BETTING ON RACES.

Patea Mail, Volume IV, Issue 404, 1 March 1879, Page 2

BETTING ON RACES.

“ The odds are & to 1 against Eclipse and 4 lo 1 against Soarrow Hawk.” say r s Sir John Daw. i “ What’s the belting about the. pair?” “ Don’t know, I’m scab,” answers Lord Verisopht, “ but I’ll'give you G to 11.” This is-Leech’s cartoon; ! and is. perhaps overdrawn ; for not even the Verisophts, who wager on horses they , k iow nothing about, would lay heavier odds against winning with one of two horses, than they would against winning with either horse separately. It, is nevertheless true, that not one bettor in fifty knows how, to combine the odds against two, three, or more horses,"so as to get the odds about the lot. It is this ignorance that renders the trade of the bookmaker possible. Wo do not intend here to discuss the fairness of the English institution of betting. Whether it is noble and right, on the part of one man, to wish to obtain Tor nothing and without labour, the Cash that his neighbour has won with care and toil, is a question that all must decide for themselves. But accepting betting as a thing that exists and is likely to exist, let us distinguish between fair and unfair betting, as the words are commonly understood.

Byway of illustration, let tis take the case of the common lottery. Suppose ton persons pay a sovereign each to form a prize of £lO. If there bo ten tickets, one of which is marked prize, and each of the ten persons draws a ticket, the lottery is fair ; for if one man bought the chance of the other nine, he would .have paid £lO and would get £lo.’ But if the drawer of the marked ticket were only to get £B, the lottery would be unfair; for if one were to buy all the tickets,'He would pay £lO ami get £B. But let ns suppose that two persons buy the tickets between them, A taking seven and B three. Three of the ten tickets are now marked prize, and B lias one draw. The just odds against his drawing a marked ticket arc 7 to 3. B’s chance of winning is exactly equal to the chance of a horse against which the just odds are 7to 3. Now if Sharper persuades Verisopht to join him in a lottery for £B, the former to contribute £5 and the latter £3, and arrange the tickets as in the case of A and B above, the affair is a manifest swindle. Sharper has staked £5, and has as good a chance as A, who staked £7, Sharper has done what A would have done, if after paying down £7, he had contrived to steal back £2. L, i other words, the odds represented by the ii t i.- o i s arc 7 to 3, while Sharper has persuaded w-M-igopht to accept 5 to 3. Now the bookmaker's business consists in persuading Verisopht and Greenhorn either-to lay more than just odds, or to accept l.ess. Thus, Eclipse and Sparrow are to nin a race ; the just odds are 9 to 3 in favour of Eclipse, and 9 to 3 against Sparrow. Our bookmaker’determines that a certain fixed sum shall be staked over each horse. He talks Verisopht into accepting £BOO to £3OO in favour of Eclipse —that is 8 to 3 instead of 9 to 3. He then seeks Greenhorn, who wishes to lay the odds instead of accepting them. He persuades him to lay £9OO to £2OO that Eclipse will win—that is 9 lo 2 instead of 9 to 3, His hook now reads —£800 to £3OO with Verisopht that Eclipse wins ; £2OO to £9OO with Greenhorn that Sparrow wins. Now, it Eclipse wins, he receives £3OO from Verisopht and pays £2OO to Greenhorn, pocketing £IOO. If Sparrow wins, lie receives £9OO from Greenhorn and pays £BOC to Verisopht, pocketing £IOO. Clearly Ufis is an unfair wager ; and had it been made in -accordance with the just odds he could neither have lost or won. If there are several horses, the bookmaker is better pleased. lie labour.-, to alter the just odds on each horse in his own favour, being careful, whether in one wager or in many, to have the same amount laid over each horse. He can then say to Greenhorn and Verisopht, “ Head, I win ; tail, you lose.”