Forums

Cheltenham Festival

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
naraic
17 Mar 16 08:38
Joined:
Date Joined: 05 Mar 12
| Topic/replies: 65 | Blogger: naraic's blog
I backed Fox Norton each way for the Arkle with Paddy Power last week.

I had understood that this was an antepost bet and that the "Non runner no bet" element was being granted as a concession

Paddy Power is saying that there is no payout on the place part because there were only 7 runners.

Has anybody come across this before? Anyone know what the relevant rule states?
Pause Switch to Standard View Non runner no bet query: HELP!
Show More
Loading...
Report DECALEC March 17, 2016 8:53 AM GMT
If terms stated ew123 you shud be paid
Report naraic March 17, 2016 9:12 AM GMT
Thanks Decalec

The terms when I placed the bet were 1/5th of odds for 1,2,3

Any ideas on how to progress
Report roobuck March 17, 2016 9:22 AM GMT
Deffo should be paid

In a shop or online?
Report naraic March 17, 2016 9:30 AM GMT
Thanks Roobuck

It was in a shop
Report roobuck March 17, 2016 9:35 AM GMT
That's your problem then. Staff unlikely to know rules.

Go in again and speak to Manager and explain it was AP bet, not day of race and should be paid place. Ask them to check  with HO as probably settled by system
Report pa lapsy March 17, 2016 11:04 AM GMT
Hope you are having a good time in Cork Naraic, if it is PP near the GPO i pity ya,severe lack of any customer relation training and lucky to get a grunt instead of a thanks. If it is the one in Paul St/Coal Quay,if there is a woman with glasses about 50 still working there,go to her,she is sound.
Agree with Roobuck and Decalec take. Understand the time constraints as you are only there a few days and hope it is sorted.
Report STUDYFORM March 17, 2016 11:32 AM GMT
I'd have thought 7 runners 2 places was right.
The same as a non-runner 2 minutes before the off if the bet was placed 5 minutes before the off.
Would you have expected paying 3 places if there were even more non-runners and only 3 ran?
Report Facts March 17, 2016 11:35 AM GMT
Rules of racing regarding Ante Post bets

......Each-Way Ante Post bets are settled according to the Each-Way terms advertised at the time the bet was placed......
Report STUDYFORM March 17, 2016 9:23 PM GMT
Not so.
There will be a rider/continuation to the phrase you posted, Facts.
That would apply to an event like Golf or perhaps ante-post football where the numbers involved decrease towards the end of an event through natural wastage, so changing e/w terms, not to Non-Runners.

Each company has its own rules although I should think the rule for non-runners is fairly universal.
Also Rule 4 might apply when it's betting 'with a run', (though not always).

Again, as I asked, would you expect to be paid if there had just been 3 starters and the horse was 3rd?
Report saxon farm March 17, 2016 9:40 PM GMT
^
NRNB is a concession.  It is against Tattersalls Rule 4 to apply the aforementioned to any kind of ante post bet.
Report roobuck March 17, 2016 9:54 PM GMT
No studyform, the logic you apply is for day of race / post final decs market. Yes I would expect to be paid if it was third in 3 runner race.

The bookmaker can choose their terms in AP market based on their expectation of the number of runners. They will have made money on withdrawn horses.

In AP markets they choose the terms and we choose to play or not. There are universal rules to cover both AP and dayof race markets and they are simply wrong to hold on to the place here as long as naraic is sure it was 1/5 ,1,2,3
Report STUDYFORM March 17, 2016 9:54 PM GMT
Not if it states at the time of placing bets that "any non runners Rule 4 will apply".
Report STUDYFORM March 17, 2016 9:55 PM GMT
That was to saxon farm
Report STUDYFORM March 17, 2016 10:00 PM GMT
Good point roobuck.
There MUST be a definitive rule for this eventuality within each Bookie's rules.
(Which aren't universal, but tend to be fairly standard and HAVE to be lodged with IBAS).
Report STUDYFORM March 17, 2016 10:03 PM GMT
Last point then roebuck.
If it had been a 3 runner affair and the horse won, then presumably you'd expect to be paid Full winnings for the win part and 1/5 the odds a place rather than ATW.
Report roobuck March 17, 2016 10:05 PM GMT
Yes as they were the terms that the bet was struck in an AP market. There would be no R4 either
Report roobuck March 17, 2016 10:07 PM GMT
And it were me and PP still refuse to pay out, out of principle I'd take it to IBAS
Report roobuck March 17, 2016 10:07 PM GMT
And it were me and PP still refuse to pay out, out of principle I'd take it to IBAS
Report saxon farm March 17, 2016 10:09 PM GMT
STUDYFORM

I know that you are an intelligent and conscientious poster. 

Not if it states at the time of placing bets that "any non runners Rule 4 will apply".

Then NRNB means nothing!
Report STUDYFORM March 17, 2016 10:21 PM GMT
Quite right, saxon.
I'm tired and typing some nonsense tbh, I don't even know why I mentioned R4!

It's an unusual occurrence - especially at Cheltenham.
What IS certain is that very few workers in any big bookies will understand the rules sufficiently to sort this out simply.
A shame there are so few independents left Sad
Report saxon farm March 17, 2016 10:28 PM GMT
Rest well STUDYFORM. Keep up your excellent work with the BF comps!
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com