Anyone seen this before?

[Shawn]

Hi guys...

Being a bit of an aspiring history buff, I wonder if anyone has ever seen this wagering rule used before. The example is soccer, but could happen in any sport at all.

Eurobet offers those Asian Handicap odds we soccer junkies crave so much. (For you non-soccer types, that's the two sided "pointspread" style lines instead of the win lose or draw three-way lines that are more common.) Very fair prices on a whole stack of leagues. One thing's a little disturbing though:

If you play a game at a pick or a 1-goal or 2-goal spread, if the game lands on the number, the game pushes of course, but you lose the juice. (Since these are decimal prices, juice is calculated at 5% of the money laid.)

Not slamming them...I'm opening there anyway based on the wide number of leagues offered and the fact this rule doesn't apply to games with fractional handicaps (games with a half-goal, or three-quarter-goal spread etc), but I'll have to remind myself to look elsewhere first on round-number-handicaps.

Anyway, has anyone ever seen this "Push Loses Juice" rule before? It's not a true split line but I suppose it is a variation.

Imagine the last Super Bowl with this one...

Shawn

[AussieVamp2]

so that goes for 0, -1, -2 then Shawn?

[AussieVamp2]

sounds like a tax issue perhaps?

If they are paying turnover tax, unlike the illegals in Asia, then a DNB line that lands 0 as they would frequently, would cost them money......... so what are they charging? 5%? Making a profit there too then.

[AussieVamp2]

None of the Eurobet pages seem to be working for me except the home page

get the old not found error on any other, even login....

[Shawn]

www.eurobet.com is working fine for me...logged in at the moment.

They're set up in Gib so there shouldn't be a tax issue. Plus it's only on those games at 0,1,2...not even on the 1 portion of a -3/4.

*shrug*

[AYCE]

I believe this has something to do with the fact that most Euro books didn't like TIEs.

Take WH for example, they always like to add a hook in American sports to avoid the TIEs.

Most of the time, they will even add the TIE option in the offer (handicap or not) even the chance of the TIE is very slim or virtually doesn't exist.

Like the TIE option in the boat race is a good example.

Remember the TIEs in boxing and golf matchups?

I guess they were thinking, once they accept your bets, there will be cost involved in their parts anyway, so its a good idea to avoid the TIE.

Or in this case, they can't avoid it because the fragments in soccer handicap limited them to do so, so they want to take your vig under this situation instead.

[This message has been edited by AYCE (edited 03-25-2000).]

[AussieVamp2]

no idea about the laws in Gibraltar, but do you mean they would pay no tax to whatever authority there at all?

Ray,

Adding the tie option like that wins dumb money and avoids the turnover tax problem nicely

[boris]

AV,
Some of the Gibraltar books still like to consider themselves as being from the UK, and don't want to offend the Home Office too much.

Stan James charge a 1% service fee, and VC were charging 3% for UK clients as some sort of voluntary tax.

Bizarre.

[AussieVamp2]

Boris,

Do they donate that to the Treasury, or do they buy ferraris with it?

[Cons]

AV, they take the 3% and pocket it themselves.

[AussieVamp2]

hoo-boy

gotta find something to sell to poms

then charge them 3% extra