Tom’s $25 million Melbourne Cup offer: Worst odds ever

You may also like...

10 Responses

  1. Patrick says:

    Thanks for this. I spent the best part of Sunday trying to get a handle on this offer. But having the maths skills of a dull chimp was never going to get close.Given the numbers I can’t believe he took insurance. So much for the myth of the fearless bookie.

  2. Steve says:

    Hey Patrick, I’m average at maths too, that’s why I had others do it for me. Tom has never or will ever be a bookie. He is a marketer.

  3. Paul says:

    When I saw this advertised on TV this also peaked my interest. This is the kind of blatant ripoff that gives the industry such a bad name… Obviously anyone who bets on this is foolish, but is it fair to charge for this?

    The maths is even worse for those who bet before the final fields. Today there are 43 runners in still in the all-in market. When I first checked it on October 11 here were 72 runners..

    What amused me was clause 9 of the terms and conditions where all bets are void if less than 20 horses start the race.. It’s like someone in WIlliam Hill said “picking the first 10 of 20….naaah, that’s too much risk for us!”

    A few years ago Sportingbet (prior to William Hill) ran a promo on the Cox Plate where you could share in $1m if you could pick the first 8 in order and at the time I remember thinking how impossible that was (and that was free entry). Someone managed to pick the first 5.

  4. Beth Krncevic says:

    I’d like to know how many bets would be required to cover every possible outcome. At $10 per bet, if it’s possible to make a decent profit, it might be worth getting a group of friends together. The egg on TW’s face would be the cherry on top

  5. Steve says:

    Beth, it would cost you at least $40 billion and that still wouldn’t guarantee a win. The only one smiling would be little tommy boy.

  6. Beth Krncevic says:

    Thanks for the number. Math goes in and out of my head in a blink, lol

  7. Grimey says:

    7,000,000,000,000 is 7000 trillion, not the 7 trillion mentioned!

  8. Steve says:

    haha, there’s always someone.

    But your wrong this time.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trillion

  9. Patty M says:

    Hi Steve,
    This article reminded me of a time when a friend and I were having a discussion about the chances of winning 100 consecutive $1.01 shots in a row. We were struggling with the maths, we knew in the long run we’d be heaps down but couldn’t work out the odds and percentages for the 100 wins to occur. Would you know how to go about working it out?

  10. Ron Jarvis says:

    hey, wot about us “billions” Grimy?? Wouldnt want you compiling the USA Debt

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.