Zeljko Ranogajec - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK harm-plan

Racehorse TALK



Zeljko Ranogajec - Racing Talk - Racehorse TALK

Author Topic: Zeljko Ranogajec  (Read 86899 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8732
O.P. « 2009-Aug-14, 09:37 AM »
To most insiders Zeljko Ranogajec is known as the biggest punter in Australia.  The following article in this morning's Sydney Morning Herald might enlighten some members on this forum, that it is possible to actually win on the punt, albeit ZR does rely on rebates to improve his bottom line........

The first Sydney sighting of Zeljko Ranogajec was at Ada Sutton's pub, The Vulcan, in Ultimo.

Ada, folklore has it, made her pile out of sly grog and did some punting for Darby Munro. More importantly, The Vulcan was a brisk three-minute walk from the sporting department on the fifth floor of The Sun-Herald building in Broadway. Mind you, it was not the first watering stop but if you were parked down that way it broke up the trip nicely.

Long after Ada had departed, word filtered through that a punter, outlaying huge amounts on the tote, was working out of The Vulcan. Lured by the promise of an extra percentage edge big-time Sydney tote punters were striking cosy deals with PubTAB licensees. The publican at The Vulcan, Richard Sharp, told The Gadfly (in The Sun-Herald) that "one of these guys tried to work out of my place. We had the fraud squad check him out. He doesn't offer the publican a commission, he just wants a place to stay. What he wants to do is pick up the 2 per cent [of turnover that PubTAB operators earn], but he doesn't offer the publican that, he just offers you rent. He offered me $650 per week which is just bloody peanuts . . . he's a mathematical genius, they reckon, but I wouldn't touch him. So he's down the road running a credit facility. He is punting big . . . I hear turning over $700,000 to $800,000".

That was Zeljko – pronounced Jelko and referred to by me previously with the J – back in 1993. He is now the biggest punter in the world with a reputed turnover of $1 billion a year. Computer skills have been a factor in his triumph but so, too, has anonymity.

Looking at most major plungers of the past many have been head-liners but hardly ended up on the bountiful side of the bottom line. In fact, some were last seen wearing a sandshoe and a gallosher.

Earlier this week, however, Z made a rare visit to newsprint. Street Talk in The Australian Financial Review reported that the sale of Tote Tasmania "is believed to have attracted the interest of reclusive betting billionaire Zeljko Ranogajec and his associate, Tasmanian art dealer David Walsh. It is thought the pair have placed a bid below that of Tabcorp and Tatts Group but will be considered because Ranogajec's wagers amount to a huge proportion of Tote Tasmania's turnover".

Seeking information on Z, the only real result came out of PuntingAce.com which reports Z "shuns publicity, only occasionally poking his head from the darkness, similar in style to the none-too-often appearances of that beast who hangs in Loch Ness".

Hobart-born in 1961, the son of Croatian immigrants, Z had, going on sketchy reports, "a natural intellect, a way with numbers rarely seen and memory that was seemingly photographic . . ."

Still, to get the real insight into Z you have to research an American, Bill Benter, and the late Alan Woods, one of ours. They discovered the river of gold that flowed from the Hong Kong tote, but also maintained a code of silence. Like Z, Benter and Woods were card counters and warned out of casinos, high-rollers who had the audacity to win too often. Wood, aged 62, died last year and PuntingAce.com estimated his wealth at $670 million accumulated from a standing start at a blackjack table. Insiders reckon it was more in the vicinity of $1 billion.

Consider the figure. Bob Ingham, bolstered by the family chicken business, was given the $1 billion tag by Business Review Weekly after he sold the Woodlands Stud equine empire to Darley.

For Woods "racing was nothing more than a mathematical equation to be solved with all players nothing more than a never-ending string of numbers," opined PuntingAce.com. He played the stock exchange but with not quite the success of horses. Obviously it wasn't as clean or predictable. Woods often bragged that he had not set foot on a racecourse for more than 20 years. Word has leaked about his end-of-season soiree for his staff in exotic locations where he really came out of his shell, performing a favourite party trick to the chant of "Go, Alan, go."

