- This topic has 11 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I’m sure this topic has probably been covered before but does anyone (Glenn?) have any data on non-runners shortening in the market just before they are declared as non-runners thus increasing the amount of the Rule 4 deduction?
I’d be more concerned about the blatant abuse of R4 deductions by certain high street bookmakers on early prices. One well known firm seem to make them up as they go along. The same firm have a habit of removing non runners from their lists so it looks like the market has been reformed before subsequently levying a sneaky R4 on the "missing" runner. I’m sure Glenn knows who I’m talking about.
I’ve seen one firm cut a horse from 7/1 to 11/2, 3 mins after the horse has been confirmed as a non-runner on the BHA website.
Data on non-runners and their price movements are notoriuosly difficult to obtain, so I couldn’t offer anything more than the sort of annecdotal evidence you’d get by searching forums I post on.
One interesting development in the BHA-bookie relationship cooling would be them actively persuing bookies/connections over the misuse of inside information regulations in this regard. I could name at least one firm with a penchant for slashing a stable they are connected with down to bottom price (and clear lowest r4 bracket in the village) before the public are made aware of said horse’s non-particpation.
There was one at Beverley in the not too distant past, I cant remember the runner’s name though, Glenn flagged it up at the time. The horse played up behind the stalls, they couldnt get him in so the handlers eventually gave up. His price continued to shorten oncourse despite the fact he had been dismounted and was being led back to the stables.
It was patently obvious he wasn’t going to run but only after the price had shortened below the next R4 bracket was the horse officially withdrawn….and they call Fallon a crook.
I’ve been gathering data on non runners since the start of the flat, I’ll post something at the end of the season. As Glenn mentions data on price movements related to non runners would be locked in vaults in Gibraltar and very difficult to get hold of.
There was one at Beverley in the not too distant past, I cant remember the runner’s name though, Glenn flagged it up at the time. The horse played up behind the stalls, they couldnt get him in so the handlers eventually gave up. His price continued to shorten oncourse despite the fact he had been dismounted and was being led back to the stables.
Green Endeavour ?
- Total Posts 17716
How quickly does Oddschecker’s website update itself? Are price changes reflected within a relatively short period (i.e. a few seconds), or are they delayed to such an extent that OC histories would be useless for the purposes of analysing markets?
Could one of you kind gents clarify a matter for me please?
The scenario is:1) I back a horse early morning at 6/4 Best-Odds-Guaranteed.
2) During the course of the morning, the third favourite in the race is withdrawn subsequent to me placing my bet.
3) The 6/4 horse which I backed becomes liable for a Rule4 deduction of the early price.However ………………..
1a) When the on-course market is formed 15 minutes before the race, the 6/4 early price horse is put in at 6/4.
2a) It remains at 6/4 up to the off and is returned SP at that price.
3a) Clearly there will be no Rule4 deduction on this race at SP as the market was formed long after the much earlier withdrawal of the early 3rd favourite.My question is:
Is my early morning 6/4 bet at B-O-G liable to Rule4 deduction ?
If so, then I am worse off on this bet compared to SP even though I am supposely on at Best-Odds-Guaranteed.Thanks in advance for your help.
You’ll be paid out at 6/4 with no rule 4. Bets odds guaranteed means you can’t be worse off than S.P., which is why it’s such a good concession and why the likes of Paddy Power are withdrawing it from most of their favoured clients
Cheers Carvills’, thank you for that.
Yes, that was how I had always assumed it might be, but recently I was returned an amount of €113.75 on the above specific bet to a €50 stake in a regional small-chain independent’s shop
When I questioned the settlement, I was given a curt "Rule4"
reply.The clerk’s apparent certainty about the matter made me less sure of my claim, and I reluctantly accepted the winnings.
Now however, armed with extra confidence I shall be returning to the shop on a point of priciple if nothing else.William Hill did a dirty with this yesterday, dropping Kingston Hill to 6/5 less than 60 seconds before the horse was withdrawn thus enabling a 45p deduction to bets instead of 40p.
They have made the 45p deduction from all bets including early price ones despite Kingston Hill being 6/4 in the early prices and it clearly stating beneath the early prices that any deductions would be based on these early prices.
Anyone who backed the winner Symphony at their early price has been ripped off.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.