Corporates caught in a sting

[ringman]

I dont get why they jump up and down when they get stung by a smarty who manipulates the pool in a race he has backed one with the corporates.Bookies have been laying off on the tote backing ones that will hurt them bad for years by shortening the price and nothing said. but when a smarty backs the rest of the field to get his picks out to good odds they scream blue murder.

What is the difference between backing to shorten and backing to lengthen the odds.

[Triple V]

Greg, that's always welcome news. I know that they grizzle long and loud when they get crushed but seriously...do they really expect anyone is going to shed a tear?
Who genuinely gives a fat rats arse if the Corporates get skinned? There'd have to be more cheering and well done's than anything else. Anyone who does those Vultures over is Ok in my book.

[TSW]

Could you elaborate on the race in question, please? Thanks.

[Danno]

I dont get why they jump up and down when they get stung by a smarty who manipulates the pool in a race he has backed one with the corporates.Bookies have been laying off on the tote backing ones that will hurt them bad for years by shortening the price and nothing said. but when a smarty backs the rest of the field to get his picks out to good odds they scream blue murder.

What is the difference between backing to shorten and backing to lengthen the odds.




I suppose the griping goes with the territory Ringman, they ( like most of us) grin when you win and have good whinge when you get a flogging!
I remember years ago when we still had a few bag boys at the trots, we had a good winner this particular day and the "boys" had a ball, no matter how much they put on the bookies just kept taking the dough. Our lads had a stack on, averaged about 9/2 and we got the bickies without any stress at all.
I stopped on the way home to grab a bite and ran into one the poor distressed bookies at the cafe' and he says " gee Dan mate, can you tell the boys not to hammer me so hard next time??" I said " sorry mate, they told me you kept laying the horse like you knew more than we did, so I reckon you better have a yarn to yourself next time Ha Ha"

The geography of punting may have changed, but you won't change the players!

Good thread ringman, should get a bit of a yarn going.

Cheers,

Dan

[ringman]

Could you elaborate on the race in question, please? Thanks.
The Daily Telegraph (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/) January 25, 2012

A PUNTER yesterday revived memories of Eddie Hayson and Steven Fletcher's notorious Lucy's Light greyhound sting when he pulled off an audacious betting plunge on a dog race at Horsham. In almost identical circumstances to the 2005 sting at the Gold Coast, the Maitland local manipulated the place pool with the NSW TAB and UNITAB before launching a significant plunge with corporate bookmakers around the country.
More than $20,000 was wagered on two dogs, Stack 'Em Flat and Echelon, to run a place in the five-dog opening race at the country Victorian track in the hope of winning $150,000.
The place pools in NSW and UNITAB were manipulated by having carefully calculated place bets on the three remaining dogs, dramatically reducing their prices and inflating the two he wished to back with separate bookies.
Echelon was the $1.60 favourite to win and $7.10 to place, while Stack 'Em Flat was $2.40 and $9.10 for the place.
With the tote pools manipulated, Stack 'Em Flat and Echelon smashed their rivals to finish first and second - the perfect result as both bets won.
Four corporate bookmakers - Sportingbet, Betchoice, Centrebet and Betstar - were hit by the punter, who opened new accounts with the bookies just hours before the race.
None of the four bookmakers paid the full amount to the punter, claiming they have terms and conditions which prevent the payments that are the result of manipulated pools.
The punter, who wished not to be named, told The Daily Telegraph (http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/) he was a friend of Fletcher's and he had played a part in the Lucy's Light sting, which ripped more than $1 million from bookmakers across the country.
South Australian bookmaker Curly Seal initially refused to pay Eddie Hayson $700,000 but the pair later settled out of court. .................................................. .................................................. ..................
Jan 2006



