Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK harm-plan harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Inflated fields – assessing the consequences about to unfold  (Read 12312 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline bascoe

  • Open
  • User 2568
  • Posts: 123
« 2018-Dec-18, 10:17 PM Reply #150 »


Working back from 'lotto like' dividends is a clue to a race that was unfair.
If we could ‘work back’ from the dividends wouldn’t we also have a clue about the results? Just shows how out of touch you are...

Try draughts or tic tac toe - punting seems beyond you


Sent from my iPhone using Racehorse Talk

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4393
« 2019-Jan-05, 08:15 PM Reply #151 »

RVL has much to answer for -- not least Caulfield today.

The early quadrella paid $70k.

There were two grossly inflated  F4s -- one paying $83k and another $25k.

The two races over the notoriously unfair 1400m, saw F4 dividends of $4.7k and $4.6k.

............ these outcomes are consistent with determination to take the bucks over delivering a fair product ....... they are especially pleasing to corporate bookmakers.

Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4393
« 2019-Jan-17, 06:09 PM Reply #152 »

Nothing funny about this farm fiasco

On Wednesday, the average starting price of the winning quadrella runners was 33/1 +.

The quadrella dividend 'should pay' was in the range $600,000 to $1,000,000+  -- some two-thirds of the Quadrella pool was 'jackpotted'.

Perusal of the newspaper tipping polls suggested these 4 winners were 'a complete surprise' to everyone.

No one would have any confidence that RNSW will spend any time reviewing 'what happened' and 'why' -- or if they did that any policy changes would be made.

Imagine the joy at  Tabcorp and other fixed-odds 'booktakers'.


Offline Peter Mair

  • Group 2
  • User 326
  • Posts: 4393
« 2019-Jan-19, 08:48 PM Reply #153 »

A tale of two cities -- a disgraceful tale of one city

.......... as mature observers of what passes for racing gambling in Melbourne ...............you will be able to compare the outcome of Melbourne racing today with  that in Sydney.

The comparison could hardly be more starkly damming of the quality of the racing presented in Melbourne.,

Use your own benchmarks: mine are the 'tips' published in the SMH as 'Monty's Top 5' -- an analyst without peer in the media.

Today , in Sydney, Monty's only 'miss' was the overcrowded 16 starter low-grade 'HWY' for rural runners -- races that have no place on a Saturday metropolitan program.

Otherwise Monty included every winner in his 5 -- in 7 races he had 3 of the first 4 and in 2 races he had the first4.

In Melbourne there was the usual shambles.

.......... 6k and 12k quadrellas - F4 dividends of 50k, 30k, 13k, 7k, 5k and 4k  -- an absolute indictment of the 'rubbish' quality of the racing presented by RVL.

Monty included the winner in his 'top-5' in 5 of the 9 races but otherwise fell well short of a comparable performance with his Sydney selections.

This characteristic outcome is disgraceful --the fixed-odds corporates revel in the absence of any semblance of product quality control in the racing presented by RVL.

...... talk about a field-day .............. the corporates would be overjoyed ..... will probably sponsor more rubbish racing.

The TAB pools on the MN quadrella  ran to some 'went-west' $2 million+ and the corporates would have lapped up more.

The Victorian government should put a full stop to this rorting of TAB punters.



 

Offline ratsack

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 327
  • Posts: 10328
« 2019-Jan-19, 09:07 PM Reply #154 »
Doesn't matter which horse wins the take is the same


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap