Past Posting Proven once again.....perhaps 49 combinations of one race!!

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

And you know what I am saying. If there is someone with knowledge that the pools will stay open long enough to cancel bets there has to be some kind of violation of some law, no?

For there to be a violation of law, there has to be malicious intent, and that might be tough to prove in this case.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by justindew

For there to be a violation of law, there has to be malicious intent, and that might be tough to prove in this case.

Thanks Atticus Finch.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Bigsmc

Thanks Atticus Finch.

Sorry for making a relevant point that no one had considered and which would explain why prosecuting people who cancel after the bell is a practical impossibility.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by justindew

Sorry for making a relevant point that no one had considered and which would explain why prosecuting people who cancel after the bell is a practical impossibility.

I find it hard to believe that manipulation of betting pools is legal regardless of your legal expertise

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I find it hard to believe that manipulation of betting pools is legal regardless of your legal expertise

We aren't talking about manipulation of pools. We're talking about cancelling tickets after the race has started, which appears to be allowed because of a glitch in the system. Yes, the cancelling of tickets happens to manipulate pools, but unless it is provable that a person intended to manipulate a pool (which may not even be a crime-I'm not sure), it would be nearly impossible to charge someone with a crime.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by justindew

We aren't talking about manipulation of pools. We're talking about cancelling tickets after the race has started, which appears to be allowed because of a glitch in the system. Yes, the cancelling of tickets happens to manipulate pools, but unless it is provable that a person intended to manipulate a pool (which may not even be a crime-I'm not sure), it would be nearly impossible to charge someone with a crime.

Huh? If cancelling a ticket is pool manipulation then how hard would it be to prove intent? "I pushed the button by mistake" defense? Wouldnt fraud be a possible crime?

[justindew]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Huh? If cancelling a ticket is pool manipulation then how hard would it be to prove intent? "I pushed the button by mistake" defense? Wouldnt fraud be a possible crime?

But cancelling a ticket is legal. Even if there was a law that said cancelling a ticket after the race started was illegal, you would still have to prove the bettor intended to break the law and knew the race had started. The bettor could always say "Hey, I made the wrong bet, told the clerk, and he cancelled it. I didn't know the race had started." Now, if cancelling a ticket after the race started required some extensive computer work like hacking some computer program, that's another story.

And there's always the possibility that the bettor is an idiot and decides to tell a bunch of people what he and the mutuel clerk are doing.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by justindew

Sorry for making a relevant point that no one had considered and which would explain why prosecuting people who cancel after the bell is a practical impossibility.

Don't apologize.

If you in fact are a lawyer or law enforcement, I apologize for my flippant comment and await your next opinion regarding this matter with bated breath.

[SniperSB23]

Would any money actually be lost by closing wagering as soon as the first horse is loaded into the gate? Once everyone was used to it wouldn't they just place their bets 30 seconds early and handle would be just the same? Sure you'd have people not getting their bets in on time and blaming the new system but in reality those would be the same people that wind up not getting their bets in on time as it is. And if you are 5 seconds late closing the pools sometime then they would still be loading horses when the pool closes so you wouldn't gain a significant advantage.

[deltagulf]

Originally Posted by justindew

For there to be a violation of law, there has to be malicious intent, and that might be tough to prove in this case.

why if cancelled the bettor has seen his horse or horses have no change of ticket coming in. some law against that.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by deltagulf

why if cancelled the bettor has seen his horse or horses have no change of ticket coming in. some law against that.

So then you're going to have to have some set standard as to when a horse is deemed to have "no chance" after the start. Does anyone really think we are going to see a law that says "when a confirmed front runner breaks slower than usual, he is herby deemed to have no chance. And any tickets using this horse that are cancelled after the start of the race, intentionally or unintentionally, can be used as proof of illegal activity"?

Prosecuting people for cancelling tickets at any time is impossible unless there is some other overt act, such as hacking into a computer or pushing a button that keep the pools open longer than allowed by law.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by justindew

So then you're going to have to have some set standard as to when a horse is deemed to have "no chance" after the start. Does anyone really think we are going to see a law that says "when a confirmed front runner breaks slower than usual, he is herby deemed to have no chance. And any tickets using this horse that are cancelled after the start of the race, intentionally or unintentionally, can be used as proof of illegal activity"?

Prosecuting people for cancelling tickets at any time is impossible unless there is some other overt act, such as hacking into a computer or pushing a button that keep the pools open longer than allowed by law.

According to what we are hearing, at least publically, they would have no idea if this was happening anyway.