Happy Sunrise

Your choice... but I think the punting gods were sending you a very clear message...?

Brooks is a long way behind. Those 40k winds better eventuate! The course must surely show its teeth. I wish I had taken the 12s on Fleetwood after the first round.

You make a lot of rational sense in your posts, barryb. ?

People like to be led to water. Most people do not pay attention. The presenters couldn't even if they wanted to.

The big question for me is when you live and breath racing like Greg O'Connor does, do you go home and watch videos and really analyse the races further? One may watch the watch the races while there but you miss a lot so I don't know how good a tipster a presenter can be. Be easier just to go with the flow and throw out the obvious form horses and stables.

Can someone explain why one would do this. Was he being nice to the horse? Was he drunk?

Comrades aplenty.

Does it have you seeing red?

and will still be a Purdon win...some things never change ?

Raymond Reekie.

Brodie is an ACT supporter?

I think there is still about 12 months to run on that suspension too lol

They are trying to broaden their reach. Not sure how much effect it will have.

Anybody within 6 shots at the end of the day could still win it. Whoever sinks their 10 footers consistently will go a long way to winning it.

He is apparently neither poor or old but definitely restricted elsewhere.

I imagine it is the same as here as I doubt many could afford to cover golf for 12 hours a day like it is at the open! Sitting here on my couch I am sure I would break 70 round that course......

If it blows later watch out! Scores will go skyward in a hurry.

Looks like tiger's only happy place is Augusta....long way to 18 if that is the case!

Fleetwood. Bit late after first round to post this but he will win a major soonish. X factor. Was 26 but now 12 I think. Not ideal and not worth backing at that.

You get used to it Globe.

Another article out there showing betting agencies will do what what they like. Maybe, that is far enough but they do pick and choose about what they payout and what they don't. They are like insurance companies.... "The moment in which a cruel deflection cost New Zealand's cricket side, has also left a Kiwi punter feeling hard done by after he was denied a $1575 return from Sportsbet over the classification of Ben Stokes' controversial last-over six in the World Cup final. The New Zealand-based sport fan placed a $12 four-leg multi-bet with the Australian corporate bookmaker last weekend. The first three legs pertained to Wimbledon: for Simona Halep to win the women's singles final against Serena Williams and for Novak Djokovic and Roger Federer to win their respective men's singles semi-finals in four sets. All three of those legs were successful. The last leg was for England to score the most sixes as well as win the final against the Black Caps. With the match having been tied after a super over, England won the final on the basis of having scored more boundaries than their opponents. However the question of which team scored more sixes remains a matter of contention. Both teams hit two regulation sixes. The Kiwi punter, who has asked not to be named, claims that the six runs scored off the third last ball of England's chase – which came about via two normal runs plus four overthrows which deflected off Stokes' bat – should be counted, which would give England the edge in sixes and reap the punter a return of $1575. Sportsbet deemed the bet to have lost. The punter raised the matter via a live chat with the bookmaker, a transcript of which has been seen by The Age and Sydney Morning Herald. Having looked into the matter, Sportsbet insisted that under their terms and conditions, a six only counted if it was hit straight over the boundary, rather than via overthrows. The punter argues that the rules are ambiguous. The first three legs of the Kiwi man's multi bet came through, which included Simona Halep defeating Serena Williams at Wimbledon. On the rules, terms and conditions page on the company's website, there is no reference to the nature of a six under the "Team to hit the most sixes/Team to hit the most sixes and win the match" subheading. Under the subheading pertaining to bets about a six being scored in a specific over, there is a clause which states that "for the avoidance of doubt players running six and boundaries which are counted as extras do not count for this market." Having been contacted for this story on Wednesday, Sportsbet were looking into the matter and expected to provide further clarification within the next 24 hours. Separately and in the wake of the controversial finish, Sportsbet refunded more than 11,000 punters a total of NZ$443,753. The bookmaker said punters who backed New Zealand in both the head to head and the outright tournament market would be refunded their stakes in bonus bets. "Let's not beat around the bush, for a World Cup to be decided in that manner is an absolute disgrace," said a Sportsbet spokesman."

In this case, not really, as Joe Average is not interested in setting up an overseas account and if they were to shut down that option then it is not simple business rules at all. I look forward to Mr TAB man's answers.

Going past the obvious answers, why are the TAB doing this? Are they getting hammered by harness punters? losing money on FF bets?

Kotare and Hunter?

There must be more to it than that. Didn't the TAB turnover 4 million on the cricket? So how could they restrict someone to a 237 dollar collect? Sorry, I just can't believe it.