TAB to monitor oversees bets

.....Fair enough on local co mingled pools.....but what are they doing to find out what is happing with our local pools for Hong Kong and Singapore....they may be small but some local okes are having a field day with total manipulation.....if they cannot address this smaller local problem..... then they are farting against thunder in trying to solve the problems in the bigger co=mingled pools....the damage is done and even though Vee appears to be reaching to try solve the problem it is beyond his scope of influence....what Crackpot would choose a maiden juvenile 6 horse race at a sandpit to have a $5000 dollar bet on not one but 2 14/1 shots in such a small field just for the hell of it....it does not make any sense at all.....other than trying to manipulate the payout for others to cash in.....:

If that is true Muhti Man then the 'Crackpots' are bad at maths too! Or very generous. They have to loose their bets to create value for others. And even if they are in some way associated with the 'others' the net result of their so-called 'manipulation' will net them no better result than simply placing a bet on the horse they are actually trying to wager a win on in the first place (no pun intended). Perhaps the 'crackpot' tried to scoop the majority of the pool on an outsider winning the race.

I admit that it seems very unlikely that someone would have a desire to bet in that way on that particular event, but in truth that is what happened, resulting in their loss. Nothing sinister there.

Folk regularly do weird things when it comes to gambling like wagering on a roullette wheel or pushing buttons on a limited payout machine with no long term propect of winning et al. Nothing sinister there either.

I can't see any feasible reason to wager money on outsiders (or any horse for that matter) to affect the payout on other horses in any field. Hence my conclusion that there is nothing to this story that can suggest skullduggery. Just a good dosage of hard core gambler stupidity perhaps.

How stupid is this crackpot then.....had one of the 2 horses actually won he looses anyway as the wiN payout was R1.10 on a 14/1 shot....the betting pattern does not make any sense as only a fool will blow his load in a pool where he is contributing a higher % than all other punters......I know of stupid gamblers and they all died once their fortunes were squandered....we had this scenario some years back and once it was highlighted it went away....we always get the same story that it is some overseas whale...but recently it started in our small pools for Hong Kong and Singapore.....no overseas influence other than the pictures beamed from foreign countries ....I always believe in an element of skulduggery as it raises Its head where big money is concerned.....:

For those that haven't read this.....posted on ABC.........last year...............

www.africanbettingclan.com/forum/phorum-...00,367263#msg-367263

Hi

Some opinions stated here just make me laugh. Clanners complain that with the restrictions of present day Bookies they are now only Accountants because when they WIN these Accountants limit their future Bets. Now when LARGE bets are placed on the Tote they shout conspiracy. In principle I say as long as the MONEY is in the bank (Tote pools and not with the Bookies) the better for RSA Racing overall.

As far as the çonspriacry theory goes I trust that it was in fact FOREIGN money.

I am not clear on the specifics of what happened exactly in times gone by. But I take your point Muhtiman. Often times, when money is invoved, dubious and devious schemes are hatched.

In this instance though, I still scratch my head as to how it can be beneficial to loose money into a pool. Somebody has to fund that loss...unless of course its not really a loss, a fictitious bet. Which is, lets face it, not a plausible idea. It means that the operator will have to weigh in to pay out the winning bets...which they will never do.

So why is it happening? What sinister intent can be possibly deduced? None IMHO. There is no gainful way to manipulate pools in such a way that provides one with a better return than what would ordinarily be the case. Not by betting on other horses in the same event anyhow...or am I missing something?

Mr Moodley hasnt gone to the overseas authorities to tell them that phantom punter must place his bets two minutes before the off. Which phantom punter? Any phantom punter? Oh, what junk.

P.S. but I do love it when the phantom appears. Its kind of eerie and adds to the intrigue of horseracing. I wish I was able to distort dividends. The power... I can only dream.

Muhtiman Wrote:

---

what Crackpot would choose a maiden
> juvenile 6 horse race at a sandpit to have a $5000
> dollar bet on not one but 2 14/1 shots in such a
> small field just for the hell of it....

Because he can....

Mac Wrote:

---

> Mr Moodley hasnt gone to the overseas authorities
> to tell them that phantom punter must place his
> bets two minutes before the off. Which phantom
> punter? Any phantom punter? Oh, what junk.
>
> P.S. but I do love it when the phantom appears.
> Its kind of eerie and adds to the intrigue of
> horseracing. I wish I was able to distort
> dividends. The power... I can only dream.


u right...u get that feeling of anticipation...everytime u back a horse on the tote...yesterday i had a bet on the tote win WHAT A LADY...kept thinking hope the phantom had a 100k on another horse...boost the fv...to R3.00 or so for a win...lol....its in our phychi already...after the race...u take a quick glance to the tote board..and hope...lol

When Vee says some punters were underpaid by a bookmaker on Monday,why does he not name and shame the bookmaker concerned.Dont condemn the whole industry because he might be telling a whopper.Name and Shame and see how quick all the rubbish will stop.

bobsmith Wrote:

---

> When Vee says some punters were underpaid by a
> bookmaker on Monday,why does he not name and shame
> the bookmaker concerned.Dont condemn the whole
> industry because he might be telling a
> whopper.Name and Shame and see how quick all the
> rubbish will stop.


He should concentrate on the MASSIVE problems the tote seems to be having and not worrying about the bookies' wrong payouts

PeeKay Wrote:

---

> bobsmith Wrote:
>

---

>

---

> > When Vee says some punters were underpaid by a
> > bookmaker on Monday,why does he not name and
> shame
> > the bookmaker concerned.Dont condemn the whole
> > industry because he might be telling a
> > whopper.Name and Shame and see how quick all
> the
> > rubbish will stop.
>
>
> He should concentrate on the MASSIVE problems the
> tote seems to be having and not worrying about the
> bookies' wrong payouts

...100%