Forum Replies Created
- Posts
But Dave, how is that ever going to happen? The bookies are always going to pass on any extra payment to their customers, because they are in racing for the same reason as trainers, jockeys, racecourses and everyone else bar the owners and punters: to make a living.
The owners from up top and the punters from down below are the only net contributors to racing, and that is never going to change. If racing wants more money, it has to come from one or the other – and since Lord Donoughue knows very well which faction has more clout at the higher levels, it was never likely to be the owners.
I recall Gay Kelleway looking me straight in the eye a few years ago and insisting, without a tremor or a waver of the voice, that she’s never been into betting and never backs her horses.
This was a short while after she famously fainted in the winner’s enclosure somewhere (Newbury?) when she was overcome by stress, waiting for the result of a stewards’ after one of hers had passed the post narrowly in front. The story doing the rounds was that she’d had five grand on at 12-1.
The result was upheld, and a few days later Ms Kelleway bought herself a spanking new sports car. Which is, of course, what every right-thinking person should do when they cop that sort of money on a bet.
(Edited by Mr Frisk at 6:48 pm on Dec. 29, 2006)
From what I know, Dave Jay is correct. It was an issue a couple of years ago – certain well-known punters were convinced that the Betfair phone operators were following them in as soon as they had a bet – but they hired a compliance officer to keep everyone in line and security is probably as tight now as it is ever likely to get. There might be scope for text messages before a race is off if someone is that keen to risk a well-paid job, but I can’t believe it would be a realistic concern for anyone betting in-running.
Other estimates are up to 250m or even 300m. Seems a lot, but it’s making loads of money already, has a guaranteed monopoly and there are plenty of "revenue streams" yet to be developed, particularly online.
LONDON (Reuters) – Trinity Mirror said it had spurned an offer for its national newspapers, as it unveiled plans to streamline the business by selling its sports unit, including the Racing Post, and some regional titles.
The group (TNI.L: Quote, Profile , Research), which owns the Daily Mirror and Sunday Mirror, launched a review in August after posting a drop in profits due to a weak ad environment and falling circulation.
Trinity said on Thursday it had considered separating its regional and national businesses by way of a full demerger but concluded that would not benefit shareholders.
It said several third parties contacted the group about acquiring a number of its assets including one conditional indicative offer for the nationals businesses but the board concluded it "substantially undervalued" it.
The firm said it expected the disposals, including the Birmingham Post, the Birmingham Evening Mail, Coventry Evening Telegraph, Croydon Advertiser and South London Press, are to be completed during the second and third quarter of 2007.
It plans to focus on its national newspapers which also include the People and Daily Record newspapers and key regional titles in Scotland, the north of England and Wales and its digital assets.
It said it would integrate its print and online operations more closely.
Zorro
Have PMd you on this. Message back if you need further details, though I guess it’s a bit late for you to jump on a plane now…
Lingfield
As far as I know, salix is now permitted everywhere in the States, as the New York authority – the one standout for many years – caved in quite a while ago.
What they will also have at the Breeders’ Cup, though, is the pre-race quarantine barn to guard against milk-shaking etc.
<br>This link gives the current state of play in Kentucky:
I’m pretty sure that BetFred are still the only firm who generally give three times the odds for a single winner on a Lucky 15, though certain punters may be restricted…
Fred Done recently claimed that it costs them around £2 million a year, but they use it as a loss leader.
(Edited by Mr Frisk at 9:45 pm on Oct. 12, 2006)
What cannot be underestimated is the effect of Betfair over the last three or four years. The market has always been a very accurate guide to a horse’s chance, but Betfair has made it significantly more accurate.
The tissue is no longer compiled by a few (very good) judges. It is effectively compiled the day beforehand by hundreds, if not thousands, of very good judges.
These days, the right horses generally start favourite, and they do so at the right price. This is the main reason why there is not a single national newspaper tipster in the Racing Post Press Challenge who can beat a blind bet on the favourite over the course of a year.
Paul Mathieu’s book "The Druid’s Lodge Confederacy" was impeccably written and researched, but sadly is now out of print and will set you back a fair bit (£40 at least) on Amazon.
Well worth it if you have that sort of money to spare, though.
"The Racey Bits", by Mark Siggers and Chris Williams, is definitely the funniest racing book I’ve read.
Whenever I pass a point-to-point track, I’m always reminded of their definition of point-to-point bookies: "These men offer the worst public display of cowardice since the Italian army ran away from the Austrians at Caporetto."
(Edited by Mr Frisk at 9:10 pm on Oct. 11, 2006)
Michael Jarvis may never have been champion, but if I had to pick a "pound-for-pound" trainer in Newmarket in the way people sometimes do in boxing, he’d do for me.
It’s something to bear in mind though – the fact that it’s not displayed on the screen means that a lot of punters forget that it’s there.
I went to Paris in 1988 to see my beloved Mtoto run in the Arc, and had what was at the time, and indeed seems even now, an eye-watering amount of money on him. The crushing disappointment of seeing him run an unlucky second was then compounded when it turned out that he paid only marginally less for a place than he would have done for the win.
That’s true, but there were at least 10,000, and possibly more like 20,000 Japanese racegoers, most of whom had been in Paris for several days. They were only there to back one horse, and would have had the chance to do so well before raceday.
The level of betting in PMU pools prior to raceday is pretty light, and I’d guess that the machine was no match for the single-minded punt that started to materialise last week.
When the gates opened, there were several thousand Japanese punters waiting to get in, who then went straight to the PMU to get their money on, and off to the terraces to get a good position for the big race about eight hours before it happened. The support for Deep Impact was therefore so relentless that his price did not shift from 1-10 until shortly before the off.
I’m also led to believe that money punted away from the course (and possibly outside the Paris area) is only fed into the on-course pool about 10 minutes before the off, which might explain why Deep Impact eventually "drifted" from 1-10 to 1-2.
This is the full notice …
SEAMUS HEFFERNAN APPEAL RESULT
The Disciplinary Panel of the Horseracing Regulatory Authority (HRA), on 3 October 2006, considered an appeal lodged by Seamus Heffernan, the rider of IVAN DENISOVICH (IRE), unplaced in the Queen Elizabeth II Stakes, against the decision of the Stewards at Ascot to find him guilty of improper riding in the light of Instruction H1 headed “Pacemakers (Team Tactics)â€ÂÂ
I’m pretty sure that the pools weren’t co-mingled ie. you had to be there, or at any rate in France, to bet into them.
The money in the PMU was simply what everyone had brought with them from Japan, for themselves, family, friends, colleagues etc.
Of course it seems odd that anyone should queue up to back a horse at such a short price when bookies are offering 9-4 against, but the Tote system is all that Japanese punters know. The fact that the JRA had produced a handout explaining how to bet on the PMU probably helped too.
Another interesting point was that they were betting win only – the place return on Deep Impact was only marginally shorter than he would have paid for a win.
The Post piece was the first mention of the likely effects in that paper, incidentally, but far from the first anywhere.
