Co-mingling?

Ok Al, I'm no IT expert so thanks for that.

Is it still possible that the betting can be manipulated in the current system as it stands?

Also, is it possible that data is transferred after the result of the race?

There must a glitch somewhere along the line to explain how the money seems to pour on winner after winner...

Al,

Dead right you are. See my new post on here.

There is not large amounts of info being transferred. The only thing that gets transferred is the pool totals and amounts bet on each horse. The individual bets get kept on the respective local systems!!!!!!!

This means that the amount of info sent is really VERY little.

We are being duped because Phumelela doesn't know whats going on......

A sinister plot is afoot my friends!

I stand to be corrected but I recall Attenborough saying that individual overseas bets arnt sent to the Saftote pool and that a summary of the bets are sent instead, am I mistaken?

Saksy Wrote:

---

> Ok Al, I'm no IT expert so thanks for that.
>
> Is it still possible that the betting can be
> manipulated in the current system as it stands?
>
> Also, is it possible that data is transferred
> after the result of the race?
>
> There must a glitch somewhere along the line to
> explain how the money seems to pour on winner
> after winner...

Beyond Measure W - 2.30 P -1.00

How this horse in the 5th started favourite is beyond me.... I have to agree, something fishy is going on!!!!

Read it Tommy. This is a mess. How can we carry on like this - we need immediate action and intervention. This cannot be good for racing in the long term.

Bottom line should not be the determining factor of every decision. Sustainability should be the quest and SA racing interests should be at the heart of that quest.

We do need some sort of Punters group to act as watchdogs but it is so difficult as forming such a group would be extremly difficult due to the nature of the players. The ultimate show of good faith would be if Phumelela helped to establish it without a hidden agenda and allowed it to operate within its branches (perhaps I'm dreaming now but such a body would have stopped this mess from escalating way before it got this far)

Sasky thought that I had it recorded on the PVR but seems the wif thought that Golden Globes was more important and the show ends with Robbie Hill saying that Greyville lights are better. I was hoping to check on what you heard.

Amnybody else got this recorded. pleas check on Sasky's comments. It is quite important.

Interesting comments from posters...did not watch,

Hope the layout below makes sense, would have preffered to send out an excel spreadsheet.

Any thoughts on a channel to transfer funds out of the country.

I fail to figure out the simple mathethics of this..below are 2 examples of, that the co-mingling of pools should not have the kind of impact on payouts that we are currently seeing.



Example One : SA bets R100k, Aussies bet R50K
Payout should be determined by net pool divided by net number of winning tickets
In 1st example R150k divided by 81k tckts = R1.85

Bet Amount. Tax @ 6% Payout Pool, Win Tckts, Payout,
SA Bets R 100,000.00 R 6,000.00 R 94,000.00 80000 R 1.18 SA Payout (Not Co mingled)
Aus Bets R 50,000.00 R 0.00 R 50,000.00 1000 R 50.00 Ausie Payout (Not Co mingled)
Total Pool, R 150,000.00 81000 R 1.85 Co-mingled Payout

Ausies collect 1,000 winning tckts x 1.85
R 1,851.85
SA collects 80,000 winning tckts x 1.85
R 148,148.15
NO PROBLEM - Equal distribution of pool
R 150,000.00

Example Two : SA bets R100k, Aussies bet R100K
Payout should be determined by net pool divided by net number of winning tickets
In 2nd example R200k divided by 81k tckts = R2.47


Bet Amount Tax @ 6% Payout

Pool Win Tckts Payout
SA Bets R 100,000.00 R 6,000.00 R 94,000.00 80000 R 1.18 SA Payout (Not Co mingled)
Aus Bets R 100,000.00 R 0.00 R 100,000.00 1000 R 100.00 Ausie Payout (Not Co mingled)
Total Pool R 200,000.00 81000 R 2.47 CO mIngled Payout

Aussies collect 1,000 winning tckts x R2.47 R 2,469.14
SA collects 80,000 winning tckts x R2.47 R 197,530.86
NO PROBLEM - Equal distribtuion of pool R 200,000.00


Conclusion
If SA bets remain constant, at R100k pool and 80000 tickets
a) Aussies bet R50k with 1000 winning tickets - win payout = R1.85
b) Aussies bet R100k with 1000 winning tickets, payout should increase from R1.85 to R2.47
c) If the excuse that comingling is affecting payouts is true, then the above examples show that SA punter should benefit.
NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

And this is what baffles the mind...SA punters are getting paid out the lesser amount...go figure

Has auditing fees taken a giant leap...who audits the auditors ???

Whatever the story is we are wasting our time here, obviously we're entitled to ask questions but we just don't have the info to work out what's going on, then again neither does Phumulela!

Stop-Betting Signal

The stop-betting signal is sent by Host System or, as a backup, handled by the Guest, but the final responsibility is with the Guest site. Once the final cycle has been completed, all systems receive confirmation of pool data being received by the Host. If a pool or pools fail to be received, pools are re-sent, either automatically or manually.

Stop betting procedures vary state-to-state and track-to-track. Some common pool Hosts require betting be stopped at the Guest site(s) a number of minutes before actual post time, while others do so only on specific Pick-N or super exotic carryover pools.

The integrity of the wagering pool is dependent upon all wagering everywhere being brought to an end at the start of the race. Failure to meet this basic requirement violates the integrity of the pool, opens all parties involved to legal liability and regulatory action, and undermines patrons' confidence. Host tracks should be aware a lax policy on policing the close of wagering
directly affects all bettors and can make wagering on its races unattractive to fans. There may also be regulatory and legal implications.

If a Guest system is unable to adequately ensure its wagering ceased at the required time, both Host and Guest should have written agreement on what procedure will be followed.

Furthermore, patrons at facilities of the Guest system should be made aware of the procedures that will be implemented should there be a failure of the wagering to close at the proper time.

The TRA 2020 Committee has taken the position all close cancel delays should be eliminated.

In 2003, the Canadian Pari-Mutuel Agency mandated a zero close cancel delay for all Association hosted pools in Canada.

I have said this before on another thread.

MAKE SURE THE TERMINALS ARE CLOSED AT THE OFF!!!!!

The punters will complain as they cannot change their bets, but let me tell you, they will QUICKLY learn how to fill in a betting slip and hand it in timeously.

The only reason why punters want to take best 10-seconds before they jump or cancel a bet 10 seconds before they jump is because Phumelela ALLOWS them to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Observer a while back I commented on the fact that this may be a legal way to transfer money overseas bypassing exchange control regulation. I am of the opinion based not on fact but rather a gut feel that the aim is to transfer the company into the international market with head office being overseas followed by the eventual transfer racing assets to the overseas holding company, much in the way SAB, de Beers etc has gone.

Your calcs seem ok but they did say that the contribution to pools was between 30% and on one occassion reached 46% of the total pool. Complete new spin on your calcs I would think.