Brodie Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 13 minutes ago, Chief Stipe said: I always found it a bit of a joke that all punters are limited to $500k in winnings a day! Is it more now? All the weird and wonderful losing $1 multi's that punters have to adjust to just tick in under $500k. So restricted punters are obviously not included in this rule! Takes a lot of bets for restricted punters to net $1m Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gammalite Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 10 hours ago, Brodie said: Gamma, Just because they do it, and are currently getting away with these restrictions, make it ethical or legal! I am under the misunderstanding that you were not allowed to discriminate against people? Not interested in betting with syndicates on galloping or harness, the challenge and enjoyment comes from personal selection. It's their money . they don't have to Accept bets against it if they don't want to. Your 2nd sentence accuses discrimination. It's their money they can accept bets from whoever they want. Kerry Packer used to have Million dollar bets when he was in town. the rest of us wouldn't be allowed this. BGP get 'large' bets on . some look risky. some win . some lose. But they are good value as come back for more . They are supplying fun and enjoyment and involvement to a lot of patrons too, your last point here shows you are Not Interested in this type of thing. Personally I agree with you about the personal selection. But you are only interested in Winning money in 'Larger' amounts in one go . Of course they will frown upon that . common sense. p.s We used to try and beat the 'Limit's' in the Bookie ring at MV by 10 blokes simultaneously hitting 10 bookies at the same time to get $1000 on each at 4-1 on NZ first start horses. $10,000 invested. If you weren't simultaneous they would wind the price in to even money , or something before you even got to them. good system , and took $4000 off each bookie, which was sort of sad in a way. One horse only got 2nd once and I was glad the books got one back for a change 😂 but all 'ethical' I spose. Bookie didn't have to take the bet afterall. there's limits on the Amount You can Put on . This Is for Everyone's Benefit. even Multi Billion dollar casino's.💰 would be irresponsible gambling to accept any bet from Brodster or any punter who rolls up on a mindless bender. At least BGP , (and the Betting syndicate I joined on a 6 months contract) were' fully controlled' for their customers , and this stopped the massive losses that Individuals would LOSE on Their own. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 2 hours ago, Brodie said: So because it is in their rules, it is acceptable? Have you specifically excluded yourself from their rules ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 2 minutes ago, Rangatira said: Have you specifically excluded yourself from their rules ? Their rules would not be legal if contested! Just like the Government policy of mandating the Pfizer Toxic jabs for school teachers and police etc! It has been recently determined to have been illegal to force citizens to have the toxins injected into them! Just because the TAB say they can be discriminatory, doesnt mean it is LEGAL!!! Anyway they are doing the industry a disservice by pissing off their client base. Punters will desert them and they wont get replacements! 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 11 hours ago, Brodie said: I am under the misunderstanding that you were not allowed to discriminate against people? The Human Rights Act The Human Rights Act 1993 is aimed at giving all people equal opportunities and preventing unfair treatment on the basis of irrelevant personal characteristics. The Human Rights Act covers discrimination on the grounds of: sex marital status religious belief ethical belief colour race ethnic or national origins disability age political opinion employment status family status sexual orientation. It's unlawful to discriminate someone on these grounds in the following areas of public life: employment education access to public places provision of goods and services housing and accommodation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 2 hours ago, Brodie said: Yeah, he was allowed to net $2k on a bet, wonder what it is now? unlikely to be less Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowornever Posted April 15 Share Posted April 15 15 minutes ago, Rangatira said: unlikely to be less Yes I thought all punters were allowed to win 2K on each win bet they placed. You can have more than one 2K bet but have to take the lowered odds on the next one. k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeynz Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 57 minutes ago, Rangatira said: The Human Rights Act The Human Rights Act 1993 is aimed at giving all people equal opportunities and preventing unfair treatment on the basis of irrelevant personal characteristics. The Human Rights Act covers discrimination on the grounds of: sexual orientation. Lots of people not sure have whats called sexual disorientation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowornever Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, Brodie