Have to agree with Rio Shill on this one. People opened accounts with intent, and emphasize, INTENT, to defraud books on this race only. Why offshore, try that stunt with locals, and you would be hangin with Hoffa before you could spell FIX. Used to be a groom, and I have seen it all, but this was a blatant attempt at theft. I would keep everything, original deposit, winnings, bonus. Sometimes fear of reprisal is enough to deter. Offshores are too legit for that. Best Wishes...OF
What a bunch of shit. So someone has some information and opens up accounts to bet on this information so that makes him a SCAMMER? Bullshit. YOU BOOKED THE BET KNOWING OR NOT CARING THAT THE BETS COULD ACTUALLY WIN. This is nothing but sour grapes by a bunch of crybaby wannabe bookmakers who got greedy and took too much action on a shit race containing shit horses and shit jockeys at a shit track. They got caught with their pants down and now they want to stiff the winning bettor.
They can stick their investigations where the sun don't shine. This was the fault of greedy incompetent "bookies" who were blinded by the new money being posted up, not even considering that these "bookies" had NO BUSINESS taking such large bets on such a bad race at a track where race fixing is rampant. Or maybe they took the bets NOT CARING whether it was a winner or not because they know that they have the power to tell someone to GFY because they won and keep their money because "we think the race was fixed".
They can stick their investigations where the sun don't shine. This was the fault of greedy incompetent "bookies" who were blinded by the new money being posted up, not even considering that these "bookies" had NO BUSINESS taking such large bets on such a bad race at a track where race fixing is rampant. Or maybe they took the bets NOT CARING whether it was a winner or not because they know that they have the power to tell someone to GFY because they won and keep their money because "we think the race was fixed".
what about some dumbass like me who might have bet on the race not knowing anything? would i get paid?
Banned,
The clients did not bet more than our max amount allows. They bet the posted limit, but we occasionally take more than those limits. I have no problem paying the client all the money he is owed, should this investigation come up with nothing, and should these guys prove not to be scammers/thieves/race fixers.
However, that being said, should I just shutup and pay the client regardless of the outcome of the investigation? What if they find the horse is juiced and they DQ him and void him as the winner. Then what happens? Some posters truly make me laugh....they do not care about anything, as long as the player wins...regardless if he cheated or not.
Michael,
To answer your question, you would probably be paid, unless you had just opened the account and only bet on this race, as these gentlemen did.
Jake
[This message was edited by Jake on April 18, 2004 at 05:40 PM.]
The clients did not bet more than our max amount allows. They bet the posted limit, but we occasionally take more than those limits. I have no problem paying the client all the money he is owed, should this investigation come up with nothing, and should these guys prove not to be scammers/thieves/race fixers.
However, that being said, should I just shutup and pay the client regardless of the outcome of the investigation? What if they find the horse is juiced and they DQ him and void him as the winner. Then what happens? Some posters truly make me laugh....they do not care about anything, as long as the player wins...regardless if he cheated or not.
Michael,
To answer your question, you would probably be paid, unless you had just opened the account and only bet on this race, as these gentlemen did.
Jake
[This message was edited by Jake on April 18, 2004 at 05:40 PM.]
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> what about some dumbass like me who might have bet on the race not knowing anything? would i get paid? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Most likely they would accuse you of being part of the "scam" and keep your money because they're running out of some 3rd world shit hole and know that you have zero recourse when they stiff you.
Most likely they would accuse you of being part of the "scam" and keep your money because they're running out of some 3rd world shit hole and know that you have zero recourse when they stiff you.
aM I missing something here. A Guy with a horse he had great feelings with open up acocunts to off shore bookmakers who are LOOKING for customers to send money and wager on horses, maybe even mailed him something or had a big color ad in a magazine. This guy races a horse with the correct name, in the correct conditions at Finger Lakes, in a parimutual wagering event. The horse gets out as a first time starter and wins this race.
Ummmm. I know what to do....this is not real difficult......how about....Pay the man?
unreal.
ws this a FIXEd race as in the other horses were told not to win? Or held back? Or was this a well trained horse, ready to fire, in a weak field who in a parimutual event won easy fair and square?
