Your Competitions

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more

Start Tour

‹ back to topics

There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.

When the Fav does not exist - Settlers

bettysboy

24 Oct 13 19:11

Joined:

Date Joined: 04 Oct 02

| Topic/replies: 3,649 | Blogger: bettysboy's blog

I posted the Div 1 table last night, simply by looking at the RP website who declared no FAV so settled as a loser. Clearly though the winner was the shortest price horse in the race, but not declared as Fav.

Methinks, it should be settled as a winner, being the shortest priced horse.
I know there has been discussion today, but as far as I can see only Divs 1 & 3 have been affected.
I agree it should not be settled as a loser nut logically would also think it should be settled as the winner, being the shortest priced horse - just cos the bookies are too lazy to declare it the Fav doesn't make it not so.

Whatever we can agree to disagree across te divisions or agree to a standard treatment.
What you all think

Pause • Switch to Standard View When the Fav does not exist - Settlers

Report Shanelee1966 • October 24, 2013 7:21 PM BST

I was of the same opinion as you bb, but it looks like the industry called the favourite a non-runner.

Report bettysboy • October 24, 2013 7:31 PM BST

The deductions rule would suggest that an 11/2 shot is considered favourite above the 6/1 shot - otherwise the bookies would have the same deduction?

Report Shanelee1966 • October 24, 2013 7:35 PM BST

You can make a good point for either given last night`s circumstances bb.

Report Shanelee1966 • October 24, 2013 7:39 PM BST

Reg had a look round for bookies rules, here goes.

Clearest guide I can find is this from Corals rules:

Where a horse is withdrawn not under starters orders but is still returned favourite (i.e. no new market is formed), then bets on that favourite are void. Bets will not transfed to the second favourite.