Research on Benter gives more insight into their winning ways.

"His secret was software," maintained Smart Gambler. "It scores each horse on 120 different handicapping factors then estimates its probability of winning and calculates the appropriate amount to bet. One reason Hong Kong is such a favourite with gamblers is that the same 1000 or so horses compete against each other throughout the season."

And the only direct quote that could be located from the three came from Benter in Smart Gambler: "If we do make money the money has come from somewhere? Well, yes, the general public loses a somewhat high ratio."

Which means sucker money aplenty in Hong Kong pools.

Generally Z seems to work successfully on a smaller margin and has even been known to play the trots in Portugal. "Anywhere he deems the odds are in his favour," PuntingAce.com pontificated.

"He has a staff of over 20 who watch videos, study form and make assessments." Once regarded as a "major, major player" in the United States, he has subsequently dropped off there. One well-known racing man after lunching with him said Zeljko was obsessed about people "robbing" him.

Yet he doesn't orchestrate plunges or sort out races. His style isn't based so much on big wins but returns of 1-2 per cent, in the opinion of PuntingAce.com.

Rebates received worldwide are a major factor to an incredible dividend.

Which is where the Tasmanian tote comes in. He gets a considerable rebate there, a point that has irked the NSW Government when the benefit of an Australia-wide pool is mooted. Tasmania investments go into the Victoria pool but Tabcorp is far more amicable to Z than the old NSW TAB. He rents office space from them in Ultimo, ironically not far from The Vulcan, and is regarded as a "Premium Punter". No doubt if he ran an end-of-season bash they would be only too happy to chant: "Go, Zeljko, go."

Me, I don't envy these computer boffins their bottom line. I wouldn't trade numbers for names and a cheer for Makybe Diva in her third Melbourne Cup or Sunline refusing to lay down in Hong Kong. Remember the song from High Society: "Who wants be a billionaire?"

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8732
« 2009-Aug-14, 09:44 AM Reply #1 »
Further to previous post the following was published earlier this wek in The Aust. Financial Review and this is what lead to today's item in the SMH.

It seems a couple of major punters are looking to upset the cart in the Apple Isle. Tote Tasmania, the wagering business being sold by the Tasmanian Government in a process that may fetch between $200 million and $300 million, is believed to have attracted the interest of reclusive betting billionaire Zeljko Ranogajec, and his associate, Tasmanian art collector David Walsh.

Offline Antitab#

  • Group 2
  • User 234
  • Posts: 2161
« 2009-Aug-14, 09:56 AM Reply #2 »

"He has a staff of over 20 who watch videos, study form and make assessments."


That figure is well in excess of 100.

Offline jordmike

  • Open
  • User 213
  • Posts: 135
« 2009-Aug-14, 11:09 AM Reply #3 »
The Life: Hong Kong betting syndicates
By Jay Johnstone
   
June 2005

Every punter has a system, but few involve 40-strong teams using bespoke software to routinely deliver seriously fat profits. Jay Johnstone looks to Hong Kong for the closest thing to a sure bet.

Crisscrossing telephone wires snaked along the carpeting of Rod Dufficy's cluttered home office near Hong Kong's Happy Valley racetrack. Dressed down in baggy black velour tracksuit bottoms and a matching gym shirt, Dufficy, 32 at the time, sat at a large L-shaped desk, rocking back in his chair and eyeing three computer screens crowded with numbers. He was cramming for a race that began in 22 minutes, calling up information from an online database and sifting it through a betting-analysis program built into his system.

The Australian was one of Hong Kong's elite breed of super-successful professional gamblers, computer-assisted horse bettors who work in teams and net millions at the races each year. That particular night, however, was not one of Dufficy's big-money sessions; he was down US$300,000 heading into this race. 'I'm going to have a lot of outlay on this next one,' he said. 'Maybe $550,000.'

