Skip to main content

Racing NSW case gets weaker, whining gets louder

Nothing new here, just more of the same acts of desperation from Peter V'landys and TABCorp.

Copyright is wrong strategy - Bill Saunders

Betfair, Racing NSW still at loggerheads

Betfair punts on revenue in NSW racing row

When I was teaching people how to use Betfair more effectively, sometimes you would just have to throw your hands up in despair when people couldn't work out for themselves that their strategy was completely flawed or they wouldn't learn from their mistakes. I once had a guy who thought it was a great idea to lay a horse at about 30, then if it looked like winning, back it back at 3. He couldn't work out why he'd lost about £50k....

In business, if you put all your eggs in one basket, ignore all the advice from educated people in the field and piss ridiculous amounts of money up the wall, you should be held accountable for it. But as per usual in a government-appointed racing body, it won't happen...

Comments

  1. And at the end of all this Racing NSW will be in the hole millions in legal fees. And will V'Landys and the rest be held accountable? No. With the TAB pulling the strings NSW he will be there until they need a fall guy

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur

lay the field - my favourite racing strategy

Dabbling with laying the field in-running at various prices today, not just one price, but several in the same race. Got several matched in the previous race at Brighton, then this race came along at Nottingham. Such a long straight at Nottingham makes punters often over-react and think the finish line is closer than it actually is. As you can see by the number of bets matched, there was plenty of volatility in this in-play market. It's rare you'll get a complete wipe-out with one horse getting matched at all levels, but it can happen, so don't give yourself too much risk...

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla