Biggest Betting Duel
 

A very good article in today's Sunday Telegraph about the duel between Sydney's biggest Punter Sean Batholomew and Unibet's Mark Morrisey.

Some interesting quotes to draw knowledge from for me were:

Morrisey: "The only strategy that can work when you are at a mathematical disadvantage is to remove the consistency from their betting.......I let him bet up when it suits me, not him. It's imperative that I'm in control."

and

Morrissey: "I don't really need to beat Sean to make money from him, I simply need to suppress him so I can get his 'intel' for a minimal cost.....If Sean backs the favourite and the third favourite in a race then I know he doesn't like the second pick, I then just push the price of the second favourite out and take a stand against it. I mimic Sean, but in reverse."

This is what is wrong with the whole system. Why should he be able to restrict him. Unless that restriction is large enough... I would assume anything under $10K bets should have to be taken.


Restricting again .... I am happy if his restrictions are high enough to allow a reasonable amount (10K) but if its less then that and he is restricting it to $3.00 as I have seen on some sites then that is just a restraint of trade on the punter.

These bookies have it so easy these days.

I'm not saying unibet does restrict to very low levels I'm just saying that the whole idea of restricting someone at any level under
$10K bets is wrong.

The restrictions were from: to win $1k, but other times to win up to $100k. Anyway Sean did OK and was up $73,586 by the end of the day.
Go Sean!!

The raceday featured in the story was Saturday 1st Feb. Of the 19 bets placed, only one was a Drifter in the market (Lost). All the rest were Steady, Firmer's or Steamer's.

..and, interestingly, every jockey had a <$10.00 SR (last 3 months) of better than 21%.......

Yes, when you read Sean's Bio his selection of jockey is as important as the horse. He also doesn't like top weight faves.

People think, wow what a big time punter, but his average liability per bet was only $2885. Now there are a few forumites I know, that if they punched that number into their existing systems, could be doing quite well themselves. It's a matter of having the successful system and backing it with as much moolah as you can muster.

If I was a heavy hitter like him though, I wouldn't be telling the newspaper anything about it. There are a lot of bad dudes out there just planning their next home invasion!

The other thing the paper stuffed up was, Sean's payout for the day included his stake! So take about 30% off that gross figure.