SYDNEY punter Eddie Hayson yesterday went on the attack against Adelaide-based bookmaker Curly Seal and the South Australian liquor and gaming office over the non-payment of almost $700,000 in the betting sting Hayson and a colleague pulled off at the Gold Coast greyhounds almost three weeks ago.
Hayson said there seemed to be "a lack of professionalism" by authorities in South Australia and was at a loss to know why it may take another three weeks before Seal pays up.
Hayson skinned Seal with a plan to manipulate the Unitab tote pool on a dog race Seal was betting on. Seal, like corporate bookmakers around the country, pay punters Unitab dividends on selected races.
More than $52,000 was wagered on Lucy's Light with Seal to win the race when it was paying as little as $1.10 on Unitab.
Just before the dogs jumped, Hayson's offsider, Steve Fletcher, placed $16,000 with Unitab on Lucy's Light's five rivals, forcing what should have been a $1.30 payout for Lucy's Light to $13.
Hayson said other corporate bookies who were targeted by the plunge had "the decency to pay us at $13", but Seal had referred the matter to the liquor and gaming office for the commissioner to investigate.
"What could possibly have to be investigated further," Hayson said.
"This should have been fixed up already. You'd think there was monkey business going on with Curly and the liquor and gaming office the way it is dragging on."
Hayson said not only was he out of pocket at the moment but charities were missing out, too.
"We will be giving $5000 to the cause that looks after greyhounds and finds them homes when they have finished their racing careers," he said. "And another $30,000 will be donated to the Cremorne Community Mental Health Centre."
Seal said he had been in constant contact with the liquor and gaming authorities and there had been "progression every day".
"They are getting all my information that is relevant. Phone records, betting sheets, things like that," he said.
"It is in the hands of the commissioner and I am bound by their rules."
Hayson said he had spoken to the liquor and gaming office, "but no one there can tell me where they are at with the investigation."
"They have, in fact, been very elusive and unhelpful. There was no fraud involved, all we did was bet with a bookmaker and also bet into a tote pool. The dog still had to win.
"What about the times that Curly has backed something on Unitab that we were on to bring its price in from $14 to $3? We can't and don't complain then."
A spokesperson for liquor and gaming said: "It is very difficult to put a timeframe on it. It may be another two or three weeks but that is not unusual … ".

[ringman]

Yes Dan i have walked away from track when i have had 6 skinners out of 7 races laughing my head off and happy with the nights winnings ;) then when it turned on other meetings i was sick as a dog going back to the car:(

No matter if your a punter or bookie never lose your cool at a result by holding a grudge against a runner/driver/ rider :rolleyes: or you may pay heavily in the long term. take your losses on the chin because your day will come although if your a punter most will have a bit longer to wait than a bookie.

[Triple V]

The Corporates are pretty bloody precious at the best of times. If you're deemed to have been too successful too often they'll quickly move to limit your activity and if you keep on being successful they'll just plain lock you out. Handbags. Big girls blouses. No Cajones.
I sincerely hope that these blokes keep on lining them up and smashing them at every opportunity. If there's one thing in this World that I have absolutely no pitty nor sympathy for...it is a Bookie, be they the traditional version thereof or a corporate.

[Gtrain]

I'd love to read a book on some of Fletchers activity!!

[Triple V]

I'd love to read a book on some of Fletchers activity!!

[VVV] Funny man. I think he loved the thrill of the chase more than he enjoyed any actual win.
Big Punter and absolutely fearless with it. He'd regularly turn over 500k of a Saturday on the TB's. Punted upwards of $30mil a year. Made Steel Balls look like a Girl Scout.

[ringman]

If If there's one thing in this World that I have absolutely no pitty nor sympathy for...it is a Bookie, be they the traditional version thereof or a corporate.

Why only reason must be you have trouble (like most) at beating a bookie ? it should be the other way round most bookies could retire happily on what they are owed by punters who have taken the knock on them :mad:. i agree with the part about corporates of today they ban winners at a rapid rate and are not like the real bookie who would love the challenge of taking the punter on.

[Gtrain]

I hate the dishonesty about the price and the fact that these companies are able to lay off into tote pools after the start of a race. But they are the only option for us now the art of the REAL bookie has been all but killed off. I have never hated an on track bookie for taking my money. I was only trying to take his.

[Just Saying]

I hate the dishonesty about the price and the fact that these companies are able to lay off into tote pools after the start of a race. But they are the only option for us now the art of the REAL bookie has been all but killed off. I have never hated an on track bookie for taking my money. I was only trying to take his.
Pardon my ignorance but how do they do that? And is that the reason for the dramatic late plunges on the TAB that Ronnie Hawkswell mentions when calling Melbourne Metro greyhound racing?

[broncobrad]

Pardon my ignorance but how do they do that? And is that the reason for the dramatic late plunges on the TAB that Ronnie Hawkswell mentions when calling Melbourne Metro greyhound racing?

:confused:Beat me to it Scott, I'd like to know the answer to that one too or do us mug punters just perceive that someone has got their money on after the jump?

Actually was having a couple of interest bets that afternoon on the net at Horsham and knew of both the dogs ability over that distance. Of course there were only two place totes and I wouldn't have considered either of them. Backed Stack Em Flat for the win cos he'd been steaming home lately and was pretty pleased when he got up. Clicked back on the final dividends and was over the moon at the winning div. Then I noticed the place divs on both the favs and felt ripped off big time. A couple of seconds later it dawns on me that the market manipulators had been at work again and I had to tip me lid to them. They pick this unremarkable little bush meeting and pull off another sting.

