One can understandably be inclined to hope the coup comes unstuck, after all logic dictates that it is the punters who are being cheated by a carefully planned sleight of hand operation - don't be fooled by bookies PR spokesman saying they would have no qualms about paying out and that each horse's chance was there to see if you went back through the history of each animal involved - the bookmaking industry is having a revolver held to its head at the moment as the prospect of affordability checks threaten the very existence of the trade. Refusing pay outs in high profile situations would not win it any much needed allies.
No, make no mistake, if this was forty or fifty years ago the chances are they would have withheld payment definitely, if not forever. Anyone thinking that this sounds ridiculous will not be old enough to remember the famous Rochester greyhound coup in the late 1970's, when two dogs were backed in doubles after having failed to demonstrate their true ability in time trials after being brought over from Ireland where they raced under different names, prior to legally having them changed - it was a far more painstaking task to trace the history of dogs or horses with similar profiles then, far from the quick pressing of a few buttons which can carry out the task now.
In short, the coup was arguably less murky than the part successful one carried out last weekend. It was estimated that £350,000 was the owed payout, the equivalent to just over £2 million in today's money. However, the bookmakers refused to pay out. In response there was a campaign carried out by a 'glue gang' who would fill the locks of targeted betting offices prior to opening time on high turnover days such as Saturdays and Bank Holidays. The money was never paid out though the firms hit by the ' glue gang' later stated that they would have been better off doing so - which makes one think that a hell of a lot of locks must have been glued up to cause a shortfall in profits of a sum equating to a modern day £2 million!
Returning to last weekend - while it did not appeal to financially join in at measly odds on animals that had been chalked up at fancy prices in the morning, if your line of thinking supports the opposite side of the court and those behind the audacious coup, you may have been influenced by your thoughts returning to those times when money was taken from us by the other side who had as good as factual knowledge that would present us with zilch opportunity of getting any return - the source of this factual knowledge not being able to be gleaned by those not privy to the full details of the ante- post market on a race until the betting exchanges arrived on the scene.
By golly it was an eye opener to those who had never been responsible for an ante- post market for the punters when the exchanges told us who the non runners would be long before they were confirmed as such by connections - this is not referring to the ambigious ones were the exchange layers may be offering 22's on something generally priced up at 12's for the Workingham two weeks before the event. This is referring to the horse generally available at a consistent price in the books only to be available to decent money at four or five times the price on the exchanges.
It's almost certainly a non runner, the books know so but price it up as a player so punters will back it in the belief that it will line up bar a late setback. These weren't the situations where you could not resist getting stuck into a fiercely competitive handicap seven weeks before the event in the knowledge that there was one more prep run left that could result in a disappointing run that would rule the animal out of the main contest, or if it came through the prep satisfactory it was still likely to get stuffed in the main target race given the nature of those big money handicaps - nope, we accepted that. One could also accept a horse doing a Levaramoss or a Vodkatini after the flag went up at the start. What ranked most was placing money on an animal when it was already known by one side that it would not get to the post.
There are many examples from the past. One from what I'd call the crossover period, the time when a few had started to move to the exchanges but just before the masses moved across in 2003. Next Desert has looked a serious Arc contender when winning the Deutches Derby at Hamburg in July, a race where the consistent Queen's Vase winner and St Leger hopeful was a well beaten fifth.
Next Desert was reportedly being readied for the Arc for which he was quoted around the 16/1 mark in the books. Many of us would have supported him a couple of weeks before trial weekend at the general price he was being quoted at. We knew and accepted if he flopped in the trials we'd be on a non runner, we knew and accepted that if he sustained an injury before the race we'd be on a non runner, we hoped that he'd win or go very close in his trial race and shorten up for the big one - what we did not know is that those accepting the bet already knew that the horse had sustained a setback and was already almost certainly a non runner, for those who had discovered the exchanges would have been aware he was available at four times the price!
This takes you back to the days when the ante- post markets were very buoyant and how the books must have given clear indications that a certain prominently priced animal would not be lining up. Remember, these would have been times when most trainers did not belive they had any responsibility to report a horse prominenty priced up in an ante- post market as a non runner - you often did not discover this until the animal was absent from the next declaration stage.
Admittedly, trainers can still be slow to reveal that one of their charges at the front end of the market for a big race has encountered a setback and will miss the intended target but back then they took the view it was not the business of anyone not connected to the yard - hence you found out when the name was absent from a forfeit stage.
1978 saw numerous well backed horses in ante post markets withdrawn. The subject made the front page of the Sporting Life ( see image) in a piece penned by John McCririck. The article was a bit crafty in the sense that Try My Best and Leonardo da Vinci would widely have been expected to be withdrawn from the Derby after their respective flops in the 2,000 Guineas and Mecca Dante respectively. But many of the others would have remained priced up as if nowt much was wrong in strong markets when the sudden reduction of levels in support would have been a certain sign they would not be lining up.
That is why when these rare coups are in progress, the instinct deep down should be to hope they are triumphant, fair or not fair.
image from author's scrapbooks
The final track of a strong throughout, easy listening, enjoy a glass of red album, brought out in 1975 when ante- post markets were strong with animals remaining priced up when their non participation was already certain. The album contains a cover of a song that would become a Rugby Union anthem, and was also the album found on the turntable of Andreas Baader's record player when he was discovered in his cell after committing suicide.
No comments:
Post a Comment