this is multi billion rand industry and its run like a bingo game at an old age home.....mediocrity continues

In the words of a great sage, and why was it up to posters here at ABC to notify the head honcho's at TAB that they had again
stuffed up with a raced horse carded as a 1st timer and placing the 2nd horse as a qualifier in yesterdays Pick 6?????

Do we continue to let it go, and go with the flow.

Our final fields and declarations are almost done in a week in advance. When the major racing publications are printed it would have stated that Kantaka was carded to run on the 13/01/2012 where as certain publications will have had it has a first timer. Now let me tell you that on the TABFORM and it sister TABcard would have had this has a first timer without hinting that this horse was carded to run on the 13/01/2012. Now most of the punters at Tote outlets only have access to these publications of which the TABFORM is pasted on the walls of the Tote outlet for free for punters to use. Now think of all the punters who do not have access to technology or superior racing publications they would have thought it was a first timer unless they were informed by the authorities. They were therefore hoodwinked out of the Pick 6 and as on the other thread stated by a clan member a precedent was set when Corne Spies horse won in a similar situation and both the winner and second place was declared for the Pick 6. So why the change ? Again its the small punter being disadvantaged.

All publications had it as a first timer. After reading Magic's post here i became aware that it wasn't a 1st timer and by then it was to late.
My 25% winning ticket down the drain

iF I HAD A TICKET without the 1st timer . Believe me i would make a HUGE FUSS about it .

I did try and make a fuss. But the disclaimer rule beat me

I have been saying the same for Years J-Pegged, the Lunatics are running the Asylum, with the technology on hand at present, a mistake like that should never happen.

Even if the Horse was Carded at the time the Racecards are printed, [which are printed days in advance] as a 1st Timer, it should never have gone unnoticed by the authorities, who should have an up to the minute data system informing them when a horse has run and this should be updated immediately, if the Punters have to miss out, it is not ideal,but the onus should be on them to either know, or be told whether or not a Horse is eligible to qualify for an exotic, but a horse should never be Officially included as in, in a PA, JP or P6 and then taken out again because the powers that be have had to be informed that it does qualify as a true qualifier, it imo, just makes the game look so amateurish in accordance with the turnover.

Kudos to Magic, for noticing the discrepancy and for informing the people, who should have been aware in the 1st place, it is time that Racing was run by REAL experts.
People like Matthew in KZN and Robert Bloomberg in the Cape would, imo, be much more useful, nay, much more reliable and Professional as Head Honcho's in their respective Provinces in the Racing Industry.

All the criticism about yesterday's mess overlooks the fact that people who found the winner (or his stable companion) and caught the P6 would have been robbed if the 2nd horse had qualified.

So, either the wording of the rule needs to be changed to "if a horse is shown as unraced in the official racecard the 2nd horse will qualify", although this could lead to more of the Sheer Courage fiascos arising. Or the rule should be done away with altogether, as has already happened in the Jackpot.

As I wrote in another thread, the fact that they fcuked up with the Spies horse is not a good excuse to fcuk up again. I'd worry more about chiselling the real winners out of a large chunk of their payout than paying out a dividend to losing tickets. This sort of thing will largely arise from time to time because of the length of time ahead of a race day that we do final declarations in SA. Clearly, there is a problem with the rule as things stand and it needs looking at, but as things are now it would have been wrong to include the 2nd horse yesterday as a winning number, even if it has (wrongly) been done before.

No ways Zesto , don't take shit from them they allowed it with the Spies horse a while back and this is exactly the same situation !

So as i said they set a precedent OR DO THEY JUST DO AS THEY LIKE FFS EVEN THEY PUT THE 2nd horse in the provisional dividends and thay misled jo punter into believing the winner was a 1st timer !

Threaten them with inconsistent conduct and that you will report it to the gambling board . I would do it if i had a reasonable amount at stake .


WHY DID THEY NOT USE THEIR DISCLAIMER CLAUSE IN THE SPIES SCENARIO ,,,,,,,,,,,

DO THEY JUST DO AS THEY LIKE!

something along the same lines happended previously in 2008 or 2009...a de kock horse that had previously run overseas was shown as a 1st timer in several publications...it won and the result stood

SG I fully agree with what you are saying, had it not been for sharpie poster Gregbucks to paste the error here, Magic would not be any the wiser, however he did contact TAB top dog to advise them. This whole affair just reeks of amateurism and I feel for the poor mullets who for starters have very little chance of cracking it with the scant info available to them in the 1st place.

As for the real shrewdies, they shut the f@ck up and captilize on the oppertunities the game is presenting to them while the poor mullets feed the pools!!!!!

fraud.

Nothing will please me more than to see a opposition tote to Phumelela...:X