Bookmakers who refused Frankie Dettori multiples slammed by Star Sports chief

The bookmakers who would not take some multiple bets on Frankie Dettori rides at Royal Ascot this week were labelled pathetic by one of their own on Sunday, when Star Sports supremo Ben Keith hit out at the practice that left punters unable to get behind racing's biggest name on the sport's biggest stage.

Dettori left layers reeling on Thursday when winning the first four races at the royal meeting, although they enjoyed some respite when Biometric collared the rider's Turgenev in the Britannia, pulling them back from a multi-million-pound brink.

However, bet365 refused certain four-horse and all five-horse accumulators on Dettori's rides for the final two days of the meeting, a move replicated by Sky Bet on Saturday, who rejected multiples that included all of Dettori's three bigger-priced mounts.

That resulted in frustration and confusion among the betting public and Keith said: "I think the only punters who won on Thursday at Ascot were people like my mum or Uncle Albert, who do a £1 yankee in the betting shop. If the average betting shop punter in the country loses 14 per cent, those people would lose 28 per cent, so they need to have their day in the sun.

"How do you not lay a multiple? You can always put the last two in short or say SP only the last leg. I've got to be honest, Joe Coral, William Hill and Cyril Stein must have been turning in their graves when the story came out."

Ben Keith: criticised bookmakers who restricted Dettori multiplesCredit: Edward Whitaker

Memories of 1996 when Dettori demolished the bookies with his Magnificent Seven at Ascot came flooding back on Thursday as he landed the Gold Cup on evens favourite Stradivarius, but Keith suggested there was a way to limit the damage.

"I thought it was utterly pathetic," added the Star Sports owner and founder whose firms bet on course and digitally.

"Nobody is stopping you making the last horse evens from 10s – that's what they did in 1996 when Frankie rode the seven-timer.

"We all see things from a different viewpoint, but whatever viewpoint I see this from I just think it is pathetic.

"They're going to get their bum smacked once every ten years. It's happened and they've shown that they're not actually bookmakers."

Matt Bisogno, the outgoing chair of the Horseracing Bettors Forum, which was created in 2015 to represent the interests of people who bet on British racing, felt the behaviour was curious and agreed it could have been managed better by the companies involved.

"Not all bookmakers were doing this and it's a marketplace, so if you can't get what you want from one place you can go somewhere else, but I appreciate recreational punters may not be aware of that," he said.

"Maybe operators are starting to look at this kind of multiple as a related contingency and therefore the chance of Dettori riding the fourth winner, after he's ridden the first three, is something they need to factor into their early prices rather than reacting as they did with Turgenev, a 12-1 shot that becomes a 7-2 shot.

"Maybe they price it up that if someone wants to back four in the bet they offer a price where there is a related contingency quote about it. That's for them to determine, but it needs to be clear to a punter it's almost like a request-a-bet type thing.

"If you changed something on the fly, like they have done, you can't just do it without any explanation. Some were very casual about it happening and not being a big deal, but it really is. It's a time when a lot of people want to follow Dettori in and you've either got to lay those bets or be explicit about why you're not."

Outgoing Horseracing Bettors Forum chair Matt Bisogno felt the decision to restrict Dettori multiples was 'very curious behaviour'

Bisogno, who is also involved in ownership, has been part of the HBF since its inception and will continue to be involved despite stepping down as chair next week after 15 months at the helm.

He was speaking from a personal view on Sunday morning and added: "I hesitate to say it's a dangerous precedent, but it's an interesting one and I think it's something that could be explored with those operators to understand their rationale and whether this was a one-off or if the intention is to manage these potentially mounting multiple liabilities more strategically in the future.

"You could say after the first two in the bet it's starting price only and then the SP is what it is, but it's not going to be what the early price was."

Some bookmakers did not answer punters' Dettori callsCredit: Edward Whitaker

Coral were among the firms happy to lay Dettori's rides, reasoning plenty had gone in their favour since the jockey left them joyless 23 years ago.

Bisogno, whose role at the HBF will be taken on by forum members Colin Hord and Colin Magee, continued: "It seems bonkers to me from a personal perspective because it was 20-odd years since the last time it happened and they've creamed off a few quid in the interim from those recreational multiples.

"Any bookmaker has the right to reserve any bet and that's explicitly stated in their terms and conditions so from that perspective they've got carte blanche I guess, but it does seem very curious behaviour because the chance of it happening are minuscule.

"It must just be a Dettori factor. If you were backing Danny Tudhope at Redcar there'd be no restriction. This is a Dettori-specific situation and I think they've got to be very explicit with customers because these are the type of customers who wouldn't really understand why this situation was being managed like this."

Sky Bet on Sunday outlined why they restricted Dettori-related bets, with spokesperson Michael Shinners saying the 48-year-old's enduring popularity meant huge liabilities.

"Punters love Frankie, and his incredible performance on Thursday really captured the imagination," Shinners explained. "On Saturday, on our early prices, the odds of the six-fold accumulator were over 3,000,000-1.

"Let's say 3,500 customers wanted to put just 10p each on, we'd be looking at over a billion-pound payout, so these potential liabilities are unprecedented, and there is no practical way to hedge this sort of demand, where so many people want to back the same high-odds outcome.

"Confidence was brimming over by Saturday, and we had loads of customers wanting to buy into the dream. With such high interest, we weren't sure we would be able to pay out if he did end up winning, so we did the right thing and limited the number of selections that people could include. We're focused on making betting better, and we don't ever want to be taking bets from customers that we might not be able to pay out!"

The Racing Post also on Sunday attempted to contact bet365, who had said on Saturday their position was also down to a trading decision.

Get exclusive insight from the track and live tipping with Raceday Live - our up-to-the-minute service on racingpost.com and the Racing Post mobile app