Three slender Hong Kong sisters faced Dufficy, waiting for a printer to spit out a list of a few hundred bets with possible big payoffs. One sister grabbed the sheets and snipped them into strips, which she distributed to the other women. They punched the information into their handheld wagering machines, which transmitted it to the track via telephone lines, filling the room with the chirping of outgoing data.

Four minutes and three-quarters of a mile later, Dufficy looked up at a large-screen TV and watched thoroughbreds lunging past the finish line. He scrutinised a fistful of papers, then scanned the race results scrolling across his desktop monitor.

Strong in Hong Kong
'We've got wins - quinellas and a tierce,' he said calmly. He was $330,000 up on this single race. 'It'll put me ahead by $30,000 tonight,' he said. By week's end, his earnings would add up to a profit of about $130,000 for essentially two days of work - a typical cycle for Dufficy.

And there's plenty of dough to go around. So much so that Dufficy earned his fortune and recently left Hong Kong for his homeland of Australia. But it's not like Dufficy's departure has created a void or anything. Action still proliferates. As a half-dozen or so computer teams in Hong Kong will tell you, the allure centres on the city's massive handle - around $10 billion per year. It allows the teams to lay out hundreds of thousands of dollars on a single race without upsetting the odds.

But Hong Kong racing has other attractions as well: run by the not-for-profit Hong Kong Jockey Club, it is scrupulously honest (fixing would hurt computer bettors' calculations), and there is a pool of only 1,200 horses per season (a manageable number for the teams to track). Then there are the extravagantly exotic bets and parlays, comprising a rich smorgasbord of financial opportunities that seem custom-made for the computer teams. One, the Triple Trio, requires picking the top three finishers in three races and often pays six-figure dividends.

Computer teams pick winners by culling data from past performances and taking advantage of the public's miscalculations. They use bespoke software programs to determine their own odds, search for overlays, and place bets that can deliver big dividends for reduced risk.

Team leaders provide the multi-million dollar bankrolls, supplemented with investments from the 30 to 40 other members. Their jobs range from accounting to code writing to placing the bets. Annual salaries start at $50,000 for those who enter the wagers by phone and rise to more than $1 million for roles such as chief technology officers.

Westerners or Australians usually head up the teams and walk off with what's left after salaries and operating costs. William Ziemba, alumni professor of financial modelling at the University of British Columbia and a longtime observer of the scene, estimates that a top-notch outfit can pull in as much as $100 million in a good season, netting the boss a cool $50 million or more. While computer-generated horse-picking is not particularly new, it has reached an apex of sophistication in Hong Kong and is spreading beyond China. Teams have recently made inroads in the United States and Japan. You can easily spot tech gamblers at the track in Tokyo because they're the ones wheeling suitcases filled with yen.

Big fish, small bets
Competition among Hong Kong's computer teams is fierce. Tech secrets are closely guarded, nobody's keen to publicise their betting strategies and the cagiest players aim to hide their wagers from other teams - all of which monitor the flow of racing money via an independent online service called Telequote, based in Hong Kong.

Nobody's more skilled at masking bets than a team launched by Bill Benter, regarded by many as the most successful sports bettor in the world. Though he recently retired from racing, his team-members haven't. 'Normally, you'd see the odds go from 141/1 to 116/1 and know it's got to be a big professional bet,' says Dufficy. 'But Bill's team had its betting model set to disguise action with little $5,000 dribbles. They ultimately put the right amount on a horse, but did it over a sequence of time, leaving no footprints. That drove other punters crazy.'

