BHA : Laying horses to lose is corrupt.

Well said jack dash, a perfect analogy and a good reply.

agree.
well said.

Sabre Wrote:

---

> What double-speak rubbish this is. Laying a horse
> to lose is the same as backing the rest of the
> field to win.

sorry to rewind to sabre's comment at the start of this interesting thread, but he has highlighted a flaw in the BHA rules that the press overlooked in the interest of sensationalism. BHA rules only prohibit the connections laying their own horses: the rules do not prohibit them backing all the other runners to get to the same result.

i believe the SA NHA rules make the same error.

the rules should prohibit ANY misuse of inside information to gain an advantage and forget about the bet type.

Always thought its the same in these match races or A vs B which horse will finish in front of the other?
If you back A you are laying B,
In the case of you owning the one and backing the other, different story.

if you think a horse has a 25% chance of winning, you will back it at 3/1 or better. the same horse also has a 75% chance of not winning - no magic in that calculation and it is the more likely result.

Laying horses to lose is corrupt, BHA tells court

we seem to be pulling the dam from underneath the duck....

Sure the guys imply..it leads to corruption..it opens the door for corruption..
in a perfect world, no bookmaker would exist if all races were true run races..
the statement was made from the background where a trainer rendered the horse no good..
be it..
1. the horse was not well
2. no properly trained
3. unfit
4. not capable of winning
5. going to be pulled out of the race
6. going to be given a ride just to show the horse the race course
7. some needle not being given
8. some grandpa powders to be given..
9. weight not correct
10. potasuim levels not correct
11. whatever else

the corruption was planned...around the facility of laying the horse..being the fav...at 66/1..the same scheme would not work..
INSIDER TRADING...JAIL..

IN RSA..90% of trainers and jockeys would be in jail..sharing a cell with their fav bookmaker...

Andrewest Wrote:

---

> Keeping racing clean is a noble idea.
> Noble ideas require people with noble intentions.
> Very few, if any people with noble intentions will
> venture into the racing industry.
> Sure many a naive person has ventured into racing,
> but no one who upfront understands the industry,
> with noble intentions will venture into the racing
> industry.
> If such a person does venture into the racing
> industry, he would be considered a rebel and not a
> fool.
> a rebel knows the reality and continues, but a
> fool is naive and does not know any better.
> based on that, we can deduct that a noble person,
> would be a rebel that came to his senses.
> based on that, we can deduct that most, if not all
> of us are rebels, for we know the reality of the
> racing industry
>
> The racing industry is certainly not built on
> noble ideas or good accounting principals like
> warren buffet would point out, with underlying
> assets.
>
>
> It's built on the underlying promise, that I can
> pull a coup and make a fortune in one day.
> the age old accounting concept of steady plodding
> with compound interest is thrown out of the window
> and rebel like tactics of bribery and blackmail
> are employed to secure an edge over my
> competitors.
>
> speaking of first hand knowledge..been there..done
> that..got the Tshirt..


Bullshit.

your opinion.
will accept you with your opinion.
you are entitled to your opinion.
allow me my opinion.
then we agree to disagree.

I so wish to know how anyone would stage a coup by laying with mischievous intent, and not be found out.

An example, complete with the amount of money in play & where, would be nice to see.
Any takers?

I like a good laugh.

Karel,

funnily enough since the advent of Betfair what you propose has certainly become more "open" and not just for horseracing. Software monitors betting patterns and in the UK if a market is being "layed" out of control the nescecary authorities get alerted.

So for eg: a horse drifts from 5/2 out to 10/1 but there is not only a drift there is unrelenting opposition to the horse then then Betfair alert the stewards at the track and due process follows.

Funnily enough though in the past when only bookmakers were the order of the day NOT 1 of them Called the Jc or BHB to alert them of the drift.

Drifting animals actually win quite a high % of races but its the "in the know" drift that causes concern. Now there is an auditable trail, there is accountability where as before there was nothing. Amazingly the main opponents to Betfair are the very same bookmakers that have lobyed to try to get Betfair banned.

you see information is KEY in all this and the fact now that its recorded and logged and easily monitored does not suit the bookies.

The people that sat on the panel i would venture to say are not racing people, and if they are racing people they are most certainly NOT betting people. So when you go out to a meal with people that are not into racing and say the follwoing to them " hey guess what you can actually lay a horse to lose which means you are saying it will lose and therefore if it loses you will make money" to a newbie this soulnd wrong and crooked.

I have layed horses every single day of my life since flutter.com days (which became betfair) and NOT once has it been "information " telling me a horse could not win. I have layed horses whe i think they will lose and when i am holding a far higher price and trade out. NOTHING corrupt in that at all.

Karel,

I can understand that you dont believe that it is happening weekly in RSA.

let me put this question to you..
do you think that the bookmakers in South Africa will be able to make a living if no coup's are pulled?

lets take RADETZKY this weekend..and his is not a coup..
the first race all the bookies won..except the ones that played him headon...
the fav got beat...


the 3rd race the fav won..the bookies lost..

get the Gauteng gambling board to post the 103 bookmaker's sheets on the web daily.
they can remove the bookmakers name and code.

each bookmaker hands in a sheet daily, showing by racecourse, by race, the amounts taken, taken back, held, won/lost and tax due.
we assume that all bets are then recorded.

once you have that infront of you, you will have another view.
perhaps then you will see that bookmaking as in the 80's is no longer a license to print money. Not that paying the jockeys in the 80's was not happening.
If Jack Khan only knew, he would never have punted with the lot.
Punters punt the winners today. punters also pay the jockeys.


do you believe that stables dont pull the horses up..and ask bookies to lay the horse..
some stables are smart, they might take PA's or P6's and keep the info about a no good horse to themselves. is that not laying the horse...???
the public fills up the PA pool or P6 pool..the trainer leaves his 4/10 out of the PA or P6...but still runs the horse..stone last..

last monday race 1 the the 3/10 went missing..only paid

It's funny debating with the guys on the forum...

I have been
1. An owner..15 horses..should have send them to the zoo..R5/kg
2. Bookmaker..39 times..39 wins..its for poor people..
3. Punter..lost millions...its for rebels like me..
4. Private box owner..single ply toilet paper..."Old Money"
5. stayed with jockeys for 3 months..never got P6 with their combined info
6. Punted for many top jockeys..never made a profit..
7. partied and punted with trainers..saw the coke usage..not the drinking type.
8. punted with syndicates..last one..jews..R200K of a horse..13 from 14 wins..

28 years...and I have yet to meet....
a bookie that has not pulled a scheme..
a trainer that has not lied to his owners..
a jockey that has not pulled up a horse...
a punter that has not lost..
a owner that has not been double....

and a guy that does not believe its ......