said: Their rules would not be legal if contested! I think you should be the one to have a shot at contesting this. You have got the means as you state on here quite often and it would definitely get some airtime in the media. Or your lawyer would soon tell you if this was a doable thing or not. Any lawyers here that would like to put their two cents in on this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 3 minutes ago, Nowornever said: Any lawyers here that would like to put their two cents in on this? Ranga from Bush Lawyers suggests leaning Bridge would be a better use of The Brodsters time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the galah Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 (edited) 14 hours ago, Gammalite said: Brodie is a single entity, trying to make a quid out of a system that has apparently reaped results. Brodie doesn't act as if he had loyalty or fondness to any Betting agency. He just wants to take them to the cleaners , for as much as he feels he deserves. If I was a betting agency I'd be VERY wary of someone doing this , and restrict them. PGB are are bunch of clever fellows who pool together , have a lot of fun , betting agency suck up to them a bit, inflates the pools nicely. Not too bothered whether they win or lose . So you WELCOME these people. they're great for the racing game and getting people involved. OF course the Betting Agency will let them Place their Big Bets. They come back and spend it . I think it is un-necessary to refund their losing bet though. That has OBVIOUSLY left a Bad taste in other punters mouths. I remember one bet once I tried to put on an Nz pacer on the grass. $500 place on number 1 using a Brodie-like strategy 🤣. the machine said "Too high amount , try lower amount" so I dropped it to $400 to win $400. I wasn't surprised in the slightest. Why should they risk more than a certain payout amount for my benefit? They're trying to make money . BTW (horse ran 4th hemmed in behind the John Dunn fav who led and won so it was goodbye $400 lol. 😆 true yarn ! and I have played better strategy than that rubbish ever since😂 I believe brodie has always been consistent. He hasn't said entain/tab should not accept sizeable bets from the BGP.He has asked why others are restricted so heavily. That is 2 different things. I agree with entain accepting large BGP bets is basically what you and tab forever and entain and others have put forward as to the overall picture of why. But very important is having a consistencyand fairness around how all punters are treated in comparison with each other. i think brodie is simply saying,i may be a winning punter. But entain should at least place high priority on the perception that punters can win,as its an extremely important factor in peoples motivation to bet . Brodies saying i have just as much rite as the next punter to be one of those winners.If your going to limit my bets,be realistic and still give me a fair chance to win a reasonable amount. Using the casino analogy you gave gamalite,brodies saying what would it do to customer numbers frequenting a casino if they knew no one wins. People go to a casino knowing the odds are against them,but there will still be many winners on the night and they believe they have a chance one of being one of them. Is the cost of having brodie win sometimes,and he won't always win as no one does,really that bad to warrant the level of restrictions they put on him?Do the negatives really outweigh the positives. i can't see whats unreasonable about that. if entain is taking a big picture approach to BGP and including all the syndicate members private betting,then why when it comes to brodie do they solely look at his betting only and not include the thousands of other punters who bet on the same race. Edited April 16 by the galah 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowornever Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 2 minutes ago, Rangatira said: Ranga from Bush Lawyers suggests leaning Bridge would be a better use of The Brodsters time. Yes Brodie is pushing shit up hill on this one. Let us know what your lawyer says Brodie! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 23 minutes ago, mikeynz said: Lots of people not sure have whats called sexual disorientation. Keep It Simple Stupid Not just a 70's Glam Rock Band Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the galah Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 (edited) Another thing thats struck me about some posts on this topic. Theres been an inference in some peoples replies that at the end of the day,once a few meetings have passed,BGP can never come out ahead on harness racing. I simply don't believe that. I only know a bit about their harness selectors,but i know the likes of matt markham and andrew fitzgerald are very good judges of form. I can't say for sure,but i would be very confident they would be winning punters overal themselves. Why would people think they couldn't bring that success with them to BGP. Besides,given BGP are so well organised as far as every other aspect of the syndicate goes,why