Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
No more link ups allowed unless
Linking to the same firm as off middle of jan
Linking to the same firm as off middle of jan
Show More
The statement also prohibits a single bookmaker linking their own pitches when they use different trading names on the different pitches.
This will be a major blow to some firms whose modus operandi is to rent out and link up
Yes RDT will not be allowed to network them up
Yes RDT will not be allowed to network them up
Rdt won't have much control as once pcs are linked
Then there not needed to link up
Plus now plenty of other books using competitors
Then there not needed to link up
Plus now plenty of other books using competitors
Other competitors have been told not to allow it either
What type of picks do this ? I would have thought that one of the picks would be unworkable solo so the racecourse would be losing out enforcing this.
WELL IT CAN BE A LOSSS TO THE RACECOURSE IAN ......BUT MY EXAMPLE -CONTARY TO BELIEF IM NOT MOANING ITS JUST A MATHMATICALL OBSERVATION IS THIS-THE MAJORITY OF SINGLE OPERATORS WILL BE BETTER OFF AND THE SOONER THEY STOP FIRMS GOING TWOS UP IN THE RING THE BETTTER OF THE MAJORITY WILL BE ....BUT THERS AS MUCH CHANCE AS THAT AS FLYING TO THE MOON AS 2 OUT OF THE 3 MAIN NEGOITIATING OFFICERS ARE RIDDLE WITH IT
Johnny just to keep you up to date.
For many months now the association nominated members of the FRB have been -
RBA - Robin Grossmith
NAB - Tony Styles
ARB - Phil Crisp although Mick Williams signed the JCR "link up" letter for the ARB.
For many months now the association nominated members of the FRB have been -
RBA - Robin Grossmith
NAB - Tony Styles
ARB - Phil Crisp although Mick Williams signed the JCR "link up" letter for the ARB.
I JUST READ THAT UGWS ON THE AGT WEBSITE ....GOT IT WRONG AGAIN ...OH WELL NEVER MIND,,,,,,,,,,,,,,BUT IIN THEORY ,MY IDEA FOR THE MAJORITY OF BOOKS WHERE ONLY ONE JOINT PER PROPRIETOR IS BETTER FOR THE ..........MAJORITY..... ITS MINORITY THAT ARE DILUTING THE TURN OVER OF THE MAJORITY ...WOULD U AGREE
ILL GIVE YOU UWGS AN EXAMPLE TO MAKE IT CLEARER .................AT HAYDOCK IN THE SILVER 2 SATURDAYS AGO ....THERE WERE 13 BOOKS 10 PROPRIETERS WITH WHICH 3 OF THEM DOUBLED UP KE GE BE ..PAUL JOHNSON...MT RACING........THERE ALL GOOD CHAPS AND IM FREINDLEY WITH ALL 3 IN FACT MT RACING I GOT A LIFT WITH HIM .........THE BUISNESS WASNT THAT GREAT .......SO IF THERED BEEN 10 BOOKS TAKINF £100 A RACE (for example)....NOW THERES 3 DOUBLING UP THERE NOW TAKING £76 A RACE.................SO THE OTHER 7 ARE NOW 24% A RACE WORSE OFF.......AND THEYVE ALLOWED THE MINORITY TO DO THIS TO THERE BUISNESS ..................ILL HAPPILY STAND CORRECTED IF ANY ONE WANTS TO POINT OUT ANY THING DIFFERNET ................UWGS WOULD YOU AGREE
THEBIZ WAS EVENLY SPREAD THAT DAY I WOULD SAY THERE WOULDNT HAVE BEEEN ANY ADVANTAGE POINT WHERE EVER YAD BET
HERES ANOTHER ONE ..........IF THERE TURNOVER HAD BEEN £2,000 THAT DAY .....THERE 400 ODD QUID DOWN ......GAME MUST BE GOOD
joe bloggs is a survivor
wheels in motion as we speak
wheels in motion as we speak
tommorrow afternoon matthew im going to be .................joe bloggs (hopefully)
Johnny it really does not matter what you think, what i think or what anyone else thinks.
The simple fact is that at least until 2052 "Doubling up" is here to stay.
