Topic: Jason Maguire & The Cheltenham hoopla

This topic has 39 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by 360 degrees.

Viewing 6 posts - 35 through 40 (of 40 total)

← 1 2 3

Author
Posts
March 21, 2011 at 20:29 #346607
Tuffers
Member
- Total Posts 1402
"360 degrees wrote: No matter how it’s phrased, I think that a bet of £16,00 to £1,000 against all his runners is laying them all.
The rules are there and they don’t (or shouldn’t) need re-interpreting as to the spirit they are made in.
If the rules are wrong in this instance, how should they be re-phrased?
It’s not as if they’re lengthy and complex – anyone can see how straightforward they are.
I’m not sure that the rules of racing actually contain a definition of ‘lay’ but I think the accepted definition is "accept a bet from another". If that is the correct interpretation then I don’t see that Henderson has broken the rules.
March 21, 2011 at 20:42 #346610
360 degrees
Member
- Total Posts 161
I’m not sure that the rules of racing actually contain a definition of ‘lay’ but I think the accepted definition is "accept a bet from another". If that is the correct interpretation then I don’t see that Henderson has broken the rules.
Well, it would seem the bookmaker in this case accepted a bet from someone with inside knowledge.
I wouldn’t know if the rules cover that eventuality.
Are bookmakers covered by the rules of racing?
I think this is a plea of innocence because of a technicality, vis a vis Henderson. Certainly seems to me a change of position from arguing that it was just a hedge.
I’ve emailed the BHA asking for their definition of ‘lay’ or ‘laying’.
March 21, 2011 at 21:02 #346621
Tuffers
Member
- Total Posts 1402
Well, it would seem the bookmaker in this case accepted a bet from someone with inside knowledge.
Why do you think the market’s so efficient these days
March 21, 2011 at 22:09 #346639
JJMSports
Participant
- Total Posts 2034
Would that be the same Champion Hurdle that had an ante post favourite that was officially pulled out shortly after his trainer had backed the field against it?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/articl … -SALE.html
What you have to understand is that British Racing is run by some very fine men. We are very lucky to have them.
March 22, 2011 at 08:24 #346686
360 degrees
Member
- Total Posts 161
Well, it would seem the bookmaker in this case accepted a bet from someone with inside knowledge.
I wouldn’t know if the rules cover that eventuality.
Are bookmakers covered by the rules of racing?
I think this is a plea of innocence because of a technicality, vis a vis Henderson. Certainly seems to me a change of position from arguing that it was just a hedge.
I’ve emailed the BHA asking for their definition of ‘lay’ or ‘laying’.
This post of mine is such a rubbish one I’m surprised no-one piled in!
Plenty of people with inside knowledge quite legitimately bet in racing.
Yes, I agree Henderson was just hedging. I take betting against an outcome as being the opposite of betting on an outcome – the equivalent, then, of laying. However, when laying you accept money & this he didn’t do.
March 22, 2011 at 13:16 #346730
360 degrees
Member
- Total Posts 161
Here’s the reply from the BHA as to what they define as ‘lay’ or ‘laying’:
"A trainer either placing a bet on one of his horses to lose or taking a bet from a third party on one of his horses winning (ie. acting as the bookmaker and laying the bet). In both scenarios the trainer can be seen to benefit financially from the horse not running on its merits."
That rather opens it up, doesn’t it?
Author
Posts