Trainers not to be sponsored by bookies

Imagine a world witout Bookies and HW - Imagine how quickly Phumalela would do zip marketing as there was no competition - Without Bookies like Ho and HW etc racing would be dead -

We just hope that Hollywood will not stop owning horses as you can't get better owners. This will prove a big loss to the industry.

Hollywood always come to the party whether its for grooms incentives or as with Chris Taylor Comrades run.
That took one call to Clyde and the support was there.

I am, as is common knowledge very much a pro Tote player and believe that Bookmakers who take out huge figures from our Stakes pool (open bet) and don't put back nearly enough are in large detrimental to racing....but to now disallow them the opportunity to invest in racing and help both Jockey's and Trainers financially with incentives to WIN races is not only ludicrous but brainless, stupidity that is only surpassed by the excuse offered up for this ridiculous decision and to add insult to injury we are expected to believe their reasoning, I wonder if they took the time to recognize the fact that most Hollywood's trainers and jockeys that benefit from their sponsorship come from outside the top 10 and could do with the help,if they really have the betterment of racing at heart then this is something that MUST be readdressed and rectified immediately and the person/s responsible for making this thoughtless move a reality should be brought to book!!

Punters need choice titch, as a veteran punter i see no value at using any tote in any country..

who cares bookies are fat enough

JustinV Wrote:

---

> who cares bookies are fat enough


punters care

The screams knee-jerk reaction to me. Internationally bookmarkers sponsor events and participants in those events, this should not be any different. It starts with trainers, what next? Once they have done this it will creep up everywhere. No sponsorships, less advertising, less money, less liquidity, less good deals for the punters. And in the end, less quality events.

i better give back my Comrades sponsorship monies received from Hollywood Sportsbook and Shirley Kruger Racing...

this will be over 25% of the fund to go towards the Coastal Horse Care Unit!

i also believe that the KZN Bookmakers Society were also responsible for supplying the CHCU with a new vehicle to tow their horse box.

in the future, would anyone then be able to be sponsored by BettingWorld or another "Bennett Bulana" sponsored by Gold Circle, as a betting operator???

The most diabolical decision I have heard in a long long while and needs to be addressed and reversed ASAP!!!

Punters Verdict

The bookmaking industry will never admit it but the commercial
arrangements they've been able to pursue with trainers are very much
in their own interests and against those of the punters - giving
them a line on inmates at the trainer's yard. Do you seriously
believe that a bookmaker paying a trainer for 'services' isn't going
to be ahead of the game when the trainer sends out a 'live' one?

Look at the relationship between Ladbrokes and the
Ballydoyle/Coolmore operation in Ireland. I'm not saying money is
changing hands. What I am saying is that it's common knowledge in
the racing world that Ladbrokes often seem to know - and are usually
shortest in the market - whenever Ballydoyle are really confident
about one. Insider information? I'm not sure. But Ladbrokes certainly
seem to be at an advantage owing to close ties between figures at the
yard/stud and figures at the betting firm. And it's the punters who
are clearly disadvantaged.

The bookmaker likes to play with dice loaded....

BBC's Panorama investigators accused Victor
Chandler of operating 'no lose' betting accounts for trainers in the
1990s in a bid to obtain advantageous information. Watch a revealing
clip here.

Knowing what a trainer fancies or thinks about his runners is
obviously good information for a bookmaker - providing him with
solid grounds for pricing fancied horses up shorter than the
competition and ensuring his book doesn't attract serious
liabilities on the horse.

There were no cries of injured outrage from Victor Chandler - the
type of indignation you might expect from a wrongly accused party.
Quite the opposite. When invited to comment a sniggering Chandler
and his minions maintained a loaded silence.

Button the lip and hope the spotlight will go away appeared to be
the preferred strategy. Chandler was concerned enough to go to the
High Court in a bid to get an injunction. But he failed and the
programme was aired despite his back-room maneuvers.

In my humble opinion - anybody who thinks that the practice
has died out as a result might want to consider booking a few
sessions with a decent psychiatrist.

In a climate where competition between bookmakers in the racing
markets is hotter than ever before and where margins are the
skinniest they've ever been it is absolutely inconceivable to me
that bookmakers - driven by self-interest and notorious for bending
the rules to snapping point and beyond - refrain from seeking out
the commercial advantage that 'inside information' undoubtedly
delivers.

Victor Chandler was daft enough to write and
personally sign letters to trainers - effectively offering to pay
them for information. And, let's face it;
bookmakers have never been short of imagination when it comes to
looking after their bottom line interests. 

I don't like Bookies anyway! The open bet is my BIG issue - so good call! Kill the Bookies!

Tero Wrote:

---

> Punters Verdict
>
> The bookmaking industry will never admit it but
> the commercial
> arrangements they've been able to pursue with
> trainers are very much
> in their own interests and against those of the
> punters - giving
> them a line on inmates at the trainer's yard. Do
> you seriously
> believe that a bookmaker paying a trainer for
> 'services' isn't going
> to be ahead of the game when the trainer sends out
> a 'live' one?
>
> Look at the relationship between Ladbrokes and the
>
> Ballydoyle/Coolmore operation in Ireland. I'm not
> saying money is
> changing hands. What I am saying is that it's
> common knowledge in
> the racing world that Ladbrokes often seem to know
> - and are usually
> shortest in the market - whenever Ballydoyle are
> really confident
> about one. Insider information? I'm not sure. But
> Ladbrokes certainly
> seem to be at an advantage owing to close ties
> between figures at the
> yard/stud and figures at the betting firm. And
> it's the punters who
> are clearly disadvantaged.
>
> The bookmaker likes to play with dice loaded....
>
> BBC's Panorama investigators accused Victor
> Chandler of operating 'no lose' betting accounts
> for trainers in the
> 1990s in a bid to obtain advantageous information.
> Watch a revealing
> clip here.
>
> Knowing what a trainer fancies or thinks about his
> runners is
> obviously good information for a bookmaker -
> providing him with
> solid grounds for pricing fancied horses up
> shorter than the
> competition and ensuring his book doesn't attract
> serious
> liabilities on the horse.
>
> There were no cries of injured outrage from Victor
> Chandler - the
> type of indignation you might expect from a
> wrongly accused party.
> Quite the opposite. When invited to comment a
> sniggering Chandler
> and his minions maintained a loaded silence.
>
> Button the lip and hope the spotlight will go away
> appeared to be
> the preferred strategy. Chandler was concerned
> enough to go to the
> High Court in a bid to get an injunction. But he
> failed and the
> programme was aired despite his back-room
> maneuvers.
>
> In my humble opinion - anybody who thinks that the
> practice
> has died out as a result might want to consider
> booking a few
> sessions with a decent psychiatrist.
>
> In a climate where competition between bookmakers
> in the racing
> markets is hotter than ever before and where
> margins are the
> skinniest they've ever been it is absolutely
> inconceivable to me
> that bookmakers - driven by self-interest and
> notorious for bending
> the rules to snapping point and beyond - refrain
> from seeking out
> the commercial advantage that 'inside information'
> undoubtedly
> delivers.
>
> Victor Chandler was daft enough to write and
> personally sign letters to trainers - effectively
> offering to pay
> them for information. And, let's face it;
> bookmakers have never been short of imagination
> when it comes to
> looking after their bottom line interests. 


This article is decades old...

And VC is a rogue,your dealing with a different class of bookmaker when dealing with hollywood you are dealing with integrity