Ummmm. I know what to do....this is not real difficult......how about....Pay the man?
unreal.
ws this a FIXEd race as in the other horses were told not to win? Or held back? Or was this a well trained horse, ready to fire, in a weak field who in a parimutual event won easy fair and square?
Banned,
Please ignore my last post. I thought we would have a rational conversation. After reading your last post, I no longer think that is possible. Thanks and best of luck!
Trytrytry,
As another option, I would like to add: Or was this horse "juiced" before the race and thus should be disqualified for cheating? When the investigation is finished, on Thursday, I will post the results.
Jake
Please ignore my last post. I thought we would have a rational conversation. After reading your last post, I no longer think that is possible. Thanks and best of luck!
Trytrytry,
As another option, I would like to add: Or was this horse "juiced" before the race and thus should be disqualified for cheating? When the investigation is finished, on Thursday, I will post the results.
Jake
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> The clients did not bet more than our max amount allows. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
So they followed YOUR RULES. But since they won too much you don't like it and are now using whatever excuses you can come up with to not pay a winner.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> However, that being said, should I just shutup and pay the client regardless of the outcome of the investigation? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
YES, because YOU decided to BOOK THE BET... on a horse race at a minor track. If you didn't know the potential damage then you shouldn't be in the bookie business. It's not like some big secret that horses are sometimes juiced and/or stiffed.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> What if they find the horse is juiced and they DQ him and void him as the winner. Then what happens? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Whatever the results of this investigation, the parimutuel results and prices remain the same (only the purse money is affected). So let's say the investigation proves you right and the horse was juiced, and you decide not to pay off on tickets on the winner. Who becomes the "winner"? No one, of course. You get to keep ALL the money. What a scam.
So they followed YOUR RULES. But since they won too much you don't like it and are now using whatever excuses you can come up with to not pay a winner.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> However, that being said, should I just shutup and pay the client regardless of the outcome of the investigation? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
YES, because YOU decided to BOOK THE BET... on a horse race at a minor track. If you didn't know the potential damage then you shouldn't be in the bookie business. It's not like some big secret that horses are sometimes juiced and/or stiffed.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> What if they find the horse is juiced and they DQ him and void him as the winner. Then what happens? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Whatever the results of this investigation, the parimutuel results and prices remain the same (only the purse money is affected). So let's say the investigation proves you right and the horse was juiced, and you decide not to pay off on tickets on the winner. Who becomes the "winner"? No one, of course. You get to keep ALL the money. What a scam.
yes that would be cheating if the horse was Juiced on an illegal substance. For sure.
Is it possible this horse was just much the best on this day? the connections knew it and knew the public did not know it and won money fair and square?
Is it possible this horse was just much the best on this day? the connections knew it and knew the public did not know it and won money fair and square?
Im sure in your long history this is not the first customer who opened up an account and bet the entire amount on one big game? one boxing match, all on one "sure thing"? you make it seem like that is some strange clue or something?
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Please ignore my last post. I thought we would have a rational conversation. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah excuse me for thinking I could try to convince some SCAM bookie to pay off on a legitimate wager made within your own rules, because you were too goddamned lazy (or busy getting blowjobbed by the local talent) to see what was happening BEFORE the race went off.
Yeah excuse me for thinking I could try to convince some SCAM bookie to pay off on a legitimate wager made within your own rules, because you were too goddamned lazy (or busy getting blowjobbed by the local talent) to see what was happening BEFORE the race went off.
did you go back and refund all the losing bets from this race? I would think not but perhaps you did.
On Wednesday, the California Horse Racing Board announced that it had filed a complaint against Baffert after morphine was found in the Baffert-trained Nautical Look, who won a $58,650 allowance race on turf on May 3.
here is a clear case of a illeagally druged horse who won a race. did you go back and refund the losing wagers? Please check into that and let us all know.
On Wednesday, the California Horse Racing Board announced that it had filed a complaint against Baffert after morphine was found in the Baffert-trained Nautical Look, who won a $58,650 allowance race on turf on May 3.
here is a clear case of a illeagally druged horse who won a race. did you go back and refund the losing wagers? Please check into that and let us all know.
did you refund all action wins and losses on the MArck Shuman horses after it was clearly an illeagal drug in the horse found on a later date?
