We want to share an important update with our Betfair Community users.
Over the coming months, the Betfair Community platform will be winding down. The final active day for the platform will be December 21st. From December 22nd, users will no longer be able to access the platform.
Your discussions, insights, engagement, and, most importantly, feedback have helped shape the platform and guided innovation. Your feedback continues to be important to us, and we will continue to listen via our dedicated feedback channels, as well as through product testing and innovations.
To share your feedback and experience, visit: https://support.betfair.com/app/home
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 87 comments are related to the topic:
Reversed result
Reversed result
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 87
|
By:
How can a SHADOW be, "PART of a horse's head" ? ...
That statement simply does not make sense. I am - correctly, surely, - IGNORING the Shadows, as BEING, 'part of Bird Of Life's head' - - and, consequently, NOT claiming that Bird Of Life's Nose is touching the White line ... Because it is NOT. But, I still also feel that NEITHER is Oregon Trail's Nose touching the White Line, EITHER. The more I look, the more I feel that you can see some POLYTRACK, between the White Line and Oregon Trail's nose. Either that - or Oregon Trail's nose is a different colour to the rest of it's head. Each to their own, however - and the BHA will have, presumably, had it enlarged even more we can access. |
|
By:
Is your name Felix by any chance?
 |
|
By:
onlooker, can you see the horses nostril on the far side ?
|
|
By:
I find myself with onlooker here..it's pretty impossible to separate them on that photo, it doesn't help that the image is very grainy
and has a whole lot of brown colour throughout. The brain apparently starts filling in things it thinks should be there, like when you see images looking at clouds or leaves, etc If someone had a computer program to separate the brown of the track from the colour of the horses, etc, then it should be clearer. At times I look and it appears the #1 far side horse has got up to win by a flared nostril, but when I look again I don't see it the same and the flared nostril has disappeared thus looking like a dead-heat, or even favouring the nearside horse. Some commentators on here are fairly confident they are seeing #1's nostril all the way to the line, but I am not so sure. |
|
By:
screaming - leaving aside your jokey jibe
 Can you CLARIFY what you mean by ... screaming from beneaththewaves 28 Mar 18 18:07 How can you ignore the black shadows? They're part of the horses' heads, ---------- Perhaps we should be talking Grammar, and sentence construction, here - and not the Photo. Have you missed out the words - APPEAR to be -"part of the horses' heads" ...? Because, otherwise, your claim is a physical impossibility |
|
By:
Sure. They're the shadows under the near-side nostril of each horse. The lights are shining from high above, the nostrils are flared, and they create shadows underneath the nostrils, which are parts of the horses' heads.
|
|
By:
Paddy power paying on the amended result, so at least Burkey will be happy
|
|
By:
The circular white ring on the bridle of Oregon Gift (if viewed leaving the paddock on Sporting Life results video) is 6 or 7 inches from the end of its mouth. On the photo finish the same white circle is about half that distance from the white line. I backed the loser in the photo.
|
|
By:
screaming -
To be kind - the nostrils are, of course, part of the horse's head - quite obviously. However - the way that you have posted - and AGAIN, in your explanation - STILL intimates that the, "SHADOWS are part of the horses' heads" - which simply cannot be so for adjudicating purposes. By that 'measure' - Where the Sun to be directly behind horses, in a race - and when the horse was still a Head from the line - But the horse casts a forwards SHADOW, that touches the line - then that would be, "part of the horse's head" - and count for the Winning Result. Of course that is Not, and cannot be, the case However - Forgive me for being pedantic - but that is how your repeated statement, "the SHADOWS ARE PART OF the horses' heads actually does read. |
|
By:
SkyBet paid me on this - didn't realise the result had been reversed until I saw this thread. Fair play to them. Thank god I didn't use Betfair.
|
|
By:
Not kingogtheheadbop then^^
|
|
By:
^^^
|
|
By:
The BHA announce that in future a BHA official will have a look at the photo in addition to the judge. Expect some long photo deliberations
|
|
By:
"Extensive new procedures" were introduced when this happened in 2016...
|
|
By:
Much easier to sack the judge but this one went to a better school than Smudger
|
|
By:
356 just settled after ringing up
|
|
By:
Good - That means much more Photo Betting on here ...
