Totalisator is Not a Success

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 822, 16 November 1929, Page 12

Totalisator is Not a Success

ENGLAND'S DIFFICULTIES ONLY £300,000 TURNOVER The Racecourse Betting Control Board, which was created more than a year ago in England, to operate the totalisator system, is already finding itself in difficulties, according to m: English writer. The board is committed to an ambi- ; tious programme involving a capital expenditure of millions of pounds, a large staff has already been engaged and heavy overhead charges are being incurred: but the results are falling far short of expectations. Official spokesmen at the board's handsome offices in iSt. James's Street profess to be fully satisfied, but the bare facts are causing the racing public to ask whether the scheme may not prove a gigantic failure. The turnover to date for the 55 racing days on which totalisators have been in operation is only £ 300,000. The board takes 6 per cent, for working expenses, but as punters are not paid fractions, the revenue really amounts to per cent. The total revenue of the board has therefore amounted to only £ 22,500. No details of expenditure are yet available, but the board admits that working expenses are heavy, and that : the turnover will have to be multiplied ! «xany times if the totalisators are to pay for themselves. A large staff and a number of highly-paid officials are maintained by the board, and a large travelling staff lias to be sent to the various race meetings. There were as many as L9O men employed at Newmarket and another 150 at Carlisle on the first day of totalisator betting. The board are already behind schedule with its programme. announced on May 30, for totalisators at 2 1 racecourses at 53 meetings this Not one fully mechanised tote is yet in working order—although the first ought to have been ready for the Hurst , Park meeting on August 23. Comi plaints are pouring in from the racing public that the hand-operated machines now in use are too slow in re- : ceiving bets and paying out. There was no totalisator at. the j meeting which has just been concluded at Edinburgh. The board had announced that one would be provided, but the , promise could not be fulfilled because! objections were raised to the erection j of temporary buildings. Many Disappointments A fully-mechanised tote had been i planned for the meeting at Ayr yes- ! ter day, but the contractors found them- j selves unable to complete the elaborate structure in time, and racegoers j again had to make the best of the | hand-operated machine. These and many other disappoint.- j ments are causing the racing public | to ask whether the Betting Control j Board will ever be able to make a success of totalisator betting. Criticisms are levelled against the j Control Board on two grounds. One is that the members of the board , ; Dck expert knowledge of betting. The j ! chairman to the board, Sir Clement. I | Hindley, and four other members are : nominees of the Government. The remaining seven represent the Jockey i ! Club, the National Hunt Committee, j the Racecourse Association, and the | Committee of Tattersall’s. i The other criticism is that the board I is making costly experiments with new j machines, while types which have stood the test of time have been ignored. Contracts have been given to four different firms manufacturing different machines. One contract fur a single totalisator is said to have been for nearly £IOO,OOO. Only one of the four firms is manufacturing a machine that has been used successfully on racecourses abroad. PHAR LAP’S FAILURE FRACTIONAL TIMES COMPARED What puzzled most people in Sydney who relied on the newspaper and the wireless for a description of the Melbourne Cup was the sudden change in J’har Bap. records an Australian writer. When he first came into prominence one uf his most impres- : sive characteristics was his tractabilI Itv. Not at any stage in his races I hero has lie indicated that he was a i “puller.” In the Rosehill Guineas j Munro had no difficulty in restraining j bim until the opportunity was "ripe” for the finishing effort. In the Derby | Pike was quite comfortable in the I early stages of the race, and after he had taken the lead from Queen Nassau with a remarkable burst of speed : Phar Lap was eased without apparj °. nt difficulty. It was almost a repetition in the Craven Plate, yet in the I Melbourne Cup Pliar Lap "fought” with his rider (R. Lewis) for about half the distance of the race, and would not settle down until lie was in front of the field. It is to be remembered that the Melbourne Cup for the first half-mile was the slowest run race that Phar Lap had contested, although the fractional times, when compared with earlier efforts, indicate that the horse should have been at his ease. Few sportsmen cared to to be too definite in their opinions gained from published accounts, although surprise was expressed that Lewis had adopted the tactics of restraining the horse in such circumstances. So far as the pace set is concerned a comparison of the fractional times in the A.J.C. Derby, the Craven Plate, the Victoria Derby and Melbourne Cup is interesting, j They arc: j t, ir A.j.cp. UP. V.D. Cup. First half .. .. 52} 52i 52.' 5F Mile 1.40 J 1.461- 1.433 1.46} ; Mile and a-half 2.31} | The mile and a-half in the two ! Derbies represents the completion of the race, and the track at Randwick for the Craven Plate was heavy, but despite this the figures for the Cup inI dicate that -Lewis was astray in the i matter of the pace set. and* that he ; may have given Phar Lap * a better j chance had he allowed him to set a ! f aster gait, even if he had to take him , to the front to do it. On Trivalve, a I horse whom lie himself declared ’ a | thorough stayer, but a lazy fellow, he j made better time in the early stages. , The first half-mile on that occasion 1 was run in 51 1-4. mile in 1.4 U and : the mile and a half in 2.33}. It was an even race throughout, but" this year the horses Joa.fed more or less until the last three-quarters of a mile, and then galloped at a great speed, the effort by Nightmarch being phenomenal. Judged through CarradaD’s effort the form of Phar Lap is oquallv disappointing. In the A.J.C. Derby Carradale did not make any impresi si on on Phar Lap, he did a little better in the Victoria Derby, but appreaching the entrance to the straight m the Cup he threw out an unmistakable challenge, brought to an untimely end when he ran off the track.