Same horse doubles Today and the July

Yip

Arise King Frodo

Ive got going forward MARINARESCO same horse 35 / 1 .fot rhe July.......did not really think he would win that 1400 pipe opener but he did....I'm not complaining.

You and frodo coupled on tote we must get together at the July

Just had a look at the same horse doubles for Saturday onto the July at Hollywood as WSB and to say the odds are nothing short of disgraceful.

I thought the bookies worked off the odds of the two races and deducted a third. When I quickly calculated the odds I was shocked by the deductions these two bookies are taking. When you consider this is on "antepost" so even if you win your first leg you are not guaranteed a run in the second if your horse gets injured for argument sake.

Here are the whopping deductions:

HOLLYWOOD:
Marinaresco - 5/2 x 11/2 = 21,75/1 Double Odds 12,5/1 = 42,5% deduction.
Black Arthur - 2/1 x 8,34/1 = 27,02/1 Double Odds 16,67/1 = 38,3% deduction
Elusive Silva - 28/10 x 14,29/1 = 57,1/1 Double Odds 30,31/1 = 46,9% deduction
Nebula - 7/2 x 20/1 = 93,5/1 Double Odds 50/1 = 46,5% deduction.

WORLD SPORTS BETTING:
Marinaresco - 28/10 x 6/1 = 25,6/1 Double Odds 16/1 = 37,5% deduction
Black Arthur - 19/10 x 9/1 = 28/1 Double Odds 16/1 = 42,9% deduction
Elusive Silva - 3/1 x 13/1 = 55/1 Double Odds 28/1 = 49,1% deduction
Nebula - 28/10 x 14/1 = 56/1 Double Odds 35/1 = 37,5% deduction

Do bookies now just price up as they see fit? Rather back your fancy for this weekend and then decide what you want to back later for the July

I would rather have a bet on the tennis, cricket and rugby (no betting tax) for the weekend than back horses with these incredible deductions.

My rant for the day.

I get your point shrek, and I certainly don't want to defend the bookies - however one needs to take into account what price the winner of the Challenge will be for the July after winning the Challenge ... as an example I took the 850/1 double on Ten Gun Salute before the Greyville 1900 - at that stage the horse was available at 100/1 for the July - after he won the 1900, the best one could get was 20's .... :ohmy:

Except Frodo that they are pricing up TGS in your example at 100-1 before the 1900 is run. IMO if those are the odds shown then the double should be exactly as per normal. I can understand if they want to limit your payout on the double by limiting your bet (they all do this anyway) but to shorten my odds is ridiculous

Frodo, I do accept that if a horse wins a race it's odds to win the July will shorten. My point is that in the past there was a standard 33,33% deduction, now on certain runners they are taking nearly a 50% deduction. I can still live with 33,33% at a push but these deductions are well over the top IMO.

Yip I get it - maybe this topic has two angles to it .... firstly, are the prices offered fair - to which I agree the deductions are way over the top .... secondly, for me as a punter, should I consider taking the double, or back the horse separately for both races and if I decide that backing the horse separately is the better option, at what stage do I back the '2nd leg' - before or after the '1st leg' - and what should be my stake be compared to the stake I wagered on the '1st leg'

Frodo, I look at these doubles the same. For me there can be value if the horse has to win the race to qualify, the likes of Black Arthur, Elusive Silva and Nebula probably do so there could be value if the odds provided are at the correct percentage. Marinaresco on the other hand doesn't need to win to qualify so rather take a straight win be for the July if you fancy this one as even a second or third will see him shorten.

I will be interested to see how the weights are affected with a 120 and a 116 running in this race. Any July hopeful that beats them will probable shoulder the top weight on July day which could ruin their chances.

I don't believe in the 1/3 deduction. So what if the horse wins the first leg and shortens for the second. If, on the other side of the coin, my horse loses the 1st leg then I should also receive an arbitrary refund on my losing stake because my horse's odds will stretch for the 2nd leg.

I agree with Shrek.....it was always reduced by a third. Some of these deductions are ridiculous.....so my view is to stay away from these bets.