The Crucible

Cheers Peter. I've shared a few messages with The Chief and here is what has transpired. Based on complaints the Chief received from more than one person apparently, he thinks I have edited someone's picks in the Super Comp, hence undermining the competition and abusing my moderation rights. He didn't think to check the facts but leapt to publish the public censure above. Had he taken the time to investigate the complaints he would have seen that I didn't in fact edit anyone's picks - of course I would never do that. All I did was edit Howie's post regarding the Comp front runners at the end of each round. I added "Stranger Things" name next to the final round - quite prophetic, and completely harmless, but foolish at the same time. However In my view not worthy of the response from the Chief - it was simply a joke and taken in the intended spirit by Howie and others in the comp. Given my contribution to BOAY, both in terms of time and on occasions money, I would have expected slightly more gratitude than the censure displayed. I accept that it is the Chief's site and his prerogative to do what he likes, but I wonder if he had his facts correct whether he might have responded differently. The irony that I pointed out to the Chief is that he has censured someone who supports his site with their time and money, based on a non-issue raised by someone who runs comps for Scooby. I know the Chief can't disclose this to me, but I'd love to know who lodged the complaints - would have been nice if they'd had the decency to raise the issue with me first. I've had a lot of fun on BOAY and have really enjoyed the comps community. Peter J a huge thanks to you for the Super comps - I look forward to them every week and have formed some great virtual friendships. Some fantastic characters in these comps - the Blues brothers (Howie & Geoff), Hesi, Gordy, Steve P, Pete, Brian, Rees, my current teammates (Mo, Sandpiper & Brett), and even my current nemesis Weasel (you were growing on me mate). Good luck to all of you left in the current Super Comp and in future Super Comps. Over and out!

Please take the moderation rights away - I'm done here.

it was closer to 35 seconds but still impressive

I don't think so but doesn't change the fact that she is the best we will ever see!

I heard on Trackside radio yesterday that Mick Guerin owns a share in Rubira. I can only assume that he wasn't responsible for naming her - surely he wouldn't choose a name with two "R" sounds in it. Reminds me of the classic Kripke/Siri scene on BBT

Yes because I think they limit it to only one bet - your first bet on the day, and they can manage that via your account but obviously can't manage that if you're placing bets at a retail outlet.

I am in fact not wrong, but I love your confidence. I agree with your assertion that the amount the TAB makes on the tote is the net losses of all of the punters combined, and I appreciate that the logic is hard to understand, but the thing you are missing is that the combined losses of all punters is not a fixed amount – it is fluid. It’s not like a bunch of punters start the day and collectively say, “we are going to lose $500k today”. The only thing that is fixed is the fact that the TAB takes a percentage of all turnover. Here’s an illustration: Scenario 1: NM bets $2k into a tote pool on a single race. The pool including NM’s bet is $20k. NM collects $2k and places no further bets. NM’s turnover for the day is $2k and he breaks even. Scenario 2: NM bets $2k into a tote pool on a single race. The pool including NM’s bet is $20k. NM collects $2k. NM then bets $1k on the next race and loses the entire $1k. The pool before NM’s bet was $20k and with NM’s bet it is $21k. NM then bets another $1k on a subsequent race and collects $2k. The pool before NM’s bet was $20k and with NM’s bet it is $21k. NM’s turnover for the day is now $4k and he breaks even. Who makes and loses what under these two scenarios (assuming a 15% TAB take-out from the tote pool) Scenario 1: First race – TAB takes $3k (15% of $20k pool), NM breaks even, and other punters lose $3k – they bet $18k and collected $15k. Second race: TAB takes $3k (15% of $20k) and other punters lose $3k (NM didn't bet in this scenario) Third race: TAB takes $3k and other punters lose $3k (NM didn't bet in this scenario) Three races combined: TAB makes $9k (15% of $60k), NM breaks even and other punters lose $9k. Scenario 2: First race – TAB takes $3k (15% of $20k pool), NM breaks even, and other punters lose $3k – they bet $18k and collected $15k. Second race: TAB takes $3,150 (15% of $21k pool), NM loses $1k and other punters lose $2,150 – they bet $20k and collected $17,850. Third race: TAB takes $3,150, NM makes $1k, and other punters loses $4,150 – they bet $20k and collected $15,850. Three races combined: TAB makes $9,300 (15% of $62k), NM breaks even, and other punters lose $9,300. So the only difference in the two scenarios was that NM kept betting and as a result of this the TAB end up making a further $300, which unsurprisingly is 15% of NM’s additional turnover. By managing to beat the TAB’s 15% take he has effectively increased the combined losses of the other punters by $300 and effectively contributed another $300 to the TAB gross profit.

Some others on here seem to have complicated a very simple totalisator process. Everyone places their bets, the TAB takes 15% of all of those bets and pays out the balance. There's no difference between the TAB taking 15% of your bet or 15% of the pool. Your bet goes in to the pool so it's the same thing.

As per my previous post, TAB take a share of turnover - whether you win or lose, they make 15% on every bet that you place. Therefore TAB much prefer Option B.