It is permitted by the terms of the 2012 licences, the laws of the land, the 2005 Gambling Act,the Gambling Commission and apart from very extreme circumstances by the OFT.
So whether it should or should not be allowed is a totally academic question.
IT IS ALLOWED !!!!
Whether individual bookmakers regard this as an opportunity or a threat to their own businesses is up to them but it is here until at least 2052 and they need to plan accordingly.
Getting worked up about this and spending time debating the rights and wrongs will not help. The situation will not change and anyone who thinks that it might is just kidding themselves.
The simple fact is that at least until 2052 "Doubling up" is here to stay.
It is permitted by the terms of the 2012 licences, the laws of the land, the 2005 Gambling Act,the Gambling Commission and apart from very extreme circumstances by the OFT.
So whether it should or should not be allowed is a totally academic question.
IT IS ALLOWED !!!!
Whether individual bookmakers regard this as an opportunity or a threat to their own businesses is up to them but it is here until at least 2052 and they need to plan accordingly.
Getting worked up about this and spending time debating the rights and wrongs will not help. The situation will not change and anyone who thinks that it might is just kidding themselves.
doubling up will be allowed as per the announcement from jcr today. no networking with different trade names, simple and to be honest the right ruling. its strong odds on others courses will follow suit as per the ew terms. next on the agenda schedule y renting ??? ps it will be self policed due to everyone having an interest in the ring and am sure betting ring managers will be briefed accordingly. a step in the right direction in my opinion.
r/snake you know as well as I do the brm's don't give a damn.
Rlyl can't respond as is busy doing the rota for Newcastle all weather 2015,don't worry Dave D you're in.
am sure mr clare from jcr will care enough and I believe the majority of the ring will be in favour of this decision and will be quick off the mark to highlight any books breaking the ruling. if jcr legals are of the opinion networking under different trade names is against the 2012 agreement then books breaking the ruling post jan 2014 may find themselves selling.
single manned joints performing multiple price changes whilst worker is getting into his cheese and onion sandwich might be a give away
ARE THEY THE PITCHES THAT ALL HAVE YELLOW HEAD BOARDS????????
Would I be mistaken several comments here with strong expressions of self interest being made ? No change there ! Find a loophole and drive a coach and horses through it - similar to the Schedule 'Y' practices.
UWGS THANKS FOR REPLYING .....I ONLY BET NOW ABOUT 6 TIMES A YEAR SO IT DOESNT AFFECT ME BUT WHERE YOU GET THE IDEA THAT IM GETTING WORKED UP ABOUT IT FROM THEN I DONT KNOW ....Q,WHO NEGOTIATED THE CLAUSE THAT DOUBLING UP WAS HERE TILL 2052 ,AS A MATTER OF INTREST ??
i personaly am a bit dissapointed with our leaders latest decision.i was lookiig forward this summer to having a link up with the paul stone outfit at y'mouth i cudn't help noticing they took nearly £8oo on acouple of days last yr!! to top it up when asking the great man about a future venture he said they had only got 3 shareholders at present and wud welcome another partner to offset his liabilities 1 race i kid u not they stood 1 for £48 with only 3 of them in it
THREES INTO 48 GOES THEY HAD IT FOR 50 THEY BACKED IT BACK TO WIN 2 QUID
Johnny - you can bet it wasn't somebody who did not want to do it ( i.e double up ). It is interesting that the two recent initiatives to create a more level playing field i.e standard terms and restrictions on linked pitches have both involved JCR. In most walks of life if parties have a vested interest in issues are up for discussion/decision they exclude themselves from the decision making process. Does this principle apply regards some aspects of pitch administration - I think not ! Is it time for the JCR and their equivalents to take a more active, impartial role in affairs to protect the interests of the run of the mill on course bookmaker ?
ITS MY GUESS DEMOCRAT THAT THE MINORITY HAD A HAND IN VOTING FOR THIS MEASURE TO TAKE PLACE TILL 2052 ,BUT LIKE THE MAN SAID THERES NOTHING ANYBODY CAN DOO ,IT DONT AFFECT ME THAT IS A CERTAINTY ....BUT THANKS FOR STICKING YA 2 BOBS WORTH IN
It's called a fait accompli Johnny ! Don't you dare call it a 'stitch up' or you will be black balled ! Any suggestions where GY races can be run next season if the grandstand has blown down ?
