Site Navigation...

Welcome to the oggs blog

Archive for April, 2009

Football’s Biggest Gambler

Wednesday, April 29th, 2009

Chairman and partial owner of the Premiership’s new boys Stoke City football club, Paul Coates has moved from betting shops to online gaming and built a £400m fortune, but will the club be buying Messi?

Paul Coates is known to thousands of football fans in the Potteries as a football mad man, but it’s his Stoke-based Bet365 that his hard work has seen him amass a personal fortune and it’s all been hard graft. Born in poverty, youngest of 14 children, his entrepreneurial spirit has ranged from achieving a successful stadium catering company to betting shops in the 90s.

He made the Sunday Times Rich List, and one of only a few to actually go up the list, due to his bankrolling the online operation which is a privately owned business. Bet365 is one of the largest sports betting sites in the world, taking £3.4 billion in bets last year and employing 900 staff.

His involvement with Stoke City is born out of love for the local community and club. His decision to return as Chairman after an earlier not so pleasant stay was one he wished to do not matter what the consequences, his first thoughts being to save the club he’d always supported and set it on its feet. And what feet it’s found, more like winged boots! From the depths of the Championship to the most pleasant surprise in the Premiership this year.

Will it get Messi in the end? I very much doubt it, this canny gentleman has lady luck and hard work under his belt to grow both concerns, backed by a family who’ve grown up in the business and shown great acumen.

The Beauty of Backing 2 Year Old Thoroughbred Racehorses

Thursday, April 23rd, 2009

I FINALLY met up with The One-Armed Man, something Dr Richard Kimble, better known as David Janssen, failed to do in 120 episodes of the classic American television series The Fugitive. Kimble, some of you may remember, was sentenced to death for a crime he didn’t commit, managed to escape when the train transporting him to a maximum security prison was de-railed, and spent the rest of his life – well, all of the series – trying in vain to track down the real killer, The One-Armed Man.

However, the one-armed man I refer to is a semi-professional gambler who lives in Wolverhampton and frequents the Midlands tracks. I hadn’t seen him in about five years but we still share something, apart from three good arms! That’s a love of two-year-old races.

I had schlepped to Leicester to back a juvenile at the bookies raceside in the first and he was there, perusing the runners in the paddock. We both agreed that the only danger – a Michael Bell debutant to be ridden by Jamie Spencer – was extremely edgy in the paddock and looked very green and inexperienced on what was his first visit to a racecourse.

I’ve been going racing for several decades but I must admit my paddock judgement is pretty naff. The only thing I can really tell is whether a horse is totally unfit. But, as everyone else, can see that a horse if fat or ‘gone in its coat’ it doesn’t give me much of an edge.

The one-armed man, though, fancies himself as a bit of a paddock expert although in my view only those closely connected with the horse can really know whether a horse is fit or not. Some horses carry more condition than others – and might not look as fit as others in the field, but that’s just the way they are.

The only thing I inspect is the form book. And if a horse has some decent form in the book then it gives it a massive edge over rivals who haven’t raced. A run will give a previously unraced two-year-old a big advantage. My selection was a good second in the first two-year-old race of the season, the Brocklesby, at Doncaster and proved too good for his rivals, all of whom were unraced.

I know it’s a classic case of ‘after-timing’, but my theory will hold good for a good few months to come. Even after the season has settled down, I still feel two-year-olds offer punters the best chance of making some dosh. One key factor is that they are too young to have picked up any bad habits, like many of their elders, who need to be persuaded to put their best hooves forward.

Look at some races and you’ll see horses with blinkers, cheek pieces, tongue-ties and eye shields. Some trainers even resort to the last resort, getting their jockey to wear spurs although how the north London side can persuade anyone to win is completely beyond my (admittedly, limited) imagination!

Two-year-olds invariably give their running – and don’t have too many off days. They haven’t been soured by too much racing and, in the first few months of the Flat turf season, will only be racing over trips of five or six furlongs, which also makes punting a little easier, cutting out some of the variables.

But a few words of warning. I would advise you to steer clear of nurseries. They’re just handicaps for two-year-olds and are pretty tough to figure, in my opinion. And ‘my’ one-armed man told me once: ‘Don’t give a two-year-old too many chances’. I have taken that on board and once a juvenile has run three or four times without winning I rarely give him or her another chance. They might be the exception to the rule, but I’m not paying to find out. Of course, the reverse is also true. Some two-year-olds just keep on wining and winning. The best example of this is the sequence of successes by two youngsters trained by Newmarket-based Bill O’Gorman. He saddled Timeless Times (1990) and Provideo (1984) to 16 – yes, you read it right, 16 – straight wins apiece.

How he kept them on the boil or at least simmering throughout their long first seasons was a remarkable feat. Unsurprisingly, no one has got close since, but it doesn’t mean it will never be equalled or even surpassed although I doubt it.

Of course, two-year-olds grow up into the Classic generation in the following season and it’s interesting to watch them develop from green-as-grass youngsters to hardened professionals. In fact, following two-year-olds can give you a very clear picture of what might win the next season’s Guineas, Oaks and Derby.

