DONT FORGET SUPERSTARS OF THE SPRING ENTRIES THIS COMING COX PLATE WEEKEND !!!!!
Varro

TAB - did you offer BGP excusive fixed odds bet, and offset extragent price against the tote punter

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Trump said:

If a bookie doesn’t/didnt lay he/she would be out of business pretty quickly. Laying off has been a practice for as long as bookmakers have been operating. It’s part of their “Risk minimising” strategy. It’s a prudent thing to do in any business.

Been done since for ever , thats bookmaking . However what the issue that is discussed here is totally different , its IF the Statutory Monopoly for Betting in NZ abused their State sanctioned Monopoly by hedging a closed private one to one bet against an unsuspecting captive audience betting into the public tote pool . Are you OK with it Trump  IF and it is clearly an IF this has happened , nothing for definite .  I can think of the possible integrity issues and possibilities of difficulties  of State Monopoly betting privately and closed IF this is allowable , this was not an open book .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Red Rum said:

Been done since for ever , thats bookmaking . However what the issue that is discussed here is totally different , its IF the Statutory Monopoly for Betting in NZ abused their State sanctioned Monopoly by hedging a closed private one to one bet against an unsuspecting captive audience betting into the public tote pool . Are you OK with it Trump  IF and it is clearly an IF this has happened , nothing for definite .  I can think of the possible integrity issues and possibilities of difficulties  of State Monopoly betting privately and closed IF this is allowable , this was not an open book .

Lots of ifs and well done for qualifying it. So if the TAB did not lay the BGP bet  through NZ tote pool whats the outcome of this whole thread??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JJ Flash said:

Lots of ifs and well done for qualifying it. So if the TAB did not lay the BGP bet  through NZ tote pool whats the outcome of this whole thread??

Brilliant news it would be  JJ ,if this is a red herring, I'd be pleased  ,  they would have proven themselves to have integrity. Correct totally correct always an IF . But worth the discussion IMHO given the different aspects of this bet . 

As I've put a ton of times , loyal TAB punter and no fan of BGP , but think are they good for industry , they are neither here nor there with me , it's just the private punt is not IMHO a good look .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JJ Flash said:

Lots of ifs and well done for qualifying it. So if the TAB did not lay the BGP bet  through NZ tote pool whats the outcome of this whole thread??

Just one further point JJ , you give me well done I put IF , well that's because it is  only merely a discussion that it could have  happened in theory not that it did happen at all  . The thing is though you seem to be quite fine with a wager if it played out like this so from your point of view wouldn't IF be a non requirement in this discussion ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of IF's here.

Varro also raised was the takeout rate on the pool adjusted in the TABs favour (which I would've thought was extremely unlikely). IF it was without notice that would be an issue that would bother me.

For most punters using technology to bet the odds were freely available to them via the website. And the quinella pay out got bigger rather than smaller closer to the race going. Personally I wouldn't have bet into a quinella like this which had attracted so much publicity without checking the Will Pay. But I equally accept many would have or don't have access. That is a risk the punters who don't research odds take with all quinella bets they place though isn't it ?

Another IF - what happens if the third horse gets going a bit earlier and runs past the Te Akau one? Quinella payout over odds and the TAB/BGP (assuming Varro is right) have subsidised punters with the quinella ? 

I'm interested to know IF the TAB did do this. I know for a fact that certain punters get enhanced odds from time to time (Fixed Odds - I have no drama with this - and presumably Varro wouldn't either as any impact it had on FO would be transparent  - although the quinella pool here was transparent too).

Result of all of the above is I don't have the outrage Varro feels about this issue IF it did happen. I saw the odds and chose not to play in that pool. But the debate is interesting and I hope Varro finds the answer and follows through to the extent he needs to.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Red Rum said:

Brilliant news it would be  JJ ,if this is a red herring, I'd be pleased 

I think that its highly likely that's the case but like the opposite side of the case- only the TAB bookie knows.

All parties are thus speculating. But according to Varro and others elsewhere i'm an idiot who doesn't grasp the issue. For the record , I'm thinking why would you risk alienating your clients for say a 20K loss on a promo bet. If you see the numbers from last 2 minutes to close it does not make sense unless they took the F/O bet then plonked it all back through tote in bits and pieces and theoretically  locked in a loss??

As for the BGP bet/promo- someone far more experienced than me in marketing said what  a smart piece of work it was. His reasoning, everyone was talking about:, the bet itself, the outcome and subsequent backlash  re tote divvy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, JJ Flash said:

I think that its highly likely that's the case but like the opposite side of the case- only the TAB bookie knows.

All parties are thus speculating. But according to Varro and others elsewhere i'm an idiot who doesn't grasp the issue. For the record , I'm thinking why would you risk alienating your clients for say a 20K loss on a promo bet. If you see the numbers from last 2 minutes to close it does not make sense unless they took the F/O bet then plonked it all back through tote in bits and pieces and theoretically  locked in a loss??

