- This topic has 23 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Is it me, or is it standard practice to shave 6pts off the first, second and third combined nowadays?
Going in the stalls …
1 King Orchisios 10-1<br>2 Woodnook 12-1<br>3 Qadar 12-1
and SP …
1 King Orchisios 8-1<br>2 Woodnook 10-1<br>3 Qadar 10-1
Seems pretty rank to me. Did a big player wade in with a cartload of money for the whole field bar the 1/3 fav, one minute before the off?<br>**sarcasm**
Are you talking to me?
Its standard practice under the new SP regulation yes.
(Edited by FlatSeasonLover at 1:42 am on Feb. 25, 2007)
- Total Posts 17716
RD<br>It’s all part of the cosy relationship between on and off course bookmakers they seem to have in that part of the country, where I of the big 3 comes in late and the course bookies, wide-eyed and innocent as they are, throw their hands up in the air and chant<br> "What me guv – never had time to change the others?";) <br>They excelled themselves yesterday though, apart from ensuring a cosy 3% per runner in this race, they actually  managed to shorten every single runner in from its opening price, a feat Dick Turpin would have bowed down before.
<br>(from Sporting Life returns):<br><br>King Orchisios (IRE)  9-0  N Callan  K A Ryan  4 8/1  <br>  made all, led, ridden 2f out, hard pressed inside final furlong, held on, all out opened 9/1 touched 10/1  <br>2  8 hd Woodnook  8-9  J F Egan  J A R Toller  4 10/1  <br>  went right start, held up towards rear, headway over 1f out, stayed on well inside final furlong, took 2nd post and gaining on winner opened 12/1  <br>3  1 s.h Qadar (IRE)  9-0  I Mongan  N P Littmoden  5 10/1  <br>  took keen hold, tracked leaders, chased winner over 2f out, every chance over 1f out, stayed on to press winner inside final furlong, lost 2nd post opened 12/1 touched 14/1  <br>4  4 ½ Red Cape (FR)  9-0  B Doyle  Jane Chapple-Hyam  4 12/1  <br>  took keen hold, in touch, ridden and slightly outpaced over 1f out, stayed on inside final furlong, not reach leaders opened 16/1  <br>5  2 ¾ Areyoutalkingtome  9-0  E Ahern  C A Cyzer  4 1/3 f <br>  steadied start, held up, chased leaders when hampered over 2f out, effort and not clear run inside final furlong, unable to challenge, eased near finish opened 4/11 touched 2/5 £800-£2000 £909-£2500 £400-£1100 (x2)  <br> 6  7 7 Angus Newz  8-12  S W Kelly  M Quinn  4 16/1  <br>  prominent on outer, chased leaders and wide straight 2f out, weakened over 1f out opened 20/1 touched 33/1  <br>7  3 1 Holbien (IRE)  9-0  D M Grant  L Roche  4 25/1  <br>  tracked winner, ridden and lost 2nd over 2f out, edged left, weakened over 1f out opened 50/1 touched 66/1  <br>8  6 ¾ Golden Asha  8-9  M L Thomas  G G Margarson  5 33/1  <br>  always rear, outpaced final 2f opened 40/1 touched 66/1 ÂÂÂ
Stinks dunnit?<br>Sooner they put themselves out of business, the better.<br>
(Edited by reet hard at 3:30 am on Feb. 25, 2007)
It’s getting a tiny bit embarrassing now, and I guess it’s up to SP punters to vote with their feet, except SP punters by definition are happy to be led like lambs to the slaughter.
http://www.sportinglife.com/racing/live … _1505.html
This link will work until next Saturday, and clearly illustrates the Dick Turpin factor. I am not usually bothered but I think this (a near 125% book on a 8-runner Listed race) is pretty embarrassing and the current situation will be damaging for the sport in the medium to long term.
What’s the %overround at Sprint Valley btw?
<br>Whilst I agree the SP is a disgrace, there’s absolutely no point in using a comparison with the last show because the two things are totally different.
The shows are sent by a separate team of people monitoring a different group of bookies and not using the same method to calculate the price.
