$360,000 layed on one horse at Terang Tues.?
 

$360,000 was layed at Betfair on Odds-on $1.30 chance, Ottens in r4 at Terang. Horse ran 4th out of 5 starters. Jockie was S. Murphy[a] and the Trainer Darren Weir.

$360,000 lay pool on one horse at a Tues. Terang meeting? Naturally there is going to be the usual stewards inquiry.

You must have backers to match every $ layed, so that statistic alone means very little.

It might mean that connections fancied the runner.

Or it might mean the very opposite.

Hi Crash the $360,000 is counted twice once when the back bet is matched and again as a lay bet so $180,000 is still a bit sus,( but only $54,000 really I think) they will look into it, see what accounts the money went to and from.

Please note, without having alleged "facts," which should be given to the proper authorities to investigate and not be posted in a public forum, it is defamatory to imply that anything untoward was done by any trainer or any jockey to ensure a horse loses and so the lay wagers win.

Thank you for your cooperation.

Moderator.

Considering the horse started at around $2.70 on the tote, it would seem that in fact the opposite was true.
The horse was plonked on the exchange because it was fancied and they got every dollar available at prices down to the odds on.
So much money was matched because people kept laying at what they thought were value unders.
I.E. The further it was matched, the more money to lay it.
It is of note, that this highly plunged horse was first up.
I feel that someone had information which didn't pan out on the day.

From the stewards:

Race 3 – lifetime trophies warrnambool 0-68 handicap - 1000 metres: OTTENS was a little slow to begin.

Near the 500 metres ALMOST FRENCH shifted out and brushed OTTENS which became unbalanced.

When asked if he could offer any explanation for OTTENS’ performing below expected S. Murphy, the filly’s rider, explained that if there was no pace in the early stages he was instructed to lead, however, if there was early pace he was to take a sit in the small field. S. Murphy added that the filly settled fourth with cover and added she had a slight tendency to over race approaching the 700 metres and the filly did not let down as expected when he commenced to ride her along near the 400 metres. He further added that that after being brushed by ALMOST FRENCH, OTTENS did not feel fluent in its action. Stewards interviewed Darren Weir, Trainer of OTTENS, if he could also offer an explanation for the filly’s below expected performance today. He explained that the filly had won a trial at Ararat on 6th February, 2008 however had developed a foot abscess subsequent to that trial and he was unable to exercise the filly other than to swim and walk her daily for two weeks. He further added that the filly had galloped over 600 metres on Thursday, 13th March, and the filly worked well and he believed OTTENS was presented fit enough today to be competitive. Stewards notified Mr. Weir that they wish to examine all aspects of betting in this race and ordered a swab sample to be taken from OTTENS. The enquiry was adjourned to a date to be fixed. A veterinary examination of OTTENS subsequent to the event failed to reveal any abnormalities.


In my opinion, a punter or punters had the trial and workout information, but didn't know of the abscess, nor that the horse was subsequently unable to work properly.

Simply a gamble that went astray.

Chrome Prince,
Can you please tell me which tote Ottens started at around $2.7.

I have just checked the 3 tabs and it was 1.3 and 1.4 because I rememember the race because at the time I thought to myself what idiots would take that sort of price in a horse race. It,s bad enough in a sports event where there is only 2 competitors but a horse race never.

Tottens was $1.30 to $1.56 on Betfair.

Ooops, yeah you're right of course, I was looking at race 4 not race 3.
That makes it even less suspicious, as a lot of money would have been traders up and down a tick or two with big money. (well bigger than normal).

Flags are only raised when a horse is laid off the map.
A $2.00 shot that gets laid for big money right out to $4.00 or $5.00.
A horse that gets backed into very short odds isn't that suspect imho.
Both cases have to have opposing wagers.

Your wrong Chrome. Tottens was layed for $1.30 to $1.56 max.

Okay, but $1.30 to $1.56 is not a big set against a horse when all that money was matched by opposing backers.
Meaning there was that much money on BOTH sides within a narrow band.

Something sus would be $1.30 out to $2.50 etc. but there was all that money waiting to back at those prices.

A Terang Tuesday meeting would never have all that money available to lay at such short prices, so there were just as many keen backers as layers.

I'll just bet (haven't seen it) that they reported that the horse was laid against for that much, not that also it was backed for that much (matched) equally.

$360.000 Lay is sus on ANY mid-week race. Especialy a race with no depth and only 5 runners. [Read Melb. Age March 20th.].

It was matched equally crash by backers as well.

Thats not the point. The point is that an odds-on favorite in a 5 horse race was layed for $360,000 to lose. HELLO!

True - no one in his right mind would lay the fave under these circumstances for such a large amount in a race where there is not much liquidity unless...(I would probably be censored if I suggested anything untoward, but anyone with a cynical mind would certainly be suspicious).

Crash,

apropos your apparently deleted post.

All I was trying to say was that layers need backers to consumate the deal.

A huge lay happens to correspond to a huge back.

Without further information the sharp direction remains undisclosed.

Fair enough. I cannot confirm how much of the $360,00 was covered.

If it was matched $360,000, then $180,000 was laid on the horse and $180,000 was backed on it.

The point is that an odds-on favorite in a 5 horse race was also backed for $180,000 to win a Tuesday Terang race and the maximum Betfair price was only $1.56, which means there was $180,000 available wanting to back the horse already - below that figure.

That's what I'm driving at.

Crash was it one amount of $360,000 or total matched for the runner?

Reminds me of the case of the trotter that was beaten at around $1.10. This was before BF was licenced in Oz and the media (that don't own part of BF) was outraged that over 90% of the 'pool' was traded on the one horse. Well Duh.........

Every time a horse is odds on the turnover is always higher than usual. Simple mathematics.

What about the bloke today who took every last dollar available on Zyzxx with one second to go, so that it traded at $1.01!!!

Zyzxx didn't win either :eek:

Might have to start putting $1.01's in the pool :D

The only difference is, he backed it.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/horse...5602482336.html

Can't wait until the result of their probe.

(Yawn).

It would be an interesting exercise comparing returns on high-action short-priced Betfair runners versus low-action shorties.

Who was this lunatic?

darky