Tote Monopoly

G

Guest_

At the Start
Joined
May 2, 2003
Messages
14,178
Location
Ireland
If it was offered, get rid of bookmakers and bring in a well run Tote monopoly on the sport..would you accept it? I would imagine those that love the sport for the sport itself would but the serious punters would not be happy?

Is it even possible to have it half way? Banning bookmakers from the track? I know anyone who wanted to have a bet with their bookies could simply do it by phone if they were at the track...but it would encourage other smaller punters to use the Tote...providing extra finance for the tracks etc.

Any thoughts on this...I am sure it is a minefield but the thoughts of independence from the bookmakers is growing more and more appealing to me as a horse racing fan.
 
Doing away with bookmakers is the only way forward.

If a halfway house were to be the first step, I'd go the other way and confine bookies to the racetrack as there's no doubt they add to the atmosphere, but the vast majority of betting takes place off course and that's where we punters are being mugged.

I'd also find a new way of deciding on SPs, without the bookies' input, if possible.
 
Really don't have the time to go into it now but I can't agree with you there Gal.

Apart from anything else, our system is well established now and any cull of bookmakers etc (even just the oncourse ones) would not only rob the UK/Irish sport of the individual character it has, but would also rob many, many people of their jobs.

I really don't think in can be done over here and I struggle to see how much of a benefit it would be anyway. I enjoy comparing prices whilst trying to get the best ones - that is more than just a part of the appeal betting has for me. As for the comraderie and sense of atmosphere you get in the ring - it adds very much to the experience of racing for me, I love the buzz of the ring and the rails. To remove it would remove most of the character of racing in this country and Ireland.
 
Shadow Leader said:
Really don't have the time to go into it now but I can't agree with you there Gal.

Apart from anything else, our system is well established now and any cull of bookmakers etc (even just the oncourse ones) would not only rob the UK/Irish sport of the individual character it has, but would also rob many, many people of their jobs.

I really don't think in can be done over here and I struggle to see how much of a benefit it would be anyway. I enjoy comparing prices whilst trying to get the best ones - that is more than just a part of the appeal betting has for me. As for the comraderie and sense of atmosphere you get in the ring - it adds very much to the experience of racing for me, I love the buzz of the ring and the rails. To remove it would remove most of the character of racing in this country and Ireland.
Click to expand...

For one, with a greater income for the racecourses...they would not have to rely on getting all those drunken yobs in the doors!!

I agree though its not a simple matter. DO's suggestion of doing it the other way around (bookies only at the racecourses) is interesting.
 
Desert Orchid said:
the vast majority of betting takes place off course and that's where we punters are being mugged.
Click to expand...

Replace the world of competing prices, special offers, differences of opinion and competitive margins for one with a big guaranteed take-out and no choice? I can see the benefit for the sport but for punters surely not?

As for whether the sport needs it... It either needs a generous allowance provided by a monopoly or it needs to operate as a business. Hamstrung by regulation as it is at present, a compromised half-way house, forced to run fixtures that make no commercial sense is hopeless.

You could argue a case for either option. My personal preference would be for deregulation, I know others on here will think differently. Both choices have their pros and cons, both would be better than the status quo.
 
Galileo said:
If it was offered, get rid of bookmakers and bring in a well run Tote monopoly on the sport..would you accept it? I would imagine those that love the sport for the sport itself would but the serious punters would not be happy?

Is it even possible to have it half way? Banning bookmakers from the track? I know anyone who wanted to have a bet with their bookies could simply do it by phone if they were at the track...but it would encourage other smaller punters to use the Tote...providing extra finance for the tracks etc.

Any thoughts on this...I am sure it is a minefield but the thoughts of independence from the bookmakers is growing more and more appealing to me as a horse racing fan.
Click to expand...

As I now live and work in the USA, the lack of choice of where to wager is the prime reason I do not wager much money.

I would not mind a 5% tax on bookmakers on course and a 10% tax for account bookmakers on course to help generate revenue for each course.

Craig
 
But what percentage of punters are in it for the betting edge, BM?

We all like to show a profit but it isn't the be-all-and-end-all for me. I'd be happier knowing a hugely greater proportion of betting money was being ploughed back into the sport in terms of vastly greater prize money (therefore less cheating necessary), cheaper entry to courses (in which case, I'd probably go very often instead of just once or so per year), etc.

Looking at the French PM returns, some people on here can still pick fancy-priced winners anyway.
 
That is an interesting point. I guess as horse racing fans we would like that percentage to be lower than it is.