Working from mathematical models that are calculated to deliver a 24% return on investments, Hong Kong's most sophisticated computer-assisted bettors operate with long-term certainty of what their profits should be. 'Racing is becoming more and more like a stock market model,' says Ziemba, who specialises in statistical analysis and edited The Efficiency of Racetrack Betting Markets, a collection of scholarly papers on the mathematics of horse wagering. Horses should be thought of as Microsoft or Dell, Ziemba says, and their past performances are the equivalent of economic charts that provide fodder for quantitative analysts.

'Racing is a financial market catching up with the rest of the world,' he says. The bedrock of a predictive betting system resides in a massive collection of data on each horse - including details about the tracks and jockeys. 'You massage all of that information into a mathematical equation that can be used for predicting probabilities,' he explains.

'If you wanted to get started in this, you would spend a year building the probabilities system, and it could cost $1 million to put together.' And that data bank needs constant updating.

Database driven
A typical team has employees whose sole job it is to review race tapes after every meet. They judge each horse on 130 characteristics - attributes like speed during the first third of the race, whether it got bumped coming out of a turn, the quality of its recovery from the bump, and how it finished - and assign numerical grades. This goes into the database, where it can be cross-referenced and called up to help predict the outcome of any impending race that particular horse runs in.

The software then determines each horse's likelihood of winning a race. When a horse's computer-generated odds are better than the public's odds, the team slams in its wagers.

'You create a model that can analyse each type of bet, judge the conditions (in terms of money in the pool and the associated odds), and tell you when it will be most favourable to bet,' explains Ziemba. 'You don't necessarily want to bet a ton every time - you only do it when you can find advantages.'

One top punter explains it like this: 'Our computer programme churns through the history of the horses and adjusts all the probability in a very sophisticated way. We feed that into our betting programme, which looks at all the odds for the various outcomes. It looks at your true chances of winning with the latest pay-off odds and calculates what the best potential bets are, based on the chances of winning and the odds. Then it runs through all the probabilities.

Formula Won Ton
'The mathematical aspect involves following a basic formulation that all successful gamblers use - whether they know it or not,' he says.

'It's having what mathematicians call a positive expectation on the bet. You multiply the probability of winning by the pay-off odds of one bet. Let's say the horse is 20/1. If it has a .05 probability of winning, you multiply that by 20/1. You get 1.0 - or 1/1 - and that is a fair pay-off bet.

'But if that same horse is paying 25/1, then it has a positive expectation. Now it is 1.25 (or 1.25/1). It gives you a 25% edge. Given that you know the true probability of winning, the amount to bet is a closed-form problem based on how much you can lay down without hurting your odds.'

Designing software to do all this is a delicate operation with seemingly endless pitfalls that can disastrously skew results. Benter, for example, went broke at least once before his system was efficient enough to turn a steady profit. 'Every year, more and more people come here and leave with their tail between their legs,' says Dufficy.

Whoever writes the team's software needs to decide early on which aspects of a horse's performance to take most seriously. For instance, if a debuting horse's odds of winning are 50/1 and it wins its first race, the software will note that - and might be inclined to view untried horses with long odds as good bets. So the system must be tweaked to give little weight to those outcomes. Other, more ambiguous factors - turf firmness, recent time trials, second-place finishes, and the jockeys' racing styles, to name a few - must also be taken into account.

'Memory is another thing,' suggests Kelly Busche, an economist who taught at Hong Kong University and consulted for one of the major teams.

'How quickly do you discount information? And to what degree? What happened two seasons ago should carry less weight than what happened last season. You need a model and a database that are both agile and robust enough to handle a variety of ever-changing situations.'

To build a good horse racing model, teams rely on workers with the skills of hedge fund technicians. Rumour has it that one of the teams has wooed programmers from Fortune 500 companies. 'You need a hardcore nerd who is good with numbers and has a mathematical and engineering background,' says one team leader. 'What we do with computers here is similar to what you see with Deep Blue. It's about attacking problems by fussing around and fine-tuning rather than using intuitive knowledge.'