It's called a fait accompli Johnny ! Don't you dare call it a 'stitch up' or you will be black balled ! Any suggestions where GY races can be run next season if the grandstand has blown down ?
if i could offer my humble opinion for what it is worth i have no problem with the "same firm" linking but strongly believe there should be limits on the number of pitches by a said firm in the ring.put simply it cannot be right longterm for the good of the ring if the biggest chequebook always wins and the said firm end up with 2 3 4 5 6 piches at any track.surely this is akin to tesco owning every retail outlet in the country and charge what they like the public wudn;t stand for it it maybe just my opinion but i am entitled to have 1 it would be my suggestion that the proprietor was limited to pitch in each ring and prevent public perceptions of cartels and my perception that it is purely driven by greed .
I would love to have just 1 pitch at all courses and the rest of the money in the bank but I'm afraid the business nowadays doesn't make that viable,it would also mean loyal staff losing their jobs in order for someone whos put bugger all in the market to perhaps take a few more bob,so sorry chaps I'm not joining your latest revolution.
they aint worked it out yet but when the few paying race-goers are left and even they can work it out that 90% of the pitch holders are the same bloke what you think they gunna do............. just another nail in the coffin of racecourse bookmakers....... most can't even see it that the sad thing they think they got the upper hand 
democrat was there damage at y'mouth racecoure y'day then?
Could not agree more Flash. Take Cheltenham Off Lower Tatts for instance - there are just ten pitches. One firm has four of them - is 40% an acceptable level of 'occupation' and not contrary to the public interests ? I simply ask the question and would appreciate opinions from all quarters especially those who have the knowledge to point out that multi-pitches are permitted as long as they do not exceed more than a certain percentage of any one betting area.
ribero 1 you don't believe in any limit then?also i don't understand your point r.e"somone whos put bugger all in the market"pls forgive my ignorance in advance
Does this ruling, if adopted by all racecourses, mean that all the aliases that have been invented by the multi pitch operators will now be scrapped and be removed from the AGT records ?
Yes Flash - grandstand crashed down making all pitches for next season unworkable except No. 1. !! I have it on good authority no alternative plans have been made to enable those who have been disadvantaged to ply their trade in other areas and because the remaining bookmaker is such a good ( definitely not smooth ) operator !!! 
We have 2 pitches at just about everywhere we go and on about 95% of the time they are run separate - if they are not worth running on there own they are not worth adding to another one.
So Peter James and Yorkshire Racing are here to stay
So Peter James and Yorkshire Racing are here to stay
the ruling is simple. you can still use other trading names but not link! in order to link they must be 1 the same firm and 2 trading under the same name. flash there used to be a limit of 40% and some still think this exists.... but it doesn't and apparently you can have as much as you want. example fakenham rails about 6 month ago. it is wrong and limit should be set for the good of the ring.
Flash,as far as I can see its a free market so I don't see how it can be stopped although I personally would be happy enough with some sort of limit,easily got around though by just forming another company.Re the bugger all comment 1 pitch only would mean big leap ups for the smaller investors and would devalue pitches considerably so once again I'm out.
democrat for a moment there my heart missed a beat christ i wud have missed the kid and his bird who rents the alan bennet pitch plus a few others there nxt season they tell me i hav been pre booked for all hospitality events in the marquee in future mainly due to the excellant service i am told
ribero1 in my opinion your argument is flawed my pitches are all decent picks dont see how smaller investors can get a leap up everybody knows even me that you only get what you pay for anyway don;t want to argue this point cos it is still a democracy in this country and we all have our different views and i accept your position on it
chelt off lower tats will 4 top picks all trade umder one name stood next to each other linked like one long joint or under separate names running around hedging between each joint trying to compile a human link up lol. staff training will be required too.