AP
I would argue that if there was ever a justified case for on course books betting to 125-130%, it would be on a race like this (especially if they were taking each way bets). They must have taken a fair bit for the 2nd/3rd favs to place against the 1/3 fav. I’m guessing like you that it was last minute money from the offices, which sort of weakens my point, but I think it’s still valid.
Even at the final returned SP prices, punters who backed each way at SP, still got a better return on the place portion of their bet than they would have betting at Tote place odds.
This was a real oppourtunity for people in favour of the new SP return system to explain why they need to take account of bookmakers that take each way bets…but the off course firms may have ruined it by shortening the e/w horses up last minute.
You get the feeling that even if they were betting to, say 130%, on course, the off-course firms would have still tried to shorten up the live e/w horses even further, maybe it’s just instinct with them.
Agreed about last shows and the different processes by which they are arrived at, but the live show records provide a graphical guideline of ‘how the market went’…
repeat, hopefully for the last time, as AP says, SIS provide shows to 8,300 betting shops, they do not decide sp’s, that is done by a sample of bookmakers, in yesterdays case, 6, of which 3 were lads hills and bd, we were the only 3 offering ew terms,
the win book shows were 24% overbroke on place terms,
I reduce all runners apart from fav so that place book is exactly 100%, ie no profit,
what do you suggest I bet 24% overbroke to accommodate ew thieves, or even force betting shops to do the same.
simple answer change place terms to tote or betting exchange prices on such races. fancy that??
The shows are sent by a separate team of people monitoring a different group of bookies and not using the same method to calculate the price.
<br>Are we saying that the people who send the shows are using different criteria & sources to those who return the SP’s??
If that’s the case no wonder the SP returns are sometimes unpredicatable. I was under the impression that betting shows from a course were complied in the same way as SP’s, if they are not, it’s surely could be very misleading to the punter.
Quote: from barry dennis on 10:23 am on Feb. 25, 2007[br]simple answer change place terms to tote or betting exchange prices on such races. fancy that??
Actually yes. Quote separate prices for a win and place. That way win only punters are getting a decent enough price on their runners. And no EW betting on course.
I think there probably should be separate win and place markets, although this would hammer consumer confidence for a while and would obviously work both ways (there are plenty of 3/1 the field 14+ runner maidens during the flat season).
Definitely the each-way terms contributed towards the overround yesterday – no arguments there.
Was this a worse result (for bookmakers) because the favourite didn’t win (thus landing the win part of some of the e/w action)?
Quote: from Colin Little
Are we saying that the people who send the shows are using different criteria & sources to those who return the SP’s??
Colin,
Well I don’t know how I could put it any more clearly – the answer to your question is yes.
AP
Thank you for your frank & slightly, er, patronising reply. I’m not sure if I believed it the first time! You will have to forgive me, I’m not up with all the racing industry ways ;)
I stand by my comments, surley producing shows & returns in different ways is, inconsistant, produces a lack of continuity, as well as being confusing & potentially misleading for punters following the market ?
I’m actually quite shocked by it.
Please don’t seperate the win and place markets on course. This would disappoint and confuse female racegoers for whom each way betting is designed.
Male punters of confused gender identity/cautious temperament are adequately catered for on the computer and Tote.
Thank you and good morning.
;)
Quote: from barry dennis on 10:23 am on Feb. 25, 2007[br]
the win book shows were 24% overbroke on place terms,
I’d have to ask why the need to be so generous on ‘the rest’ in the first place. Why not just open up the rest shorter, and see how the e/w market goes. Or, god forbid, lengthen the fav to compensate for it. I’m sure there was no e/w money for the 1/3 shot. <br>The way I see it is that a lot of people bet on that race, at SP, thinking they were getting better prices than they actually were. Imagine their shock when they realised they should have took the price, no matter what runner they bet on.<br>A good advert for taking the price if ever I saw one. SPs are far too volatile according to that race. It’s like picking up a PS3 for £419, and finding out that it’s gone up to £439 when you reach the till LOL
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.