• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Any gamblers out there had enough?

Mar 30, 2009
55
0
0
Visit site
So I posted this in the Boonen thread a few days ago but thought it required some extra thought.

Sure gambling isn't the best vice in the world but its mine and I love having a punt on cycling races. HOWEVER....my working class dollars are continuously being screwed by riders getting done for doping. There's been too many to mention but to name a few from this year, good money on Schleck to win Fleche, he comes second to Reb, I lose my money, Reb gets busted...do you think Reb is going to repay me my money??? NOPE. Now Valverde, had him at good odds for tdf (Sure, it was a long shot but hey), now he's out and my money has vanished into the gambling website slush fund.

These guys make great money, I don't....maybe when Reb retires with his millions in the bank and a broken ego, he could put a few hundred in my bank account as a nice gesture! I'd forgive him.

Can't imagine how Schleck feels!!!! Guess its back to the horses for me.
 
I just think you're being a sore loser. No matter if Rebellin was doped or not a gamble on any race should assess the strength of the riders given the knowledge of their form and possible strength in the race.

Even if Rebellin was doped at Fleche there is good reason to believe that it wasn't the first time so it's highly improbable that he performed well above his ability in just that perticular race. Given that fact I see no reason to be upset.

If someone was a non issue leading up to a race and then doped and suddenly was classes better than his previous results would indicate then I could possibly sympathize but that's hardly the case now.

As for Valverde then it's a risk no matter what to gamble on someone far ahead of the tour if the bet is non refundable in case of a non starter. Would you feel the same way if a person you bet on could not start because of a crash and injury?
 
Mar 30, 2009
55
0
0
Visit site
All good points ingsve and not being a sore loser, just a sore gambler ;)...but Reb based on form at the time of Fleche was fairly long so I had assessed form and Schleck to me looked to be the man for the race. (Had him for Liege too so some consol).

Of course the valverde issue is me just having a go and of course so far out from tdf isn't the best bet but thats gambling...you can get good odds and if a few others falter then you never know. If a rider before or during a race gets injured and pulls out then of course its not the same thing...that I'll take as just unlucky, for me and the rider.

I guess my point of all this is that doping has many consequences and not just the obvious ones. I gamble for fun and only gamble what I can afford but I'm sure there is a few out there that have done some big dollars. And while the guilty iders just make their millions they only worry about the consequence of getting caught and what excuse they are going to come up with to get out of it!

As a side note - can anyone tell me if riders ever do have to repay winnings after getting busted at a race?
 
Mar 11, 2009
3,274
1
0
Visit site
There will always be people gambling with way larger amounts in the fields you are betting in.

Rebellin was just another guy betting on Fleche, he just did it another way.


Back to horses? Right, no doping there. lol.

Maybe pick football? Scandals in Italy, Germany, Belgium and so on.
You bet $100 bucks on a game? Good chance there's some Asian betting 1mil and willing to manipulate to get results. Bigger chance the ref screws you over.


Valverde was just a dumb pick. Maybe the payout was that big because your online-bookie did consider CONI trial.