best thing that's happened since std ew terms... just get rid of win only now and pitch renting and happy days
racing snake rgt are only allowed to link them if the said pitches are trading under the same name that is the criteria otherwise have to be run as separate entities rgt have agreed to police it
anyway goodnite all enjoyed the chat but fri nite is pub nite for me and am in the mood to have a few pints of greeneking ipa tonite
Your 'democracy' point is noted Flash - 'theory' and 'practice' come to mind as do 'head' and 'sand' re some of the self-interest based views still being expressed. It will always be thus I fear but a journey of a thousand miles starts with the first step ! Trouble is this business does not have a thousand miles left on the clock.
you cant stop linking its like saying you are not allowed to lay back on betfair its unworkable and easy to get around the rules if you buy the right add ons at maplin electronics for 30 quid
^^^^^^^SUMMARY,IM ALRIGHT JACK EVERY MAN FOR HIMSELF,BRING IT ON!
The lack of response to previously posted questions speaks volumes. Others with views that the minority set the standards for the majority without that majority having a say have a point. One poster used the word 'revolution' - is that the answer every time a view is expressed calling into question what has been allowed to take root in the Ring ? On another subject - use of exchanges on course was allowed without consultation. If a poll of layers had been taken on this matter how do the forumites think the votes would have been cast i.e. FOR usage or AGAINST ? Honest, unbiased views appreciated.
know all..... think u are missing the point. hiding non allowed link ups is about as easy as hiding your turn over. books look at screens and also who talks to who. secondly most firms who link together now may try to link in future already exposed in the eye of the bet ring. imo it will be self policed and easily too.
democrat.... use of exchanges on course imo is a yes... I don't spin money through the machine like some books but believe it to be an essential tool to construct a book on quiet days and to keep an ipad or telephone arbors steeling the value. wish it didn't exist at all but it does so use at as necessary.
MUGBOOKIE,U WERE RIGHT ABOUT THE GAMMA RAY BURSTER
,PS DID U GET MY TEXT?
,PS DID U GET MY TEXT?
In answer to democrats question,if a poll had been taken when exchanges started and BF led a campaign to get exchanges allowed on course,the vote would have gone against them but now would go massively for them as the ring is now full of plenty who have never known anything else and wouldn't know how to work without them.
Using them on course is comfortably the worst thing ever to happen to the on course industry,turkeys for Christmas etc.
Using them on course is comfortably the worst thing ever to happen to the on course industry,turkeys for Christmas etc.
VERY TRUE RIBERO,A SLIGHT ADJUSTMENT TO YOUR POST SHOULD BE"THE RING IS NOW FULL OF PLENTY COMMISSION AGENTS WHO WOULDNT KNOW HOW TO WORK WITHOUT THEM" OTHER THAN THAT THOUST ARE SPOT ON!IM SURE U WILL BE PLEASED TO HEAR I TO HAVE TURNED TO THE DARK SIDE AND SHALL BE RENTING PITCHES GALORE AS FROM NEXT YEAR
You have gone a stage further than myself ribero in that my disquiet concerned no consultation regarding whether Exchanges on course should be allowed. You appear convinced that should opinions have been sought the majority would have opted for no Exchange usage. We shall never know if your assumption is correct but everyone will know the reason for the Ring's inevitable demise when not if it occurs.
DEMOCRAT,ALL IS LOST,COMMISSION AGENTS NOW DOMINATE THE BOOKMAKERS REPS ON ALL COMMITTEES,AND BETTING RINGS,RIBERO MAKES IT QUITE CLEAR HOW DARE THE BOOKMAKERS THAT HAVE PAID NEXT TO NOTHING FOR THEIR PICKS(WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE WORTH)DARE TO HAVE A SAY IN THE FUTURE OF THE BETTING RINGS,WHEN SOME OF THESE COMMISSION AGENTS HAVE PAID HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF POUNDS FOR PITCHES!
Truth - But with the way they operate how can they possible every get their original investment back yet alone hope to show a profit whilst at the same time bringing about the demise of the ring in it's in entirety.... 
sad thing is they think they are putting themselves at some sort of advantage...... they will never be able to compete with the King of the Ring Bigger than the machine....... long live the King..... and avoid all commission agents at all costs for the limited life span that the ring has left
sad thing is they think they are putting themselves at some sort of advantage...... they will never be able to compete with the King of the Ring Bigger than the machine....... long live the King..... and avoid all commission agents at all costs for the limited life span that the ring has left
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539