Some punters believe the Jockey Club created big, complex bets like the Triple Trio as a hedge against the computer teams' skill-based advantages. The idea was that such wagers would be impossible to handicap, thus enhancing the luck factor and levelling the field. But things have not worked out that way. The biggest Triple Trio ever, paying a dividend of $18 million, was snagged by a pair of computer-assisted players who covered 900,000 possibilities with bets totalling $1.2 million. The top teams routinely make their fortunes through complicated parlays, quinellas, and exactas.

Revelation: the number of the beast
The story of computer-assisted betting in Hong Kong begins with Bill Benter, the US-educated, impeccably dressed technician who developed the first successful programme put to use at Happy Valley. The importance of his pioneering work is confirmed by rivals and experts alike. Benter got his start in the mid-1970s, when he discovered Beat the Dealer, a bible for blackjack card counters. He memorised the best-selling book's strategies and hit the casino circuit, where he met his future partner, Alan Woods, a former actuary turned counter. In Las Vegas Benter stumbled on a slim handicapping guide - and turned from casinos to horse racing.

Equipped with a $150,000 bankroll provided mostly by Woods, the two card-counters planned to apply the theories of winning at blackjack to winning at the races. Beat the Dealer, after all, had been written with the aid of a computer that analysed every possible situation at a blackjack table and assigned numerical values based on which cards remained in the deck. The idea, when you follow that best-selling guide, is to rigorously stick to its formula and bet high - even when you have only a tiny advantage. In the long run, despite frequent fluctuations and potentially long periods of losing, you will win a prescribed percentage of money.

By the time their computer programme had been fully refined, he and Woods had bitterly fallen out. But in the end, each wound up with an odds- and probability-crunching machine. Woods, now operating out of Manilla with a Hong Kong-based team, uses off-the-rack Pentium computers, still runs DOS, and employs an out-of-print program called Revelation for his database. At its core, it remains the original system.

Most telling of all, though, when winners cross the finish line, you don't hear even a whoop from Woods and his crew. As any punter can tell you, the real miracle of this technology is that winning fails to come as a surprise.

Exacting exactas? Exactly
The Hong Kong model is catching on. Consider that as the horses bolted from the starting gate at Gulfstream Park in Hallandale Beach, Florida, a few years ago, the odds for the winning horse suddenly went from 10/1 to 8/1. A gambler reported the shift to Gulfstream's Vice President of Finance, Bob Zambreny Jr, who discovered that in a three-second span, 167 exacta wagers were placed from a North Dakota betting outfit that attracts sky-high gamblers by taking low commissions and offering flexibility. Further snooping uncovered a computer team operating in the US using handicapping software similar to the systems employed in Hong Kong.

The team-leader used a special interface allowing him to batch his bets - to place dozens of wagers per second - into the system. This allowed the team to lay down a skein of complex exacta wagers after nearly all wagers were in, the odds were practically set, and it was relatively clear as to how much could be staked before upsetting the odds beyond a tolerable degree. The bets, automatically placed by the computer, ultimately paid out $246,020 on a total bet of $25,569. More impressively, over a 50-day period the team had reportedly netted $3.3 million in profits on $12.9 million in bets.

Gulfstream quickly barred the team from placing bets by computer, asserting all punters must have an even chance. Other racing professionals are more open-minded. In fact, Barry Schwartz, New York Racing Association chair, welcomes high tech action: 'Computers are simply another tool for handicapping. There's no guarantee of winning just because you're using one. These gamblers are willing to risk money just like everyone else.'

No guarantees, but the evidence from Hong Kong suggests it's the closest thing to a sure bet. There, the models have been taken as far as they can go, and it will be up to a new generation to tweak them for use in other locales. As handicapping systems seep into the mainstream, the innovators anticipate a future involving artificial intelligence - a Kubrickian computer that blends the human sensitivity of the best old-fashioned gamblers with the brute force of a supercomputer. If that day ever comes, traditional horse bettors may really have something to worry about.

