So it's not exactly unexpected news that Yorker

hibernia Wrote:

---

> gregbucks Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > A CHALLENGE TO BOOKIES
> >
> > Give those punters that backed Yorker anttepost
> a
> > FREE BET for the July?
>
>
> Greg although that would be nice,the bookies
> cannie be blamed

I'm not blaming the books Hibs, but sometimes you need to act in ''good faith'' to satisfy your customers...

JC Wrote:

---

> I'm not trying to start an argument, but isn't it
> unfair to blame the owners?
>
> When I bought my horse I surely didn't take the
> punters into consideration, it was my money I was
> spending after all...


No its not unfair considering how much they depend on punters to provide stakes for them(and thereby huge dividends at stud) - This was not a Grade 3 at the Vaal but Sa's premier race and this horse was the potential favourite - They did not decide two days ago that they wanted to export him surely - No respect for the people that give them the opportunity to race their horses(Punters will bet on donkeys so the theory that Owners keep racing going is absurd)

On the other side of the coin if there were no punters owners will race against themselves.

Thanks for the explanation, makes sense now.

I kept thinking that without owners/trainers/jockeys etc there would be no industry but keep forgetting how much the punters contribute. Guess we all need each other so it would be fair to say that more transparency is required from trainers/owners... and from the bookies!

Is it fair to say that if everyone knew that taking anti-post bets were at own risk there wouldn't be much of a problem from a punting point of view (with regards to Yorker in this scenario)?

And in the same sense, if the owners/trainers were transparent about Yorker going overseas instead of partaking in this race?

I do agree with JC and as a owner as well although I am paying for the horse and also stable fees I am prepared to share the information because I believe that without the punters we cannot have horse racing and the enjoyment of owning.

JC Wrote:

---

> I'm not trying to start an argument, but isn't it
> unfair to blame the owners?
>
> When I bought my horse I surely didn't take the
> punters into consideration, it was my money I was
> spending after all...

Rightfully so, indeed it is your money that you spent. Ask yourself this question though- if no punters punt- will your horse race?

tottenham Wrote:

---

> I do agree with JC and as a owner as well although
> I am paying for the horse and also stable fees I
> am prepared to share the information because I
> believe that without the punters we cannot have
> horse racing and the enjoyment of owning.


Summed up perfectly, thanks!

The problem here is that both sides are right

Bookmakers should shove antepost.

Gents - I think we need to remember that no punter HAS to take the ante-post odds...it is a chance you take hence you generally get better odds before the final field. So we as punters also need to take responsibility on the choices we make...that's why we call it GAMBLING! No horse is guaranteed of running ANY race until the gates are open and away they go! 3 year old will win the July again...but watch out for the De Kock factor...only horse who has a jockey declared at this stage! Good luck to ALL the clanners out there! ()

Sadness.....

Remember you get much better odds (or should) before they announce final field, so its a risk punters take betting early.