBusinessInteractive • NOVEMBER 2011 Live betting
GAMBLING COMMISSION Live betting poses ‘no additional risks’
The Gambling Commission’s Nick Tofiluk discusses the regulator’s stance on live betting and what operators should look out for.
D
oes the Gambling Commission have any specific concerns with live aka in-
running betting? We know that in-running betting is in- creasingly popular and while we continue to monitor developments, our position hasn’t changed since we reviewed the issue in 2008/09. As long as betting cus- tomers are made sufficiently aware of their position and the respective positions of other players and the betting operators,
NICK TOFILUK
there are no specific additional risks cre- ated by new technologies enabling in-run- ning betting. In other words, so long as punters are made aware that others may have information slightly earlier, the prac- tice is considered fair.
Have you had any complaints about any of the individual markets that are offered dur- ing live betting? It’s well known that some people think
some types of novelty bets should be banned. The Commission has so far not considered it necessary to restrict the type of bets that the operators may accept and we are unlikely to change our position unless we establish a significant pattern of cases involving corruption and unfairness in these markets. In our recently pub- lished discussion paper on inside informa- tion, we are asking for views on whether further information should be made avail- able to betting customers about novelty bets and the risk of markets being influ- enced by the misuse of inside information.
What is the Commission’s view on the self- service betting terminals that are starting to become popular in betting shops? Are there any potential pitfalls that bookmak- ers should be wary of? Self-service betting terminals are being
developed in a number of formats and in principle they can be legally sited in bet- ting premises provided the right licences are in place. As the recently published consultation on the Commission’s fees noted, it is likely that in using a terminal customers place their bets via remote means and the operator of those premises will therefore require a remote licence. The consultation process is looking at po- tential changes in this area to make sure operators are appropriately licensed. Bookmakers also need to keep in mind
the requirements of the law and the Li- cence Conditions and Codes of Practice. For example, operators must continue to make sure that betting is the primary gambling activity on their betting premis- es - especially if they are relying on bet- ting terminals as the sole means of offer- ing betting.
ACTION IMAGES / JASON CAIRNDUFF LIVEPIC
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48