There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
IT APPEARS THE BRBA HAVE ONCE AGAIN WITHOUT CONSULTING ITS MEMBERS SPOKEN TO RACECOURSES REGARDING NUMBER REDUCTION IN THE BETTING RINGS ,IM SURE THEY WILL HAVE COME UP WITH A FAIR AND AMICABLE SOLUTION FOR ALL PITCH HOLDERS 
BEWARE THE ONCOURSE BOOKMAKER ASSOCIATIONS .
BEWARE THE ONCOURSE BOOKMAKER ASSOCIATIONS .
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 57
|
By:
BY THE WAY IF ANYONE OF YOU THAT BETS OUTSIDE THE TOP TEN PICKS STANDS FOR WHAT THE BRBA PROPOSE TO DO IN THEIR LATEST LETTER, YOU DESERVE ALL THATS COMING, THEY WILL EFFECTIVELY KILL THE ONCOURSE BOOKMAKING GAME.
|
|
By:
Surely if a racecourse can hold 20,000 people but they only let 5,000 punters in at the start you wouldn't bother turning up if you were outside the top 10 anyway so nothing to see here.......
|
|
By:
YEP SO IF THATS THE CASE THE BOOKMAKERS CAN RETURN RUNNING ONE PITCH, JUDGED BY THEIR ATTENDANCE IN THAT RING ,NO PROBLEM
 |
|
By:
Depends how many they got in the top 10 I guess....
|
|
By:
Depends how many they got in the top 10 I guess....
|
|
By:
Will you be falling into line with all the other green up merchants in the ring now fact? The Racecourses won't want any above the machine prices as this could lead to a rush down to bookmaker joints putting at risk the social distancing policies in place
|
|
By:
I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN FORTUNATE IN RESPECT OF MOST IF NOT ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES WERE PRACTICING SOCIAL DISTANCING WITH THEIR PRICES BEFORE LOCKDOWN, SO NOTHING TOO SEE HERE
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
If the proposed reduction in numbers is successful it seems reasonable that once no limit is placed on the crowd that an amended, streamlined designated no. of books becomes a permanent arrangement. I am sure the BRBA will make their decisions on sound principles.
|
|
By:
DEMOCRAT
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Not much chance of the above I wouldnt worry
|
|
By:
Was actually in reply to not putting anything up to equal or better the exchanges.
|
|
By:
I note with some dismay that the Lockdown time hasn't helped Factmachine locate the Caps Lock key.
|
|
By:
I think paris he wants CAPITAL punishment brought back for the BRBA !!!
 |
|
By:
agreed paris , he who shouts the loudest generally has nothing to say
|
|
By:
PARIS, ALWAYS REMEMBER SNAKES HARDLY MAKE A SOUND .
|
|
By:
factmachine - I think you will find, whatever your argument, well structured, correctly spelt, correctly capitalised prose will help advance your case.
Perhaps you should try it. AS OPPOSED TO SHOUTING ALL THE TIME. |
|
By:
'Please feel free to contact any of us if you want to discuss anything in the newsletter'....have the Northern Board learned NOTHING from the Pontefract debacle....your fellow bookmakers, who you profess to 'represent' SHOULD have been consulted BEFORE you 'put together a few ideas and sent them to the major racecourse groups as well as to 'responsible' and 'influential' individuals....whoever they may be !!!....what utter contempt you must have for some of your 'colleagues'
|
|
By:
If and only IF only ten bookmakers required, would it not be fairest to select the 10 with best attendance previous year, regardless of pick
|
|
By:
Barry....much will ultimately depend on how large a crowd the powers that be deem to be 'safe'....our fate is significantly linked to football....the Northern have proposed that regardless of crowd limit only TWO lines of SPACED out pitches be allowed !!!!!!....and yes,you are spot on, those who have supported a track to a significant degree, regardless of list position, SHOULD be treated with equal consideration !!!
