Australian
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
29 Aug 12
14:47
Joined:
Date Joined:
04 Apr 03
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qneLWoG2MY4&feature=youtu.be
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 129
|
By:
This is the third thread dedicated to this story, Shapeshifter.
It's certainly great publicity for Bet365. I can only hope enough people see this and boycott their miserable business, if you can even call it that. |
|
By:
They`ve broken their silence and issued a statement regarding this issue. They are obviously suspicious of some possible skullduggery.
|
|
By:
What does bet 365 say ?
|
|
By:
Its been posted on the horse racing forum
|
|
By:
Anaglogs Daughter 29 Aug 12 20:45 Joined: 05 Jan 10 | Topic/replies: 22,453 | Blogger: Anaglogs Daughter's blog
BET365 PRESS RELEASE Race 2 - Ipswich, Queensland August 29, 2012 bet365 has been the subject of various media comments relating to a claim by a Mr Steve Brunker that he was not paid out properly for his bets on a greyhound race that took place in Ipswich, Queensland on 27th July 2012. Following a steward's inquiry immediately following the race, two dogs in the race in question, including the favourite, were subsequently suspended for 28 days for "failing to pursue" and Racing Queensland are conducting an integrity inquiry into the race. The Northern Territory Racing Commission (which licenses bet365 in Australia) is also conducting its own inquiries in respect of all betting activity on the race. bet365 does not yet know when these integrity and betting reviews will be completed but will be providing assistance in connection with each of these inquiries and with any inquiry conducted by any relevant racing, sports or other body. Pending the outcome of these inquiries, bet365 will, unfortunately, be unable to comment any further on this matter. In the meantime, enquiries should be directed to aus-enquiries@bet365.com. Rate reply: | report block user |
|
By:
so ...was the all clear given on the race?
Have the TAB'S paid out on the race? Yes and Yes. Next we'll have correct weight declared on the Melbourne Cup but these blokes won't pay out until all the drug tests are analyzed. Did they refund all other bets on the race? Surely they must have  |
|
By:
Have the dogs been questioned yet?
|
|
By:
they're trotting out heaps of the samuel l jackson adverts now on foxtel
... costing them big bucks to try and repair the tarnished image ... and catch a few new customers who are unaware of their filthy non-paying ploys too late for the scum tho ... their name is MUD |
|
By:
Knowing you were rorted and proving you were rorted are 2 different things, unfortunately bet365 only know they were rorted, won't prove they were and will be forced to pay out
|
|
By:
Dogs fail to chase all the time, how is that relevant to them paying out, looks to be a feeble and very convenient excuse.
How is that a rort admittedly I'm no expert on greyhound racing as can't stand the sport. |
|
By:
Wonder if Samuel L Jackson realises how Bet 365 is tarnishing his name!!!
|
|
By:
I don't think its because dogs failed to chase, maybe something to do with punters betting pattern, he did outlay just under 5k on a bush dog race, also choosing unitab or whatever tab divvy it was over the other 2, then 2 favoured dogs fail to chase, i wonder how many times he had them in his combinations as he had quite a few? looks a bit suss, as i'm sure the last thing 365 want at this early stage is bad publicity, which they will get either way. If they suspect a sting and do nothing about it, how long before they get another bowler account and do the same?
|
|
By:
Do they generally pay out on the official race result, or what they think the result should be?
|
|
By:
If they got stung they got stung. They're not the stewards.
Can you imagine what would happen to an on course bookie that refused to pay because he didn't like the result of a race? |
|
By:
You asking kindergarten kids a question Mr Target? just as Curly Seal withheld payment from the brothel owner as he thought a rot had been pulled and it had, they're obviously within their rights to withhold and investigate otherwise they would've been instructed by government to pay
|
|
By:
curly had to payout as i'm sure 365 will
|
|
By:
Its an Ipswich greyhound race and you expect them to bet on supertab???? I'm pretty confident I know which pool would hold more.
