BILLY HILLS NAP TABLE - February 2022

[Zilzalian]

5 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

I can't quite follow the logic of that.  Internetmails could get 28 placed horse at 66/1 and wouldn't stand a chance of winning the most winners comp.

I feel that the whole administration team at Punters Lounge would have to think very carefully about imposing a rule that states that in the case of a dead-heat a person who's bet shows a negative value should have the horse treated as a loser.

Think about it.  Had someone else chosen the other winning horse in my race then, according to @MCLARKEthat would have been deemed to be a winner and my horse a loser.  You will not find one racing authority in the UK or indeed around the world that will support the idea that there is a winner and a loser in a dead-heat race where there are only two runners!!

I think that it was right to record the negative value of my bet and not right to not record it as a loser.

I do have a lot of respect for Michael @MCLARKE he seems to shrug off a losing bet of £100 at odds of 1/3 and has great financial and spreadsheet skills.  However, when I feel that he has said something wrong then I feel entitled to voice my opinion.

Well as it stands a placed horse/bet in profit is classed as a winner so by your logic a 9/4 horse placed ew coming placed would also be a winner like, i said earlier as it stands the table headings are bet, won, lost. and not horse, won, lost. like i say i do understand your angst and the reasons for it but sometimes we just have to bite our lip, kick the cat and accept the situation. One thing for sure is that it is not something to fall out with anyone over.

[The Equaliser]

7 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

Well as it stands a placed horse/bet in profit is classed as a winner so by your logic a 9/4 horse placed ew coming placed would also be a winner like, i said earlier as it stands the table headings are bet, won, lost. and not horse, won, lost. like i say i do understand your angst and the reasons for it but sometimes we just have to bite our lip, kick the cat and accept the situation. One thing for sure is that it is not something to fall out with anyone over.

I have no wish to fall out with anyone, I'm just trying to make the point that my horse was a winner. I didn't even think that this would be an issue. The rules of racing should surely be applied to racing competitions. And as stated before there is no rule for dead-heats so I cannot for the life of see why my horse is not classed as a winner

[The Equaliser]

3 hours ago, roger2256 said:

Knew I'd seen this somewhere, Another well known and respected site does not agree with your opinion. One was credited with a win , the other a loss .

Ok Mate.  Just look at the official reported results.  The racing rules apply in this country and around the world.  Both horses finished first. Both were winners!!!!!!!

[MCLARKE]

1 hour ago, The Equaliser said:

I have no wish to fall out with anyone, I'm just trying to make the point that my horse was a winner. I didn't even think that this would be an issue. The rules of racing should surely be applied to racing competitions. And as stated before there is no rule for dead-heats so I cannot for the life of see why my horse is not classed as a winner

You are the only one who sees this as an issue. Everybody else agrees that the bet was a loser.

[The Equaliser]

Once again I'm being told that everybody else agrees that the bet was a loser when only a handful out of 80 PL members has made a comment.

The way I see it is that the rules of racing have to apply, even to racing competitions.  There is no UK racing authority responsible for horse racing results that will confirm my horse is a loser.  I accept that it is a losing bet and that the negative figure was correctly entered against me.  I cannot accept that the horse was a loser.  Just to be clear it was a winner.

Looks like we are getting into fantasy horse racing now so I need to learn to adapt.

The rules should be changed if you want to count future dead-heat horses as losers when there is a financial loss involved with the bet.

Meanwhile I'll carry on trying to find winners in the Nap competition to offset against a winner that never was a loser. 

[harry_rag]

19 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

I accept that it is a losing bet

This is the point! Everybody else (who has chosen to express an opinion) has said so and no-one has claimed that your horse lost. The table records whether the bet was a winner or a loser. Imagine an each way selection that placed rather than won but returned a profit. The table would record it as a winning bet. This despite the fact that the horse did not win the race. Nothing about the table is predicated on whether or not the horse won the race. It is about whether or not the bet was a winning one. A bet that returned less than the stake is a losing one and it really is as simple as that.

I can understand why you queried the decision and why you might be disappointed but in view of the ensuing discussion and clarification I don't think there is any sense or scope in pursuing the argument.

[MCLARKE]

1 hour ago, The Equaliser said:

Once again I'm being told that everybody else agrees that the bet was a loser when only a handful out of 80 PL members has made a comment.

