14/1 2nd place, 5th odds, you don't even double your money and people say great selection, great bet. You'll go skint if you think that'll work.

For the French 2000 they were happy to offer 5 places.

For the 1000 Guineas with the hot hot Fav for the Aga they only offered 5th 1,2.3!!! (Only two places were up for grabs)

So that was obviously a terrible race to play EW, you have to adapt. The goal posts are continually being moved in the bookies favour. 

I always thought Cheltenham a rip off with 3 places a race with a Mullins hot pot making it like the French 1000.

As you say each to their own, I like multiples and the payout at 1/5 is altered dramatically compared to 1/4.

Group 1’s were always 1/4 the odds and should be because with the domination of O’Brien on standard terms you’re playing for 2 places.

So I agree ew isn’t good.

Nothing wrong with 1/4 in a 5 - 7 runner affair…..

Back in the 50s and 60s it was 1/3 ace.

Before my time barstool…..quarter the odds in a small field…

Squeezed the pips out of everything.

Can anyone else remember how they cut and cut the old Chart Forecast on the greyhounds?

chart fcast for greyhounds ,great days
the beige/orangey greyhound racecard sat morning hackney dogs in laddies

1st time poster30 May 25 17:15Joined: 25 Dec 05 | Topic/replies: 57,251 | Blogger: 1st time poster's blog
the beige/orangey greyhound racecard sat morning hackney dogs in laddies

Assume you mean the Jackson & Lowe wall-chart?

I had a mate that swore if they Napped a Trap One at Bristol - you would always collect - tbf he never bought a round and often wanted a loan.

Brings back memories       


Mark Coton's account:-

"The 1982 Fulwell Chase at Kempton Park appeared
a mundane contest. True, the Gold Cup winner
Little Owl was in attendance but he faced only
two rivals in Venture To Cognac and Great Dean.

"Venture To Cognac had some useful form to his
credit but had become injury-prone and was
considered to need the run. As for Great Dean,
he had been pulled up at lowly Fontwell and
needed a miracle if he was to win such
a valuable prize.

"Little Owl was sent off the 4-11 favourite,
Venture To Cognac 5-2 with Great Dean appearing
for all the world a lost cause at 66-1.

"As far as winning the race was concerned,
Great Dean was virtually friendless.
On the course and in the betting shops it was
only the odd `just-for-fun' merchant and
habitues of the `outsider-of-three' system who
gave him even a moment's consideration.

"Or so it seemed. But dotted about the country
were a handful of shrewd punters who had spotted
the chance to make a killing on the race.
A chance, that's all. Those shrewdies didn't
_expect_ to pickup but knew exceptional value
when they saw it.

"And what a killing! Not only were these punters
expecting to receive odds of around 150-1 on
their bet, they were also gleefully awaiting
the chance to make fools of the big bookmakers.

"For once, the bookmakers had made a `rick' and
a mighty serious one at that.

"The mistake was in the format for the then
relatively new Computerised Straight Forecast
(CSF), which allowed for inflated dividends should
a long-priced outsider make the frame in a small
field.

"The Fulwell Chase offered an ideal chance to
exploit this loophole. All it needed was for
Little Owl to fail to complete the course (as
he had done at Cheltenham on his previous start)
and this would enable Venture To Cognac to win
with Great Dean hopefully putting in a clear round
to come second.

"The race went entirely to script for these
backers. Little Owl leading and seemingly
going well, swerved and was pulled up by
jockey and part-owner Jim Wilson at the 10th.

"This left Venture To Cognac clear of the already
tailed-off Great Dean. The former sauntered round
to win by a distance and Great Dean, with forecast
backers holding their breath, completed in his own
time to earn a place in the history books.

"Little Owl's bit had reportedly slipped, but
the bookmakers were not happy, especially when
they realised the extent of their liabilities.

"Payment was held back while BOLA and the racing
authorities carried out an investigation into
the race. No evidence of any misdemeanour was
produced and the bookmakers, suitably chastened,
paid out.

"They also called in their computer people to
change the format of the CSF to avoid such inflated
dividends in small fields in the future, and
the result was what is disingenuously referred
to as the `Harmonic formula' for producing CSF
dividends. Today, if Venture To Cognac were to
beat Great Dean in identical circumstances, backers
would receive odds of only 15-1.

"This was a blatant over-correction and the few
punters who were on were crying foul after
after the 1989 Eclipse in which Nashwan at 2-5
beat 200-1 shot Opening Verse. Those that had
the combination were dismayed to receive odds
of only 24-1 (the Tote paid over 50% better at
38-1), which provides a fine indication of
the high level of profit bookmakers build into
the CSF."

there's the debate in a nutshell been discussing it with SD SERVICES on x,around so called dirty ew bets
Chappers you lose a little bit betting 4,s ew, at least he admitted you lose,SD in his interview with Simon Knott,said you get 0.6% for 3,s getting placed ,we no what he means but he,s not getting 0.6% he,s losing at least 0.4% and I,d argue your losing a lot more because for most especially serious/pro punters its, 10 ew or 20 straight win
in Chappers case he,d get he,d get 68 quid back for his 10 ew at 4,s, I,d get a 100 back,so in my eyes he,s lost  not a little but a lot, at,3,4,5 to 1 ,at least one in 3,4,5 have to win anyway or you not winning so you might as well be betting on the nose
SD put it like this you don't like 4 to 7 for the fav to win, so although you don't think the 3,s 2nd best will win  have a few bob ew, there is a 3rd option leave the race alone as you obviously haven't got a strong opinion on the race or you,d be backing one straight win to beat the fav,
people surprised SD gets on EW but if you were a bookmaker why wouldn't you take dirt ew bets of SD,your not losing and as he,s the latest hot streak punter on the street,why wouldn't you rather him having half his stake on which must be plenty of winners ,otherwise he wouldn't be getting the headlines
long post but enjoy this EW debate,good luck ew or on the nose

I bet a lot ew at 8,s and above, enhanced places etc because I cant stomach getting lots of paced horses with no return, and 32 losing bets waiting for the 33td at 33,s to win,is imo a lot different than 3 or 4 bets backing ew on so called dirty ew bet,
anyone can buy 10 apples for a quid each and sell them at 80 p each doesn't make you a great businessman,  your trying to sell them at a profit
in Chappers case backing ew at 4,s,if 3 get placed,when the 4th one wins ,his little loss is 3 x a little loss ,taking of his winner is a big loss and if non winner he,s losing on every race anyway, he,s eventually turning 20 quid nots in to 10 quid notes.just prolonging the journey by getting a bit back

And that's just for EW single - without even touching on multiples or accas!

so more chance/value in the non Lester piggot ridden horse in the race or todays equivalent who've you obviously think you've spotted,which adds another place to the already enhanced places in some races

TM, most people haven't even got a toolbox.

Each way is such a killer. I was feeling chuffed when I backed a 9/1 winner yesterday. This morning, I woke up to the reality that I only got just under 11/2! It's hard to stop yourself though when the Fav is 11/10.

Nice win. Jockey had to pull out all the stops to get that one home.

He got a tune out of it swifty.

I would probably have gone down the Offal route rather than the musical instrument route - possibly why I never made it as a commentator.

Seven of the nine runner were 10/1 or shorter?

If that changes your take on the race and it's suitability for EW betting - from one pedant to another - sincere apologies.