|
|
By:
I would support that proposal Barry. Another option could be to - assuming 10 books required - ask the first 10 on the list for the first meeting, 11 - 20 on the list for the second meeting and so on upto the designated number.Then go round again. Even FACT might support something like this -but dont bank on it !! PS If any chose not to attend then go through the list until the required number is achieved ie first meeting picks 7 and 9 'opted out'and picks 11 and 12 accept then the start point at the next meeting would be pick 13. AGT to administer.
|
|
By:
BARRY, YOU HAVE BEEN IN THE GAME LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT FAIR AND THE ASSOCIATIONS DONT MIX, THE BRBA HAVE UNILATERALLY CONTACTED RACECOURSES WITHOUT THEIR MEMBERS KNOWLEDGE AND PUT FORWARD A PLAN I WOULD BE CERTAIN MOST OF THEIR MEMBERSHIP WOULD BE AGAINST,AT BEST AN ASTONISHING ACT OF CONTEMPT OF THE BRBA MEMBERSHIP!
|
|
By:
actually , it was the other way round . the RCA contacted the BRBA and asked them to provide idea's on how to approach racing with crowds might best work , starting with a minimal attendance and a small number of bookmakers........but , hey , why spoil a good story
|
|
By:
looking as though it won't happen before october at the earliest though unfortunately
|
|
By:
AND THE BRBA THEN CONTACTED ALL MEMBERS VIA THE AGT SITE (EASY TO DO) AND CONSULTED AND CANVASSED OPINION OF THEIR MEMBERS BEFORE SPEAKING TO THE RACECOURSES,....... DIDNT THEY ????????????
|
|
By:
I DONT THINK YOU COULD GET A CLEARER EXAMPLE OF AN ASSOCIATION NOT REPRESENTING IT MEMBERSHIP!
|
|
By:
we have our own forum on our web page which is quite active on this subject
|
|
By:
I BET IT IS, YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED ! |
|
By:
other points open to discussion are gambling commission and their annual fees [they claim that fees are set by statute ] and AGT and their expected and probable increases in charges. should be plenty to get your teeth into there , factmachine
|
|
By:
IM AFRAID BY FAR AND AWAY THE NUMBER ONE ISSUE AS FAR AS LOT OF YOUR COLLEAGUES ARE CONCERNED WITH IS THE FACT THAT YOU ARE PUTTING A PLAN OF ACTION TOGETHER THAT WILL ULTIMATELY DISENFRANCHISE YOUR OWN MEMBERS, IF THEY HAVNT GOT ENOUGH TO CONTEND WITH WITHOUT THEIR OWN ASSOCIATION TRYING TO SHAFT THEM.
|
|
By:
ADGE...Who are these 'responsible and influential individuals' ? Why does the Northern board feel it appropriate that they have knowledge of your ideas before your OWN membership and the wider bookmaking community...whose investments/livelihoods are most affected ?
'NO MORE THAN TWO LINES OF BOOKS IN ANY ONE AREA'....So some of the new MAXIMUM tatts numbers regardless of designated numbers or permitted crowd are 15 Betfair chase day at Haydock...15 at Market Rasen on Boxing Day....and if this continues into next year 10 at Beverley....all meetings !!!!! 'BOOKMAKERS TO COME IN NUMBER ORDER OFF LIST'....certain bookmakers will end up with lots of work trading from very advantageous positions....others and their staff will have very limited amounts of work and will no doubt have to find alternative ways to support themselves and their families. 'NO OPT INS FROM OUTSIDE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER'....almost certainly illegal....It's very telling that whilst you seem perfectly happy to prevent a bookmaker with a single purchased list position from earning a living.... given the opportunity....no trading restrictions will apply during this time to bookmakers who hold multiple list positions !!!. 'NO MORE THAN TWO PEOPLE PER JOINT INCLUDING THE BOOKMAKER'... If ALL bookmakers and staff have to certify that they are covid free before setting foot on a racecourse....what difference does it make how many staff are on the joint ?....I've a sneaking suspicion that a spare pair of hands will come in very useful to the five bookmakers operating on the rails on Betfair Chase Day!! 'WE VERY MUCH HOPE THAT THESE MEASURES WE HAVE TAKEN AND SUGGESTIONS WE HAVE OFFERED GO SOME SMALL DISTANCE TO ALLEVIATING THE HARDSHIP THAT ALL MEMBERS ARE EXPERIENCING DURING THESE TERRIBLE TIMES'.....As Factmachine often says.....YOU....SIMPLY...COULD...NOT...MAKE...IT....UP.... !!!! On a lighter note....It's amusing that the Gambling Commission is just about the only issue that on course bookmakers are in full agreement about....I've never ONCE heard any bookmaker say " that Gambling Commission are doing a sterling job.....and their fees are so reasonable ".....but these are interesting times.....and THEY probably live in hope.....on second thoughts.....probably NOT !!! |