wouldn't they be just as professional when it comes to tapping into using knowledgable and successful punters on harness. Personally i believe that is something underestimated by entain. I still think they should take their bets like they do,but entain shouldn't come crying to anyone down the track and start suggesting they should place unrealistic limits on BGP bets due to success they may have on the punt. Instead Entain must use it properly as a marketing tool if it happens. Thats a real possibilty in my eyes. Entain has to realise theyv'e taken the top off the jeannie bottle. You may just see a thousand brodies pop out if you start limiting bgp unrealistically in the future. Now wouldn't that be interesting. Edited April 16 by the galah 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 3 hours ago, Nowornever said: Pretty sure the 1 million cap is not daily but weekly I could probably live with that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Stipe Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 20 minutes ago, the galah said: I only know a bit about their harness selectors,but i know the likes of matt markham and andrew fitzgerald are very good judges of form. I can't say for sure,but i would be very confident they would be winning punters overal themselves. Why would people think they couldn't bring that success with them to BGP. So if they do become hugely successful will the individuals that bought syndicate $1.01 tickets be restricted as individuals because they are winning heaps? Just asking for a friend @Brodie. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 1 hour ago, Nowornever said: Yes I thought all punters were allowed to win 2K on each win bet they placed. You can have more than one 2K bet but have to take the lowered odds on the next one. The launch of Punters Promise landed with a simple email from the TAB, understandable as it will affect only a small percentage of those who bet on New Zealand racing. It hailed the end of frustrating restrictions for winning punters, which often meant punters were restricted to winning a few hundred dollars, even less, on racing and sporting events when they were trying to place bets to win much more. Punters Promise, a self-imposed new minimum win limit imposed by the TAB themselves, means any customer betting on their TAB account is allowed to win a minimum of $2000 in a single fixed odds win bet on any New Zealand horse or dog race. Most people will never bet to that level nor should they. Most importantly, punters should find their own level and with racing being an entertainment for most they should treat betting the same way they treat going to the movies or out for dinner: money traded for a good time. But there are a small percentage of punters who take betting more seriously. They like to invest more and have the disposal income to do so, and there are plenty of racehorse owners who want to back their own horse for more than the restricted amounts which is an important lure of actually owning a horse. These punters, should they win even semi regularly, are often inhibited by restrictions that are incredibly frustrating and make them fume at the TAB. Of course the TAB isn't alone in restricting winning punters, it is standard practice in the bookmaking industry worldwide, and while the ethics of letting people lose as much as they want but only win set amounts are questionable, because most punters don't win over an extended period the restrictions don't affect them. But the punters it does affect tend to be the bigger, more regular punters and the TAB restrictions here, which reached farcical levels as the new website and betting framework were bedding in, have now been relaxed. The $2000 minimum fixed odds win limit, with the option to bet again at the readjusted price, is up with the best in the world, especially considering the smaller size of the New Zealand gaming market and the TAB should be congratulated for make the change of their own accord. It is a good thing. A very good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 2 hours ago, Rangatira said: The Human Rights Act The Human Rights Act 1993 is aimed at giving all people equal opportunities and preventing unfair treatment on the basis of irrelevant personal characteristics. The Human Rights Act covers discrimination on the grounds of: sex marital status religious belief ethical belief colour race ethnic or national origins disability age political opinion employment status family status sexual orientation. It's unlawful to discriminate someone on these grounds in the following areas of public life: employment education access to public places provision of goods and services housing and accommodation. So they are clearly breaking the law! Provision of goods and services!