Offline The Aussie Bricklayer

  • Open
  • User 481
  • Posts: 128
« 2009-Aug-14, 11:50 AM Reply #4 »
I find it very hard to believe that Zeljko Ranogajec even bets with any Australian TABs these days.

The betting landscape has changed, the stability of dividends has been eroded by Corporate Bookmakers betting BestTote and MiddleTote and Exotics, and sending this money back to the various TAB's right at the jump.

Practically every horse is at a better price on Betfair at some stage, than what the best of the 3 totes ends up at. In my opinion, it is now impossible to win especially on win betting on on the TAB's, because price stability now is non-existant.

I first met Zeljko Ranogajec. David Walsh and his brother Tim at Brisbane racetracks in 1988. The are clever punters, but nothing stays the same.

In my opinion, Zeljko and company would be huge winners on the UK racing on Betfair.

In saying this, It is now easing to win win than ever before, because it is now a Punter's Paradise for win only punters, because of Betfair, BestTote, TopFluct.




Offline Clibbo

  • Group3
  • User 537
  • Posts: 984
« 2009-Aug-14, 01:39 PM Reply #5 »
That figure is well in excess of 100.
Young Feller I know works for him doing pre - race analysis. Been there 2 years and never seen the boss.

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8732
« 2009-Aug-14, 01:57 PM Reply #6 »
TAB
Like you I came acoss Tim Walsh back in the 1980's. He fronted up with computers and a team of 'runners' on Victorian racetracks. He was an eccentric type and often sat on the floor with his legs crossed. At one time he called me a Ludite ,as I did not have a computer and I did all my betting by doing mental calculations. :clap2: He died prematurely with a form of cancer when I would think he was only in his early thirties.On the other hand, Z only came once to my knowledge to a Victorian high rollers room and that was on Melbourne Cup Day. :what:

I am fairly sure most of Z betting in Australia today would be on the exotics and as you point out, any value that was there in win betting has eroded as the corporates started laying off on the TAB

For many years on various forum I have seen it said "no professional has ever been taxed on their winnings". I would be prepared to bet with anyone that Z , who employs upto 100 staff ( ?? ), would  pay tax , probably under a company structure, on his winnings. Can ayone imagine that any operation , punting or not, that has an annual turnover of $ 1 billion would not be taxed ?

Offline Da Judge

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 408
  • Posts: 5557
« 2009-Aug-14, 02:00 PM Reply #7 »
he still turns over 500 million a year through the totes,he corrects the market,not the corps betting back

Offline Antitab#

  • Group 2
  • User 234
  • Posts: 2161
« 2009-Aug-14, 02:11 PM Reply #8 »
About 4 years ago the bloke that ran the TAB professionals room at Randwick told me Z turns over more than the next 10 biggest punters combined.

Suspect the corporates are turning over more now betting back so figure might currently be a bit lower.

Offline Magiciansmask

  • VIP Club
  • Group 1
  • User 410
  • Posts: 5939
« 2009-Aug-14, 02:25 PM Reply #9 »
I have a team of 5 working for me. The kids are on 'beer and snacks' duty and the wife is there to comfort me when i do my $50  ;)

Offline Mrs Judge

  • VIP Club
  • Listed
  • User 483
  • Posts: 292
« 2009-Aug-14, 03:28 PM Reply #10 »
Judgey only gets comforted when he wins. If I comforted him when he lost, he would just do it again.