My concern is that if you make betting on horses 'poor value' in comparison to other sports, then a significant proportion will choose to gamble their money elsewhere. That would have the detrimental effect of reducing the amount of money/interest/profile that the sport has.

The French PMU system is an interesting example. Despite both the accessibility and good value that following horse racing in that country brings, it is very much a niche sport and outside of the big meetings is relatively poorly attended. Arc Saturday never fails to shock me when I turn up.

I don't think we should under-estimate the PR job that bookmakers do on behalf of our sport.
 
Last edited:
I'd prefer a an off-course tote monopoly with bookmakers on-course only.

The chance was blundered away nearly 50 years when this very topic was being discussed in the run-up to what became the legalisation of betting shops. The head of the Jockey Club at the time, one of the Lords Rosebery if I remember correctly, was what would now be diagnosed as a problem gambler, and he liked to take a price and opposed any such plan.

I believe William Hill often gave him a point over the odds, he was such a mug it was a licence to print money (as John Banks was later to describe betting shops!).

After all these years, it's extremely frustrating that the tongues of the sport's rulers are still rammed as far up bookmakers' rectums as they were all those years ago.
 
betsmate said:
My concern is that if you make betting on horses 'poor value' in comparison to other sports, then a significant proportion will choose to gamble their money elsewhere. That would have the detrimental effect of reducing the amount of money/interest/profile that the sport has.

The French PMU system is an interesting example. Despite both the accessibility and good value that following horse racing in that country brings, it is very much a niche sport and outside of the big meetings is relatively poorly attended. Arc Saturday never fails to shock me when I turn up.

I don't think we should under-estimate the PR job that bookmakers do on behalf of our sport.
Click to expand...

1. I'm not convinced the percentage would be significant. Sports betting is, in terms of relativity, still in its infancy. Your everyday punter is still more inclined to pick out his 'three-cross' or his 'yankee' in the hope of a return that will cover his Friday night in the pub. My concern is that it would be much more difficult to operate multiple betting without bookies.

2. I've heard the argument about poor attendances a number of times. When I lived in Bordeaux, I regularly attended the bread & butter Sunday meetings at Le Bouscat and they were far better attended than the meetings I was used to at home. How many attend a wet Monday afternoon at Musselburgh?

3. Bookmakers do an excellent PR job for the sport but the price is ridiculously high. For a fraction of the cost, the authorities could hire the top ad agencies to promote racing.
 
I used to go down to Paris quite often but only bother now for the Arc weekend. Why? Lack of atmosphere and excessive tote takeouts.
 
Why is a pool monopoly always put forward as the saviour of racing and why is it assumed that the punters must be even worse off so that racing can be better off. If we just cut out the middlemen then racing and the punters could have the bookmakers / exchanges profits between them. So why don't we talk about a racing run exchange or bookmaking monopoly. You'd think most losers would be betting with the tote anyway (whether pool or fixed odds) as that way their losses would go to racing instead of a shower of parasitic shareholders. Is the fact that they don't down to indifference, how badly the tote is run or is it because the average punter detests the institutionally corrupt nobs within racing as much as they seemingly destest him/her?
 
Grey said:
I used to go down to Paris quite often but only bother now for the Arc weekend. Why? Lack of atmosphere and excessive tote takeouts.
Click to expand...

A lack of atmosphere wouldn't particularly bother me, if the atmosphere in the UK is what we're going by. The yob culture has been very much in evidence at the popular meetings for years. It's even infiltrating the good NH meetings. I'm quite happy to toddle around at my leisure in a quiet atmosphere, watching nice horses, top jockeys and getting home without other people's beer all over my clothes.

HT might actually have the right answer. I keep forgeting about the exchanges.
As for excessive tote takeouts, as HT says, the big difference is that the majority of the takeout goes back into the sport. It's a wee bit like the guys who come into the pub on a Friday night with a football card, trying to raise funds for the local kids' team. You're maybe only getting 40/1 about an 80/1 chance but you don't mind if you know where the money's going and the guy himself isn't taking the profit himself.
 
You're maybe only getting 40/1 about an 80/1 chance but you don't mind if you know where the money's going and the guy himself isn't taking the profit himself.
Click to expand...

I don't find that a convincing analogy when many participants in racing are very wealthy as a result.
 
Homer J said:
I suspect a racing run exchange would go down more frequently than Abi Titmuss.
Click to expand...

You're betfair brainwashed though Homer. It's entirely possible to have an exchange that doesn't have to process thousands of requests for every £2 matched.
 
Back
Top