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 3 minutes ago, Brodie said: So they are clearly breaking the law! Provision of goods and services!! Based on what ? Your sexual orientation ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gammalite Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 Well it's like biting the hand that feeds you. Brodie has already made a lot of money from the TAB and just wants to continue getting BIG helpings like he once did. There are plenty of folk that once did. But forgets that the TAB has been his friend and 'fed' him in the past , and there's a LOT of other dogs in the Pack that need a feed as well. I appreciate their efforts. The QLD TAB even miraculously keeps Tasmanian Harness racing going. Even though it has really 'Gone To The Dogs ' 😅🤣 (a lot of the equine participants are even fed to them down there , when they can't run any faster anymore 😪) The FEEDer (the TAB or casino) is going to give FAVOURITISM to the dogs like Packer and BGP who come in and have a good regular feed and bring lots of Food (money) with them.... like on a jolly good Picnic. they will be played with and give lots of fun and joy chasing the Frisbie cash. Some folk just want to take them to the cleaners (take as much food as they can) and close down anything racing that is of No value. i.e. that you can't get a bet on or whatever. even though a few of us make/made a living from the great sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 10 minutes ago, Rangatira said: The launch of Punters Promise landed with a simple email from the TAB, understandable as it will affect only a small percentage of those who bet on New Zealand racing. It hailed the end of frustrating restrictions for winning punters, which often meant punters were restricted to winning a few hundred dollars, even less, on racing and sporting events when they were trying to place bets to win much more. Punters Promise, a self-imposed new minimum win limit imposed by the TAB themselves, means any customer betting on their TAB account is allowed to win a minimum of $2000 in a single fixed odds win bet on any New Zealand horse or dog race. Most people will never bet to that level nor should they. Most importantly, punters should find their own level and with racing being an entertainment for most they should treat betting the same way they treat going to the movies or out for dinner: money traded for a good time. But there are a small percentage of punters who take betting more seriously. They like to invest more and have the disposal income to do so, and there are plenty of racehorse owners who want to back their own horse for more than the restricted amounts which is an important lure of actually owning a horse. These punters, should they win even semi regularly, are often inhibited by restrictions that are incredibly frustrating and make them fume at the TAB. Of course the TAB isn't alone in restricting winning punters, it is standard practice in the bookmaking industry worldwide, and while the ethics of letting people lose as much as they want but only win set amounts are questionable, because most punters don't win over an extended period the restrictions don't affect them. But the punters it does affect tend to be the bigger, more regular punters and the TAB restrictions here, which reached farcical levels as the new website and betting framework were bedding in, have now been relaxed. The $2000 minimum fixed odds win limit, with the option to bet again at the readjusted price, is up with the best in the world, especially considering the smaller size of the New Zealand gaming market and the TAB should be congratulated for make the change of their own accord. It is a good thing. A very good thing. That bet minimum of $2k is for ff win betting only! Bring it in for all wagering or at least have reasonable levels! $20 I do not consider a reasonable level! Anyway, if most agree with the way the TAb/Entain are operating in regards to limitations on certain punters on account then so be it! Maybe there are other ways to skin a cat?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 2 minutes ago, Gammalite said: Well it's like biting the hand that feeds you. Brodie has already made a lot of money from the TAB and just wants to continue getting BIG helpings like he once did. There are plenty of folk that once did. But forgets that the TAB has been his friend and 'fed' him in the past , and there's a LOT of other dogs in the Pack that need a feed as well. I appreciate their efforts. The QLD TAB even miraculously keeps Tasmanian Harness racing going. Even though it has really 'Gone To The Dogs ' 😅🤣 (a lot of the equine participants are even fed to them down there , when they can't run any faster anymore 😪) The FEEDer (the TAB or casino) is going to give FAVOURITISM to the dogs like Packer and BGP who come in and have a good regular feed and bring lots of Food (money) with them.... like on a jolly good Picnic. they will be played with and give lots of fun and joy chasing the Frisbie cash. Some folk just want to take them to the cleaners (take as much food as they can) and close down anything racing that is of No value. i.e. that you can't get a bet on or whatever. even though a few of us make/made a living from the great sport. Gamma, it is the principle that I find abhorrent and unfair! Brodie does not need or never has needed the TAB to feed him, far from it! They do not play fair and have made it very difficult for restricted punters. Anyway, it is what it is, but I do know that many find it very hard to believe that the TAB/Entain stop people from winning, and they say well if that is the case they wont bother betting with them! