Winged Captain

hibernia Wrote:

---

> 1/12 and 7/1 returned sp in the uk about 106%
>
> 1/10 and 5/1 as you stated 107%
>
> not to shabby


r u sure hibs?..for me it seems its closer to 120 % in sa

1/10 and 5/1 (107%) is roughly the same you get in "two horse" sporting events

9/10 and 9/10 = 105% - the usual betting in rugby handicap betting

so lay 800/8000 the 1 and 4500/900 the other....thats what fancy cars and double story houses are made of...

Titch Wrote:

---

> so lay 800/8000 the 1 and 4500/900 the
> other....thats what fancy cars and double story
> houses are made of...


is 1/10 and 5/1 107 %...surely its closer to 120% ..or am i wrong

100/1.1 = 90,9% + 100/6 = 16,66% = total of 107.56%

Titch Wrote:

---

> Agreed Mac..but they do it far too often and
> always a fashionable jock/trainer combo...they
> have done it again today Naval Victory in the 2nd
> race12/10???? are they serious??/ and then when it
> gets beat Neisius gets all the flack...

now a more realistic 2/1 with some 5/2 available

if that horse was wiid/khumalo it would never have been 8/10..but tarry/strydom with some form and thats the price u get..gota try look past it..

it is really simple why it ran so badly i backed it and it is very very simple - do you want the answer ? it is a very very moderate piece of kakka that will battle to ever win a race in jhb and never ever deserved to be close to 7/10 and went the correct price on the jump should have gone 10/1 - piece of kak

Dear Mr Scott
 
I refer to your email below.
 
Whilst the comments here relate to the betting aspect; I would like to state that our Stipendiary Boards monitor the betting to see where the money is going and when are significant changes in the betting they would keep a close eye on the respective performances. There wasn’t anything untoward in the race, no queries from the Stipes and the Vets didn’t find anything wrong with the horse. As it was a Gauteng race meeting you may want to contact the Gauteng Off-course Bookmakers Association to get their input on the betting aspect.
 
Regards
 
 
Denzil J Pillay
Racing Control Manager
 
 

scotia Wrote:

---

> Dear Mr Scott
>  
> I refer to your email below.
>  
> Whilst the comments here relate to the betting
> aspect; I would like to state that our Stipendiary
> Boards monitor the betting to see where the money
> is going and when are significant changes in the
> betting they would keep a close eye on the
> respective performances. There wasn’t anything
> untoward in the race, no queries from the Stipes
> and the Vets didn’t find anything wrong with the
> horse. As it was a Gauteng race meeting you may
> want to contact the Gauteng Off-course Bookmakers
> Association to get their input on the betting
> aspect.
>  
> Regards
>  
>  
> Denzil J Pillay
> Racing Control Manager
>  
>  


this statement sounds very contradictory fcuk me

Its like an automatic response from your email account...

sorry hibs is out of the office,will reply later.


7/10 to 28/10

is nothing Pirates

"You may want to contact the Gauteng Off-course Bookmakers Assoc"

If you were doing your job you would have............how else can you justify the statement "the stipendiary boards monitor the betting"
Why does every statement from the authorities sound dishonest?

(personally I found nothing wrong with the result of this particular race.................what worries me is incompetent regulation as a generalisation)