- This topic has 30 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
I believe some firms refunded stakes on Shishkin, while others gave money back as a free bet.
Should this happen? The rules are clear. If the horse comes under starters orders, it is deemed to be a runner.
Punters who backed Shishkin on the track or on Betfair will not have been refunded. Why should some punters get their money back but not others?
I don’t think any reasonable person would dispute that he was a runner. Some bookmakers decide to refund in such instances but that is more of a marketing ploy than a different interpretation of the rules.
Good promo though for some firms .
Next race he runs in a watch for me , he jumps off he probably wins , but very good chance he plants his hooves again and money done cold this time as doubt bookies be so fair again .
Been a few good ones like that , Mad Moose and few years ago now Vodkatini Iam sure was dodgy at start .
I remember Pat Eddery sitting on Percy’s Lass shoving and pushing at Newmarket once as she just stood there in the stalls .It is nice to get your money back and it is a publicity stunt to refund.
You go in with your eyes open and come out with the pennies nicked sometimes.It is a publicity stunt because I expect not many small stakes punters will have backed an odds on favourite, so I doubt it cost much.
I somehow doubt the same firms would refund stskes if the favourite in the Cheltenham Gold Cup planted himself.
I don’t suppose the rules can legislate for firms deciding to make what is in effect an ex gratia payment but it is unfair some punters gain and some do not. Any punter who received a cash refund was fortunate.
Shouldnt be allowed to justice refund customers as stated by the OP its unfair on the exchange or on track punters, there should be a rule that ensures the rules are followed, this is half the reason that BOG has went down the toilet the last few years, is in these instances, people expect to get there money back… he lined up, he RR’d, bet loses…
“its unfair on the exchange or on track punters”
All punters know the terms of their bets. You pays your money, you takes your choice.
But do they? How many punters know for certain the likes of Hills will refund stakes on a horse which refuses to race and choose to bet with it rather than Betfair?
Would Hills refund stakes on every horse which plants itself? If Shishkin was to refuse to race in the King George – a race with much higher turnover – will stakes be refunded then?
I don’t think anyone should have been refunded yesterday. The horse was under orders and the start is as much a part of the race as any other. If the horse does not start, hard luck.
Bet he wasn’t deemed a non runner in betting multiples.
The more I know the less I understand.
I’ve previously wanted anything that plants itself to be a starter, because anyone studying form can identify 90% of those who might not start. Don’t want a rule 4 taking away my hard earned cash. However, if a bookmaker wants to give the money back without a rule 4 then let them.
Does anyone know how many off course bookies refunded and how many didn’t?
It might be frustrating for those on course or off course punters who did not get their money back; but anyone who bets has a responsibility to know the rules.
However, Shishkin didn’t go past the start so there is a good argument to say he didn’t start.
If there is a change in the rules to make it the same for all.bookmakers, then maybe change to if a horse does not go past the starting line / tape it is a non-runner? Decided on the starter’s discretion?
Value Is EverythingShiskin is 16s for the GC on GC morning …. Would anyone tickle him
Pick 3 on Saturday champion 2025/2026
Don’t know how serious Henderson is being by suggesting he may send him up to Newcastle for the Rehearsal.
The more I know the less I understand.
“How many punters know for certain the likes of Hills will refund stakes on a horse which refuses to race and choose to bet with it rather than Betfair?”
That’s irrelevant. The rules are that a horse who comes under orders is deemed a runner. If it doesn’t start, you lose your money. If a bookmaker offers you a refund, it’s an unexpected bonus.
Paddy Power have been doing it for over a decade
Gaelic Warrior Gold Cup Winner 2026
“Anyone who bets has a responsibility to know the rules.”
It is not the rules though Ginger, is it? The bookmaker firms who refunded took an arbitrary decision to do so. Before the race, how can punters know if they will refund or not?
As far as I am aware, Sky Bet, Hills and Ladbrokes/Coral refunded stakes. That is taken from comments on the Betfair Forum, so I do not know if it is accurate.
It is not fair for some punters to get their money back and not others. That is why I think there should be a clear rule which all bookmakers use: if the horse comes under starters orders and refuses to race, no refund. Clear and simple.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.