Offline Shaftesbury

  • Group3
  • User 461
  • Posts: 640
« 2009-Aug-14, 05:43 PM Reply #11 »
Oh ..... so that's why I never "get any" when I lose ....... Winners are grinners I guess !  :clap2:

Offline VoRogue

  • Group 2
  • User 240
  • Posts: 2958
« 2009-Sep-02, 06:51 PM Reply #12 »
for someone who's tentacles spread right over to Portugal trots in his quest for "overs", he missed one almost in his backyard at bathurst trots, how does $32.90 sound on unitab for an exacta, horses involved started at $3.70 and $3.20 NSW home state tab. I think Zeddy is becoming unprofessional  :o :yes:

BATHURST
   
ST 1
   PAYING
02 Sep 2009    C3 TO C4    
2130M    FINE    FAST
   
               
6         KID COURAGEOUS    3.70    1.20    
2         ALBERTS CHARM       1.50    

8         TULHURST CRUSADER       5.30    
   SCR -
         
QN    2* 6    5.40    
EX    6* 2    32.90    
   
         
TF    6* 2* 8    180.00    
            
1         REVAMY                        4.2    1.6         BEN SETTREE               
2         ALBERTS CHARM        2.7    1.5         JASON HEWITT               
3         SPIRIT OF AURORA        7.3    2.5         NATHAN TURNBULL               
4         THATS THE STATURE    26.7 3.5         ANTHONY FRISBY               
5         CARDIFF ARMS    4            62.6 7.1         GREGORY RUE            
6         KID COURAGEOUS        3.7    1.2         ASHLEE SIEJKA               
7         LASSWHO                10.4 2.1         JOHN O'SHEA               
8         TULHURST CRUSADER    58.6 5.3         NATHAN HURST            
« Last Edit: 2009-Sep-02, 07:24 PM by VoRogue »

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8732
« 2009-Sep-03, 08:29 AM Reply #13 »
C'mon Vo, the exacta pool only had $969 in it,the approximate dividends are blind and Betezy did not boost the pool by $50,000 . I doubt very much as to whether our mate would bet on a pool of that size. :what:

Offline VoRogue

  • Group 2
  • User 240
  • Posts: 2958
« 2009-Sep-03, 09:46 AM Reply #14 »
Zeddy has his huge team looking at ALL meetings on ALL totes, making sure that overs like the above dont occur, otherwise people might actually build up a bank and damage HIS dividends, we cant have that now can we. I know without a doubt he bets on trots on all totes, the pools are constantly pre-loaded and fiddled with on interstate totes. Lots of suckerbait out there, as in 2/1 shots paying 12/1 early, they never win either, but strangely...a 7/1 shot on victab paying $2.20 early on Unitab runs very well  :yes: I dont bet each way, but it can throw exotic calculations out the window  :rant: Small pools never stopped Zeddy before, nor will they in the future. Anyone who bets on Portugal trots in search of overs is a force to be reckoned with  :wacko: And as far as the baiting of small pools go, well i can do that with the best of them  :yes: :yes:  :rant:

Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8732
« 2011-Mar-06, 06:17 PM Reply #15 »
I have just finished reading the book “Beating the Odds”, written by Nichola Garvey, which in essence is the life story of Allan Tripp who started out as a small time SP in Melbourne back in the 1970’s and finished up in Vanuatu running the Number One Betting Shop before on selling the business to Sportingbet, the company of which Michael Sullivan is the CEO.

In 1998 Tripp was approached by Robbie Waterhouse as Cinemagic, Waterhouse’s public entertainment company, was interested in buying an offshore betting business.The offer to Tripp was $10 million in cash plus a ‘significant number of shares with reasonable voting rights’ in Cinemagic,


Cinemagic had a number of high-profile directors; one of whom was Zeljko Ranogajec, who even then was reputed to be the biggest gambler in the world.

Tripp mused over the offer but could not see himself going into partnership with the Waterhouses and Zeljko.

In 2002 Tripp sold the business to Sportingbet for $100 million

That is one bet Zeljko did not win.  :shy:
« Last Edit: 2011-Mar-06, 06:23 PM by Bubbasmith »

Offline jfc

  • Group 1
  • User 723
  • Posts: 7283
« 2011-Mar-07, 04:05 AM Reply #16 »
I have just finished reading the book “Beating the Odds”, written by Nichola Garvey, which in essence is the life story of Allan Tripp who started out as a small time SP in Melbourne back in the 1970’s and finished up in Vanuatu running the Number One Betting Shop before on selling the business to Sportingbet, the company of which Michael Sullivan is the CEO.