My comment related to those PL members who made a comment.

[Zilzalian]

2 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

Ok Mate.  Just look at the official reported results.  The racing rules apply in this country and around the world.  Both horses finished first. Both were winners!!!!!!!

But. You keep ignoring the fact that the "bet" was a loser and for the competition it is the bet that applies not the horse IHO.

[In Play Race Reader]

3 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

Once again I'm being told that everybody else agrees that the bet was a loser when only a handful out of 80 PL members has made a comment.

The way I see it is that the rules of racing have to apply, even to racing competitions.  There is no UK racing authority responsible for horse racing results that will confirm my horse is a loser.  I accept that it is a losing bet and that the negative figure was correctly entered against me.  I cannot accept that the horse was a loser.  Just to be clear it was a winner.

Looks like we are getting into fantasy horse racing now so I need to learn to adapt.

The rules should be changed if you want to count future dead-heat horses as losers when there is a financial loss involved with the bet.

Meanwhile I'll carry on trying to find winners in the Nap competition to offset against a winner that never was a loser. 

Can’t believe this still going on ,,forget about it ,move on ,,it’s only a bit of fun !! 

[MCLARKE]

[gbettle]

4 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

Once again I'm being told that everybody else agrees that the bet was a loser when only a handful out of 80 PL members has made a comment.

Oh give it a rest please. How dare you drag the esteemed PL membership into this argument - why the hell should any of us give a monkeys for such a petty squabble.

This is - and I hope, will always be - a clear, free-spirited, and honest competition in the name of Billy Hills,

I implore you to stop this bickering and nonsense and move on.

Or quit the BILLY HILLS NAP TABLE, like you abandoned the £20 Daily Challenge thread.

[The Equaliser]

6 minutes ago, gbettle said:

Oh give it a rest please. How dare you drag the esteemed PL membership into this argument - why the hell should any of us give a monkeys for such a petty squabble.

This is - and I hope, will always be - a clear, free-spirited, and honest competition in the name of Billy Hills,

I implore you to stop this bickering and nonsense and move on.

Or quit the BILLY HILLS NAP TABLE, like you abandoned the £20 Daily Challenge thread.

I did not quit the £20 Daily Challenge thread.  At the time, I conceded that I would not post up because @Valiant Thorsaid he would not post up unless I refrained from posting up lay bets.  I honoured this because I know that PL Members like his posts.

I am no quitter.  You should know that.

I am moving on now from this debate; it has run its course so to you and everybody else please stop posting up comments that cause me to come back and make even more comments. 

[Budgie 65]

G bettle u sound like a froghorn if one can't say ones opinion it being dictatorial lol over the top or what

[Budgie 65]

10 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

I did not quit the £20 Daily Challenge thread.  At the time, I conceded that I would not post up because @Valiant Thorsaid he would not post up unless I refrained from posting up lay bets.  I honoured this because I know that PL Members like his posts.

I am no quitter.  You should know that.

I am moving on now from this debate; it has run its course so to you and everybody else please stop posting up comments that cause me to come back and make even more comments. 

They say everyone's welcome  accept it equaliser some r so arrogant I'll leave the rest to imagination

[Valiant Thor]

43 minutes ago, Budgie 65 said:

They say everyone's welcome  accept it equaliser some r so arrogant I'll leave the rest to imagination

If thats aimed at me , Id get your facts correct first before you start making statements

I did NOT  say I would not post unless @The Equaliser refused to post , he stated he might catch me up profit wise so I said Id stop posting until he did, which is quite different than his wrongly perceived version,mind you thats his trait trying to twist everything .

Quote

On 9/22/2021 at 11:26 AM, Valiant Thor said:

As for catching me up , this will be my last post in this thread until you do and going off your past performances it will be my POST ULTIMUM  as they say.

Also as above his posts lead to no value to the forum whatsoever and just turn into schoolboy type bickering.

