Calling Pete The Bloke...

Hello Pz. Sorry - only just seeing this.

The answer is 'no' afaik. I suggested this to them a few years ago and they
wouldn't talk.

It makes no sense at all, does it?

I don't see why a 10% holdover wouldn't be enough.

cheers.
so if you lay TR to lose £500 you have to put
up another £500 to lay another horse,tying up
a Grand.

Nah, it's not quite that bad. You could lay all the horses to lose £500 and you'd have a £500
liability.

I'll simplify to a 2 horse race for ease of explaining. Normally both horses are 1.9 (say) and you
take £100 on each to get a green book for £10 - liability against your account balance is zero.
Same scenario in a 2 horse grand national (I know, but bear with me) is that you have a £90 liability
so that your account balance is £90 lower than it was before.

A more probable scenario: you've laid £5000 and have a green book for, say, £250. However, offsetting
is not allowed so your account balance has gone down by about £4750 (give or take).

Hope that makes sense.

PS You'll have noticed that the right hand side is >100% at the moment, which reflects the
chance of ballots. It was >107% a few days ago, but there was no one mopping it up because
1. It gets expensive quickly and
2. It's very risky because who knows which ones will be balloted?

tx
GL

You too