9:12 a.m. December 4, 2003
NEW YORK – Trainer Mark Shuman was suspended for 20 days and fined $5,000 after one of his horses was given medication too close to a race.
The New York State Racing and Wagering Board issued the ruling Wednesday, stating that the horse Askara had an ankle injected with a steroid within the five-day limit, and was also given Celebrex, a drug used to treat arthritis, within the seven-day limit
Askara, who finished second in a race at Belmont Park on Sept. 17, has been disqualified and taken out of the order of finish.
The medications are not illegal, but can only be administered at certain times prior to the horse's next race.
Shuman, who operates out of owner Michael Gill's Elk Creek Training Center in Pennsylvania, has appealed. He says he treated the horse within the proper time frame.
"They're going by the vet's billing record, showing it was four days, but it was done five days out," Shuman told the New York Post, referring to the steroid, depomethorol. "It's kind of shocking how this came out. I know other people in New York use (Celebrex). I just want to be treated fairly."
The Gill-Shuman team has been criticized in racing circles for their aggressive claiming tactics – buying horses and then running them back in lower-priced races to pick up an easy victory.
Last winter, Shuman shattered the record for victories at Gulfstream Park, and Gill was among the nation's leading owners in victories. Their medication methods also came under close scrutiny.
During last winter's Gulfstream meet, Gill's veterinarian Phillip Aleong was banned from the track for amputating the leg of a Gill-owned horse who broke down in a race. Gill and Shuman were cleared of wrongdoing when drug tests came back negative.
9:12 a.m. December 4, 2003
NEW YORK – Trainer Mark Shuman was suspended for 20 days and fined $5,000 after one of his horses was given medication too close to a race.
The New York State Racing and Wagering Board issued the ruling Wednesday, stating that the horse Askara had an ankle injected with a steroid within the five-day limit, and was also given Celebrex, a drug used to treat arthritis, within the seven-day limit
Askara, who finished second in a race at Belmont Park on Sept. 17, has been disqualified and taken out of the order of finish.
The medications are not illegal, but can only be administered at certain times prior to the horse's next race.
Shuman, who operates out of owner Michael Gill's Elk Creek Training Center in Pennsylvania, has appealed. He says he treated the horse within the proper time frame.
"They're going by the vet's billing record, showing it was four days, but it was done five days out," Shuman told the New York Post, referring to the steroid, depomethorol. "It's kind of shocking how this came out. I know other people in New York use (Celebrex). I just want to be treated fairly."
The Gill-Shuman team has been criticized in racing circles for their aggressive claiming tactics – buying horses and then running them back in lower-priced races to pick up an easy victory.
Last winter, Shuman shattered the record for victories at Gulfstream Park, and Gill was among the nation's leading owners in victories. Their medication methods also came under close scrutiny.
During last winter's Gulfstream meet, Gill's veterinarian Phillip Aleong was banned from the track for amputating the leg of a Gill-owned horse who broke down in a race. Gill and Shuman were cleared of wrongdoing when drug tests came back negative.
Trytrytry,
This track was not listed on our site, as we were unable to download that track to our system on this day. All bets were taken on paper. In fact, only 3 clients bet that race....and they are the ones in question.
Jake
This track was not listed on our site, as we were unable to download that track to our system on this day. All bets were taken on paper. In fact, only 3 clients bet that race....and they are the ones in question.
Jake
Try,
I was simply answering your questin in regards to the losing wagers. Done with this post and topic.
Again I say...No wonder more book's representatives do not post on these sites.
Jake
I was simply answering your questin in regards to the losing wagers. Done with this post and topic.
Again I say...No wonder more book's representatives do not post on these sites.
Jake
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Again I say...No wonder more book's representatives do not post on these sites.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah because they hate it when they try to invent phony BS excuses to justify their stiffing a winning player and the posters call them on it.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah because they hate it when they try to invent phony BS excuses to justify their stiffing a winning player and the posters call them on it.
