FINGER LAKES #1 YESTERDAY ???

[RIOSHILL]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Railbird:
Books must pay, Bonds is on illegal steroids, but if I bet against the Giants and lose I dont get a refund. Sounds like Jake is trying to be a thief here.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
lol. Good analogy.

 

FWIW,

NO ONE HAS CALLED GOLD MEDAL SPORTS LOOKING FOR ANY PAYOUTS!!! So, nobody is being no paid or slow paid because of this. That being said, their funds will be frozen until the investigation is complete. Yes, I have personally spoke to 2 of the 3 clients in question. The third has not called regarding his account...as suprising as that may seem.

I side with the poster Rio Shill....should the results prove clean and the investigation turns up nothing, we will pay the client. I never stated otherwise. Banned, Railbird, and themanowesme...with the way you have proven to think, I think we can both agree it would be better if you did not play at any of my sites. Trytrytry, thank you for the understanding.

Thanks and best of luck!

This was my final post in this thread, until I receive the results from the track.

Jake

 

[Pickles]

'known' race fixers
....
LOL,WHAT????
...
Id hate to think that every 10-1 shot I hit was just because it was fixed

 

[RIOSHILL]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pickles:
'known' race fixers
....
LOL,WHAT????<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
A known associate of the guy who posted up the day before the race has been criminally charged for race fixing and is banned from Finger Lakes. that came from a good source. Will he still get paid? Yes, as long as nothing surfaces about a fixed race, and I am sure nothing will.

 

[HateTheRiverCard]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rio Shill:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HateTheRiverCard:
The offshore books are wrong here, regardless of whether an investigation proves wrong doing or not the race was declared official and all bets were paid at the track.

As TryTryTry stated, if you guys are going to create new rules then will you go back and research all wagers you have collected on races were improprieties occurred?

If you're going to have horse racing as part of your book then employee workers that not only understand the sport but also can limit liability and/or recognize abnormal situations. If you don't then you have no one to blame but yourselves when a situation like this occurs.


HTRC<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You make some meritorious points here. However, do you really think books that do not put their bets in the pool, many do btw, should take it up the ass on fixed races. Understand that the track paid out, and still made their 15%. Totally no skin off of their asses. You can't even see any point on the sides of the offshore books that don't throw the money back into the pools?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tracks have that 15% to cover overhead so that argument doesn't wash. Offshore books use their products free of that overhead.

Offshore books also have the option of putting that money into the pools thru contracts with hubs. Many don't for the simple reason that they love the money coming in but don't necessarily like it going out. My point again is the race was declared official and all patrons paid, regardless now of whether a horse was doped or not the players must be paid.

With what some books are suggesting one could also make an assumption that SPORTSBOOK A laid the money off..collected and still cries foul to avoid paying a player. Isn't that scenerio possible as well?

HTRC

 

[RIOSHILL]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HateTheRiverCard:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rio Shill:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HateTheRiverCard:
The offshore books are wrong here, regardless of whether an investigation proves wrong doing or not the race was declared official and all bets were paid at the track.

As TryTryTry stated, if you guys are going to create new rules then will you go back and research all wagers you have collected on races were improprieties occurred?

If you're going to have horse racing as part of your book then employee workers that not only understand the sport but also can limit liability and/or recognize abnormal situations. If you don't then you have no one to blame but yourselves when a situation like this occurs.


HTRC<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You make some meritorious points here. However, do you really think books that do not put their bets in the pool, many do btw, should take it up the ass on fixed races. Understand that the track paid out, and still made their 15%. Totally no skin off of their asses. You can't even see any point on the sides of the offshore books that don't throw the money back into the pools?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tracks have that 15% to cover overhead so that argument doesn't wash. Offshore books use their products free of that overhead.

Offshore books also have the option of putting that money into the pools thru contracts with hubs. Many don't for the simple reason that they love the money coming in but don't necessarily like it going out. My point again is the race was declared official and all patrons paid, regardless now of whether a horse was doped or not the players must be paid.

With what some books are suggesting one could also make an assumption that SPORTSBOOK A laid the money off..collected and still cries foul to avoid paying a player. Isn't that scenerio possible as well?

HTRC<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
All of your points are well taken, and that is why these guys, slimeballs or not will be getting paid here. We certainly aren't going to throw away 7 years of paying customers diligently over a tough beat. Just curious, do you feel that if books continue to get hit hypothetically on fixed races, that they should continue to pay?

 

[Pigpen]

I have not read the total thread here but if this player wagered within the limits you accept at FL and you took the bet this looks cut and dry. You can't have it both ways IMO.

