U.S. Horse Racing
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I've never seen this before, but perhaps I've just never come across it.
Commentator announces the late scratch of horse 2 and therefore horse 2B was declared as "running for purse money only". Horse 2B duly won, leaving the 2nd horse to be declared 1st for betting purposes, despite horse 2B winning the race.
I assume this is because it was a linked horse with a late scratch and this is standard practise for late scratches involving linked horses? I suppose they have to do this for the Tote?
Commentator announces the late scratch of horse 2 and therefore horse 2B was declared as "running for purse money only". Horse 2B duly won, leaving the 2nd horse to be declared 1st for betting purposes, despite horse 2B winning the race.
I assume this is because it was a linked horse with a late scratch and this is standard practise for late scratches involving linked horses? I suppose they have to do this for the Tote?
Show More
Betfair removed this runner very late so if you didn't refresh your screen it was showing as a runner. I'm guessing that's what happened to the 1000 layer on the 4 horse who went on to 'win' the race (for betting purposes anyway), I'm assuming the 2B was still in his betting market.
I can't answer why the 2B couldn't run for betting purposes in the US ,but more pertinently why did Betfair remove it from the UK market which could have stood all 7 runners in a 7 runner betting market.
I can't answer why the 2B couldn't run for betting purposes in the US ,but more pertinently why did Betfair remove it from the UK market which could have stood all 7 runners in a 7 runner betting market.
Think this explains it quite well.
First, everyone should understand that this is a rule of the New York State Gaming Commission, not NYRA, so before you go spouting off on Twitter or anywhere else, it’s good to get the facts right. The rule exists to protect bettors who may have been focused on a stronger part of the entry. Imagine the complaining if you bet on an entry with a much stronger partner and that horse scratched, leaving you with the “rabbit.”
First, everyone should understand that this is a rule of the New York State Gaming Commission, not NYRA, so before you go spouting off on Twitter or anywhere else, it’s good to get the facts right. The rule exists to protect bettors who may have been focused on a stronger part of the entry. Imagine the complaining if you bet on an entry with a much stronger partner and that horse scratched, leaving you with the “rabbit.”
Man USHR is confusing as anything. Never knew what the A/B thing was about, so B is only there to support A?
a) If we back 2B where 2A is in the race do we win?
b) If we back 2B where 2A has been a late scratch and not removed in the market do we lose?
RULES state "BETS ARE PLACED ON A NAMED HORSE. Horses are NOT COUPLED." which suggests we win in both cases but no idea
a) If we back 2B where 2A is in the race do we win?
b) If we back 2B where 2A has been a late scratch and not removed in the market do we lose?
RULES state "BETS ARE PLACED ON A NAMED HORSE. Horses are NOT COUPLED." which suggests we win in both cases but no idea
Coupling is for the US tote market only. In the US Tote you can only bet on them as a pair, so you stake on horse 1, which includes both 1 and 1A. For the UK Betfair market they are NOT coupled so are treated as separate selections.
The anomoly here is that I assume due to US Tote coupling, if one of the couple is late scratched then it's partner is deemed a non-runner for betting purposes, even though it still runs in the race. This is what happened in the example I gave. As it is deemed a non-runner for betting purposes in the race Betfair choose to also exclude it for better purposes. Therefore it would have been a non-runner on BF.
The anomoly here is that I assume due to US Tote coupling, if one of the couple is late scratched then it's partner is deemed a non-runner for betting purposes, even though it still runs in the race. This is what happened in the example I gave. As it is deemed a non-runner for betting purposes in the race Betfair choose to also exclude it for better purposes. Therefore it would have been a non-runner on BF.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539