Not Letting It Go Away!

Have been monitoring the tote payouts,looking for patterns,to try and make some sense of the anomolies.
There have been a number of theories but there is one phenomena that does not fit any of them...The no. of R1 place payouts.
Late bettors would not pile onto "money back bets" as there is no point and late cancelling of bets INCREASES payouts on short priced horses,does not reduce them!

Perhaps we are missing the obvious.Perhaps there is no skullduggery,except,that in order to secure co-mingling,bigger or more fees/commisions/middlemen are being paid.This would explain lesser amounts to distribute to winning tickets.Perhaps explains P's need for confidentiality.
I have no idea whether this is the case,but it does fit the patterns,of lower payouts,all round!
It would also explain the lack of investigation,as there is no need to investigate a situation that you are aware of!
I wonder If we could get a confirmation that co- mingled pools have the same take-out as other pools.
I don't think we should allow the strategy of"if we ignore them long enough they will go away" to succeed.We need a sensible explanation!

Rob the bottom line is why would any informed punter stake money on a bet that he could potential lose his stake to gain nothing, fixed odds with a bookie has to be a more logical option.

The trouble with your option Dave is that racing is dead without the stakes provided by the tote....but racing is probably dead anyway!

Levvy Board needed in that case..

Has to be better options? We need a win win situation and P are not being proactive to win the punters hard earned Rand

imvho

How about a little bit of truth!!
The more you think about the confidentiality agreement between "P"and the RA,the more suspicious you have to get.Who do "P" need to have secrets from...how can an elected board(RA) enter into a confidential agreement that is a secret from the people they represent and who elected them.
I would be surprised if the confidentiality agreement is legally enforcable,on that basis!

I recently backed Chico Azul, was 7.40 just before the off but the final payout was 9.50... sometimes commingling can be sweet....

Marketing is KING and they need to market and re-establsih a relationship with their punters.

I have got ideas for them!!!!

rob faux Wrote:

---

> The trouble with your option Dave is that racing
> is dead without the stakes provided by the
> tote....but racing is probably dead anyway!

The most money made by the tote is on exotics. Many of the 100's of bookies each can hold the tote win pool. The tote win pool in not a money maker when in competition to fixed odds.

I was told that for some races in the UK, that the SA contribution is sometimes 60% of their win pool.

I had a winner in Dec and cheque was 43K. Jock gets 10% and trainer gets 15%. Had a bit of a vets bill the month before so paid 29K bills in 12 weeks up to the win.

Stakes paid last season was R297 million to 5600 horses in training. There are 108 jocks and 41 appies. Lets say about 120 are active and earn about 8.5% on ave (many 10% jocks) = 297,000,000 * 0.085 / 120 = about 200k pa on average + riding fees 43500/120 = 360 rides p.a x 500 = 180K. (total 380K pa pre tax)

Is 380K p.a on average enough, or is it time for the 7% to be fixed at 10% and the better jocks can charge an additional 50% all over again and we go to 15%?

Trainers don't do nearly as well. Say R150 profit /horse per month = 10mil p.a. and 297 mil x 7% = 20 mill divided by 187 trainers is R165K/a or R14K per month on average.

Ave horse earns 52K pa (4375/ pm)...means that all stakes contribute to training fees only.

Some great stats there

Read an interview with S`manga Khumalo,he seemed to think an average Jock earned 50 -60k a month..

.

Some take extra 50%, others extra 100%.

I thought common practice?