DONT PUSH IT -was the SP RIGGED?

Interesting post, why has nobody else considered this?

probably a lemming here..but easy pickings for high street...could have gone to 165 and no one would notice.

red lorry~ yellow lorry 10 Apr 22:18
laddies backed it 2 win £220k with those in the sp ~ hence a return of 10/1

thats the reason, laddies made sure and 220k is nothing to them when it must have saved them paying out millions more

KNOW ALL - thanks for that .

Yes Laddies would only have had to shell out circa 20 /30 grand on course to do the trick.
They are a shrewd organisation -no doubt about it

it stinks thats all i know

Not rigged but certain people know how to manipulate it.

Jonjo's 'Pulled Up last time' have a good record....

returned 19.1 on betfair

It was nearly 20s here at the off. Why would books really want to shorten it cos everyone takes the prices anyway so its not like they would be takin SP.

Are you jokin? Most people who bet on the national DONT have a clue... they do NOT take prices...

I myself have several people who ring asking me to put bets on for them. They take the price that the BBC says it wins at... I don't tell them what price I got...

i didnt take a price for my mum,gettin real grief,it was 20/1 and you say 10/1--blimey charlie its like im trying to do her over for a few quid, it aint cool man

have to pay the difference Terry

Well done Dik

should do the honourable thing--never hear the end of it

I got 24 Terry... easily available 'early doors'... Wouldn't have backed it myself but happy to have a 14/1 winner...

never thought for a second it would halve in price

I had a grand at 25 and layed a few mates a grand at sp.

I now have 14k pocket money if my maths is any good?

well if thats the case,thats f ucking lovely

I make it 15K profit

you won 25k and gave them 10k

well done mate.

Nope, you have to take 1 off the 25. So my odds were 24/1

the bookies were shortening everything up,absolute joke,didnt affect me playing on here,but the general public have been mugged imo.

What sort of bets would have to be struck on the National to shorten a horse from 20/1 to 10/1 ,

Probably the same bets that were on Monkerhostina few years back when he was hammered off the boards.

10000-£500 (x5) £9000-£500 £80000-£5000 £10000-£600 (x8) £5000-£300 (x4) £10000-£700 (x7) £5000-£350 (x5) £10000-£800 (x5) £5000-£400 (x9) £10000-£900

apparently this is all it takes according to sporting life.com
imagine how easy it was for the lads laying 10000-900 , putting 600 on @ 18+ on here@ 19 for a handy profit of 300+. It beggars belief

Surely the question is why the Betfair SP was almost double: why did the ring layers not arb or hedge back onto here?

Part of the reason must involve the extraordinarily high margin the ring was betting to at the off, suggesting that Don't Push It's price was not the only one out of line.

Perhaps too the perception that Don't Push It was getting worked up at the start so could not win.

But the on-course bookmakers who so obligingly cut the price for the high street firms may be facing losses, especially if in doing so they allowed their books to become unbalanced.

Come to think of it, would the betting shops be hoist by their own petard: are many National bets on the unnamed favourite?

Hopefully Bruce will have the Post's crack investigative team on the case!

Maybe Rishi said it had no chance

Why shorten only this horse though and it bolts up? This was a gamble I think. JP laid this horse out a while ago if you look through its form and all of the 'not knowing what to ride' kept the price up for a late plunge.

It happens every year - has done for ever- the grand national returns 150% every year - they dont have to manipulate it the on course bookmakers who include all the big boys -- take the** out of once a year punters. No serious punter bets large amounts on course anymore. It would be interesting to see if any on course bookmakers went 12345 - ?

JP didnt back that horse @ 10-1 dont worry - he probably didnt have a bet.

Its a simple fact when demand outsrips supply the net result is the buyer gets stuffed. Ladbrokes were so busy yesterday on the phones the wait time was 10 minutes. It was a bad result for the bookmakers - plus the eway horses didnt help - but all the balldung about losing 10 million each was a load of cods

Far From Trouble 10 Apr 23:52
Interesting post, why has nobody else considered this?