Happy punting…

The invention of political betting

Monday, April 6th, 2009

RON POLLARD, Ladbrokes’ legendary odds-maker, claimed he invented political betting. He said so in his irreverent and entertaining autobiography, ‘Odds and Sods, My Life in the Betting Business’, which was published in 1991.

But he’s way out of line. Pollard may have started political betting in the UK in the wake of the Christine Keeler affair when he opened a book on the Tory leadership race in 1963. However, 47 years earlier, in 1916, the Americans wagered the equivalent of $160million in today’s money on the race for the White House contested by Woodrow Wilson and Charles Evans Hughes.

Even though he was pretty late on the scene in global terms, Pollard gave Ladbrokes a tremendous boost and acres of free publicity when he priced up the Tory battle for the leadership with Rab Butler at 5-4, Lord Hailsham at 7-4 and Reggie Maudling at 6s. It was 10-1 and more the rest. Yes, even in those faraway days bookies bet brutally over round! Ladbrokes were, of course, big winners. The media went into overdrive and the punters loved it.

In the same year Ladbrokes began General Election betting. As ever Ladbrokes’ book made a healthy profit. But the biggest winner was millionaire hotelier Maxwell Joseph, a true-blue Tory, who rang to inquire what price a Labour victory was. He was put straight through to Ladbrokes’ managing director Cyril Stein, himself a dyed-in-the-wool Labour supporter.

Joseph wanted £50,000 on a Socialist victory – it was a huge sum in those days, equivalent to more than a million pounds at today’s prices. Stein told him he could have £30,000 at 11-8 on and the rest at 7-4 on. Joseph picked up a cool £32,272 in winnings, a little hedge against the inflation he feared if Labour got in.

Ladbroke’s Pollard reckons that all the attendant publicity turned Ladbrokes into the major company it is today. He may be right – and his legacy of political betting is with us to this day.

If anything it is growing faster than many other betting markets. Britain’s punters wagered a staggering £30million with traditional bookmakers on the recent US presidential election with a similar amount staked online. It dwarfed the £10million placed on Britain’s 2005 election.

Such growth means that any future election in the UK will produce big numbers. British bookmakers and exchange operators must already be licking their collective lips, for it is only in the UK and Ireland that betting on the outcome of elections is legal, nowhere else in Europe is political betting allowed. In fact, in 2007, when Wimbledon-based bookmaker Unibet offered odds on when a new national government in Belgium might be formed they were promptly hauled before the Brussels prosecutor’s office after a complaint from that country’s Gambling Commission.

This attitude may change as the UK’s recent Gambling Act kicks in, adding to the pressure on European legislators to allow more freedom of choice in betting matters. Ladbrokes may well yet cover far more elections throughout the world than they ever first expected and continue their claimed invention.

However, they won’t be alone though, political gambling is getting bigger and bigger, betting exchanges like Betfair are inventing new political betting opportunities themselves as and creating new markets for the political punter.

What Odds On A General Election in 2009?

Monday, April 6th, 2009

What odds on a General Election in 2009? Well Ladbrokes go 4/1, with 2010 being favoured at 1/6. Perhaps not surprising David Cameron’s Conservative Party are 8/15 favourites. But could it all change in the next month or so?

The UK Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, has been under massive pressure at home for 12 months with the world economy crumbling around his feet, problems with bankrupt bankers, businesses going bust, house repossessions growing as the number of unemployed grows, and now even his own cabinet under daily fire from the British media over MP expenses excesses.

Last month the UK leader was taken to task and dressed down in the most spectacular and totally purely British way of pure oratory art in the European Parliament, by UK Conservative MEP, Daniel Hannan, who dubbed him ‘The devalued Prime Minister of a devalued Government’.

And after that yes 2010 looked a good bet. However, they say ‘a week is a long time in politics’ and in flies the new enigmatic President of the United States of America, Barack Obama and the First Lady, Gordon’s hosting of the G20 is reported a success and even a scheming French and German Presidential pair are placated. What with the seasonal weather spilling sunshine over the country too, perhaps Prime Minister Brown will just spring a snap election out of the blue, so to speak, in June. The bookies have that at an interesting 8/1, the shortest price until June 2010 at 7/1.

The reported ‘green shoots of recovery’ are for sure many months still away, but Spring always brings rebirth, warmth and hope and certainly a busier economy and whilst everyone hopes the property market and other indicators are levelling out Labour have an opportunity to go for broke.

They could gamble on the economy recovering in 2010 and catching its coat tails to milk the assumed applause, but really they could be left high and dry with an electorate blaming them for the many high tax increases needed to pay off the massive borrowing and debt Gordon and his Chancellor heaped on the country in their need to spend their way out of recession. The political gamble is a big one for both punter and Mr Brown, there will be winners and losers.

Interestingly an OHIO University study showed that political gambling provided more reliable results than surveys and polls so even though Labour are behind the Conservatives on every count, now might just be the moment to strike for Gordon Brown and risk it all, and why not it’s only politics. Whoever’s next has the mountain of economic recovery to climb after all.