As they say

Its hard to beat a scholar in a debate  ,
but its even harder to to beat a fool

[Budgie 65]

It wasn't aimed at you just the arrogance of some equaliser asks a question gets hammered what can he do he trying to forget it then a stupid comment sets him off it set me off sorry it is getting childish lol I have a mental age of 13 and 60000 hrs to live

[Budgie 65]

1 minute ago, Budgie 65 said:

It wasn't aimed at you just the arrogance of some equaliser asks a question gets hammered what can he do he trying to forget it then a stupid comment sets him off it set me off sorry it is getting childish lol I have a mental age of 13 and 60000 hrs to live

Fools have fun unlike scholars who no let's not go there

[bymatrix]

The last few posts on this thread as so unlike this great site.        

Come on guys take the competition in the spirit intended and always accept the judge's decision as final.

We move on.

 

Best of luck today everyone        

[Wanderlust]

On 2/4/2022 at 5:54 PM, The Equaliser said:

I can't quite follow the logic of that.  Internetmails could get 28 placed horse at 66/1 and wouldn't stand a chance of winning the most winners comp.

I feel that the whole administration team at Punters Lounge would have to think very carefully about imposing a rule that states that in the case of a dead-heat a person who's bet shows a negative value should have the horse treated as a loser.

Think about it.  Had someone else chosen the other winning horse in my race then, according to @MCLARKEthat would have been deemed to be a winner and my horse a loser.  You will not find one racing authority in the UK or indeed around the world that will support the idea that there is a winner and a loser in a dead-heat race where there are only two runners!!

I think that it was right to record the negative value of my bet and not right to not record it as a loser.

I do have a lot of respect for Michael @MCLARKE he seems to shrug off a losing bet of £100 at odds of 1/3 and has great financial and spreadsheet skills.  However, when I feel that he has said something wrong then I feel entitled to voice my opinion.

 

[Zilzalian]

3 hours ago, Budgie 65 said:

It wasn't aimed at you just the arrogance of some equaliser asks a question gets hammered what can he do he trying to forget it then a stupid comment sets him off it set me off sorry it is getting childish lol I have a mental age of 13 and 60000 hrs to live

If you re-read the thread he didn't get hammered, what he got were responses to his points and most were sympathetic to his situation but simply didn't agree with him on this issue. some at least put their reasons forward for why they didn't agree with him. surely that is useful in any debate. and i would suggest a consensus was reached and that was, that it is the bet and not the horse that counts for the competitions. okay so it wasn't what he wanted to hear (and i did sympathise) but at least they were honest opinions.

[MCLARKE]

[Xcout]

On 2/1/2022 at 6:43 PM, MCLARKE said:

I recall this debate a while back and the stance that BH took was that if the bet resulted in a financial loss then it would be deemed a losing bet.

I confirm this, it was I that  had that debate with BH and if the bet has a financial loss then it is a loss. Simple as that!

[Xcout]

double post, please delete

Edited February 6, 2022 by Xcout
double post, please delete

[vangovin]

You could change the column titles to Profitable and Unprofitable bets

That would prevent any confusion when a winning horse is a losing wager

[The Equaliser]

2 hours ago, vangovin said:

You could change the column titles to Profitable and Unprofitable bets

That would prevent any confusion when a winning horse is a losing wager

I think that the problem with that is it could bring each-way winners with placed selections into the realms of winning the most winners competition

[MCLARKE]

57 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

I think that the problem with that is it could bring each-way winners with placed selections into the realms of winning the most winners competition

Nothing wrong with that, a 25/1 placed effort is as good as a 2/1 winner and so should be treated equally.

[MCLARKE]

[Craig bluenose]

4.55 Wolverhampton Street Poet  16/1 Bet365 EW

[The Equaliser]

On 2/5/2022 at 10:46 AM, Valiant Thor said:

If thats aimed at me , Id get your facts correct first before you start making statements

I did NOT  say I would not post unless @The Equaliser refused to post , he stated he might catch me up profit wise so I said Id stop posting until he did, which is quite different than his wrongly perceived version,mind you thats his trait trying to twist everything .

Also as above his posts lead to no value to the forum whatsoever and just turn into schoolboy type bickering.

As they say

Its hard to beat a scholar in a debate  ,
but its even harder to to beat a fool

I question that my posts lead to no value to the forum and I would like to point out that members who make no posts indeed have no value to the forum ?

[Valiant Thor]

3 minutes ago, The Equaliser said:

I question that my posts lead to no value to the forum and I would like to point out that members who make no posts indeed have no value to the forum ?

Yawn