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangatira Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Brodie said: That bet minimum of $2k is for ff win betting only! Fortune(s) for The Brave(s) Edited April 16 by Rangatira Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gammalite Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 6 minutes ago, Brodie said: Gamma, it is the principle that I find abhorrent and unfair! Brodie does not need or never has needed the TAB to feed him, far from it! They do not play fair and have made it very difficult for restricted punters. Anyway, it is what it is, but I do know that many find it very hard to believe that the TAB/Entain stop people from winning, and they say well if that is the case they wont bother betting with them! I do feel sorry for you feel bad about Not getting the Bets on you once did. My son won a thousand once on Ladbrokes on-line and got restricted straight after. It's just part of the parcel mate. The TAB/Entain seem to offer a product you don't like? . so you should look elsewhere really. Every sport (and business company ) plays 'Favourite's' in some form or another. It's happened since Sport and betting ever began. It's called business management (Not Descrimination as you suggest) As seen through this thread Entain and even BGP are developing ways to co-exist in a Racing world where there is still Fun to be had, as well as the dollar spend . refunding the BGP bet to keep them 'interested' is a Bit of Stretch though 😂😅 their money but. my personal harness interest is in the fantastic racing 99% and the money bets 1% , and yours is the other way around which is fine . so I do apologize for not seeing things from your lens and sounding un-sympathetic to your needs. I think people need limits on their OWN Bank card money daily withdrawals mate, let alone how much they spend on a single bet. Gambling is a huge society problem , and when people get on a bender a LOT of DAMAGE is done. I had an owner who just did small bets at the TROTS with his horse and seemed quite normal. not getting carried away. He was a company Director and had access to the company card. One day suddenly flew to Sydney Royal Randwick and told me he has been stood down at work the following week . He spent $72,000 odd at the races that one day. 🤕😱 ya need limits. cards, bets, for the sake of everyone. Betting pools mean zero to me, just the development , maintenance and enjoyment and progress of the great harness sport. Best of Luck with your bets !!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brodie Posted April 16 Share Posted April 16 24 minutes ago, Gammalite said: I do feel sorry for you feel bad about Not getting the Bets on you once did. My son won a thousand once on Ladbrokes on-line and got restricted straight after. It's just part of the parcel mate. The TAB/Entain seem to offer a product you don't like? . so you should look elsewhere really. Every sport (and business company ) plays 'Favourite's' in some form or another. It's happened since Sport and betting ever began. It's called business management (Not Descrimination as you suggest) As seen through this thread Entain and even BGP are developing ways to co-exist in a Racing world where there is still Fun to be had, as well as the dollar spend . refunding the BGP bet to keep them 'interested' is a Bit of Stretch though 😂😅 their money but. my personal harness interest is in the fantastic racing 99% and the money bets 1% , and yours is the other way around which is fine . so I do apologize for not seeing things from your lens and sounding un-sympathetic to your needs. I think people need limits on their OWN Bank card money daily withdrawals mate, let alone how much they spend on a single bet. Gambling is a huge society problem , and when people get on a bender a LOT of DAMAGE is done. I had an owner who just did small bets at the TROTS with his horse and seemed quite normal. not getting carried away. He was a company Director and had access to the company card. One day suddenly flew to Sydney Royal Randwick and told me he has been stood down at work the following week . He spent $72,000 odd at the races that one day. 🤕😱 ya need limits. cards, bets, for the sake of everyone. Betting pools mean zero to me, just the development , maintenance and enjoyment and progress of the great harness sport. Best of Luck with your bets !!!! With total respect Gamma, i don’t need any sympathy from anyone for being treated unfairly by the TAB, and I am not the only one that this is happening to. The TAB/Entain advertise their betting services and then when you try and use them you are basically shut down! Havent got a problem with punters having gambling limits imposed on them if they require them, but they are normally self imposed rather than by the TAB. Ladbrokes Australia are owned by Entain as I understand it so wont be any favours from them as I already know! Anyway more profitable ways of making $ without the frustration of being treated unfairly by the monopoly! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.