Morality Betting: Why I won't back what I don't like

Other / Richard Douglas / 22 March 2009 / Leave a Comment

Richard Douglas takes aim at Tottenham Hotspur, Andy Murray and the Prime Minister as he explains why he won't back what he doesn't like...

"Sorry mate," spluttered the betting shop manager barely disguising his mirth. "I think you'll find Spurs aint in the FA Cup this season."

It was late 1995 and I had gone into my local bookies to stick a fiver on Tottenham lifting the trophy in May. Nothing unusual there, except for the fact that Terry Venables' side had been banned from the competition at the start of the season for failing to complete ground improvements in time for the big kick-off.

I was banking on media pressure forcing the FA to buckle and re-instate them. After that, a mixture of injustice, momentum and opportunity just might take them all the way.

These were those dark, well-forgotten times before Betfair when when your only way to place a bet was to swipe aside one of those beaded curtains (and sneers from the clientele once inside), wade through the cigarette fog and fill up your coupon in front of some disinterested Doris at the counter.

No flexibility, no convenience, no customer service.

I went away feeling slightly ashamed at my own impertinence. But I was so nearly right. Tottenham were allowed back in and they did storm into the semi-finals only for an Daniel Amokachi-inspired Everton to end their dream.

Now, your average punter would be pretty smug about this. I was kind of three-quarters right on a very long shot.

But I'd have been distraught if Tottenham, and I, had won.

You see, I am a disciple of Arsène Wenger. I belong to the righteous red and white half of North London. I have always poured scorn on the forces of darkness from N17.

As a result of this failed attempt to bet, I now never punt on anyone, any team or anything I don't like.

It is too confusing for my emotions. I cannot stand the fact that money might make me lean towards something to which normally I am diametrically opposed.

Let's bring this tale up to date. Ordinarily I'd quite fancy Andy Murray to win a Grand Slam in 2009. A price of [1.91] seems reasonable. OK, the Australian Open did not pan out but he consistently gets results against the world's elite. If he can just string two weeks of form and fitness together then he could be in the mix. But the other half of me sees him as a surly so-and-so who needs a bloody good buzz cut. Every interview seems to have the air of a tea-time table for a family with teenagers.

Polite enquiry then monotone, monosyllabic answer. Polite enquiry then monotone, monosyllabic answer. Polite enquiry then monotone, monosyllabic answer. Jesus give me strength!

Gordon Brown's another one. Should we really trust a so-called economics expert who waited years for the top job only to take it and be slapped full in the face by the biggest fiscal crisis in a century. His response seems to have been to throw a few vault-loads money at the situation and see how much sticks. Marvellous. Here I suppose I can bet against my man. The Betfair market thinks he'll go between April and June next year ([2.66]) but think it may be the following quarter ([6.8]). The sooner the better for me.

And, worst of all, my selective policy effectively means I don't bet on darts at all. Phil 'The Power" Taylor is a beast on the oche. He record is impeccable and he is almost certainly the best exponent of his sport ever.

But I just feel he is well aware of that fact - and I like my sportsmen to be humble. I hasten to add I have never met the guy and could be completely missing the board here. It is just an opinion based on what I have perceived through my TV - and internet betting is pretty much based on that!

However, if you are not going to bet on Taylor, how can you bet on darts? He is [1.5] to win the PDC title now and the event doesn't take place until the end of the year.

Of course, I could lay these people but the potential losses if they won would just make me dislike them more and I don't want my betting to be full of hate.

But there is a flipside; liking people does make me more likely to punt. I want David Haye to be world champion in 2009 so his price at [1.1] seems all the more decent. Likewise Lance Armstrong at [1.16] to start the Tour de France is feel-good bet. But the danger of this policy is obvious.

In fact, maybe the best position from which to punt is total indifference to the subject matter. The best thing about a bet is that it adds meaning to sport where, frankly, you couldn't care less.

And, after my Tottenham trial in 1995, I cannot and will not go against the grain. No matter how much money is involved.