Because we bet with betfair, and ain't interested in the SP.

diddles 7 apr 07;24
150% ?there were 40 runners ffs,just over 1% per runner.if it was a 15 runner handicap it would be just about the same (115%)you lot want everything in your favour.

Why shorten this horse though? AP is not really a housewife's choice and it was sweating up before the race. I could understand shortening all the betting market leaders but this one horse. Does not make sense to me. And splitting the favourites would surely bring in the un-named favourite backers. I think this was a JP gamble.

I put £5 ew on it for my sister , when it won she expected to get about £70 back , when i told her i had taken 22/1 she was chuffed to bits. Once a year punters do not have a clue.

THEY don't want you to win :-(

brigust1 11 Apr 08:16


Why shorten this horse though? AP is not really a housewife's choice and it was sweating up before the race. I could understand shortening all the betting market leaders but this one horse. Does not make sense to me. And splitting the favourites would surely bring in the un-named favourite backers. I think this was a JP gamble.

I would be inclined to agree.

with no ruby .......a tide for AP ..........still smells especially the swetty state of it .....i neve knew that horses in a larther shorten up like that

ap not the houswvies choice? r you jokin? i work in a bookies and for my cashiers and helpers on the day i wrote down which horse he was on as its the most commmonly asked question every year, every 'clueless' punter wants to back whoever they hear is the top jockey regardless, even if the hourse only has 3 legs. Good luck to everyone who had the winner even if 10/1 was a little skinny dont push it carried the largest volume of sinlge bets for us yesterday even if not he largest stakes

BOOKMAKERS in Britain and Ireland on Saturday claimed that Tony McCoy's historic first win in the John Smith's Grand National cost them £10 million on the day the SP overround of the race was the worst for at least 20 years.

Don't Push It could be backed at 22-1 on Saturday morning, and was no shorter than 20-1, but he was among a number of horses to shorten up in the minutes before the off, as a best-price percentage in the morning of 119 rocketed to 155.

How to drive customers away from your own business and straight to Betfair. Lemmings

at least dick turpin wore a mask B-)

rubbish, saying you lost 10million is a great way to get your business in the paper for free even if its not true, why all the punters get cheesed off on here is beyond me, if your a serious punter it doesnt affect you and if your a casual player you probably dont understand or care, get over it

Ramruma 11 Apr 05:13
Surely the question is why the Betfair SP was almost double: why did the ring layers not arb or hedge back onto here?

While his price had shortened, in the last few minutes prior to the off, tv pictures showed Don't Push It to be sweating heavily (in fact it was dripping off it) and shrewdies started to lay it heavily as it was a spent force even before the race had started innit !

This is a forum 'forecast'. On here are discussed racing related matters and one prominent matter today is the SP of the Grand National winner. I cannot see anything wrong with that. Can you?

Even if you don't understand, all it needs is for a few who backed DPI to be boasting about a 10/1 winner till their mates tell them they got 18s on Betfair.

It does matter. Biggest day of the year, racing is going to hell in a handcart and should get a grip on these pirates among other things.

You won't be saying it doesn't matter when there's no racing left to bet on

I'm sure we can expect a hard-hitting investigation of this charade from the Racing Post next week.

What? Eh?

Oh.

RAMRUNA ..5.13
THE REASON THE COURSE LAYERS DIDN'T HEDGE ON HERE IS THAT ALL BETS WE TOOK WERE AT 20/1 AND 16/1

plus [ in my case ] three late bets of £2.50 each way at 14/1.

so where do i gain by taking 18/1 less commission ?

informaniac..i done exacly that ..times that by a world wide tv audiance and i think ucould have hit the nail on the head m8 .;)

I posted exactly this on Jimnasts thread about a bookie at Aintree ripping punters off. The SPs on the GN are ALWAYS rigged, and its nothing short of theft.

Every year horses end up around the 10-1 mark which were never that price earlier, the over round must be huge and must be looked at.

I'd never though i'd say this but i look forward to the day when its just Tote and Exchanges. More money would be ploughed back into racing an we'd all be better off.

I feel for you mate, I didn't have a bet in the race but would've been tempted seeing that,

let this be a lesson to us all for the future !

