Anti-post bets and supplemented horses.

by Robert
(Epsom)

If you back a horse for the Derby in say January and it comes 2nd to a horse that was supplemented in perhaps May, why are you not paid out as the winner, as the horse that won the race wasn't even entered at the time you placed your bet?

Answer: When you place an ante post bet you are required to accept the loss of your stake if the horse is a non runner.

The same applies if a horse that is supplememted at a later stage goes on to beat the ante post bet.

Comments for Anti-post bets and supplemented horses.

Average Rating

Click here to add your own comments

Jun 29, 2016
Rating

Ante-post betting is untenable with supplemention
by: Michael DB

What is not being considered or recognised enough here - with the increase in supplemented horses at late stages of betting - is the importance of betting to the racing industry!

It's becoming almost impossible to place ante-post bets on any big race, because on the one hand trainers like Aiden O'Brien make so many entries and can decide late in the period where a punter wants to bet ante-post, which horse to run, or which horse to supplement.

There has to be some recognized rules introduced to allow ante=post punters a reasonable assurance that it is possible to trust which horses will actually be in a race - at a certain stage at least.

At what point do we know what the field is?
It's reducing ante-post betting to a lottery. The better word would be a mockery!

Click here to add your own comments

Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How? Simply click here to return to Invitation 6 - Questions.