What annoys me is how the bookies are able to wiggle out of their liability, but us punters have to honour our losing bets. It sux that these blokes were not paid out in full when as far as I can see they have not broken any rules. They just outfoxed their quarry.

[teecee]

pardon my ignorance but how do they do that? And is that the reason for the dramatic late plunges on the tab that ronnie hawkswell mentions when calling melbourne metro greyhound racing?

YES!!!!....
They have the tech ability to do anything to manipulate pools usually to their advantage between the CLOSE and DECLARING A RESULT.
These include but not exclusive to.. laying off bets after the close.
Cancelling bad sales...i.e. punter takes bet for wrong amount or selections.
Holding bad sales till result is known then acting on these to their advantage.... ie if the bet's a loser....Cancel. If the bet's a winner keeping the bet for themselves.

How do I know this for a fact????
I worked for a corporate Bookmaker organisation doing these things as my job as policy..!!!!

[broncobrad]

YES!!!!....
They have the tech ability to do anything to manipulate pools usually to their advantage between the CLOSE and DECLARING A RESULT.
These include but not exclusive to.. laying off bets after the close.
Cancelling bad sales...i.e. punter takes bet for wrong amount or selections.
Holding bad sales till result is known then acting on these to their advantage.... ie if the bet's a loser....Cancel. If the bet's a winner keeping the bet for themselves.

How do I know this for a fact????
I worked for a corporate Bookmaker organisation doing these things as my job as policy..!!!!


I might be a bit wet behind the ears or just plain naive Teecee and I know you are not prone to making scurrillous statements that can't be backed up but how could a fully regulated system such as the TAB allow that kind of behaviour to occur and if so are you saying it is still happening?

Howcan a person place a bet with the tote after betting is closed?

If its an operator error I would agree there would be some avenue of recourse for the poor old punter eg operator places a larger bet (in error) and rings the hotline to cancel the bet. No problems. But if that was repetitive behaviour at that site surely the TAB would be investigating said behaviour and that outlet would soon have some explaining to do.

The only loophole I know of (don't know if it still exists) is an operator especially on trot races could cancel a bet for a very short period of time after the start of the race.

[teecee]

I have no reason to believe it doesn't still happen but I've been out of it 10 years now. Such tickets are listed "legitimately" as unclaimed dividends as will always be having no owner. They then go down The big deep dark hole"..!!

Howcan a person place a bet with the tote after betting is closed?
A person can't place a bet after the tote has closed but virtually anything can be done with those betsplaced b4 close, in the period between the tote closes and the results and divvies are posted. Have you ever noticed that divvies from some pools take some time to appear after the result. It is mostly common with exotic pools. Why do you think that is when computers work all this stuff out in microseconds.???? even quaddies, BIg 6 and in NZ Pick 6...!!!!!! Do u have access to "WILL PAY' odds on last leg exotics. Do you wonder how often they differ from payable declared divvies.

If its an operator error I would agree there would be some avenue of recourse for the poor old punter eg operator places a larger bet (in error) and rings the hotline to cancel the bet. No problems. But if that was repetitive behaviour at that site surely the TAB would be investigating said behaviour and that outlet would soon have some explaining to do.

This is probably true but in my experience most things like this happen on track with the customer error..e.g. not filling in the slip properly and then being unable to pay for the bet. It often happens in the rush of the last minute. If it's a loser it's deducted at no loss to the punter. If it's a winner then it's held and goes into the audit trail as an unclaimed dividend ticket. It tends to only happen on exotics with a value to make it worthwhile otherwise it's cancelled. It's done by system control staff after the result is known but before result and divvies are declared for payment.

The only loophole I know of (don't know if it still exists) is an operator especially on trot races could cancel a bet for a very short period of time after the start of the race.[/QUOTE]

[Triple V]

How do I know this for a fact????
I worked for a corporate Bookmaker organisation doing these things as my job as policy..!!!!

[VVV] :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek: You were once part of the Evil Empire?
Geeze Tony...mate, I'd keep that to yourself if I were you. That's like going to a very swank soiree and slipping the topic of Hemorrhoids into the dinner table conversation. ;););););)

[teecee]

I've been the length and Breadth of this industry. From the real highs of seeing and helping foals into the world and following their careers to the depths of seein g and being innocent parties to the corruption within and on the borders of it.
I do like your analogy..!!!!

[Triple V]

Indeed. Love seeing those foals arrive. Strength & Honour TC. Strength & Honour.