- with many Markets sliding towards 'Evens each of Two' - the longer that it takes. |
|
By:
yeah horses that have won a short head will go 1.5 money money money
 |
|
By:
Excellent photo deliberation news
 |
|
By:
I backed Bird for Life at 2.88 to get the photo and cover my stake on Oregon Gift.
|
|
By:
Well name winner in an earlier race there Ripp Orf
|
|
By:
This sort of stuff really doesnt help when im trying to get friends interested in horse racing. Ridiculous
|
|
By:
Bring back Jane Stickels I am sure she would called the correct result.
|
|
By:
The photo technology being used is obviously inadequate and/or the BHA's website reproduction of the photos. The pictures are often grainy and
unclear. In 40 years of following US racing I have never come across an incidence of this nature. There the photos are crystal clear and always include the mirror image. The same in France. It's not that surprising that ,given the poor quality, judges are occasionally going to make mistakes. The problem with the photos is that it is often very difficult to separate horses' noses from the background. Whether the result is called correctly or not when will the BHA realise that 'justice must not only be done it must be see to be done'? |
|
By:
well said rograin, it's embarrassing
|
|
By:
it is true the technology used is shockingly inadequate given the bha drive to bring horseracing into the 21st century.
|
|
By:
they'll have to drive it into the 20th century first ...
|
|
By:
re: Quality of PHOTO-Finish Prints.
I agree - they are abysmal in anything other than a very bright sunny day Irish Photo Prints are also crystal clear - becacuse they still use PHOTOGRAPH technology - - whereas - the BHA thought they were being clever by adopting a VIDEO technology system - as the system also gives fractions of a second differences between the finishers - from which, the BHA/Judge then CALCULATES the Distances between the horse ... on a pre-determined time-scale. This has really backfired badly on the BHA - with many racing followers and punters often questioning some of the Distances announced - compared to the naked eye ... So, that is another UNSATISFACTORY issue. that needs addressing. Of course, with the BHA, it will not happen - as it would mean abandoning their 'brilliant' idea  - and reverting to proper Camera Photo-Finishes, with the Judge deciding the Distances, as before. |
|
By:
you would much prefer to have the right result rather than a pinpoint distance
|
|
By:
anyone get paid out from powers on this, oregon let my mate down for a lucky 15.
|
|
By:
oregon didnt let your mate down . those blind f*ckers @ the track did.
|
|
By:
And we don't want results like at Bangor a couple of months ago when a horse that wins by MORE than a nose is given a dead heat. What are you going to do about that track (and others ) BHA ?
|
|
By:
I know the enquiry made the photo irrelevant btw but that's not the point.
|
|
By:
paddy power paid out on the amended result luckyme
|
|
By:
looked like a lot more matched on that chelmsford photo than normal? Has the new procedure kicked in immediately?
1.02 £13,665 1.03 £30,237 1.04 £25,789 1.05 £2 £17,695 |
|
By:
The judge F Wheeler commentates at Point to Points, he has called the wrong horse throughout the race at Badbury Rings, even when its passed the post he didn't realise his mistake... c$$t
|
|
By:
Tight photo finish calls can often be misleading at first glance and present a challenge on racedays when there is a time pressure.
WTF, what time pressure? And how much longer does it take to be certain? |
|
By:
Smith sacked. If this guy keeps his job, why ?
|
|
By:
^ probably because he is named Felix - and not plain Smith.
'Old School Tie', and all that. |
|
By:
there had been plenty of complaints re dave smith before he messed up, he was calling photos in seconds on a number of occasions, it wasn't just his error he was plain reckless
|