In 1998 Tripp was approached by Robbie Waterhouse as Cinemagic, Waterhouse’s public entertainment company, was interested in buying an offshore betting business.The offer to Tripp was $10 million in cash plus a ‘significant number of shares with reasonable voting rights’ in Cinemagic,


Cinemagic had a number of high-profile directors; one of whom was Zeljko Ranogajec, who even then was reputed to be the biggest gambler in the world.

Tripp mused over the offer but could not see himself going into partnership with the Waterhouses and Zeljko.

In 2002 Tripp sold the business to Sportingbet for $100 million

That is one bet Zeljko did not win.  :shy:


And in between starting out and finishing Alan Tripp managed to acquire a criminal record for himself.

Here's a cute reference to Tripp's disparate associates:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/bbing/stories/s1133269.htm





Offline Bubbasmith

  • Group 1
  • User 197
  • Posts: 8732
« 2011-Mar-07, 10:21 AM Reply #17 »
Jfc
The book does not hold back on Tripp's criminal record for SP bookmaking, warts and all. Personally, I think the book is written without fear or favour to Tripp and if anyone has a knowledge of the punting in the 1970-1980's they will find the book a good read.

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31340
« 2011-Mar-07, 11:40 AM Reply #18 »
Quote
Helen Thomas:

 Politics aside, the arrests in Melbourne in the last few days, have made everyone jumpy. Again. And wild theories abound, the most alarming of which suggests last week's alleged foiled hit could lead to another murder. Or string of murders.

Another whisper has an alleged drug baron's money tied to a recent racetrack incident that led to a jockey and a bookmaker being disqualified
.

Victoria's Chief Steward denies this.

This is from june 2004, from the link provided by jfc.

Does anybody know who these people where ?

Offline J.Glenoban

  • Listed
  • User 421
  • Posts: 413
« 2011-Mar-07, 11:46 AM Reply #19 »
Craig Newitt and Anthony Cullen from the Leone Chiara saga i presume.

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31340
« 2011-Mar-07, 11:50 AM Reply #20 »
Craig Newitt and Anthony Cullen from the Leone Chiara saga i presume.

The race in question, must have been the one on the 15th Nov 2003 behind Fair Embrace ?

The time frame seems right.  8-)

What a broodmare Leone Chiara has turned out to be.

Offline gratlog

  • Group 1
  • User 5
  • Posts: 12700
« 2011-Mar-07, 12:00 PM Reply #21 »
Might have to check out ebay for this book as I see a lot of bookshops going broke down at our local shopping centre.

I have finally taken Magic's advice and joined pay pal so makes shopping on ebay a lot easier.

Offline Antitab#

  • Group 2
  • User 234
  • Posts: 2161
« 2011-Mar-07, 12:56 PM Reply #22 »
This is from june 2004, from the link provided by jfc.

Does anybody know who these people where ?

The rumour at the time was tha Mokbel was involved in the Leonie Chiara race, that would be the drug reference.  Not sure if was ever proved.

Offline Authorized

  • Group 1
  • User 18
  • Posts: 31340
« 2011-Mar-07, 01:05 PM Reply #23 »
The rumour at the time was tha Mokbel was involved in the Leonie Chiara race, that would be the drug reference.  Not sure if was ever proved.

There where rumors Mokbel was involved or a business partner of a prominent owner of a West Aussie filly and some imported mares wasn't there ?

Offline Tacca

  • Open
  • User 1156
  • Posts: 182
« 2011-Mar-07, 11:38 PM Reply #24 »
great thread guys really interesting:)


BACK TO ALL TOPICS
Sitemap