[teecee]

Great to see you back.
Now for some sensible dialogue.

[Toohard]

Great to see you back.
Now for some sensible dialogue.

INDEED!!! Luv ya work Triple!!

Cheers
Luke and Paul

[aussiebreno]

I'll give it 2 weeks until he's top of the post count again :D

[teecee]

I'll give it 2 weeks until he's top of the post count again :D
At a current count of 29 you shouldn't be far away with that assessment...!!!!

[ringman]

we couldnt get this thread back on the original topic could we:confused:

[Triple V]

By and large I think Corporates are parasites. There you go Ringman. That should do it. ;)

[ringman]

By and large I think Corporates are parasites. There you go Ringman. That should do it. ;)

I love it when a punter gets jealous of a bookie he cant beat:p thats when you know you have them hook line and sinker then they tip every dollar into your bag:D.

Triple its a business not a game and winning is all that counts:rolleyes: who cares what people think when your counting their money:p.

[Triple V]

I'm not jealous of them or anything of the sort Ringman. I've got friends who have worked and do work for them.
I just don't think they remit their fair share of the action in return for the use of the Industry's race fields etc. That's why I think they're parasites. The outcome of the race fields legislation case is much awaited to say the least.
That being said, there are MANY aspects to their (the Corporate's) respective operations that the TAB's could learn from and/or adopt with regard to the options they offer their customers.
I can't help but think feel that the TAB has been/is in continual 'catch up football' mode when it comes to the current wagering landscape.
They have had feet of clay for far too long now. I only needed to stand on the lawn on Miracle Mile night & watch a group of my mates with their all singing, all dancing ipads in hand & going at it hammer and tongs across multiple Totes, multiple Corporates and Betfair to fully realise just how much that wagering landscape has changed and be shocked by just how far the respective TAB's have to go if only to try and get to even terms with their competition.......let alone exceed anything that's on offer.

[ringman]

I agree triple in corporates paying their dues.they want to use the product then pay simple that one. as for tabs the day will come when the lay option will be available to all punters because they must change or go further behind.

[Gtrain]

I agree triple in corporates paying their dues.they want to use the product then pay simple that one. as for tabs the day will come when the lay option will be available to all punters because they must change or go further behind.

You only have to look at the setup of Englands thoroughbred racing and what the absence of a TAB does for the industry there. They have had the gambling industry monopolised by corporates and it has not fared well for prizemoney over there.

[Danno]

You only have to look at the setup of Englands thoroughbred racing and what the absence of a TAB does for the industry there. They have had the gambling industry monopolised by corporates and it has not fared well for prizemoney over there.

Spot on Grant, it doesn't matter what sort of game you're in, you need real, fair dinkum competition between the players to get a an improved result, handing the reins over to one mob or the the other is not the answer nor is giving one sector a leg-up on their competition, as is currently the case with the corporates.
They, like any other mob in business want everything they can get for as little expense as possible!

But they need to pay their fair share towards the production and maintenance of the product! Once this has been settled ( hopefully fairly) the corporates will pay their share and the TAB will get more competitive in the betting medium market and everyone will be better off.

[2minuteman]

Just to put in my two bob's worth here re. corporates.They initially said that they would go broke if they had to pay the same as the Totes and took Uncle Tom Cobbly and all to court,looking for a ruling that would say that they did not have to pay the extra.
As a condition of the application the corporates had to pay in the difference between what they had been paying and what they would be required to pay if the case was won by the racing/pacing/chasing industries.
This they have done since the start of the case and the amount now held by the authorities, pending the outcome of the case, is in the high tens of millions,and how many corporates have gone broke in this period?
Really,that many?

[Danno]

Just to put in my two bob's worth here re. corporates.They initially said that they would go broke if they had to pay the same as the Totes and took Uncle Tom Cobbly and all to court,looking for a ruling that would say that they did not have to pay the extra.
As a condition of the application the corporates had to pay in the difference between what they had been paying and what they would be required to pay if the case was won by the racing/pacing/chasing industries.
This they have done since the start of the case and the amount now held by the authorities, pending the outcome of the case, is in the high tens of millions,and how many corporates have gone broke in this period?
Really,that many?

Yeah Ron, like years ago when there was a big push for superannuation for ALL employees, not just Government and mining as was then the case, I remember the employers organisations ( their term for union) fighting it tooth and nail and their biggest spiel " we will become uncompetitive and go out of business if we have to pay this", like I said earlier people will have something for nothing if you let them have it for nothing and then they'll turn around and sell it back to you.