More Allen Deed Background
Thursday’s item about Allen Deed, the Ballarat Cup heat and steward‘s reactions apparently posed some consternation here and there, including from our readers. Let’s clarify some form issues and also add to the betting story, which is decidedly odd.
Two points have been made about Allen Deed’s habits and form. Neither is accurate.
The idea that the dog would prefer, or find it easier, to handle a one-turn track and a longer run to the turn is not supported by its 46-run history. We all know that it tends to race in the middle of the track yet it has actually done well from a range of boxes from 1 to 8. Its sectional times can vary a lot but once again there is no indication throughout its career that it does better from one side to the other. In any case it has used a one-turn track like Ballarat only twice before this occasion – both times at Geelong where it did quite well.
16 of its 18 wins prior to the Ballarat run were on circle tracks.
Lastly, the suggestion that its poor Sandown runs were due to bad boxes is simply not true (the last two were 3 and 8). On both these occasions the dog left the boxes poorly and then raced poorly at the tail of the field. There were no incidents in the race that affected its progress.
Consequently, its lively performance at Ballarat and its smart BON time were in sharp contrast to its previous two runs. There were no obvious excuses and it is now too late to go back and check out the reasons. In all three cases the key issue is that a favoured dog, previously a strong and consistent performer, was impossible to predict. Apparently, stewards are either not qualified or not interested in such ups and downs, which amounts to a systemic failure.
Further checks on the betting on Allen Deed’s heat add to the comments already made in this column. The mystery was why the NSW Win pools escalated to unprecedented levels (nearly $34k) when the other heats averaged $8,446. So now consider the relative starting prices of four runners in that race.
Runner | NSW | Victoria |
---|---|---|
Take Charge |
$5.50 |
$2.30F |
Scenic Shot |
$2.70 |
$16 |
Allen Deed |
$9.70 |
$3.70 |
Beckenbauer |
$2.50F |
$9.20 |
If we assume that the home (Victorian) prices were “normal” – and the pool there certainly was – then the huge plonk from unknown sources on the NSW TAB was clearly on Scenic Shot and Beckenbauer, which ended up running 4th and 6th respectively. That same plonk obviously ignored Allen Deed, and so its price eased right out. NSW also had a completely different favourite.
All this is in stark contrast to typical TAB behaviour where “home” and “away” prices tend to merge closer together as betting finalises. Fluctuations in this particular case therefore suggest the big money came in very late.
I might also point out that the disparity between the prices of Take Charge and Allen Deed in Victoria indicates that local punters had doubts about the latter’s current form – quite logically. Normally these two dogs are in very different classes.
What happened with online bookies or Betfair is unknown but GRV officials would have access to that data.
We can have no idea why all these peculiarities were present – whether in form or betting. That was the very reason I raised the subject. Such a knowledge gap is not a help in encouraging the public to support greyhound racing. Since the basic facts are clear it is up to GRV to look further and come up with some explanation.
I might add that since TABs started doing business in the 1960s I have never ever seen such huge price variations from one state to the other. That alone justifies investigation.
Incredible Bruce based on it two previous runs the dog was not a consideration in my betting. Particularly based on its performances from middle boxes. Sadly I see the stewards did not ask any questions.
This is much better analysis than the original article. But the betting is not really about Allen Deed. Whoever did this appears to want to manipulate the NSW tote prices of all the runners, other than Scenic Shot and Beckenbauer so they were big overs. Why I don’t know as I don’t know any corporate bookmaker that would have let you on provincial dogs at top tote for any or all of the other six runners. Most of the sponsors of this forum such as Sportsbet won’t let you on the dogs for a decent bet fullstop. I agree with… Read more »
Yes there was pool manipulation last week they were especially active, in the interview with Wheeler he specifically mentions that Allan Deed was going well and not be retired that was after the two previous poor runs, maybe there was something we don’t know or will never know that was effecting the dog.
All I know is it never used any energy in those 3 or 4 starts
Glenn Nye
Incredible Bruce based on it two previous runs the dog was not a consideration in my betting. Particularly based on its performances from middle boxes. Sadly I see the stewards did not ask any questions.
This is much better analysis than the original article. But the betting is not really about Allen Deed. Whoever did this appears to want to manipulate the NSW tote prices of all the runners, other than Scenic Shot and Beckenbauer so they were big overs. Why I don’t know as I don’t know any corporate bookmaker that would have let you on provincial dogs at top tote for any or all of the other six runners. Most of the sponsors of this forum such as Sportsbet won’t let you on the dogs for a decent bet fullstop. I agree with… Read more »
Yes there was pool manipulation last week they were especially active, in the interview with Wheeler he specifically mentions that Allan Deed was going well and not be retired that was after the two previous poor runs, maybe there was something we don’t know or will never know that was effecting the dog.
All I know is it never used any energy in those 3 or 4 starts
Glenn Nye