As for the BGP bet/promo- someone far more experienced than me in marketing said what  a smart piece of work it was. His reasoning, everyone was talking about:, the bet itself, the outcome and subsequent backlash  re tote divvy.

It would be great to know either way,  the quin pool was quite large in comparison , I think it is a  question that Dean MacKenzie or someone in authority at TAB  should answer as clearly a number of people and mates I've spoken too agree it's an issue of integrity . Remember IF they dumped funds into quiniela pool , it could happen in another pool after another private bet and this could affect you next time as the unwitting patsy . I honestly believe it needs clearing up by them . I really do hope they didn't,  I am sure it would be against their policy , to be clear I am talking private closed bets only .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, JJ Flash said:

I think that its highly likely that's the case but like the opposite side of the case- only the TAB bookie knows.

All parties are thus speculating. But according to Varro and others elsewhere i'm an idiot who doesn't grasp the issue. For the record , I'm thinking why would you risk alienating your clients for say a 20K loss on a promo bet. If you see the numbers from last 2 minutes to close it does not make sense unless they took the F/O bet then plonked it all back through tote in bits and pieces and theoretically  locked in a loss??

As for the BGP bet/promo- someone far more experienced than me in marketing said what  a smart piece of work it was. His reasoning, everyone was talking about:, the bet itself, the outcome and subsequent backlash  re tote divvy.

It's probably a matter best dealt with by a question to DIA gambling regulator to look into a clear up and set against the law , regulations and policy if nothing is forthcoming from the TAB PR office .

Anyway Wellington Cup Day Saturday , good luck on punt JJ 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Red Rum said:

t's probably a matter best dealt with by a question to DIA gambling regulator to look into a clear up and set against the law , regulations and policy if nothing is forthcoming from the TAB PR office .

Do you know if anyone has actually contacted NZTAB??  None of the incensed have. or we would quickly know about it🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, JJ Flash said:

Do you know if anyone has actually contacted NZTAB??  None of the incensed have. or we would quickly know about it🤔

I have and am yet to receive a reply. I note Red Rum asked Scooby to add as a late question to Dean.

That is it, and that is why I have been so vocal as it is a matter of integrity.

A number of things I have raised here, is also because of information from others which I have been told about, like for e.g. take out rate on that race being different. That is why I asked in this post, at the very beginning because i know for a fact TAB marketing read this site.

The issue is not the promo, nor the bet option, or even as some have said the inflated odds you could say BGP got.  My info is that the take out was different, and if what I understand is correct that the TAB layed the bet via their tote pool then that is using the tote fund inadvertently potentially subsidizing the BGP bet.  

 

hence the title of this thread being above, because ultimately i am directing this at the TAB and we are discussing this further via the forum.

Chelseacol, the quinella pool is not transparent, if the above is correct, and the TAB accepted the bet, the will pays from that point onwards were then never going to be a true reflection of the tote, (one mentioned earlier potential manipulation) as it appears they then drip fed the tote pool to include liability of BGP bet.

The TAB reads this site, I know along with others the TAB have been sent emails on this matter, not one reply as of yet.  

As a matter of integrity I think Scooby you should raise this with Dean to see if this can be clarified or a representative of the TAB come on here and provide some clarity on this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Varro said:

I have and am yet to receive a reply. I note Red Rum asked Scooby to add as a late question to Dean.

That is it, and that is why I have been so vocal as it is a matter of integrity.

A number of things I have raised here, is also because of information from others which I have been told about, like for e.g. take out rate on that race being different. That is why I asked in this post, at the very beginning because i know for a fact TAB marketing read this site.

The issue is not the promo, nor the bet option, or even as some have said the inflated odds you could say BGP got.  My info is that the take out was different, and if what I understand is correct that the TAB layed the bet via their tote pool then that is using the tote fund inadvertently potentially subsidizing the BGP bet.  

 

hence the title of this thread being above, because ultimately i am directing this at the TAB and we are discussing this further via the forum.

Chelseacol, the quinella pool is not transparent, if the above is correct, and the TAB accepted the bet, the will pays from that point onwards were then never going to be a true reflection of the tote, (one mentioned earlier potential manipulation) as it appears they then drip fed the tote pool to include liability of BGP bet.

The TAB reads this site, I know along with others the TAB have been sent emails on this matter, not one reply as of yet.  

As a matter of integrity I think Scooby you should raise this with Dean to see if this can be clarified or a representative of the TAB come on here and provide some clarity on this

Want is needed is easy , Tab to confirm they didn't hedge by dumping into tote pool , didn't mess with any cuts , and that private bets are within their regs and policy , if so do they think it's a great idea for private side bets . 

Im sure there is an answer out there from Tab , it will come .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.