- This topic has 49 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 16 years ago by
.
- Posts
Having placed a decent sized bet on Twist Im pretty miffed as you can imagine that the big bookmakers will not refund stakes. Yes i know all the spiel about under orders but having worked in the game we were always told if a punter cant win then he cant lose. If Twist had started and then stopped then fair enough but not to have started at all then you obviously have no chance of winning at all, then surely stakes should be returned. Of course KJC refused in the National and VC refunded stakes but then that is a worldwide event and the bookies have to be seen to be fair dont they!!??
If you are going to refund then all punters need to know that a Rule (not sure of the number) applies so that bookmakers can deducted so much in the £/$ according to the price of the RR (withdrawn horse) from the winning
stakes.As long as everyone understands that would be better imo. It would also apply to the flat.
I didn’t have a bet on Twist Magic but was tempted – bad luck.
If you are going to refund then all punters need to know that a Rule (not sure of the number) applies so that bookmakers can deducted so much in the £/$ according to the price of the RR (withdrawn horse) from the winning
stakes.As long as everyone understands that would be better imo. It would also apply to the flat.
I didn’t have a bet on Twist Magic but was tempted – bad luck.
For sure a R4 would have to apply
If I’d backed the winner, why should I have a deduction from my winnings because a horse that has shown signs of reluctance at the start in the past refused to race.
Agree with DJ- caveat emptor (and I backed TM)
According to today’s Post, Paddy P and Boyles are refunding- fair play to them.‘Twist Magic and the rules’ might be a fairer headline than ‘Twist Magic and the bookmakers’.
The bookmakers don’t make the rule and would be perfectly happy I’m sure to go with a R4 deduction if that was the preferred option. Not reasonable though to expect them to pick up the tab. Many punters believe it’s unreasonable to expect them, having picked the winner and swerved the horse with dubious temperament, to pay the price though.
Big Mac is in favour of the rule 4 option. I prefer current system. If you laid Twist Magic the other day having made up your mind, maybe at Cheltenham, that the horse has had enough you’d be pretty annoyed at being penalised for being right?There’s a difference between running badly and not running at all.
And layers of Twist Magic didn’t lay the horse in the expectation that he was going to refuse to race, they laid him on the basis that the horse wouldn’t run well enough to win.
The start is an integral part of the race. Why should those who picked out Golden Silver yesterday have to suffer a deduction because Twist Magic didn’t handle the start?
It’s not the first time he has done it either.
Well there’s the rub isn’t it. Either you think the start is part of the race (the status quo) or you don’t (the rule 4 option). Under current system those who laid the horse feeling that he has soured, have got paid and the reason he failed to start is probably not unrelated to their logic in laying him in the first place. They were not required to predict that the horse would fail to jump off to be proved right in their instinct about the horse’s appetite for racing. That bit was just a bonus for them.
Funny post on Betfair about this – the thread started when one guy emailed Ladbrokes to see if they would refund his bet (which they did apparently). Hence a few other guys tried their luck:
Thanks for this, I emailed LB and they sent me this reply aswell..
Thank you for your email regarding Twist Magic, I have looked in to your account and can see your bet placed on Twist Magic as yes it is correct we have settled it as a loser as per our rules.
However we have looked at your account and your in branch activity and have realised a number of things..
Did you use the 25 x Daily Mirror £5 vouchers each day over Cheltenham festival when in fact you should have only used one? – YES
Did you ask for a refund on a bet recently when you were late on but the horse was beaten, and would expect paid if it had of won? -YES
Did you back J Defoe to score first and Spurs to win 2-1 at the incorrect price last week and expect paid out at nearly 5times the correct price? YES
Did you care that it was a computer error? NO
Did you care that the guy that made this error was gonna get happy slapped round the office? NO
Would you give us back our money of only Twist Magic started as the other 8 fcuked about at the start? – NO
So..therefore NO you cannot have a refund..you brass necked dirty rotten tapping bsatard..if you ever ask that again I will come round ours and smash your windows.If I can be of any further assistance please do not hesitate to ask?
Kind Regards,Gatthe Fukouttamyshop
Ladbrokes Senior Customer Care Manager
IndiaMade me laugh anyway.
Good point about the start IC
It is a difficult one. We have had three recent incidents, King Johns Castle, De Valira and Twist Magic. All were non stall starts.
These non starters do not help the image of racing. On balance I would go for the R4 option as I think it is the fairest or the least unfair.I know this may seem unfair to the backers of the winner but on the other hand the winners task has been made easier due to the non participation of the non starter.
It is similar to a horse been withdrawn at the start and a R4 application.Regarding a stall start I do not feel as hard done by if my horse enters the stalls but refuses to race but KJC and De Valira were never going to start ( I have not seen yesterdays start)and this is almost equivalent to not entering the stalls so they would have been declared non runners under a stalls start.
either refund your stake or add 1 or 2 points to its starting price for the extra gamble that this creature does things his own way sometimes! But thats not going to happen.
Paddy Power has a few things going against them but this is one of the reasons I enjoy backing with them. You know that if something like this happens they will be the first ones off their asses to offer a blanket refund
Paddy Power and setantabet.com refunded all bets on Twist Magic multiples and singles. Boyles refunded all single bets on Twist Magic too. Just shows Irish bookies are a step ahead of the English ones.
I’m all for a R4. I wasn’t aware that Twist Magic was a quirky starter. Had I had a bet I would have been a bit miffed as it doesn’t show in his past records.
I think you would need the stewards to make the decision. I’m thinking of a 2yo who refuses to race once the stalls open. Currently if they refuse to enter the stalls you are ok but once in the risk is on you.
The outcome should not be left up to one or two decent bookmakers.
Joke from my friend fighting cancer. He has a large collection of old postcards which he is disposing of. He’s keeping this one………
Picture a bedroom and an unattractive wife being woken up by her drunk husband as he comes back from the pub.
"Do you realise what the time is? It’s twenty to one" she screams.
"In that case I’ll have 5 shillings ew" he replies.
- Total Posts 17716
The bookmakers don’t make the rule and would be perfectly happy I’m sure to go with a R4 deduction if that was the preferred option.
The bookmakers didn’t make the rule, but – like the people who did – they have a vested interest in keeping as much of the punter’s pound as they can get their hands on. Though they might have just broken even on keeping TM in the race, there’s little doubt at most prices they’d have shown a profit, as there’s little doubt many of these RR’s wouldn’t have been under orders – prior to the rulemakers being in hock to the betting shops.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.