|
By:
by far the number one issue is health and safety and complying with government regulations as we reach the time when racing with very limited attendances can resume
i can't foresee this being allowed before October though the much more minor issue to you that the gambling commission is so far refusing to refund any part of licence costs for the current year and being prepared to hold their hand out again shortly in august for another donation is noted. the BRBA also spent over £5,000 of members money on legal fees fighting the fines imposed on the ascot 7 . cases dropped , do you really believe that is a goodwill gesture. the BRBA have also reduced their annual fees from £100 to £50 this year which means an annual loss....we all wish others would follow suit |
|
By:
Adge....All for health and safety and complying with government regulations.....but I am NOT a member of the BRBA....I do not want the BRBA to represent me in ANY discussions with racecourses....when the RCA contacted the BRBA for ideas regarding course bookmaking on resumption you should of made it clear to them that you do NOT represent all stake holders, and as a consequence, it would be only fair to undertake some form of consultation process to formulate ideas/suggestions that may be of benefit to ALL concerned.....That you did not even attempt.....despite investments/livelihoods being at stake...that's not REPRESENTATION....that's CONTEMPT.
I can assure you that the Gambling Commission and their fees are NOT a minor issue to me Adge...neither are the other business related expenses that I'm going to have to find this year...with very little on course work !!!! |
|
By:
hello mugbookie , pleased to hear you're fit and well
your list of examples appear to suggest the bookmakers will be largely reduced but punters will not the betfair chase day and boxing day are way in the future so many changes could occur before then as a stark earlier example doncaster are hoping to have just 500 hospitality customers on st leger day although others are still hoping to race in august. we have to be more realistic , these are only suggested temporary measures to enable racing with public to return to clarify the pitch layouts....front line using odd number pitches only with one bookmaker and one staff on opposite sides of the joint [ to as near as possible satisfy self distancing regulations] , no second lines because clearly any punters in front of a second line book would be too close to the frontline computer man this doesn't mean that a third or fifth line can't be used. your beverley example for tatts would allow for tatts of 5 at the top end , 5 on the front line at the bottom end plus 8 on a third line near the fence but i do hope that 2021 will be back to normal and so will all original optimum numbers back in place. a number of the BRBA directors have had conversations with their MP'S to try to get them onside for the earliest possible return , i suggest that yourself and factmachine do the same |
|
By:
Yes, thanks Adge, reasonably fit...and well...you ?
As you post, if Beverley were to race... 18 would bet, that would exclude me and a number of others who attend nearly every meeting.Regarding spacing, pick 32 at Uttox would end up betting the middle of the second line past the gap....that would be unworkable with present expenses. Our fortunes are inextricably linked to football...many small football/rugby clubs will go under if they do not see a significant four figure crowd this year.....one or two racecourses will be no doubt in the same boat....little doubt that the powers that be are already acutely aware of this....but I'll happily lobby my MP to get YOU back into work Adge....them round the world cruises can be expensive...as I know  ... |
|
By:
i'm fine , my car has covered 31 miles since the week after cheltenham as i am in lockdown.
if we get racing back i probably wouldn't be attending unless the situation dramatically improves. in fact many senior pitch holders are unlikely to reappear too soon. i just hope next year returns to normal |
|
By:
Cant see it being worth turning up at any track off pick 32 for sometime to come.....
|
|
By:
DEPENDS WHO IS OPERATING IT
|