There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Er 137.97 on here
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 36
|
By:
also said 66/1 betfair
 |
|
By:
I thought I must have misheard that 66/1 bit.
 |
|
By:
what did the nanny pay £30-£40?
 |
|
By:
some unlucky beggar layed £180 at 137
 |
|
By:
3.00 AscotFull Result
1stStamp Hill (22)50/1 2nd1.25LMjjack (27)25/1 3rd1LWithernsea (12)22/1 4th0.75LJohnny Barnes (8)25/1OFF 3.03.27 RanTote Win £112.90 ; Plc £16.20, £8.50, £8.50, £5.80 |
|
By:
First 4 all had form on soft ground. Winner back to its last winning weight. Shouldn't have been that hard to find.
|
|
By:
I expected less than 112 sparrow tbf
|
|
By:
in the old days they'd be saying that's why its best playing on the nanny
|
|
By:
A lot less wonders but the TV channels won't be telling you about the better prices.
|
|
By:
Backing outsiders with bookmakers is a complete mugs game.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
50/1 industry sp, 137 on here.
Compare that Friday's Yarmouth 13:40 where they 'accidently' ran a ringer ( yes, an imposter ) again 50/1 industry, 60 on here. A smoking gun indicating someone knew about the ringer, and betfair won't void the market. Shame on them |
|
By:
Not my type of race, dave1357.
|
|
By:
You've lost me there wonders.
|
|
By:
25/1 with bookies, 23 to lay on here = far from a mugs game
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
I only check the SPs which 98% of the time will be bigger on here over a price of say 10/1
|
|
By:
SP betting is the definition of muggery
|
|
By:
Assuming you all get on these morning prices
|
|
By:
who's 'you'?
|
|
By:
All the bookmaker punters on here. I am not one of them.
 |
|
By:
if bookies didn't exist and betfair was the only means of having a bet, then I'd be finding a proper job ASAP
but as a fair judge on here once said "I don't dig no roads" |
|
By:
We all have our different way of doing things.
|
|
By:
as it should be sparrow
|
|
By:
Some horse that Enable.
|
|
By:
pretty weak renewal but she is 1 of the better fillies we've seen in the last decade, classy horse
|
|
By:
SunRacing
SunRacing @SunRacing · 26m A 50-1 winner for one of @Templegate_tips ten to follow! Stamp Hill VERY MISLEADING templegate mentioned 6 horses his pick WASNT stamphill |
|
By:
"why would they void the market??? the weighed in signal was given, end of
yes it is an absolute fkin joke what happened but nothing anybody can do about it once WI, WI announced" I disagree with your opinion that nothing can be done about it. There is no dispute about the facts and the pertinent fact here is the winning horse was a ringer, the weigh in is just paper work. Betfair has in the past voided markets "in the interests of fairness", I'd really like to understand why this race does not get voided "in the interests of fairness". The industry has deemed it such an 'unfair' incident that they have paid out on 2nd place. As far as I know Betfair are the only company to have settled the market as though nothing untoward happened at all. Usually Betfair lead the pack when it comes ensuring that fairness prevails against cheaters, but not in this case and I'd like to know why. |
|
By:
nothing anybody can do about it once WI, WI announced"
I disagree with your opinion that nothing can be done about it its not an opinion, these are the rules of racing The industry has deemed it such an 'unfair' incident that they have paid out on 2nd place. I think you will have find that people who backed the fav have been given a CONCESSIONARY payment money that you have no right to as a punter if "fairness" concessions are important to you (like double result on stewards, money back on horses who refuse to race etc etc) then I suggest you take your business to the firms who frequently do this sort of thing as it is not what is going to happen on a betting exchange the rules of racing will rightly be upheld |
|
By:
let me draw your attention to other incidents where betfair voided the market "in the interests of fairness" such as the Voler La Vedette
race a couple of years ago. Betfair voided bets in this market, but the horse won and weighed in etc. Do you think betfair wrongly voided this market? if "fairness" concessions are important to you (like double result on stewards, money back on horses who refuse to race etc etc) then I suggest you take your business to the firms who frequently do this sort of thing as it is not what is going to happen on a betting exchange Actually, I come to betfair because they lead the field in fairness, all the flim flam you mention is just that: flim flam dressing. Integrity is important to me, stupid maybe, but that's the way I choose to play. Hey ho, I only lost £1300, I can swallow that but it's the lack of integrity that sticks in my throat. |
|
By:
the voler la vedette race was voided because the ridiculous sums of money that were being laid on VLV (@ 28s was it from memory??) weren't actual funds
it was a betfair system error a completely different set of circumstances to yarmouth yes the integrity issue is a MASSIVE problem for racing/betting I completely agree however, the weighed in signal is the final checkpoint before bets are settled whatever happens after that is irrelevant from a betting point of view ^^^^^^^^1 of the fundamental rules of racing if you cannot accept that you shouldn't be betting on racing imo I come to betfair because they lead the field in fairness that's news to me |
|
By:
however, the weighed in signal is the final checkpoint before bets are settled
whatever happens after that is irrelevant from a betting point of view ^^^^^^^^1 of the fundamental rules of racing if you cannot accept that you shouldn't be betting on racing imo The weigh in might be 'a fundamental rule of racing' but it might not be, because this incident is of such unfair proportions that even the BHA is convening a meeting specifically to propose the overturning of the result. but it is not a fundamental rule of betting "I come to betfair because they lead the field in fairness" "that's news to me" Now you're either being facetious or have formed an opinion without ascertaining the true facts, If it's the latter I suggest you verify your opinion with some research. |
|
By:
100% the result will be overturned as the "winner" is ineligible
but you clearly don't understand why you won't be getting paid here are the rules... Horseracing 13.1General All individual race markets will be determined according to the official result at the time of the 'weigh-in' announcement (or equivalent). Subsequent disqualifications, appeals or amendments to the result will be disregarded. I feel sorry for people who have lost money over this, it is grossly unfair but the rules have been applied to the letter the matter is over from a betting point of view move on |
|
By:
Correct and well-answered Wonders.
Unfortunately your adversary has not grasped the concept of the Exchange, where ex-gratia payments cannot be entertained in this or any other instances. Rules correctly applied here. |
|
By:
With regard to the BSP, yes it was slightly shorter than expected, I put that down to paddock watchers though that saw a well formed mare, mature for her age, in good condition and tickled her accordingly. They certainly weren't laying it.
Re the "fairness and integrity voiding" I'm not sure they have that anymore ( I couldn't find it.) It might be that the GC objected to a catch all rule under BF's discretion. |