On the tote (win or place) the TAB are guaranteed to take ~15% of what you bet whether you win or lose. In your example, but using 15% instead of the 10% that you've used, you bet $10k and other punter(s) bet $10k. That's $20k gross in the pool and the TAB take 15% or $3k - $1.5k of your bet and $1.5k from the other punter(s). That leaves $17k to be paid out. You collect $12k and the other punter(s) collect $5k. The other punter(s) made a net loss of $5k - they gave $1.5k to the TAB and they gave $3.5k to you. And you've made a profit of $2k - $3.5k from the other punter(s) less the $1.5k you gave to the TAB. The higher the tote turnover the better the TAB will do.

What would you know - Weasel and I agree on something I can't stand that farking woman. Oh the pressure and the weight of expectation - my heart bleeds for the poor thing. Most of us would give anything to win one group 1 race and she's got a mare that wins them for fun, but oh it is so stressful.

I'm getting an access error when I try to watch race replays on NZ Racing. Anybody else having the same problem?

Flemington R7 #12 Thorondor - currently $38 & $9 on tote. Third run back from a spell, nice draw, not awful the past two starts.

Yes, nice word. Or perhaps an even slightly easier word - "propensity". Was watching a preview show on Trackside at the weekend and the host (Matt Cross?) asked whether a certain factor in a horse's chances (bad draw or something like that) was "exasperated" by another factor. I think he meant "exacerbated" which kind of rhymes with a ruder word, which is kind of appropriate given his efforts to sound extra smart by using big words which he clearly didn't know the meaning of. Keep it simple!

unlike this woman!?

They broke even for the day so I’ll take a stab and say they got their $100 back (excluding any admin fee)

I think they started with $178k, turned over nearly $200k and broke even for the day despite the handicap of having Ted on their selection panel.

Unbelievable - at least 15 people at the start (9 jockeys plus starter plus assistants, ....) and not one of them figured out that something was wrong. Farrrrk - are we beyond help!? Stewards report not on the website yet Chief - perhaps they're too embarrassed.

There are a few things I'm used to accessing on the old TAB website, but I can't find on the new site. I'll list them here, because some of you may have found them and could perhaps tell me where to find them. Or perhaps someone from the TAB will read this and respond - I've emailed them but have not had any response. Please feel free to add things that you can't find: - jockey index for a particular meeting - trainer index for a particular meeting - jockey's book of rides - used to be able to click on their name and see all of their rides for the day (similar to the index), as well as their strike rates - quinella dividends Just managed to find Will Pays so have taken that off my list.

I think you've hit the nail on the head here Hesi. To be a true test of ability to make a return, it needs to be free form and is very hard for one person to score (spreadsheet or no spreadsheet). Particularly difficult for someone to score centrally if you allow lots of different betting agencies. Honesty based self scoring with the knowledge that others are watching is the way to go. I don't think you need to set a minimum number of bets - different people will have different methods and some may go for a period of time without finding a bet that they like. I think you should run it over a reasonable period of time - a number of months, not weeks.

Only two horses in it for me: Melody Belle - best horse in NZ. Freshened up and two very impressive trials. Yes the draw is not good, but has the ability to give them a 3-4 length start at the top of the straight and still win. I see her dropping back, lots of pace in the race, and her getting a drag into the race round the home turn and sprinting past them in the straight. and if she is going to get beaten I think it will be Princess Kereru. Very nice win last time despite it being a slowly run race. Finally living up to the potential and should get a nice trip from barrier 2. Just needs a clear run in the straight. $3 final field place is good money in my opinion.

I understand the concept of "value" and the expected return (over an extended period) if you bet on horses that are over the odds relative to your assessment of their chances of winning. The challenge of course is getting your assessment of a horse's chances right. The previous two posts have rated Piece of Kate at $9.34 and $7.80. Love to understand how you arrived at that!? The TAB have her at $81. Your ratings suggest you'd be very keen to have a bet on her at that price. I reckon the TAB are closer to the truth. She's a winner of four races from 30 starts, none above Rating 72. Its a WFA race so she is carrying the same weight as some very good mares - the top two in particular. There is no way in the world that she can be considered a better than 10% chance of winning. Provided track doesn't turn into a bog, I'd take $7.10 on Love Affair every day - much better than a 14% chance of winning.

Poundforpound said: I would add that between all of them they’ve done absolutely nothing, even Doug ( who outrageously claims he had a share in a group winning horse ) couldn’t pay the bills for the 20% share he had in a little 4 win horse with a very popular Levin trainer recently. That's a bit rich isn't it coming from a bankrupt!?

can someone tell George how to pronounce the word "deluxe" (as in the horse's name - Deluxe Edition) Dulux is a type of paint - the second letter is a "u" Deluxe is an adjective meaning fine or luxurious - the second letter is an "e". It's pronounced nothing like "Dulux"

He won't be looking at the stuff that the little bloke complains about, like free TV or form in newspapers. I'm guessing he'll be looking at big ticket items like: - leadership of the NZRB (Board and management) - imagine there will be wholesale changes. - that Racefields legislation - sort it out one way or the other. - the new sports betting platform - don't throw any more good money after bad - bin it and outsource this stuff.