NON RUNNERS DO NOT CHANGE THE PLACE TERMS?

Betfair are correct


its the number of runners when the market is formed on Betfair not declarations 


The Newmarket NR was yesterday just after declaration hence market wasnt formed until after when 7 runners - hence 1-2

the Brighton race the NR was after market formed

HTH

Rococoa (IRE)
Declared: Thu 28 May 10:17am
Reason: Self Cert (Cast in Box)



PS   post moore

Realize that it is not based on the declarations but how do we know when the market was set up though?

I am looking at the old site and it has the non runner clearly displayed in their rules with a reduction factor -

Withdrawal time

6. Rococoa  9.8% 12:02 (UKT)

This surely suggests that the non runner was included in their market??

dont see how, as they took it out at 12:02 yesterday

surely markets werent up till later in the day


not sure where their 9.8% comes from ...



Race card No.     Reduction factor     Withdrawal time
6. Rococoa     9.8%     12:02 (UKT)

The race declared on Wednesday so it is feasible the market went up Thursday morning.
 
The 9.8 % is actually the win market, this is the place market -


6. Rococoa  23.9% 12:02 (UKT)


If it was withdrawn with a reduction factor then surely it was in their market originally so 8 runners = 3 places.

Good point.

I think they must load the market with the non-runner already established as a non-runner. I don't know how they establish the reduction factor.

But if you look at the 2.00 Haydock for tomorrow, you'll see there's already a non-runner (9:09 this morning), with a reduction factor of 13.0%, although no money has yet been matched on the market.

so in the example above, punters have been hit with a 23.9 reduction and lost one place, that cant be right ...

this is the actual reduction factor


2:00    Newmarket    Rococoa(IRE)    Richard Hannon    DOUBTFUL    0    22:44    0%    0%

I don't think they're hit with anything. I think the market is loaded clean, and the reduction is purely theoretical, based on an expected SP.

The reduction factor seems to be based - [pre any trade] - on the seeding the bots have put up and are just sitting there  - as that race at Haydock highlights  - all the horses have a reduction factor despite no bets struck - hence the NR has come out with a 'made up' reduction factor never applied

my 11:43 post shows the real reduction factor re the HQ N/R

If you look at the Brighton 14.50 and Newmarket 14.00 on the old site they have identical number of runners and the same non runner scenario (i.e. one non runner displayed with a reduction factor) in their rules yet have different place terms. It has always been the case that if a runner is included in the original market (which it clearly has been in the Newmarket 14.00) then it counts towards the place terms.

I don't think it would be based on the bots. At the beginning, all you'd have is the 1.01 and 1.02 on the back side, then gradually they get a little more sensible.

not if nowt has been traded...

^
^

ged -

they do get silly in the early stages  - theres even minus ones in there


Reduction Factor      (1.59%) n/a

Not relevant to the place terms but take a look at the 20.20 Haydock race, they have not included the non runner 12. Nordic Beat in their market as I guess it was a very early non runner so correctly their is no non runner information/reduction factor displayed. Why then does the non runner/reduction factor information appear for the 14.00 Newmarket race if it was never included?

because that market was loaded without it in

the HQ was loaded with it in   - but as nowt traded was amended and no RF applied even tho shown


^ probably


simples

Presumably they are 'pre-loading' markets, with doubtful runners, leading to them loading markets with actual non-runners already in them, at which time the place rules are established (2, in the case of the Newmarket race, 3 in the case of the Brighton race).