Why percentages add up

Thank you for having published a number of letters I have written. In one of these I gave a detailed illustration of the poor comparison between percentages bet at SP by Brisbane bookmakers and those of their southern counterparts.

In another I was critical of Richard Callander’s bombastic style as an on-air presenter on TVN. However, whilst I am no Callander fan, I have to agree with his comments (18/6) laying much of the blame for decline in attendances at Brisbane races squarely at the feet of bookmakers’ poor percentages, and the failure of Queensland Racing to use its authority in arresting this practice.

During the current winter carnival, racing was featured in sections of the media which at other times would not concede the sport exists.

In one such article the journalist interviewed Wade Birch, the chief steward of Queensland Racing, and Birch emphasised the importance of his betting steward in keeping him up to date with all manner of information from the betting ring.

He is informed of statewide betting activity with the TAB, racetrack tote, corporate and on course bookmakers. Betting fluctuations and serious investments are of particular interest "to protect the integrity of the sport, and instill confidence in the punter".

That’s fine, but why does not Queensland Racing, through Birch and his betting steward ensure that bookmakers are betting fair percentages? That would go a long way to instilling confidence in punters.

I migrated to Brisbane from Melbourne almost 20 years ago, and immediately attended local races, both city and provincial, on a regular basis as I had done in Melbourne for many years.

Having been a part-time bookmaker’s clerk (in the days when the only computer was between your ears) I immediately noticed that bookmakers’ percentages in Brisbane and provincials were extremely unfair, and as a consequence I have over the years all but ignored Brisbane and local racing and concentrated on southern events.

There were one or two local leaders of the ring who would force percentages down to some extent, but these gentlemen have since retired and/or passed away, and these days it is open slather. I recall in Melbourne the betting steward would often go along the line of bookmakers and call out: "Ease ’em out, chaps, ease ’em out," if he was not satisfied with the percentages being bet. But not here.

Then the local interstate bookmakers began to nitpick, and often bet prices below the fluctuations being bet interstate, and on one occasion I was embarrassed when a well known interstate bookmaker loudly abused his clerk for giving me the price on the fluctuation board as opposed to his price, a difference I recall of 30 cents.

Eventually enough was enough, and I and several pals gave it away and began operating from home with corporate bookmakers. There is no comparison between the two, course or home. No more transport costs, admission or membership fees, exorbitant catering and drink prices, and very ordinary quality. At my only day at the track this year I was charged $8 for a factory packaged pie and a cup of instant coffee in a paper cup. Sauce extra.

Then there are the bands and drunks yahooing and high-fiving with absolutely foul language. A complaint to an official was met with a comment that "they spend more money than you old codgers". On "promotion" days the track has become an undignified daytime nightclub.

Compare this to being at home. Apart from the comfort and serenity of being with a few pals who can BYO whatever, there are two televisions (if you pay for the second Foxtel plug), computers, laptops, mobile phones, good home-made catering with supplies at supermarket prices and bottomless coffee.

You get a choice of three totes, several corporate bookmakers or Betfair, best fluctuation or fixed odds, fluctuations from all tracks instantly on your screens and a myriad of bet choices including the incredible Maxi Div or Best of 4, in which you are paid SP or the highest of the three totes, whichever is greater. I have regularly been paid not cents but dollars over the end fluctuation price. No wonder corporates are doing so well.

Just this weekend I backed two horses in the one race. As you can only make one bet at a time on the web, and then are issued with a reference (ticket) number, there was a gap of say 20 seconds between making the two bets.

From the ticket numbers of the two bets I could establish there were no fewer than 15 bets accepted in the 20 seconds or so between my two bets. Almost a bet a second.

Of course I have no idea how big these bets were but a bet a second is huge turnover in anyone’s language.

This is why I can’t understand the criticism of your correspondent Steve Glare, who apart from sinking to personal insults of Richard Callander, berates him for complaining and pointing out that Brisbane bookmakers are doing nothing towards restoring punters’ confidence and returning them to Brisbane tracks.

Glare seems to want to defend local bookmakers by claiming they don’t have the backing of a corporate arm, as do their southern counterparts. His attitude seems to be: "So what? If on-course punters choose to cop 130 percent that’s their choice."

Well, Steve, there were no corporate bookmakers around when I first encountered Brisbane bookmakers 20 years ago, and the unfair situation then has since gone from bad to worse. And not every southern bookmaker has a corporate arm.

The only time a large crowd can be attracted in Brisbane is for a one-off Black Caviar day, or a special promotion or carnival day where the partygoers and social butterflies boost the numbers. And they couldn’t care less about, or perhaps even understand, bookmakers’ percentages.

Yes, Steve, you are quite correct. Punters do have a choice, and this punter, his pals and many others have and are making their choice, and that my friend is Richard Callander’s extremely valid argument.

I doubt he personally cares what percentages Brisbane bookmakers bet, except when it’s contributing to the fall of racecourse attendances meeting to meeting.