On checking the Racing Post today I noticed unusually that William Hill were best priced about a rugby bet. According to the comparison table they had New Zealand to beat Georgia by between 61-65 points in tonight's game at 7/1. Since the handicap had been set at 64 this seems a reasonable punt to me.
Despite his best efforts the cashier could not find the price so had to phone it through.
After a longish wait and a short conversation he said to me, '250-1'.
I said, 'Are you sure. that sounds a bit high to me?'
Further muffled conversation and then 'Yes, 250-1.'
What a dilemma! Do I take the 250-1 in order to get one over the capitalist pig dog corporate bookie (as surely my hero from the Morning Star would do)?
After a moment's hesitation - ok a few moments' - discretion gets the better of me and I suggest that cannot be right.
The cashier agreed to give me 7-1 for as he put it 'the bloke in the call centre didn't even know the Rugby World Cup is happening'.
Of course in reality the bet would have never stood as the bookie would have ruled it out under the palpable error rule. I am pretty sure the expert at Hill's HQ was quoting the price for Georgia to beat New Zealand by that margin - which represents no kind of value at all. The true odds of that would be nearer 1million-1.
Shame though - even if it would have made New Zealand's final attack in the 79th minute with them leading 67-3 a touch tense. Come on Georgia.
No comments:
Post a Comment