Betting Vaal 5/10

The betting for the Vaal has been out for some time now. It's ridiculous that bookmakers such as Fouries and Hollywood don't have the betting on their websites.
Are they waiting for the market to settle?

Well done guys. Still no betting. Think its time to move to Bettingworld. Their betting for Durbanville is out already.

Normally the betting for racing up North only comes out the afternoon before the Natal lads usually a day earlier if not mistaken.

No Scotia. The official betting was disseminated. They just didn't load it on their websites. They have both since loaded it(about 2 laters late). That doesn't help us punters who wanted to have a bet on horses that have shortened. (Engagement for example).

ok with u and txs for tip?

I think Hollywood was a bit delayed because they were movin office. they have apologised.

Some discrepancy in the form guides in race 4; according to Formgrids Woman of the Year and Behind the Lines respectively finished 16.25 and 19.75 lengths behind Shuffles last time; Computaform shows 9.5 and 13.0 lengths; which is correct?

All the Best to Fair Brutus (tu)

Frodo I guess Brian Roux helping with the form Guides. One is VAT INC and the other is VAT EXC.

So just apply what ever % to the lengths and you get close to the actual distance behind.

Could be wrong just a thought.

Frodo,Winning form (hollywood site) reflects the same as Computaform so is probably official ?

Thanks Rob, you're probably spot on.

Do you have a view on the accuracy of the '400 to finish' times as published in Computaform - are they always correct, or are they correct most of the time, or are they so often incorrect that we need to apply Shayne's formula to them? I seem to recall that Karel Miedema has at times queried the accuracy of race times, so if the race times are suspect, how much more suspect is the '400 to finish' times - yet I often hear a trainer or presenters/tipstes refer to these times as if they were cast in stone?

Taking the argument further, are the 'lenghts behind the winner' as published always correct, or mostly correct, or mostly a 'guesstimate'? Is there someone somewhere (NHA?) monitoring these figures?

The "400m to finish" times is not a timed record,because the racing operators do not have the technology to record it,or any other sectional timing,so it is apparently some kind of formula ,applied to the overall?????
It has to make comparisons very suspect,for a number of reasons.