 

[Pickles]

A known associate ,

LOL- yep I think most of us know some "Bad Guys"
- I could never understand that
(I neva cashed- neva cost me much either---the association is kind of fun)

Kinda funny about Jake contacting FL stewards,lol.
Talk about a strange alliance,lol
...
Judge you there?,lol

 

[Railbird]

This thread was started with this LIE

SUPREME BEING
NEWBIE
posted April 17, 2004 04:13 PM
Anyone know the scoop? Vegas is not paying as it was a fix?

who knows the story?
Posts: 41 | Registered: July 07, 2002



ZERO books in Vegas take FINGERLAKES.

 

[HateTheRiverCard]

Being a horse racing fan I hate even hearing that races can be fixed. It truly ruins the sport and events like this (if true) especially on the heels of the Breeders Cup fiasco just add another blackeye to the sport.

But to answer your question, I think that books should utilize liability management as much with their horse departments as they do with their other sports, especially when dealing with B tracks such as Finger Lakes. Until they do so they will have to pay what they book IMO.

I know of a book that has looked into a bettor that only plays one track and usually bets only one or two races every couple of weeks yet he seems to hit them with regularity. Not sure if they have booted him but it would probably be a good idea from a liability point of view.

HTRC

 

[Banned4Life]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Banned 4, in your opinion, if a story surfaces on the DRF site that this race was fixed, and the trainer gets suspended for a dirty test, do you still believe the books should pay? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The tracks would still pay. So the bookies who were dumb enough to allow themselves to be hammered like that should pay too.

Races are fixed and horses are doped all the time. If a bookie is worried about such activities then he should not be booking horse action. But they're greedy so they take the bets and then worry about the payoff after it wins.

This opens up a whole new way for bookies to stiff gamblers... just say that you think the game was fixed and you're not paying. Who the hell is gonna do anything about it??

If the bookies didn't either get greedy or fall asleep at the switch here then this problem would have never happened.

 

[Pickles]

When I was truly serious about racing(8yrs on NY and NJ circuits) I can honestly say I never saw
'fixed.
Do your numbers/profiles its all there.
Curiously at first then funny in later yrs all the people at the track with the 'wow did you see that- fix'- of course they were losers

 

[RIOSHILL]

Hate and banned, i appreciate your points, and I have to admit that I agree with most of them. I know my peers may not want to hear this, but your points are lucid and make sense to me. A long time ago, I was at dinner with the head guy from CRIS, and he said that if you book the bet you should pay no matter what. I have to respect those words despite the bitterness of being on the wrong end of a fix.

 

[HateTheRiverCard]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rio Shill:
I have to respect those words despite the bitterness of being on the wrong end of a fix.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats the worst part of the situation and anyone would feel the same way IMO.


HTRC

 

[trytrytry]

Rio Shill

Great exchange today. Im learning much about your behind the scenes issues and situations. Very interesting.


Question for you. If there is no drugs is this still a FIX in your opinion? Or is it a horse well placed, well trained and ready to roll? Its still a 4 legged animal?

If the horse was 10-1 but really had a 98% chance of winning on his skill is that a FIX? Or is it a scheme? I think there is a difference morally.

 

[RIOSHILL]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by trytrytry:
Rio Shill

Great exchange today. Im learning much about your behind the scenes issues and situations. Very interesting.


Question for you. If there is no drugs is this still a FIX in your opinion? Or is it a horse well placed, well trained and ready to roll? Its still a 4 legged animal?

If the horse was 10-1 but really had a 98% chance of winning on his skill is that a FIX? Or is it a scheme? I think there is a difference morally.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Very good question. It reminds me of a guy who was a living legend, and made all of his money on "steam" horses. His name was Bill Johnson who died about 2 years ago. His game was taking great horses, making them look bad for a couple of races, and then winning easily when all systems were go. this has been a part of racing for over a hundred years, and it is simply a part of the game. I tend to agree with you that holding back or "stiffing" a horse for a few races is really not any different than drugging the horse, the books are at a big disadvantage. What I have learned from you guys here is that as books, we should really be men and pay when we lose, and it is really up to us to limit our exposure. I personally don't have the majority say at Rio, but ownership respects me enough to listen hard to what I say, and after this exchange, my vote is that we have to pay.

 

[RobFunk]

no wonder baffert wins all the time. man i knew something was up. hes had success with so many horses. im like damn is it wheaties?

 

all top trainers are chemists

 

[Pickles]

Rio-
thanks for being in this thread
(youve earned my respect)
GL to you

 

[RobFunk]

get ready for SAT's next month

baffert is to horses

as bonds is to:

thats right. .

balco