- This topic has 58 replies, 35 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
ocean finance ads
, aaaah the good old days, cant understand why this thread exists , can you guys go on the betfair forum and shout loudly !!!! you will feel far more at home
Ricky
Barry,
If McCririck was at Aintree, where were you? The other meetings that day were at Taunton and Leicester. I can’t find any record of stewards enquiries there that day and I wasn’t aware you had pitches at either.
Aragorn –
I agree that in essence there is no moral difference between the two types of ‘insider’ trading (i.e. financial markets and the horses).
What I was getting at was that, even with guidelines in place, trying to prove insider trading within racing is likely to prove significantly more difficult than in the financial markets.And, to put another slant on things, what about cases like the Bolger New Aprroach scandal where the horse was declared an intended non-runner and then left in the race, making a mockery of the trading on one of the biggest markets of the year. Would there be regulations similar to that in use by the FSA to ensure that incompetent practitioners are not allowed to operate in the industry?
Perhaps it is correct though to suggest that the radical changes in the nature of betting/trading on the outcome of horse races requires us to perhaps frame a new set of regulations for the industry. Bookmakers rules and licensing regulations, along with the current arbitration services are probably are no longer adequate I’d agree.
One more thought on the Barry Dennis scenario though. The important thing to remember about that situation is that the information was in the public domain. The enquiry had been held and the result of the objection publicly announced so there was no ‘insider’ knowledge. I would suggest that anyone betting on the result of an objection and using a TV channel to esnure they have the most up to date info just about deserve all they got. Probably the view that Barry Dennis took also.
I think the case is the result of the chips on someone’s shoulders having ‘spurred’ them into action.
In my first post on this topic I stated that I do not think that the City of London police will waste much time on these allegations.
Whist others have seen that there is no harm in profiting from what Barry Dennis has admitted doing when the ‘boot is on the other’ foot he squeals like a Pig!
The ‘dog boys’ who had forecasts with him at Sittingbourne dogs recently though never knew the results before they placed their bets with him and others.
And as everyone knows anything can happen and often does in Greyhound racing and with years of experiance behind him Barry Dennis must have known as well.
So when a few forceasts came in recently why did he feel the need to phone up the track and have a moan up and originally refuse to pay out on what was no more than some others idea of what dogs would be likely to be collecting!
To prevent the sort of problem that has led to this thread, would it not be a good idea to stop all betting on Stewards’ Enquiries?
It’s hardly "sport", is it?
If the motivation is financial, then I’d guess that bettors feel they have an "edge" of some kind.
I’d doubt that this perceived edge comes from any belief in their superior knowledge regardinga) what actually happened in the event in question
b) outstanding comprehension of the racing rulebook
c) ability to predict the stewards’ opinions and decision.Egotistical pride would be an unlikely motivation for a punter to risk big money on his being right about a,b, and c, so I’d conclude that
the "true edge" is more akin to that of the on course arbers and technicians
who just bet on being ahead of the game in the fast info stakes.All in all a dirty business, tailor-made for the unsporting Exchanges, where the in-the-know 2% regularly dupe the "sporting" 98%, who think they’re playing "person to person" ( ha, ha, ha.).
The cards are marked, my friends. That’s the stark reality.
I would suggest that anyone betting on the result of an objection and using a TV channel to esnure they have the most up to date info just about deserve all they got.
No one "deserves" to be ripped off. But we might feel more sympathy for some victims than others.
This action, if it took place, was fraudulent. The bookmaker took money from punters knowing that they could not win. I would not do business with anyone capable of such behaviour.
In his Sun newspaper column yesterday Barry stated the race in question was indeed the one I first mentioned.
The Ember Inns 4 yo Novices Hurdle run at 4-20 on the first day of the Grand National Meeting in 2003.
There was a photo finish and a stewards enquiry.
The result stood.
1st Le Duc ridden by R. Walsh won 33/1
2nd Spectroscope ridden by B. Geraghty
3rd Well Chief the 2/1 fav
4th Starzaan
5th HarchibaldSo as it turned out some exellent horses competing that day.
Mr Dennis claimed the jockey left the stewards room with both thumbs up he then backed the winner on a result of that.
The jockey therefore must have been Ruby Walsh as he kept the race.So was Barry waiting outside the stewards room with a mobile in his hand or did he have time to run off to phone someone in Essex before the results were confirmed?
No mention now of using any ad breaks.
Maybe Ruby sought him out first before he went to see owner Andy Stewart and trainer Paul Nicholls who were both there.
Where was the steward entrusted to convey the findings of the enquiry? (no doubt phoning Betfair as well!)
Barry said he was now not working for C4 but must have been a Sky Channel. No doubt he has an invoice from them to check his claim.
Under Inland Revenue rules every transaction by every one in business whether a one man band or Sky T.V. has a duty to keep all invoices for at least 6 years. So he should still have it if it exists.
The races from Aintree are only covered by the B.B.C. although the final few seconds of the Grand National will be shown around the World but this was not a big race as Barry yesterday descibed it but a novices hurdle.
Heres the twist.
The person who picked up Barry’s story and contacted M.P. Jim Devine and the Police was former bookmaker Henry Spurway.
Now this is someone with a one man mission to close the exchanges.
Former manager to comedian Billy Connolly and owner of the Larkspur betting shop chain in Scotland.Mr Spurway opened a betting exchange shop in Edingbugh and survived a court action by William Hills over the claim by them that those using the exchange in his £500,000 shop did not need a bookmakers licence.
Henry Spurway had plans to open 100 exchange shops in 5 years he had a deal with Betfair but this collapsed after Betfair refused to grant him the favourable commision terms he requested.
After his Easi-bet venture collapsed in 2005 he blamed heavy losses on
‘not being aware’ that some punters on exchanges could know results before him.
He has since made a mission for himself to close betting exchanges and his M.P. has joined him.
Henry Spurway wants exchanges to be able just to allow to bet to win but thats what exchanges are all about. So a non starter.
Check out Jim Devines blog!No doubt Mr Dennis would like exchanges closed but Barry its not going to happen!
Do you think the whole story was made up?
I certainly do.link may work
http://www.jimdevine.org.uk?EZEdit/viewasp?MID=90
link works then click on speeches l/h side.
"Mr Dennis claimed the jockey left the stewards room with both thumbs up he then backed the winner on a result of that.
The jockey therefore must have been Ruby Walsh as he kept the race"If that’s the evidence what has BD done wrong? 2 thumbs up could mean "Ok I’ll meet you for dinner tonight" or whatever. If Ruby Walsh had said directly to BD "I have kept the race" and he used that to make money by cheating then there is a case to answer.
If however he simply saw RW give two thumbs up and assumed he kept the race and phoned a bet on ahunch then he has done nothing wrong that I can see……bloddy smart man if you ask me.
No matter how small there was still an element of risk he misunderstood RW’s gesture and could have lost instead of winning……..it’s called gambling.
CheeksterMuch as I love racing and like betting, this and the ‘interesting situation’ thread only serve to reinforce my long-held wish to remain as near to the boundary ropes of the game as is possible, without walking away.
Tread that lonely, lovely path: fellow members of the racing/betting fraternity, I really don’t like you very much at all.
has it ever occurred to anybody it could have been said tongue in cheek and never actually happened ?
Assuming the story is true, isn’t it essentially the situation that obtains every day when those on course and viewing a race live are able to bet via Betfair and other exchanges with more knowledge than those watching "live" on their televisions who are actually seeing events some seconds later than they are occurring?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.