Dream Alliance shortened on course from 33/1 to 16/1 , freely available at 42's on here.

it didn't ,bob. was 33/1 on my board at the off

Well according to the MONEYPENNY post earlier it would appear that circa £450,000 was taken out of the ring on course .But most of the big bets were struck at about 10-12/1.
Did JP have an almighty plunge at the death or was the money already down ?
Also when a horse is sweating so profusely just before the off surely the bookies on course lengthen the odds because those horses dont very often win. You would have expected a 2 or 3 point drift in the final minutes . But it never happened.
It was a BAD DAY for the image of british bookmaking shortening so many horses odds at the same time and not lengthening the others .
Betting to 150% is daylight robbery and there is NO EXCUSE !

JP said on TV that he did not bet the horse,in fact he bet BFT.

Office punters should automatically be given the screen price in BOG races. At least on National day. Simple as that. Most once a year punters wouldn't have a scooby and don't deserve to be skanked when they are helping to fund the sport and the bookmakers.

Brigust 1 is incorrect when he says that A P McCoy is not the housewives choice.Who else have once a year punters heard of ?
Nearly £30K's worth of bets were recorded in the ring by the SP validators and these would have taken out approaching £350,000.
Of course these bets belonged to the off course office boys in an attempt to shorten,and succeed,in trimming up the SP.
This manipulation of the Starting Price has been going in since the Victoria Blower days and goes on today.
It is not illegal but just business.

betting to 153%...my son had 25p EW and my wife 1 pound EW...i see them as vile thiefs...racing for change..how can they attract new people to racing with stunts like this on the biggest betting race of the year..

jamilla absolutely right AP is housewives choice, as well as all Daily Telegraph readers. The once a year punters want to tell their friends they backed the winner of the Grand National. If it was the Derby the housewives choice is whatever Frankie rides.

my dad once told me of a story from years ago when the fav in the lincoln was 3/1, one bookmakers (forgot his name) went 4/1, an off course bookey has 2k on, so this bookmaker went 5/1..all the on course bookmakers pilled on and he kept pushing the price out come the off had around 15k at an sp of 13/2 and it was job done for him..

why can that happended a good 20 years ago but nothing has changed since

a fear for racing i really do

it was like no other national market i have seen, the bookies not seemed to want a outstanding fav, but crunched everything up behind, it was like the bookies version of the january sales, makin hay and al that, tthe 150 % over round can be compare to "theft" a disgrace i feel

Jamilla by saying AP is not the housewives choice I mean he is not as clearly defined as Lester was. And even LPs horses never shortened 10 points and more at the off. A mate works for Billies and he said lots of people backed AP but only small. The lumpier bets were on BFT and others, not AP.
Either this was a major punt by JP when he saw DPI got to the start safely and sanely or else it was a stitch up by the bookies.

brigust a major jp punt would have beeen more noticed..........

re jamilla "it is not illegal but just business" nice business practice ripping off punters who already had a bet on.

It was probably a bookies stitch up. They have treat punters like absolute morons. That clown from Ladbrokes said it will take 'months to recover' after yesterday. The bookies raked in absolute million on the gold cup, as well as the two festivals. In the unlikely event they did take a hit yesterday, it would have hurt them much considering what they have raked in recently. These people, to the eternal shame of British Racing, have the game by the balls.

big aitch 11 Apr 06:42


Maybe Rishi said it had no chance

he was getting a little excited and said how much it was sweating up down at the start,

seriously, interesting topic and nobody brought this up yesterday
surprised me when he shortened so much.

it wouldn't have hurt them much is what i meant to say

They always shorten up most of the fancied runners,nothing new

they knew mcoy factor - why not shorten it before the plunge

y dont on course bookmakers put a sign up..........NO TRADE

this tells me no!!

opened 20/1 £10000-£500 (x5) £9000-£500 £80000-£5000 £10000-£600 (x8) £5000-£300 (x4) £10000-£700 (x7) £5000-£350 (x5) £10000-£800 (x5) £5000-£400 (x9) £10000-£900