Does The Tote Really Give More To Racing Than Bookmakers

The same can be said about the TOTE then Elmer,and the TOTE take a bigger cut from the punter

Tipster Wrote:

---

> It is a fact that bookmakers contribute only 12%
> of the costs of racing and the Tote contributes
> 88% (taxes don't pay for racing) yet according to
> the above figures bookmakers are making more
> profit out of racing than the Tote! So the answer
> is yes the Tote really does give more to racing
> than the bookmakers.

But there is NO risk factor involved with the tote.

The Tote has to provide the racecourses after they pay their tax bases on the gross deduction
No racecourses no races Who pays for everything The operators who have one income source
the tote Think of the costs of maintainance starters handlers handicappers stipes
transport List is too long

Do Bookmakers punt the Tote when doing cover bets & taking back?
Also in the case of UK racing , don't Bookies do the bulk of the business yet the show is put on the road by different race clubs with no Tote operator driving the product.

Maybe Hibs can give us the inside take on this topic in the UK.:S

elmer Wrote:

---

> JAP answer this question The contribution from the
> bookmakers "where do they get the money"?

At no point have I stated a position on this therad.I am merely putting the facts on the table,from another perspective as opposed to Phumelela's.

Punters fund the whole of racing,be it bookmakers or tote.

What I can say at this stage is the bookmakers services to punters are about 10 miles ahead of the tote.And as a customer of the industry it's service that I want.

"
in the same Act, an “open bet” is defined as follows:
“'open bet' means-
(a) a bet, other than a totalisator bet, taken by a bookmaker on one or more contingencies, in which no fixed-odds are agreed at the time the bet is placed; or
(b) a bet in respect of which the payout is determined after the outcome of the contingency on which such a bet is struck became known, with reference to dividends generated by a totalisator”
"

I thought the open bet was all bets taken on racing at bookies, now I see from the above that it is only bets where the price is determined by the tote payout.

1. I don't see the value in taking these bets with a bookie as the payouts are the same, and there are payout limits. (Customer service is better though!)
2. If the bookies lay, say p6 bets, don't they in effect score the 25% tote takeout (minus tax). For example: R100 000 is bet on the p6 at the tote. Tote keeps 25%, pays the 75% out. R100 000 is bet on the p6 at the bookies. Bookies payout same as tote, 75%, keep 25%. They have 75% risk. On some days the bookies pay out nothing, nobody wins the p6. Other days they pay out more than they took in p6 bets.

Don't know if the makes sense. Am I bonkers?

vis

what if you the big punter and take the pa or any other bet type 1000 times. your pay out will be much lower if you pay on the tote.

Why?

I you take a straight line PA 1000 times, and win, the tote will pay you a 1000 times the dividend. Bookie will pay you a 1000 times the dividend (unless you are over their limit, then you will get less than the tote).

vis Wrote:

---

> Why?
>
> I you take a straight line PA 1000 times, and win,
> the tote will pay you a 1000 times the dividend.
> Bookie will pay you a 1000 times the dividend
> (unless you are over their limit, then you will
> get less than the tote).


yes but remember the dividend is calculated on the tote tickets, therefore your 1000 times pa with the bookies will not be calculated in the equation.

Most of the bigger punters shift their money about the open bets,makes sense

Greg, Hibs,

So you are saying that if you make a big punt on the tote and win, you would have diluted the dividend. Must say my puny punts don't have that effect.

Owners and punters and bookies have always been around.

Meetings at kenilworth started in 1882, some 8 years after the venue had been chosen and the SATC came into being.

The President was Sir Hercules Robinson and the VPs Lt-Gen Torrens and Hon R.Southey.

Stakes were small, 1232.10 pounds of which 502.10 was from breeders, the Governor and the Colonial government and the trustees of the Late Thomas Bailey. The meeting made a 750 pound profit at the gate and 2830 through the tote of which 10% went to the club.

In Aug 1887 the Totalisator Bill was rejected by only one vote as the Hon Mr van den Heever "who had a large bible open before him, referred to the Book Of Revelations, where he said it was pointed out that "roevers, woekeraars and spielers" (usurers, gamblers, etc) could not enter the Kingdom Of Heaven". The tote was subsequently only legalised in 1890. (They Raced To Win -Jean Jaffee)

The point is the tote was given to racing to help cover expenses. It was never started to take over everything. It's right that the tote pays the majority of the bills, that was the goal from day one. Who has hijacked the tote? It was never meant to be "owned" and the revenue decided how to be spent by it's "owners". That the tote (a specific monopoly that only racing has) was there to fund racing never meant that what existed before be excluded. As customers, it's disconcerting that the choices one has is getting less, not more.