For fark sake how dumb can you be, of course the local pool is going to hold more money on it 99 times out of 100 especially at some obscure low life greyhound meeting. |
|
By:
Are you sure about that?
|
|
By:
I would suggest that the license they are operating under would require them to pay on the official race result, not some fantasy result.
|
|
By:
1 tab pays 14k yet the other 2 around the 2k mark, if it was a rort they left 1 tab alone obviously, but then again you think DN has never had a case to answer so maybe you believe in the tooth fairy as well
|
|
By:
so if the possibility of improper practices is sufficient grounds to withold payouts, then why do we bother with stewards?
|
|
By:
Let's just looking at Rockhampton Dogs yesterday...race 1 win pool was nearly 20 k in Victoria and only 8k in QLD.......race 2 24k vs less than 9k
|
|
By:
The only leg they have to stand on, is whether they can not pay on races where the TAB pools have been manipulated (which any half wit would have in their T's and C's). But they have never mentioned that.
Their argument is essentially the raced was fixed. Stiff sh!t, judging by all the reports around at the moment, if that was their rule they wouldn't be paying out on any race. |
|
By:
Mr Cushion, i think they're aware they will have to cough up, think they're just trying to send a message to minimise such rorts happening. Lets face it whenever there is a rort pulled, it affects a lot of punters
|
|
By:
Joel 30 Aug 12 04:38 Joined: 14 Feb 04 | Topic/replies: 12,032 | Blogger: Joel's blog
Let's just looking at Rockhampton Dogs yesterday...race 1 win pool was nearly 20 k in Victoria and only 8k in QLD.......race 2 24k vs less than 9k He aftertimed and got it wrong, there's a first  |
|
By:
spy my problem is that their defence points at the race being improperly run, not pool manipulation.
That's not for them to decide. It's a very dangerous precedent All clear is all clear...pay out. |
|
By:
Are you certain its only that and no pool manipulation as well? But either way the punter or whoever he was placing the bet for will end up getting paid
|
|
By:
The idiots at bet 365 have clearly held the bet or not out it on or only partially put it on as for the pools at supertab being bigger at rockhampton dogs than on the local tote clearly indicates that I've had understimated the amount of desperate sicko's in Victorian TAB's then again I don't frequent TAB's and and haven't for donkey years now and maybe the the desperate sicko whpo bet on ttts are smarter than their counterparts and refuse to be on such filler craap.
|
|
By:
Mr Spy - as i said in my last post, who cares if the pool was manipulated, where in there T's and C's does it say anything about not paying out if they suspect the pool has been manipulated?
Either way, the reason they haven't paid out is because they think the race is fixed, they have no legal rights whatsoever to not payout on races they suspect are fixed. |
|
By:
They must have some legal right, otherwise they would themselves be breaking a law. I am sure they will eventually pay out, but i think they're trying to send a message to any rorters to go elsewhere.
But against them is if its outside the punters normal betting patterns, they should've done something prior to the off, ie not accept or only partially accept the bet, they did neither and yes they would've held onto the funds had bet lost |
|
By:
so just becaue somedoes something different to what they normally do which may not have been working that is immediately suspicious, do you guys actually have any comprehensiion of how stupid you're sounding.
I'm absolutely staggered that supposedly intelligent people, can in reality be this dumb. |
|
By:
Are the police dumb?
|
|
By:
oops i am reading the wrong thread. Carry on.
|
|
By:
The way I read this, is the punter knew exactly what he was doing. He obviously saw a loophole in their conditions and took advantage of it.
How much was in the pick 4 pool. A lot less than the 14K, I would guess, unless it was a jackpot race. If it wasn't a jackpot pick 4, I would say someone got it for a small percentage and 14k is what it would have paid for a dollar unit. Also how many of the other corps, would let someone invest $5k on a pick4 at an Ipswich dog meeting. None, alarm bells would be ringing. Good luck to the guy, Bet365 deserve no sympathy. |
|
By:
The latest twist is superb. It appears the place where the 2 dogs that were tailed off are kennelled is the registered property of a guy called Brunker. The same name as the punter with the bet. This may be a popular name of course....
I hate politicians more than I hate bookies, and I would love that opportunist Xenophobe to have egg on his face. This has the makings of a film !!! |
|
By:
How good is Xenophan, going in to bat for blokes who set up a races, hope they go all the way with this http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/match-fixers-face-10-years-in-jail-under-new-laws-20120813-244sy.html
|
|
By:
Tattsbet declare dividends for a 25cent unit so only had to be 4k in pool for 14k dividend.If same thing happened today punter would lose 1k
|
|
By:
How would punter lose 1k Mr Jabba?
|
|
By:
Think they changed terms to say max pay is size of pool
|